Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 3 minor 104 references

By applying the Kontsevich–Segal–Witten criterion to the pullback metric of a family of complex extremal surfaces, this paper shows the criterion uniquely fixes the admissible contour in timelike AdS3, dS3, and AdS4 hyperbolic examples, sel

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-01 08:39 UTC pith:C3ZTLF7V

load-bearing objection A genuinely new contour-selection proposal whose headline uniqueness theorem has a real proof gap: the sign bookkeeping in the AdS3 monotonicity argument does not survive contact with the spacelike sector. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.21030 v2 pith:C3ZTLF7V submitted 2026-07-23 hep-th gr-qc

Selecting Complex Extremal Surfaces with the Kontsevich--Segal--Witten Criterion

Wu-zhong Guo This is my paper
classification hep-th gr-qc PACS 11.25.Tq04.60.-m
keywords Kontsevich–Segal–Witten criterioncomplex extremal surfacestimelike entanglement entropycontour uniquenessAdS3/CFT2de Sitter holographyholographic entanglementcomplex saddles
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper proposes that the Kontsevich–Segal–Witten (KSW) criterion — a pointwise bound on the phases of a complexified metric that guarantees a convergent path integral — can serve as a selection principle for the complex extremal surfaces that arise in holographic descriptions of timelike entanglement. By pulling the bulk metric back onto a real-dimensional cycle generated by a whole family of such surfaces, the author turns the KSW bound into a constraint on the integration contour, and shows that in several AdS and dS examples the constraint uniquely pins down the contour within the class of piecewise-regular contours considered. For spacelike separations it selects the real Lorentzian section; for timelike separations it selects a three-piece contour (C_AdS or its dS reflection C_dS) that glues real Lorentzian sections through analytic continuation. The same framework identifies a failure case: timelike strips in AdS4 violate the KSW bound near the boundary, revealing the construction's scope. If correct, this provides a concrete mechanism by which complex bulk geometry emerges from timelike entanglement and an organizing principle for complex saddles in real-time holography.

Core claim

The central discovery is that the KSW criterion, applied to a bulk cycle built from a family of complex extremal surfaces rather than to a single surface, acts as a strong contour-selection principle. Within a class of piecewise-regular contours confined to the strip −π/2 ≤ Im λ ≤ π/2, the criterion uniquely fixes the timelike contour C_AdS in AdS3 (lower horizontal branch at −iπ/2, vertical segment on the imaginary axis, upper horizontal branch at +iπ/2) and in the AdS4 hyperbolic family via the same contour in a transformed coordinate; the dS3 counterpart is the reflected contour C_dS. Spacelike entanglement is forced onto the real axis. Every selected segment saturates the bound Θ = π, co

What carries the argument

The central object is the extremal-surface-adapted family metric, obtained by pulling back the complexified bulk metric onto a real-dimensional cycle parametrized by (u, σ^A, a^i), with the surface parameter λ promoted to a complex contour. In the AdS3 examples the metric reduces to the universal form ds² = L²(dλ² + cosh²λ dξ² − sinh²λ dη²), shared by Poincaré, global AdS3, and nonrotating BTZ; the dS3 and AdS4 hyperbolic families reduce to it after real coordinate changes. The selection mechanism is the KSW phase-sum bound Θ = Σ_γ |Arg Λ_γ| ≤ π, evaluated pointwise from the eigenvalues in a real diagonal frame, together with a monotonicity argument built on Q = |tanh g|/|tan f| σ (or the re

Load-bearing premise

The uniqueness forcing the three-piece contour is proved only for contours that are piecewise C¹ with piecewise-monotonic real part and confined to the strip −π/2 ≤ Im λ ≤ π/2; the author explicitly notes in Appendix C.4 that contours leaving this strip could be KSW-allowable and yield different complex geometries, which would break the uniqueness claim as stated.

