Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 70 references

The paper argues that infrared-dressed quantum states—a particle wrapped in soft gauge bosons—are precisely the irreducible unitary representations of asymptotic symmetry groups extended with logarithmic dual symmetries and a Heisenberg cen

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 21:06 UTC pith:IVS6ECSQ

load-bearing objection A plausible synthesis that frames the right open problem, but the load-bearing representation-theoretic step is unproved and the abstract oversells the result. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.16179 v1 pith:IVS6ECSQ submitted 2026-07-17 hep-th

Dressed States Call for Logarithmic Asymptotic Symmetries

Jorrit Bosma , Jeremy A. Mann , Charles Marteau , Blagoje Oblak , Marios Petropoulos This is my paper
classification hep-th
keywords asymptotic symmetriesinfrared dressingsoft gauge bosonsHeisenberg central extensionlogarithmic symmetriesBMS groupirreducible unitary representationsinfrared structure
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's central claim is that the Hilbert space of a dressed particle (a naked particle plus a cloud of zero-frequency gauge bosons) is not just any construction: it is the carrier space of an irreducible unitary representation of an extended asymptotic symmetry group. Standard asymptotic symmetry groups such as the electromagnetic analogue of the BMS group are too small—their representations live on finite-dimensional orbits and leave no room for soft bosons. Adding logarithmic, canonically conjugate 'dual' symmetries produces an infinite-dimensional Heisenberg central extension, and with it the Lorentz orbits collapse to a point, so the representations are labelled only by mass, spin, and charge while their carrier spaces factorize as a naked particle space times a soft-boson Fock space. If correct, this gives a group-theoretic reason for why infrared dressing is unavoidable and why logarithmic symmetries are not optional extras.

Core claim

Dressed states call for logarithmic asymptotic symmetries: the groups whose irreducible unitary representations are dressed particle states are the Heisenberg-extended versions of the asymptotic symmetry groups, denoted in the paper as \PMax and \BMS. The key structural fact is a non-commutativity between standard large gauge charges/supertranslations and their logarithmic duals, giving a central extension of Heisenberg type. As a result, Lorentz transformations act on soft degrees of freedom but their orbit is a single point; the representation labels reduce to the usual mass, spin, and electric charge, and the carrier space is a tensor product of an L2 space of a naked particle and a space

What carries the argument

The infinite-dimensional Heisenberg algebra generated by standard asymptotic charges Q_ε (functions ε on the celestial sphere) and their logarithmic partners eQ_η, with bracket {Q_ε, eQ_η} = ∫ sqrt(g) ε η. The bracket is the central extension. Its Lorentz covariance—ε and eF carry weight 0 and F and η carry weight 1 (or the analogous weights in gravity)—is what makes the pairing invariant and lets the Lorentz orbit collapse to a point, reducing the representation theory to that of a single soft irrep.

Load-bearing premise

The argument assumes that an irreducible unitary representation of the extended group restricts to a single irreducible representation of the infinite-dimensional soft Heisenberg subgroup, so that the Lorentz orbit is one point; the paper notes that the standard uniqueness theorem does not hold in infinite dimensions and that the required measure on the soft space is an open problem.

What would settle it

Construct an irreducible unitary representation of the extended group whose restriction to the soft Heisenberg subgroup is a direct integral of inequivalent irreps, or exhibit a Lorentz-invariant state that is not a coherent state of the logarithmic duals; either would break the factorization and the single-orbit step. Alternatively, find two inequivalent irreducible representations of the extended group with the same mass, spin, and charge but inequivalent soft sectors.

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

If this is right

  • If correct, every infrared-finite dressed state in QED and gravity is a state in an irreducible representation of the extended asymptotic symmetry group; the 'dressing' is not put in by hand but is forced by the group.
  • The standard asymptotic symmetry groups without logarithmic extensions are demonstrably too small: their induced representations have finite-dimensional orbit spaces, so they can never contain a Fock space of soft gauge bosons.
  • The central extension is responsible for the factorization of the dressed Hilbert space into a naked one-particle sector and a soft-boson sector, and for the fact that the same labels (mass, spin, charge) as in the undisguised case still classify the states.
  • In gravity, the extended BMS group's irreducible unitary representations carry the same labels as representations of the ordinary spacetime symmetry group, removing the extra orbit label that would appear in the unextended BMS construction.
  • The construction suggests that any complete asymptotic symmetry algebra of a gauge or gravitational theory must contain logarithmic duals together with the standard charges.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • A testable extension: the soft-boson sector should be realizable explicitly as the Fock space of a Gaussian field on the celestial sphere; one can check whether coherent states obtained by acting with logarithmic duals span the full soft space and whether the Lorentz action is irreducible there.
  • If the Heisenberg central extension is the origin of infrared dressing, one might expect soft theorems and memory effects to be derivable from the representation theory of this extended group alone, without separate assumptions about asymptotic states.
  • The open problem of defining an invariant measure on the soft space may be sidestepped by algebraic constructions of the representations, in which case the factorization corollary would remain valid even if the L2 picture is not.
  • The same reasoning could extend to non-Abelian gauge theories or to higher-spin asymptotic symmetries, where analogous logarithmic duals might be required for the dressing to be group-theoretically irreducible.

