Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 55 references

The anisotropic chiral boson

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A chiral boson with anisotropic scaling exists for odd integer z; its exact partition function is the generating function of partitions into z-th powers.

desk verdict New chiral Lifshitz boson with a solid partition-function result; the equivalence to the standard Lifshitz scalar is only established up to zero modes. read the letter →

arxiv 1909.02699 v1 pith:IF5RXN6N submitted 2019-09-06 hep-th gr-qcmath-phmath.MPmath.NT

Oscar Fuentealba , Hernán A. González , Miguel Pino , Ricardo Troncoso This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-thgr-qcmath-phmath.MPmath.NT
keywords chiralbosonanisotropicscalingLifshitzscalardynamicalexponentcurrentalgebraVirasoropowerpartitionsfinite-temperaturepartitionfunction
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper constructs a bosonic field theory in two spacetime dimensions that is simultaneously chiral and invariant under anisotropic scaling $t\to\lambda^{z} t$, $x\to\lambda x$, with $z$ an odd integer. Its action extends the isotropic $z=1$ chiral boson by adding a term with $z$ spatial derivatives; the field equation is first order in time and of $z$-th order in space, so all modes travel in one direction. Two opposite-chirality copies of the theory combine, through a nonlocal field redefinition, into the standard free Lifshitz scalar, and the theory retains a current algebra together with a nonlocal realization of the Virasoro algebra. The exact finite-temperature partition function is the generating function of partitions of integers into $z$-th powers, so the density of states follows from a classical number-theoretic asymptotic formula.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the first-order-in-time, $z$-th-order-in-space action (2.1), together with the nonlocal field redefinition (2.14) that splits the Lifshitz scalar into two chiral sectors: $\phi=\sigma^{-(z-1)/2}(\partial_x^{\frac{1-z}{2}}X_+ + \partial_x^{\frac{1-z}{2}}X_-)$ and a similar expression for the momentum. The canonical structure is carried by the constraint $\Pi-\partial_x X\approx 0$; the shift-symmetry charges $K_n$ in (3.25) close into the $\widehat u(1)$ current algebra, and the Sugawara construction $L_n=\frac{1}{2\pi}\sum_j K_j K_{n-j}$ turns these currents into Virasoro generators. The partition function is carried by the identity $\sum_N p_z(N)q^N=\prod_{n=1}^{\infty}(1-q^{n^z})^{-1}$, which turns the trace over descendants into a product over $z$-th power energies $E_k=k^z$.