What would settle it

Find a contour λ(u) that leaves the strip −π/2 ≤ Im λ ≤ π/2, remains piecewise C¹, joins the same boundary anchors, and for which the family metric pointwise satisfies Θ ≤ π in a real diagonal frame; if such a contour gives a different bulk geometry (evaluated, say, through geodesic length or timelike entanglement entropy), the uniqueness theorem as stated fails. A numerical scan over contours with a single excursion outside the strip is a concrete way to search for one.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Timelike entanglement entropy in AdS3/CFT2 reproduces the known vacuum result S_T = c/3 arcsinh(ρ_t/ε) + iπc/6, with the universal imaginary part πc/6 arising from the middle timelike segment of the KSW-selected contour.
  • Spacelike entanglement selects the real Lorentzian section in all cases considered, providing a mechanism for why spatial entanglement yields a real bulk geometry.
  • Because the universal complex family metric is identical for Poincaré, global AdS3, and nonrotating BTZ, any holographic prediction built on the KSW-selected contour is identical in these backgrounds up to global identifications.
  • The AdS4 timelike strip is excluded: the induced complex geometry violates the KSW bound at order O(z) near the boundary, so within this construction such strips do not yield allowable complex saddles.
  • In AdS5 (even boundary dimension), the timelike strip admits an exact real Lorentzian branch that saturates KSW and extends toward the Poincaré horizon, but it does not return to the second boundary; a complete surface requires a genuinely complex interior continuation.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the uniqueness extends beyond the treated contour class, the KSW-selected three-piece contour is a plausible steepest-descent cycle for the Lorentzian replica path integral; the paper leaves the Picard–Lefschetz intersection-number computation open, and a direct test is to compute the thimble attached to this saddle in a mini-superspace truncation.
  • The AdS4 strip violation suggests that complexifying only the single affine parameter λ is insufficient for strip geometry; a natural extension is to allow complexification of additional surface parameters and check whether KSW allowability is recovered.
  • A numerical continuation of the straight real branch in AdS5 beyond its coordinate caustic could reveal whether a complex completion exists that joins the two boundary branches while remaining KSW-allowable — a concrete, finite calculation.
  • All selected cycles sit at the marginal value Θ = π on the boundary of the KSW cone; testing subleading iϵ deformations, as the paper gestures toward, would confirm that these cycles are strict limits of allowable contours rather than isolated boundary points.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a method for constructing complex bulk metrics from families of complex extremal surfaces: a complex affine parameter λ=λ(u) is chosen on each extremal surface, and the pullback of the complexified bulk metric onto the real family cycle is tested with the Kontsevich–Segal–Witten (KSW) criterion. The main results are that, within a restricted class of piecewise-smooth contours in the strip |Im λ|≤π/2, the KSW criterion selects the real Lorentzian contour for spacelike data and a three-piece complex contour for timelike data in Poincaré AdS3, global AdS3, BTZ, and dS3, and that the same AdS3-type contour is inherited by the hyperbolic timelike family in AdS4. The paper also analyzes planar strips: the AdS4 timelike strip violates the KSW bound near the boundary, while an exact real Lorentzian branch exists for the AdS5 timelike strip. A consistency check reproduces the known CFT2 timelike entanglement entropy.

Significance. If the central selection theorem is correct, the paper gives a concrete, parameter-free organizing principle for complex saddles in real-time holography and a geometric interpretation of timelike entanglement in terms of different real Lorentzian sections of one complexified geometry. The derivations are unusually explicit, and the matching of the selected AdS3 contour with the CFT2 timelike entropy is a strong nontrivial check. The AdS4 strip obstruction is a clean falsifiable local result. However, the uniqueness theorem rests on a monotonicity lemma whose sign bookkeeping is inconsistent as written; until that lemma is repaired, the paper's central 'uniquely determines' claim is not fully established.