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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes that the Hilbert space of a dressed charged particle in QED or gravity, i.e. a naked one-particle state tensored with a Fock space of soft gauge bosons, can be realized as the carrier space of an irreducible unitary representation of the asymptotic symmetry group extended by logarithmic dual symmetries. The authors introduce extended Poincaré–Maxwell and BMS groups, (3.5) and (3.6), whose normal subgroups contain an infinite-dimensional Heisenberg algebra with central extension (2.3). They argue that, unlike the standard BMS or Poincaré–Maxwell groups whose irreps live on finite-dimensional orbits, the extended groups have irreps labeled by mass, spin, and charge, with carrier spaces factorizing as L²(R³) ⊗ L²(soft). The central representation-theoretic step is the claim that Lorentz transformations act on the dual of the Heisenberg normal subgroup with a single-point orbit, so that the soft part is uniquely determined up to the central charge.

Significance. If correct, the paper would provide a Wigner-like classification of IR-dressed states and would tie the existence of logarithmic asymptotic symmetries to the unitarity and irreducibility of physical Hilbert spaces. It synthesizes recent work on logarithmic symmetries and formulates a sharp question. The paper is honest about the open status of the measure on the soft function space and about the lack of a general classification theorem, which is a strength. However, the decisive representation-theoretic claim is not proved, and the factorization corollary is presented more definitively than the evidence supports.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 3, paragraph after 'There is more:'] The decisive step is the assertion that, because Lorentz transformations preserve the full carrier space H, their 'orbit' in the unitary dual of the Heisenberg group \widehat{LGT×LGT*} 'consists of a single point.' This does not follow. For infinite-dimensional Heisenberg groups, Stone–von Neumann uniqueness fails; inequivalent irreducible representations are parameterized by complex structures on the symplectic space of functions on S² (Shale), and the Lorentz group acts nontrivially on this parameter space through conformal transformations of S². Irreducibility of the full representation only implies that the restriction to the normal subgroup is supported on a single orbit in a direct-integral sense, not that the orbit is a singleton. A singleton would require an explicitly Lorentz-invariant complex structure or a Lorentz-invariant measure on the dual, neither of which is constructed.
  2. [Sec. 3, around eqs. (3.5)–(3.7)] The Hilbert space L²(ST*) (or L²(LGT*)) used in the factorization is not a well-defined Hilbert space: ST* is an infinite-dimensional function space with no natural measure, and the authors refer to [67] for the open problem of defining it. Thus the corollary that the dressed Hilbert space factorizes as L²(R³) ⊗ L²(soft) is a formal statement, not a proven result. To make the claim rigorous, one would need to supply a measure (or a Gaussian construction) that is Lorentz-invariant or at least quasi-invariant and compatible with the group action. As it stands, the statement 'we will view the soft Hilbert space abstractly as L²(LGT*)' hides the main difficulty.
  3. [Abstract and Sec. 4] The paper claims that 'it is the criterion of irreducibility that ultimately requires the presence of extended, dual symmetries' and that the answer is given by the specific extensions (3.5)–(3.6). However, the argument exhibits a form of reverse engineering: the Heisenberg extension is chosen precisely so that its Fock representations reproduce the known dressed-state Hilbert space, and then it is asserted that irreducibility forces this structure. No argument is given that excludes other extensions or shows that logarithmic duals are necessary rather than sufficient. The 'requires' wording is therefore too strong relative to the evidence presented.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 3, eqs. (3.5)–(3.6)] The notation for the hatted products is ambiguous: the text says 'the hatted factors on the right-hand side are the Heisenberg groups' but writes \LGT×LGT*, which looks like an ordinary direct product. Please clarify that (3.5)–(3.6) use the Heisenberg central extension (2.3).
  2. [Sec. 2, eq. (2.3)] The normalization of the central extension depends on the integration measure on S²; it may be worth stating that the bracket is the L² pairing and that the zero-average condition on η ensures the zero mode of ϵ does not appear, consistently with the separate U(1) factor.
  3. [Sec. 3, scalar vs. spin] The explicit factorization argument is given only for scalar particles, while the abstract and conclusion claim irreps are labeled by mass and spin. Please indicate how the spin multiplicity C^{2s+1} is incorporated and why it does not mix with the soft factor.
  4. [Sec. 2, eq. (2.4)] The definition of density weight w uses both the ratio of volume elements and a Jacobian factor, which looks redundant. Please clarify whether w is the Radon–Nikodym weight or the conformal weight, or remove the redundancy.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the paper transparently reverse-engineers groups to realize the known dressed-state Hilbert space; its main weakness is an unproved orbit-triviality assumption, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The paper is best read as a synthesis: it takes the logarithmic asymptotic symmetry algebra (2.3) from Fuentealba–Henneaux–Troessaert [27,28] and the Faddeev–Kulish dressed-state Hilbert space [32] as inputs, then constructs groups (3.5)–(3.6) whose normal subgroup is the Heisenberg group. The claim that irreducible representations contain a soft Fock space is true by construction: the Heisenberg group was chosen precisely because its Fock representations are the soft-photon/graviton Hilbert spaces, and the paper says so ('we will view the soft Hilbert space abstractly as L^2(LGT*)'). This is reverse-engineering, not circularity, because the dressed-state structure is not being derived from the group; the group is being engineered to reproduce it. The factorization H = L^2(R^3) ⊗ L^2(ST*) is presented as a corollary, but in the text it follows only after the assertion 'since the action of the Lorentz group preserves the carrier space as a whole, its orbit consists of a single point' — a step that is not proved and that the authors themselves qualify by noting that Stone–von Neumann 'fails to hold in infinite dimension' and that a general classification theorem is not known. That is a rigor gap in the central claim, but it does not make the derivation circular: the conclusion is conditional on an unproved assumption, not identical to the input. Self-citations (Oblak's BMS papers [48,49,51,61]) appear only as background on three-dimensional gravity and celestial-sphere conventions and are not load-bearing. No fitted parameters are renamed as predictions. Accordingly, the paper shows no significant circularity, though its headline result is less strong than the abstract suggests.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 5 axioms · 1 invented entities