What would settle it

Keep the integration constants in the step from (2.3) to (2.5) and keep all boundary terms in the reduction (2.15); if the resulting action picks up a temperature-dependent contribution on the torus, the exact partition function (4.12) and the equivalence to the Lifshitz scalar are not correct. A second check is to verify directly for $z=3$ that the nonlocal transformations (3.29)-(3.31) close under the Dirac bracket to the Virasoro algebra (5.1) on low-lying states.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that, for every odd integer $z$, the action $S^\pm_z[X_\pm]=\int dt\,dx\,(\pm\partial_x X_\pm\partial_t X_\pm-\sigma^{z-1}\partial_x X_\pm\partial_x^z X_\pm)$ defines a consistent chiral boson with anisotropic scaling. Its equation of motion is $\dot X_\pm=\pm\sigma^{z-1}\partial_x^z X_\pm$, and the paper shows through a Hamiltonian analysis that the theory has a gauge zero mode, second-class constraints for the nonzero modes, and the Dirac bracket $\{X(\varphi),\partial_{\varphi'}X(\varphi')\}_D=\tfrac12\delta(\varphi-\varphi')$. The conserved charges of the shift symmetries form a $\widehat u(1)$ current algebra independent of $z$, and the Sugawara generators $L_n$ satisfy the Witt algebra; for $z>1$ the associated conformal transformation is nonlocal, while for $z=1$ it reduces to the standard local transformation. The exact finite-temperature partition function, obtained both from the path integral and from a trace over current descendants, is $Z[\tau]=q^{\frac12\zeta(-z)}\prod_{n=1}^{\infty}(1-q^{n^z})^{-1}$, which is the generating function of power partitions $p_z(N)$; consequently the microcanonical entropy is $\log p_z(N)$ and its asymptotic growth is controlled by the known extension of the classical partition asymptotic.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that the nonlocal field redefinition (2.14) is valid 'up to zero modes' and that all boundary terms can be consistently dropped when passing from the Lifshitz scalar to two chiral copies; the paper states this but does not analyze the integration constants and boundary terms on a cylinder.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For every odd integer $z$, the theory describes a genuinely chiral excitation: every Fourier mode propagates in the same direction with phase velocity proportional to $(i\sigma k)^{z-1}$.
  • The nonlocal field redefinition (2.14) identifies the theory as a chiral half of the standard free Lifshitz scalar, so computations in one theory translate directly into the other.
  • The Virasoro algebra (5.1) with the standard center is realized for all odd $z$, so the representation theory of ordinary chiral conformal field theories applies even though the symmetry is realized nonlocally.
  • The exact partition function $Z[\tau]=q^{\frac12\zeta(-z)}\prod_{n=1}^{\infty}(1-q^{n^z})^{-1}$ fixes the energy degeneracies as the power partitions $p_z(N)$ and gives the high-temperature entropy through the classical asymptotic formula for $p_z(N)$.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the construction is exact, the chiral theory should provide a clean factorization of the Lifshitz scalar partition function; one test is to verify that the nonchiral Lifshitz result is the square of (4.12) times a zero-mode factor.
  • The fermionic version (5.2) mentioned in the paper should have a partition function that is essentially the inverse square root of the bosonic one, turning the same power-partition generating function into a fermionic state count.
  • Because the $\widehat u(1)$ algebra is $z$-independent while the spectrum is not, one could deform the kinetic term while keeping the current algebra and ask whether the Virasoro structure survives; this would probe how much of the conformal representation theory is protected by the current algebra.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript constructs an action for a chiral boson with anisotropic (Lifshitz) scaling, S_z^± = ∫dtdx(±∂_x X^± ∂_t X^± − σ^{z−1} ∂_x X^± ∂_x^z X^±), for odd integer z, which reduces to the Floreanini–Jackiw chiral boson at z=1. It claims that two opposite chiralities combine through a nonlocal field redefinition into the standard free Lifshitz boson; it analyzes the canonical structure, finding one first-class zero-mode constraint and second-class nonzero-mode constraints; it derives a u(1) current algebra and, via the Sugawara construction, a nonlocal conformal algebra; and it computes the finite-temperature partition function both by the Hamiltonian path integral and by a trace over u(1) descendants. The resulting partition function is Z[τ] = q^{ζ(−z)/2} ∏_{n≥1}(1−q^{n^z})^{−1}, the generating function of partitions into z-th powers, whose Hardy–Ramanujan asymptotics is then applied to the microcanonical entropy.

Significance. If the missing derivations are supplied, this would be a useful contribution: it provides a parameter-free exact partition function for a chiral Lifshitz theory, connects the microstate counting to well-studied power partitions with rigorous asymptotics, and exhibits an explicit nonlocal conformal symmetry for z>1. The strengths of the paper are the careful Dirac-bracket analysis, the use of ζ-function regularization, the agreement between the path-integral and trace derivations, and the honest appeal to known number-theoretic results. It should be noted, however, that the trace computation uses the same spectrum E_k=k^z that enters the path integral, so the agreement is a consistency check rather than an independent confirmation. The main weaknesses are that the zero-mode sector of the nonlocal map to the Lifshitz boson is not analyzed and that the nonlocal conformal symmetry is asserted rather than demonstrated.