major comments (2)
  1. [C.4–C.5 and D.3] The monotonicity lemma is built on a quantity Q that is not consistently defined. In C.4, Q is defined as |tanh g|/|tan f| times σ, with σ=sgn(gg')sgn(ff'), and Eq. (C.17) is stated for this Q. For the spacelike first departure in C.5 (g<0, g'>0, f>0, f'>0), the C.4 definition gives σ=-1, so Q is negative and diverges as f→0; the text instead sets Q=|tanh g||tan f|, which is a different quantity. Moreover, the derivative identity as written is only correct for Q=|tanh g||tan f|^{-σ}, not for the displayed C.4 definition. The same sign bookkeeping is repeated in the dS3 proof in D.3. As written, the first-departure lemma cannot be applied, so the uniqueness claims for C_AdS and C_dS, and hence the AdS4 hyperbolic conclusion, are not established. This is repairable by defining Q=|tanh g||tan f|^{-σ} and deriving the sector-correct derivative, but the repair is not supplied.
  2. [C.5] The 'first-departure lemma' is invoked to exclude later departures after an initial interval, but the argument is only sketched. In particular, Q may not be differentiable at the departure point, and the transition from 'no first departure' to 'no departure anywhere on the half-contour' needs a more careful inductive statement. This is a rigor issue that should be fixed together with the Q-sign correction.
minor comments (3)
  1. [§2 and §C.2] Typos: 'The abolve statement' should be 'The above statement'; 'timeliek' should be 'timelike' in the BTZ discussion.
  2. [§6] The text says the AdS4 strip metric is 'constructed from Eq. (6)', but Eq. (6) is the hyperbolic family metric; the relevant expression is the strip family metric of Appendix F.2, Eq. (42). Please correct the cross-reference.
  3. [§2 and §4] The uniqueness statements such as 'the only possible curve' in §2 and the corresponding sentence in §4 would benefit from the explicit qualifier 'within the class considered', used correctly in the abstract and in Appendix C.4. This would avoid any impression of unrestricted global uniqueness.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the KSW criterion is an external parameter-free input and the contour selection follows from explicit phase inequalities and endpoint conditions, not from the target contours.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is constructive: explicit extremal-surface families are pulled back to real-dimensional cycles, giving complex family metrics (Eqs. (3), (13), (27)); the KSW phase condition (Eqs. (1), (10)) is then applied; and the claimed unique contours are obtained by solving the resulting inequalities together with fixed endpoint conditions. No parameter is fitted to a target quantity, and the KSW criterion is cited from the external mathematical work of Kontsevich and Segal. The author's self-citations (e.g., [28], [41]) appear only as context or as consistency remarks—such as noting that the selected contour coincides with contours already used in [32,41]—and are not load-bearing for the uniqueness argument. The paper explicitly acknowledges the restriction to piecewise-monotonic g in the strip, which is a limitation of the theorem's scope rather than a circular assumption. A possible sign inconsistency in the monotonicity quantity Q in Appendix C.4/C.5 would be a mathematical correctness issue, not a circularity: the proof would need repair or the conclusion would fail, but the result would not be equivalent to its input by construction. The distinction between spacelike and timelike contours is not imposed separately; it is derived from the same KSW inequalities with different endpoint conditions. The derivation is therefore self-contained relative to the stated KSW criterion, and no circular step can be exhibited.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 6 axioms · 0 invented entities

No free parameters are fitted to data; constants such as c_d and the Brown-Henneaux central charge come from standard definitions or known AdS/CFT relations. The main extra baggage is the KSW selection rule itself (treated as an external consistency condition), the contour-class restriction needed for the uniqueness proofs, and the nondegeneracy/regulator assumptions. No new particles, fields, or forces are introduced.

axioms (6)
  • domain assumption KSW allowability (with closure Θ≤π) is the correct selection principle for complex gravitational saddles.
    The entire selection mechanism uses the Kontsevich-Segal-Witten condition (Eq. 1) as a strong consistency filter. The paper does not derive this from the Lorentzian path integral and states in §7 and Appendix I that Picard-Lefschetz intersection numbers are still required to establish that a surviving cycle contributes.
  • domain assumption The pullback family construction defines a valid real-dimensional cycle only where the family map is nondegenerate.
    §1 and Appendix A assume the map X(λ(u),σ,a_i) is a nondegenerate coordinatization. At f=0 in the AdS3 middle segment the η direction degenerates, so the KSW test there needs a limiting prescription (Appendix C.6).
  • ad hoc to paper Uniqueness is proved only for contours in the strip |f|≤π/2, with g piecewise monotonic and piecewise C1.
    Appendix C.4 explicitly restricts to this class and notes that contours leaving the strip may produce different admissible cycles and metrics. The 'unique' conclusion is therefore class-relative.
  • domain assumption The holographic coordinate is regulated by a positive real cutoff z→0+ (or u→0+), fixing the boundary phase ω=-i for timelike strips.
    Used in §F.3 to determine ζ(u)=-iu+O(u²). This is a standard holographic regulator, not derived from KSW.
  • standard math The standard Brown-Henneaux relation c=3L_AdS/(2G_N) is used to convert bulk geodesic length into CFT2 timelike entanglement entropy.
    Known AdS3/CFT2 relation, used in §C.8. It is not a free parameter.
  • standard math For AdS4 hyperbolic surfaces, the relevant planes are totally geodesic fixed-point sets of AdS isometries.
    Appendix E.1.3 uses this to reduce the extremal-surface equation to a two-dimensional plane. This is standard differential geometry.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 42343 in / 18581 out tokens · 188366 ms · 2026-08-01T08:39:56.609507+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Complex extremal surfaces naturally arise in holographic observables associated with timelike subregions in AdS/CFT and with holographic observables in dS/CFT, but their integration contours are generally ambiguous. In this work, we propose a method for constructing complex bulk metrics from families of complex extremal surfaces, thereby generating candidate complex geometries relevant to the gravitational path integral. This construction provides a concrete realization of how complex bulk geometry may emerge from timelike entanglement, extending the familiar idea that spacetime geometry is encoded in quantum entanglement. We use the Kontsevich--Segal--Witten (KSW) criterion as a strong consistency condition to constrain the corresponding contours. The same framework also explains why spacelike entanglement naturally selects a real Lorentzian section. In several AdS and dS examples, the KSW condition uniquely determines the admissible contour within the class considered. We also identify configurations for which the resulting complex geometry violates the KSW bound near the asymptotic boundary, revealing both the scope and the limitations of the construction. These results highlight KSW admissibility as a useful organizing principle for complex saddles in real-time holography.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.21030 by Wu-zhong Guo.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Illustration of the reduced spacetime density matrix [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Integration contours in the complex λ plane for (a) AdS3 and (b) dS3. In (a), the red and blue curves correspond to the spacelike and timelike branches of the KSW-selected contour, respectively. In (b), the blue curve denotes the KSW-selected contour. Lorentzian sections connected by an AdS–Rindler interior section. The two examples differ, however, in their global embedding. In the Poincar’e case, the ext… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Schematic representations of the geometries associated with the KSW-selected [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Boundary configurations in Poincar´e AdS [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p031_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Tilted strip configurations in the boundary Minkowski spacetime. (a) A [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p036_5.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

104 extracted references · 77 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Holographic derivation of entanglement entropy from AdS/CFT,

    S. Ryu and T. Takayanagi, “Holographic derivation of entanglement entropy from AdS/CFT,” Phys. Rev. Lett.96, 181602 (2006) [arXiv:hep-th/0603001]. 51

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  2. [2]

    A Covariant holographic entan- glement entropy proposal,

    V. E. Hubeny, M. Rangamani and T. Takayanagi, “A Covariant holographic entan- glement entropy proposal,” JHEP07, 062 (2007) [arXiv:0705.0016 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  3. [3]

    Entanglement Renormalization and Holography,

    B. Swingle, “Entanglement Renormalization and Holography,” Phys. Rev. D86 (2012), 065007 [arXiv:0905.1317 [cond-mat.str-el]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  4. [4]

    Building up spacetime with quantum entanglement,

    M. Van Raamsdonk, “Building up spacetime with quantum entanglement,” Gen. Rel. Grav.42, 2323 (2010) [Int. J. Mod. Phys. D19, 2429 (2010)] [arXiv:1005.3035 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  5. [5]

    Cool horizons for entangled black holes,

    J. Maldacena and L. Susskind, “Cool horizons for entangled black holes,” Fortsch. Phys.61(2013), 781-811 [arXiv:1306.0533 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  6. [6]

    Bulk Locality and Quantum Error Correction in AdS/CFT,

    A. Almheiri, X. Dong and D. Harlow, “Bulk Locality and Quantum Error Correction in AdS/CFT,” JHEP04(2015), 163 [arXiv:1411.7041 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  7. [7]

    Relative entropy equals bulk relative entropy,

    D. L. Jafferis, A. Lewkowycz, J. Maldacena and S. J. Suh, “Relative entropy equals bulk relative entropy,” JHEP06(2016), 004 [arXiv:1512.06431 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  8. [8]

    Reconstruction of Bulk Operators within the Entanglement Wedge in Gauge-Gravity Duality,

    X. Dong, D. Harlow and A. C. Wall, “Reconstruction of Bulk Operators within the Entanglement Wedge in Gauge-Gravity Duality,” Phys. Rev. Lett.117(2016) no.2, 021601 [arXiv:1601.05416 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  9. [9]

    Quantum Extremal Surfaces: Holographic Entangle- ment Entropy beyond the Classical Regime,

    N. Engelhardt and A. C. Wall, “Quantum Extremal Surfaces: Holographic Entangle- ment Entropy beyond the Classical Regime,” JHEP01(2015), 073 [arXiv:1408.3203 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  10. [10]

    Entanglement Wedge Reconstruction and the Information Paradox,

    G. Penington, “Entanglement Wedge Reconstruction and the Information Paradox,” JHEP09(2020), 002 [arXiv:1905.08255 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  11. [11]

    The entropy of bulk quantum fields and the entanglement wedge of an evaporating black hole,

    A. Almheiri, N. Engelhardt, D. Marolf and H. Maxfield, “The entropy of bulk quantum fields and the entanglement wedge of an evaporating black hole,” JHEP 12, 063 (2019) [arXiv:1905.08762 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  12. [12]

    Replica wormholes and the black hole interior,

    G. Penington, S. H. Shenker, D. Stanford and Z. Yang, “Replica wormholes and the black hole interior,” JHEP03(2022), 205 [arXiv:1911.11977 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  13. [13]