major comments (3)
  1. [2.1, Eqs. (2.14)–(2.15)] The nonlocal field redefinition (2.14) is not shown to be valid on the full circle. For z>1, the operators ∂_x^{(1−z)/2} are inverse powers of ∂_x, which on a compact spatial circle are defined only on nonzero Fourier modes and require integration constants. The text says the identification holds 'up to zero modes' and that boundary terms can be 'consistently dropped', but the zero-mode sector is never tracked through (2.13)–(2.15). This matters because the chiral theory has a first-class zero-mode constraint that is gauge-fixed and integrated out in Section 4, whereas the Lifshitz scalar in (2.13) has a physical zero mode with Hamiltonian p_0^2/2. Thus the advertised equivalence to the standard Lifshitz boson is established only for the nonzero-mode sector, not for the full cylinder or torus. The authors should either analyze the zero-mode and boundary sector explicitly or weaken the claim in the abstract and Section 2.1 to an equivalence of the nonzero modes.
  2. [3.2.3, Eqs. (3.29)–(3.31)] The nonlocal conformal symmetry is asserted but not verified. The transformation law (3.29) with kernel (3.30) and the conserved charge (3.31) are written down, but no computation shows that δX in (3.29) leaves the action (2.1) invariant for z>1. Since the kernel f is nonlocal and time-dependent through the modes η_j, this is not an immediate consequence of the local z=1 result. The authors should provide a direct variation of the action or a proof that L[ε] generates (3.29) as a Hamiltonian symmetry through the Dirac brackets. Without this, the central claim that the standard conformal symmetry is still present in a nonlocal realization is unsupported.
  3. [5, Eq. (5.1)] The quantum Virasoro algebra with central charge 1/12 is stated in (5.1), but the derivation from the Sugawara construction (3.27) is not given. In particular, the normal-ordering prescription for the products K_j K_{n−j} and the computation of the anomaly are omitted. Because the paper emphasizes the symmetry structure and uses the Virasoro algebra in the ending remarks, this is a load-bearing point and should be demonstrated explicitly, even if the final result is standard.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Abstract and 2.1] The abstract and Section 2.1 say that the standard free boson with Lifshitz scaling is 'recovered', but the body of Section 2.1 limits the statement to 'up to zero modes'. The abstract should be qualified accordingly.
  2. [2.1, Eq. (2.14)] The notation ∂_x^{(1−z)/2} should be defined precisely as a pseudo-differential operator on the nonzero Fourier modes; for odd z it is an integer power, but when negative it is an inverse derivative and the domain of definition matters.
  3. [4, footnote 2 and Eq. (4.12)] The exclusion of winding modes and the gauge-fixing of the chiral zero mode should be discussed in relation to the word 'exact' in the partition function claim, so that the reader understands precisely which sector of the torus is being summed over.
  4. [4.1, Eqs. (4.7)–(4.8)] The cancellation between the second-class determinant and a contribution from the Euclidean action is stated but not displayed; an outline of the algebra would improve the readability of the path-integral derivation.
  5. [4.2, Eqs. (4.16)–(4.21)] The text should state explicitly that the microscopic counting uses the same single-particle energies E_k=k^z that entered the path integral, so the agreement between the two methods is a consistency check rather than an independent derivation of the spectrum.
  6. [3.2.3, Eq. (3.33)] The identity Σ_j η_j(φ,t)η_{−j}(φ',t) = 2πδ(φ−φ') is distributional and requires a convergence/stieltjes prescription; it would be useful to state the sense in which this sum is defined.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the chiral action is introduced independently, the Lifshitz equivalence is an explicit nonlocal field redefinition, and the partition function is derived from the action rather than fitted.