    Replica Wormholes and the Entropy of Hawking Radiation,

    A. Almheiri, T. Hartman, J. Maldacena, E. Shaghoulian and A. Tajdini, “Replica Wormholes and the Entropy of Hawking Radiation,” JHEP05(2020), 013 [arXiv:1911.12333 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  14. [14]

    The entropy of Hawking radiation,

    A. Almheiri, T. Hartman, J. Maldacena, E. Shaghoulian and A. Tajdini, “The entropy of Hawking radiation,” Rev. Mod. Phys.93(2021) no.3, 035002 [arXiv:2006.06872 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  15. [15]

    Essay: Emergent Holographic Spacetime from Quantum Informa- tion,

    T. Takayanagi, “Essay: Emergent Holographic Spacetime from Quantum Informa- tion,” Phys. Rev. Lett.134(2025) no.24, 240001 [arXiv:2506.06595 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  16. [16]

    Quantum correlations which imply causation,

    J. F. Fitzsimons, J. A. Jones and V. Vedral, “Quantum correlations which imply causation,” Sci. Rep.5(2015) no.1, 18281 [arXiv:1302.2731 [quant-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  17. [17]

    Direct observation of any two-point quantum correlation function,

    F. Buscemi, M. Dall’Arno, M. Ozawa and V. Vedral, “Direct observation of any two-point quantum correlation function,” [arXiv:1312.4240 [quant-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  18. [18]

    Towards a Formulation of Quantum Theory as a Causally Neutral Theory of Bayesian Inference,

    M. S. Leifer and R. W. Spekkens, “Towards a Formulation of Quantum Theory as a Causally Neutral Theory of Bayesian Inference,” arXiv:1107.5849. 52

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  19. [19]

    Can a quantum state over time resemble a quantum state at a single time?,

    D. Horsman, C. Heunen, M. F. Pusey, J. Barrett and R. W. Spekkens, “Can a quantum state over time resemble a quantum state at a single time?,” Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A473(2017) no.2205, 20170395. [arXiv:1607.03637 [quant-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  20. [20]

    Superdensity Operators for Spacetime Quantum Mechanics,

    J. Cotler, C. M. Jian, X. L. Qi and F. Wilczek, “Superdensity Operators for Spacetime Quantum Mechanics,” JHEP09, 093 (2018) [arXiv:1711.03119 [quant- ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  21. [21]

    On quantum states over time,

    J. Fullwood and A. J. Parzygnat, “On quantum states over time,” Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A478(2022) no.2264, 20220104 [arXiv:2202.03607 [quant-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  22. [22]

    From Time-Reversal Symmetry to Quantum Bayes’ Rules,

    A. J. Parzygnat and J. Fullwood, “From Time-Reversal Symmetry to Quantum Bayes’ Rules,” PRX Quantum4(2023) no.2, 020334 [arXiv:2212.08088 [quant-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  23. [23]

    Multipartite Quantum States over Time from Two Funda- mental Assumptions,

    S. H. Lie and J. Fullwood, “Multipartite Quantum States over Time from Two Funda- mental Assumptions,” Phys. Rev. Lett.135(2025) no.23, 230204 [arXiv:2410.22630 [quant-ph]]

    arXiv 2025

  24. [24]

    Probing Quantum States over Spacetime through Interfer- ometry,

    S. H. Lie and H. Kwon, “Probing Quantum States over Spacetime through Interfer- ometry,” Phys. Rev. Lett.136(2026) no.25, 250201 [arXiv:2507.19258 [quant-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  25. [25]

    Spacetime Quantum Actions,

    N. L. Diaz, J. M. Matera and R. Rossignoli, “Spacetime Quantum Actions,” Phys. Rev. D103(2021) no.6, 065011 [arXiv:2010.09136 [quant-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  26. [26]

    Observable and computable entanglement in time,

    A. Milekhin, Z. Adamska and J. Preskill, “Observable and computable entanglement in time,” [arXiv:2502.12240 [quant-ph]]

    arXiv

  27. [27]

    Spacetime quantum mechanics for bosonic and fermionic systems,

    N. L. Diaz and R. Rossignoli, “Spacetime quantum mechanics for bosonic and fermionic systems,” [arXiv:2506.10250 [quant-ph]]

    arXiv

  28. [28]

    Spacetime density matrix: formalism and properties,

    W. z. Guo, “Spacetime density matrix: formalism and properties,” JHEP01(2026), 128 [arXiv:2508.20397 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  29. [29]

    Temporal correlations and chaos from spacetime kernel,

    R. N. Das, A. Kundu, M. H. Martins Costa and N. C. Sarkar, “Temporal correlations and chaos from spacetime kernel,” [arXiv:2512.06078 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  30. [30]

    Unifying spacetime approaches to quantum mechanics,

    N. L. Diaz, M. Cerezo and P. Braccia, “Unifying spacetime approaches to quantum mechanics,” [arXiv:2606.12539 [quant-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  31. [31]

    Pseudoentropy in dS/CFT and Timelike Entanglement Entropy,

    K. Doi, J. Harper, A. Mollabashi, T. Takayanagi and Y. Taki, “Pseudoentropy in dS/CFT and Timelike Entanglement Entropy,” Phys. Rev. Lett.130, no.3, 031601 (2023) [arXiv:2210.09457 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  32. [32]

    Geometric Interpretation of Timelike Entan- glement Entropy,

    M. P. Heller, F. Ori and A. Serantes, “Geometric Interpretation of Timelike Entan- glement Entropy,” Phys. Rev. Lett.134(2025) no.13, 131601 [arXiv:2408.15752 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  33. [33]

    Tr denotes the trace overH 0 ⊗ H1, while tr denotes the trace overH 0

    Notice that the traces Tr and tr on the left- and right-hand sides are different. Tr denotes the trace overH 0 ⊗ H1, while tr denotes the trace overH 0

  34. [34]

    On holographic time-like entanglement entropy,

    Z. Li, Z. Q. Xiao and R. Q. Yang, “On holographic time-like entanglement entropy,” JHEP04(2023), 004 [arXiv:2211.14883 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  35. [35]

    Timelike entangle- ment entropy,

    K. Doi, J. Harper, A. Mollabashi, T. Takayanagi and Y. Taki, “Timelike entangle- ment entropy,” JHEP05, 052 (2023) [arXiv:2302.11695 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  36. [36]

    Notes on time entanglement and pseudo-entropy,

    K. Narayan and H. K. Saini, “Notes on time entanglement and pseudo-entropy,” Eur. Phys. J. C84(2024) no.5, 499 [arXiv:2303.01307 [hep-th]]. 53

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  37. [37]

    Time-like entanglement entropy in AdS/BCFT,

    C. S. Chu and H. Parihar, “Time-like entanglement entropy in AdS/BCFT,” JHEP 06(2023), 173 [arXiv:2304.10907 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  38. [38]

    Bulk reconstruction using timelike entanglement in (A)dS,

    A. Das, S. Sachdeva and D. Sarkar, “Bulk reconstruction using timelike entanglement in (A)dS,” Phys. Rev. D109(2024) no.6, 066007 [arXiv:2312.16056 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  39. [39]

    Relation between time- and spacelike en- tanglement entropy,

    W. z. Guo, S. He and Y. X. Zhang, “Relation between time- and spacelike en- tanglement entropy,” Phys. Rev. D112(2025) no.8, 086020 [arXiv:2402.00268 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2025

  40. [40]

    Black hole singularity and timelike entanglement,

    T. Anegawa and K. Tamaoka, “Black hole singularity and timelike entanglement,” JHEP10(2024), 182 [arXiv:2406.10968 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  41. [41]

    Duality of Ryu-Takayanagi surfaces inside and outside the horizon,

    W. z. Guo and J. Xu, “Duality of Ryu-Takayanagi surfaces inside and outside the horizon,” Phys. Rev. D112, no.10, L101901 (2025) [arXiv:2502.16774 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2025

  42. [42]

    Measuring the black hole interior from the exterior,

    W. z. Guo, “Measuring the black hole interior from the exterior,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. D34(2025) no.16, 2544006 [arXiv:2505.09878 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  43. [43]

    Interpolating between Space-like and Time-like Entanglement via Holography,

    C. Nunez and D. Roychowdhury, “Interpolating between Space-like and Time-like Entanglement via Holography,” [arXiv:2507.17805 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  44. [44]

    Nunez and D

    C. Nunez and D. Roychowdhury, JHEP11, 100 (2025) [arXiv:2508.13266 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2025

  45. [45]

    M. P. Heller, F. Ori and A. Serantes, Phys. Rev. X15(2025) no.4, 041022 doi:10.1103/qlsv-gp22 [arXiv:2507.17847 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  46. [46]

    Entanglement measures for causally connected sub- regions and holography,

    X. Gong, W. z. Guo and J. Xu, “Entanglement measures for causally connected sub- regions and holography,” Phys. Rev. D113(2026) no.10, 106009 [arXiv:2508.05158 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  47. [47]