full rationale

The paper's central objects are introduced by definition, not derived from the target results: the anisotropic chiral action is posited in eq. (2.1), and its field equation is then integrated to recover the expected chiral dispersion in eq. (2.5). The claimed recovery of the standard Lifshitz boson in Section 2.1 is an explicit mathematical map: eq. (2.14) defines a nonlocal field redefinition, and substitution into the Hamiltonian action (2.13) yields the sum of two chiral actions, eq. (2.15). This is a construction/equivalence proof, not a prediction that reduces to its own input; the Lifshitz action (2.7) is an independent benchmark, not something fitted from the chiral theory. The partition function is first computed from the Hamiltonian path integral in Section 4.1, with the infinite product regularized by zeta-function methods, yielding eq. (4.12). The later trace over u(1) descendants in Section 4.2 uses the same Hamiltonian and current algebra, so the agreement between eqs. (4.12) and (4.21) is a consistency check, and the paper explicitly presents it as 'reassuring' rather than as an independent determination. No free parameter is fitted and renamed as a prediction, no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' prior work, and no ansatz is smuggled in via citation. The self-citations to [29,33,35] appear as context or as benchmarks for the entropy formula and for the chiral-copy statement, not as load-bearing premises for the central derivation. The unanalyzed zero-mode and boundary sectors in the nonlocal map (2.14) and in footnote 2 are a completeness gap in the equivalence claim, but they do not make the derivation circular. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks, and no significant circularity is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard methods (constraint quantization, zeta regularization) plus two theory-specific assumptions: z odd, and validity of the nonlocal field redefinition up to zero modes. No numerical constants are fitted; σ is an input scale. No new entities are postulated.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The dynamical exponent z is restricted to odd positive integers so that the modes e^{i(kx ± (iσk)^{z-1} k t)} propagate with a single chirality.
    Section 1 and footnote 1; if z is even, the phase velocity becomes purely imaginary and no chiral propagation exists.
  • standard math The Dirac/constraint quantization procedure, including the path integral measure for systems with first and second class constraints, is valid.
    Used in Sections 3.1 and 4, eqs. (4.1)-(4.2), following Senjanovic, Faddeev-Slavnov, and Henneaux-Teitelboim.
  • standard math The divergent infinite product in (4.8) can be evaluated by zeta-function regularization.
    Section 4.1, eqs. (4.9)-(4.12); this fixes the Casimir energy E0 = -ζ(-z)/(2l).
  • domain assumption The nonlocal field redefinition (2.14) is invertible up to zero modes and the boundary terms can be dropped.
    Section 2.1; inverse powers of ∂_x require integration constants that are not fully specified.
  • standard math The number-theoretic identities: ∏(1-q^{n^z})^{-1} is the generating function of partitions into z-th powers, and Wright's asymptotic formula (4.26) for p_z(N).
    Sections 4.2 and 4.3; external results from Hardy-Ramanujan and Wright.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The anisotropic chiral boson." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/IF5RXN6N

@misc{pith2026190902699,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The anisotropic chiral boson},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/IF5RXN6N}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1909.02699}
}
abstract

We construct the theory of a chiral boson with anisotropic scaling, characterized by a dynamical exponent $z$, whose action reduces to that of Floreanini and Jackiw in the isotropic case ($z=1$). The standard free boson with Lifshitz scaling is recovered when both chiralities are nonlocally combined. Its canonical structure and symmetries are also analyzed. As in the isotropic case, the theory is also endowed with a current algebra. Noteworthy, the standard conformal symmetry is shown to be still present, but realized in a nonlocal way. The exact form of the partition function at finite temperature is obtained from the path integral, as well as from the trace over $\hat{u}(1)$ descendants. It is essentially given by the generating function of the number of partitions of an integer into $z$-th powers, being a well-known object in number theory. Thus, the asymptotic growth of the number of states at fixed energy, including subleading corrections, can be obtained from the appropriate extension of the renowned result of Hardy and Ramanujan.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

55 extracted references · 33 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    The Heterotic String,

    D. J. Gross, J. A. Harvey, E. J. Martinec, and R. Rohm, “The Heterotic String,”Phys. Rev. Lett. 54 (1985) 502–505

    work page 1985

  2. [2]

    Principles of string theory,

    L. Brink and M. Henneaux, “Principles of string theory,”New York, USA: PLENUM 279p (1988)

    work page 1988

  3. [3]

    Quantum Hall effect,

    M. Stone, “Quantum Hall effect,”Singapore, Singapore: World Scientific 371 p(1992)

    work page 1992

  4. [4]

    Lectures on the Quantum Hall Effect,

    D. Tong, “Lectures on the Quantum Hall Effect,” 2016.1606.06687

    work page arXiv 2016

  5. [5]

    Manifest Lorentz Invariance Sometimes Requires Nonlinearity,

    W. Siegel, “Manifest Lorentz Invariance Sometimes Requires Nonlinearity,”Nucl. Phys. B238 (1984) 307–316

    work page 1984

  6. [6]

    Consistent quantum mechanics of chiral p forms,

    M. Henneaux and C. Teitelboim, “Consistent quantum mechanics of chiral p forms,” in2nd Meeting on Quantum Mechanics of Fundamental Systems (CECS) Santiago, Chile, December 17-20, 1987, pp. 79–112. 1987

    work page 1987

  7. [7]

    Dynamics of Chiral (Selfdual)P Forms,

    M. Henneaux and C. Teitelboim, “Dynamics of Chiral (Selfdual)P Forms,”Phys. Lett. B206 (1988) 650–654

    work page 1988

  8. [8]

    On Lorentz invariant actions for chiral p forms,

    P. Pasti, D. P. Sorokin, and M. Tonin, “On Lorentz invariant actions for chiral p forms,” Phys. Rev. D55 (1997) 6292–6298,hep-th/9611100

    arXiv 1997

Show all 55 references
  1. [9]

    Selfdual Fields as Charge Density Solitons,

    R. Floreanini and R. Jackiw, “Selfdual Fields as Charge Density Solitons,”Phys.Rev.Lett. 59 (1987) 1873

    1987

  2. [10]

    Non-relativistic holography,

    M. Taylor, “Non-relativistic holography,”0812.0530

    arXiv

  3. [11]

    Lectures on holographic methods for condensed matter physics,

    S. A. Hartnoll, “Lectures on holographic methods for condensed matter physics,”0903.3246

    arXiv

  4. [12]

    Horizons, holography and condensed matter,

    S. A. Hartnoll, “Horizons, holography and condensed matter,” inBlack holes in higher dimensions, G. T. Horowitz, ed., pp. 387–419. 2012.1106.4324. – 14 –

    2012

  5. [13]

    Lifshitz holography,

    M. Taylor, “Lifshitz holography,”Class. Quant. Grav.33 (2016), no. 3, 033001,1512.03554

    2016 arXiv

  6. [14]

    On the theory of second-order phase transitionsi & ii,

    E. Lifshitz, “On the theory of second-order phase transitionsi & ii,”Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz11 (1941), no. 255, 269

    1941

  7. [15]

    Lifshitz Scale Anomalies,

    I. Arav, S. Chapman, and Y. Oz, “Lifshitz Scale Anomalies,”JHEP 02 (2015) 078, 1410.5831

    2015 arXiv

  8. [16]

    On Supersymmetric Lifshitz Field Theories,

    S. Chapman, Y. Oz, and A. Raviv-Moshe, “On Supersymmetric Lifshitz Field Theories,” JHEP 10 (2015) 162, 1508.03338

    2015 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Lifshitz Anomalies, Ward Identities and Split Dimensional Regularization,

    I. Arav, Y. Oz, and A. Raviv-Moshe, “Lifshitz Anomalies, Ward Identities and Split Dimensional Regularization,”JHEP 03 (2017) 088, 1612.03500

    2017 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Holomorphic Structure and Quantum Critical Points in Supersymmetric Lifshitz Field Theories,

    I. Arav, Y. Oz, and A. Raviv-Moshe, “Holomorphic Structure and Quantum Critical Points in Supersymmetric Lifshitz Field Theories,”1908.03220

    1908 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Quantum critical phenomena,

    J. A. Hertz, “Quantum critical phenomena,”Phys. Rev. B14 (1976) 1165–1184

    1976

  12. [20]

    Sachdev,Quantum Phase Transitions

    S. Sachdev,Quantum Phase Transitions. Cambridge University Press, 1999

    1999

  13. [21]

    Quantum Shock Waves: The case for non-linear effects in dynamics of electronic liquids,

    E. Bettelheim, A. G. Abanov, and P. Wiegmann, “Quantum Shock Waves: The case for non-linear effects in dynamics of electronic liquids,”Phys. Rev. Lett.97 (2006) 246401, cond-mat/0606778

    2006 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Non-Linear hydrodynamics and Fractionally Quantized Solitons at Fractional Quantum Hall Edge,

    P. Wiegmann, “Non-Linear hydrodynamics and Fractionally Quantized Solitons at Fractional Quantum Hall Edge,”Phys. Rev. Lett.108 (2012) 206810, 1112.0810

    2012 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Equilibration in one-dimensional quantum hydrodynamic systems,

    S. Sotiriadis, “Equilibration in one-dimensional quantum hydrodynamic systems,”J. Phys. A50 (2017), no. 42, 424004,1612.00373

    2017 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Two dimensional non-Fermi liquid metals: a solvable large N limit,