    G. Y. Li, M. H. Xiao, S. He and J. R. Sun, JHEP06(2026), 144 [arXiv:2511.17098 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  48. [48]

    Aspects of holographic timelike entangle- ment entropy in black hole backgrounds,

    M. Afrasiar, J. K. Basak and K. Y. Kim, “Aspects of holographic timelike entangle- ment entropy in black hole backgrounds,” [arXiv:2512.21327 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  49. [49]

    Black Hole Interior and Time-like Entanglement Entropy,

    Z. H. Li and R. Q. Yang, “Black Hole Interior and Time-like Entanglement Entropy,” [arXiv:2601.18319 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  50. [50]

    Entanglement inequalities for timelike intervals within dynamical holography,

    G. Katoch, D. Sarkar and B. Sen, “Entanglement inequalities for timelike intervals within dynamical holography,” [arXiv:2604.11158 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  51. [51]

    Temporal Entan- glement from Twist Correlators in 2d Conformal Field Theory and Holography,

    A. Bernamonti, F. Galli, M. P. Heller, F. Ori and A. Serantes, “Temporal Entan- glement from Twist Correlators in 2d Conformal Field Theory and Holography,” [arXiv:2607.14012 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  52. [52]

    Extremal surfaces in de Sitter spacetime,

    K. Narayan, “Extremal surfaces in de Sitter spacetime,” Phys. Rev. D91(2015) no.12, 126011 [arXiv:1501.03019 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  53. [53]

    Comments on Entanglement Entropy in the dS/CFT Correspondence,

    Y. Sato, “Comments on Entanglement Entropy in the dS/CFT Correspondence,” Phys. Rev. D91(2015) no.8, 086009 [arXiv:1501.04903 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  54. [54]

    de Sitter space, extremal surfaces, and time entanglement,

    K. Narayan, “de Sitter space, extremal surfaces, and time entanglement,” Phys. Rev. D107(2023) no.12, 126004 [arXiv:2210.12963 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  55. [55]

    dS extremal surfaces, replicas, boundary Renyi entropies in dS/CFT and time entanglement,

    K. K. Nanda, K. Narayan, S. Porey and G. Yadav, “dS extremal surfaces, replicas, boundary Renyi entropies in dS/CFT and time entanglement,” JHEP11(2025), 095 [arXiv:2509.02775 [hep-th]]. 54

    arXiv 2025

  56. [56]

    Entropic inter- pretation of Einstein equation in dS/CFT,

    K. Fujiki, M. Kohara, K. Shinmyo, Y. k. Suzuki and T. Takayanagi, “Entropic inter- pretation of Einstein equation in dS/CFT,” JHEP04(2026), 072 [arXiv:2511.07915 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2026

  57. [57]

    de Sitter extremal surfaces, time contours, complexifications and pseudo-entropies,

    K. Narayan, “de Sitter extremal surfaces, time contours, complexifications and pseudo-entropies,” [arXiv:2604.00108 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  58. [58]

    Traversable AdS wormhole via non-local double trace or Janus deformation,

    T. Kawamoto, R. Maeda, N. Nakamura and T. Takayanagi, “Traversable AdS wormhole via non-local double trace or Janus deformation,” JHEP04(2025), 086 [arXiv:2502.03531 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2025

  59. [59]

    Non- Hermitian density matrices from timelike entanglement and wormholes,

    J. Harper, T. Kawamoto, R. Maeda, N. Nakamura and T. Takayanagi, “Non- Hermitian density matrices from timelike entanglement and wormholes,” Phys. Rev. D113(2026) no.12, 126017 [arXiv:2512.13800 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2026

  60. [60]

    Deriving covariant holographic entanglement,

    X. Dong, A. Lewkowycz and M. Rangamani, “Deriving covariant holographic entanglement,” JHEP11(2016), 028 [arXiv:1607.07506 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  61. [61]

    Real-time gravitational replicas: Formalism and a variational principle,

    S. Colin-Ellerin, X. Dong, D. Marolf, M. Rangamani and Z. Wang, “Real-time gravitational replicas: Formalism and a variational principle,” JHEP05(2021), 117 [arXiv:2012.00828 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  62. [62]

    Real-time gravitational replicas: low dimensional examples,

    S. Colin-Ellerin, X. Dong, D. Marolf, M. Rangamani and Z. Wang, “Real-time gravitational replicas: low dimensional examples,” JHEP08(2021), 171

    2021

  63. [63]