    J. A. Damia, S. Kachru, S. Raghu, and G. Torroba, “Two dimensional non-Fermi liquid metals: a solvable large N limit,”Phys. Rev. Lett.123 (2019), no. 9, 096402,1905.08256

    2019 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Gravity Duals of Lifshitz-like Fixed Points,

    S. Kachru, X. Liu, and M. Mulligan, “Gravity Duals of Lifshitz-like Fixed Points,”Phys.Rev. D78 (2008) 106005, 0808.1725

    2008 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Black Holes in asymptotically Lifshitz spacetimes with arbitrary critical exponent,

    G. Bertoldi, B. A. Burrington, and A. Peet, “Black Holes in asymptotically Lifshitz spacetimes with arbitrary critical exponent,”Phys. Rev. D80 (2009) 126003, 0905.3183

    2009 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Thermodynamics of black branes in asymptotically Lifshitz spacetimes,

    G. Bertoldi, B. A. Burrington, and A. W. Peet, “Thermodynamics of black branes in asymptotically Lifshitz spacetimes,”Phys. Rev. D80 (2009) 126004, 0907.4755

    2009 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Holographic Metamagnetism, Quantum Criticality, and Crossover Behavior,

    E. D’Hoker and P. Kraus, “Holographic Metamagnetism, Quantum Criticality, and Crossover Behavior,”JHEP 05 (2010) 083, 1003.1302

    2010 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Field theories with anisotropic scaling in 2D, solitons and the microscopic entropy of asymptotically Lifshitz black holes,

    H. A. González, D. Tempo, and R. Troncoso, “Field theories with anisotropic scaling in 2D, solitons and the microscopic entropy of asymptotically Lifshitz black holes,”JHEP 11 (2011) 066, 1107.3647

    2011 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Emergent scale invariance of disordered horizons,

    S. A. Hartnoll, D. M. Ramirez, and J. E. Santos, “Emergent scale invariance of disordered horizons,”JHEP 09 (2015) 160, 1504.03324

    2015 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Asymptotically Lifshitz wormholes and black holes for Lovelock gravity in vacuum,

    J. Matulich and R. Troncoso, “Asymptotically Lifshitz wormholes and black holes for Lovelock gravity in vacuum,”JHEP 10 (2011) 118, 1107.5568

    2011 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Lifshitz Black Hole in Three Dimensions,

    E. Ayon-Beato, A. Garbarz, G. Giribet, and M. Hassaine, “Lifshitz Black Hole in Three Dimensions,”Phys.Rev. D80 (2009) 104029, 0909.1347

    2009 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Boundary conditions for General Relativity on AdS3 and the KdV hierarchy,

    A. Pérez , D. Tempo, and R. Troncoso, “Boundary conditions for General Relativity on AdS3 and the KdV hierarchy,”JHEP 06 (2016) 103, 1605.04490. – 15 –

    2016 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Integrable systems with BMS3 Poisson structure and the dynamics of locally flat spacetimes,

    O. Fuentealba, J. Matulich, A. Pérez , M. Pino, P. Rodriguez, D. Tempo, and R. Troncoso, “Integrable systems with BMS3 Poisson structure and the dynamics of locally flat spacetimes,”JHEP 01 (2018) 148, 1711.02646

    2018 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Lifshitz Scaling, Microstate Counting from Number Theory and Black Hole Entropy,

    D. Melnikov, F. Novaes, A. Pérez , and R. Troncoso, “Lifshitz Scaling, Microstate Counting from Number Theory and Black Hole Entropy,”JHEP 06 (2019) 054, 1808.04034

    2019 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Revisiting the asymptotic dynamics of General Relativity on AdS3,

    H. A. González, J. Matulich, M. Pino, and R. Troncoso, “Revisiting the asymptotic dynamics of General Relativity on AdS3,”JHEP 1812 (2018) 115, 1809.02749

    2018 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Near horizon dynamics of three dimensional black holes,

    D. Grumiller and W. Merbis, “Near horizon dynamics of three dimensional black holes,” 1906.10694

    1906 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Boundary conditions for General Relativity in three-dimensional spacetimes, integrable systems and the KdV/mKdV hierarchies,