    Analytic Continuation Of Chern-Simons Theory,

    E. Witten, “Analytic Continuation Of Chern-Simons Theory,” AMS/IP Stud. Adv. Math.50, 347-446 (2011) [arXiv:1001.2933 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  64. [64]

    A New Look At The Path Integral Of Quantum Mechanics,

    E. Witten, “A New Look At The Path Integral Of Quantum Mechanics,” [arXiv:1009.6032 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  65. [65]

    Harlow, J

    D. Harlow, J. Maltz and E. Witten, JHEP12, 071 (2011) [arXiv:1108.4417 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  66. [66]

    Euclidean and complex geometries from real-time computations of gravitational R´ enyi entropies,

    J. Held, X. Liu, D. Marolf and Z. Wang, “Euclidean and complex geometries from real-time computations of gravitational R´ enyi entropies,” JHEP02(2025), 136 [arXiv:2409.17428 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  67. [67]

    Generalized gravitational entropy,

    A. Lewkowycz and J. Maldacena, “Generalized gravitational entropy,” JHEP08 (2013), 090 [arXiv:1304.4926 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  68. [68]

    For the highly symmetric subregions considered in this work, the nontrivial com- plexification can be reduced to the single coordinate λ, while the coordinates σA may be kept real. For more general subregions without these symmetries, one may need to complexify some or all of the σA as well, leading to a multidimensional contour problem that is considerab...

  69. [69]

    A Note On Complex Spacetime Metrics,

    E. Witten, “A Note On Complex Spacetime Metrics,” [arXiv:2111.06514 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  70. [70]

    Action Integrals and Partition Functions in Quantum Gravity,

    G. W. Gibbons and S. W. Hawking, “Action Integrals and Partition Functions in Quantum Gravity,” Phys. Rev. D15(1977), 2752-2756

    1977

  71. [71]

    Path Integrals and the Indefi- niteness of the Gravitational Action,

    G. W. Gibbons, S. W. Hawking and M. J. Perry, “Path Integrals and the Indefi- niteness of the Gravitational Action,” Nucl. Phys. B138(1978), 141-150

    1978

  72. [72]

    Integration Contours for the No Boundary Wave Function of the Universe,

    J. J. Halliwell and J. B. Hartle, “Integration Contours for the No Boundary Wave Function of the Universe,” Phys. Rev. D41(1990), 1815 55

    1990

  73. [73]

    Wave Function of the Universe,

    J. B. Hartle and S. W. Hawking, “Wave Function of the Universe,” Phys. Rev. D 28(1983), 2960-2975

    1983

  74. [74]

    Complex actions in two-dimensional topology change,

    J. Louko and R. D. Sorkin, “Complex actions in two-dimensional topology change,” Class. Quant. Grav.14(1997), 179-204 [arXiv:gr-qc/9511023 [gr-qc]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  75. [75]

    Wick Rotation and the Positivity of Energy in Quantum Field Theory,

    M. Kontsevich and G. Segal, “Wick Rotation and the Positivity of Energy in Quantum Field Theory,” Quart. J. Math. Oxford Ser.72(2021) no.1-2, 673-699 [arXiv:2105.10161 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  76. [76]

    Allowable complex metrics in minisuperspace quantum cosmology,

    J. L. Lehners, “Allowable complex metrics in minisuperspace quantum cosmology,” Phys. Rev. D105, no.2, 026022 (2022) [arXiv:2111.07816 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  77. [77]

    Complex saddles and Euclidean wormholes in the Lorentzian path integral,

    G. J. Loges, G. Shiu and N. Sudhir, “Complex saddles and Euclidean wormholes in the Lorentzian path integral,” JHEP08(2022), 064 [arXiv:2203.01956 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  78. [78]

    Feynman’s i ϵ prescription, almost real spacetimes, and acceptable complex spacetimes,

    M. Visser, “Feynman’s i ϵ prescription, almost real spacetimes, and acceptable complex spacetimes,” JHEP08, 129 (2022) [arXiv:2111.14016 [gr-qc]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  79. [79]

    Uses of complex metrics in cosmology,

    C. Jonas, J. L. Lehners and J. Quintin, “Uses of complex metrics in cosmology,” JHEP08, 284 (2022) [arXiv:2205.15332 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  80. [80]

    Kontsevich-Segal Criterion in the No- Boundary State Constrains Inflation,

    T. Hertog, O. Janssen and J. Karlsson, “Kontsevich-Segal Criterion in the No- Boundary State Constrains Inflation,” Phys. Rev. Lett.131, no.19, 191501 (2023) [arXiv:2305.15440 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

Showing first 80 references.