    E. Ojeda and A. Pérez , “Boundary conditions for General Relativity in three-dimensional spacetimes, integrable systems and the KdV/mKdV hierarchies,”JHEP 08 (2019) 079, 1906.11226

    2019 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Quantum phase transitions in frustrated quantum antiferromagnets,

    A. Chubukov, S. Sachdev, and T. Senthil, “Quantum phase transitions in frustrated quantum antiferromagnets,”Nucl.Phys. B426 (1994) 601–643

    1994

  32. [40]

    Ferromagnetic transition in one-dimensional itinerant electron systems,

    K. Yang, “Ferromagnetic transition in one-dimensional itinerant electron systems,”Phys. Rev. Lett.93 (Aug, 2004) 066401

    2004

  33. [41]

    Critical exponents of the chiral Potts model from conformal field theory,

    J. L. Cardy, “Critical exponents of the chiral Potts model from conformal field theory,” Nucl.Phys. B389 (1993) 577–586,hep-th/9210002

    1993 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Chiral Scale and Conformal Invariance in 2D Quantum Field Theory,

    D. M. Hofman and A. Strominger, “Chiral Scale and Conformal Invariance in 2D Quantum Field Theory,”Phys.Rev.Lett. 107 (2011) 161601, 1107.2917

    2011 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Asymptotic formulaæ in combinatory analysis,

    G. H. Hardy and S. Ramanujan, “Asymptotic formulaæ in combinatory analysis,” Proceedings of the London Mathematical Society2 (1918), no. 1, 75–115

    1918

  36. [44]

    Hamiltonian Reduction of Unconstrained and Constrained Systems,

    L. D. Faddeev and R. Jackiw, “Hamiltonian Reduction of Unconstrained and Constrained Systems,”Phys. Rev. Lett.60 (1988) 1692–1694

    1988

  37. [45]

    Conformal field theory,

    P. Di Francesco, P. Mathieu, and D. Senechal, “Conformal field theory,” (2012)Springer Science & Business Media

    2012

  38. [46]

    Path Integral Quantization of Field Theories with Second Class Constraints,

    P. Senjanovic, “Path Integral Quantization of Field Theories with Second Class Constraints,” Annals Phys. 100 (1976) 227–261. [Erratum: Annals Phys.209,248(1991)]

    1976

  39. [47]

    Gauge fields. Introduction to quantum theory,

    L. D. Faddeev and A. A. Slavnov, “Gauge fields. Introduction to quantum theory,”Front. Phys. 50 (1980) 1–232. [Front. Phys.,1(1991)]

    1980

  40. [48]

    Henneaux and C

    M. Henneaux and C. Teitelboim,Quantization of gauge systems. Princeton, USA: Univ. Pr. (1992) 520 p

    1992

  41. [49]

    A theory of reparameterizations for AdS3 gravity,

    J. Cotler and K. Jensen, “A theory of reparameterizations for AdS3 gravity,”JHEP 02 (2019) 079, 1808.03263

    2019 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Power partitions,

    A. Gafni, “Power partitions,”Journal of Number Theory163 (2016) 19–42.1506.06124

    2016 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Asymptotic partition formulae. iii. partitions into k -th powers,

    E. M. Wright, “Asymptotic partition formulae. iii. partitions into k -th powers,”Acta Math. 63 (1934) 143–191

    1934

  44. [52]

    Squares: additive questions and partitions,

    R. C. Vaughan, “Squares: additive questions and partitions,”International Journal of Number Theory11 (2015), no. 05, 1367–1409

    2015

  45. [53]

    Power partitions and saddle-point method,

    G. Tenenbaum, J. Wu, and Y.-L. Li, “Power partitions and saddle-point method,”Journal of Number Theory204 (2019) 435–445.1901.02234. – 16 –

    2019 arXiv

  46. [54]

    An explicit bound for the number of partitions into roots,

    F. Luca and D. Ralaivaosaona, “An explicit bound for the number of partitions into roots,” Journal of Number theory169 (2016) 250–264

    2016

  47. [55]

    On the r-th root partition function, ii,

    Y.-L. Li and Y.-G. Chen, “On the r-th root partition function, ii,”Journal of Number Theory 188 (2018) 392–409. – 17 –

    2018

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.