No free parameters: no numbers are fitted to data; the unit coefficient in the central bracket (2.3) is a normalization convention, not a fit. The argument's inputs are (i) the log-extended charge algebra from [27–29], which the paper imports without re-deriving the fall-off/parity conditions; (ii) standard Mackey/orbit-method facts for Abelian normal subgroups; (iii) an unproven uniqueness-style step for the infinite-dimensional soft Heisenberg sector; (iv) the identification of soft states with coherent states from [32–37]; and (v) the open problem of an invariant measure on the dual-supertranslation space [67]. No new physical entities are proposed; the extended groups are composites of prior objects.

axioms (5)
  • domain assumption The log fall-off asymptotic symmetry algebra is u(1) ⊕ Heisenberg(LGT, LGT*) with bracket (2.3)
    Imported from [27–29]; the paper omits the fall-off and parity conditions ('all of which we omit', Sec. 2) and states (2.3) without derivation.
  • standard math Mackey orbit construction classifies irreps of semidirect products with Abelian normal subgroups (3.2)-(3.3)
    Used to argue standard BMS/PMax irreps live on finite-dimensional orbits [66].
  • ad hoc to paper An irrep of (3.5)/(3.6) restricts to a single irrep of the Heisenberg normal subgroup, and the Lorentz action preserves that irrep class ('orbit = single point')
    Asserted in Sec. 3 without a theorem; authors note no general classification exists; Stone–von Neumann uniqueness fails in infinite dimensions.
  • domain assumption L2(LGT*) / L2(ST*) is a well-defined Hilbert space with an invariant measure
    The paper identifies the soft sector abstractly as L2 of the dual and cites the open problem [67].
  • domain assumption Soft Hilbert space of a Gaussian field = Fock space of coherent states
    Standard dressed-state result [32–37] used to identify the soft irrep content.
invented entities (1)
  • Extended Poincaré–Maxwell group (3.5) and extended BMS group (3.6) no independent evidence
    purpose: Groups whose irreducible unitary representations are claimed to be dressed-particle Hilbert spaces
    Composite objects built from prior elements (Lorentz × [R4 × U(1) × Heisenberg]); no new physical degrees of freedom proposed; no falsifiable handle outside the paper — they are mathematical organizers, not new particles or forces.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 11772 in / 17268 out tokens · 145796 ms · 2026-08-01T21:06:51.133239+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

Inspired by Wigner's classification of elementary particles as irreducible unitary representations of a spacetime symmetry group, we ask what group can give rise in this way to the quantum states of a particle dressed with clouds of infrared gauge bosons. We show that the answer is given by standard asymptotic symmetries (such as BMS in the gravitational case), supplemented by the logarithmic symmetries identified in arXiv:2305.05436. A corollary is the factorization of the Hilbert space of a dressed particle as a tensor product of the space of `naked' one-particle states with a Hilbert space of soft gauge bosons. The latter cannot be obtained without logarithmic transformations, which are ultimately responsible for the presence of a crucial Heisenberg central extension.

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

70 extracted references · 42 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Asymptotic Symmetry Algebra of Einstein Gravity and Lorentz Generators,

    O. Fuentealba, M. Henneaux, and C. Troessaert, “Asymptotic Symmetry Algebra of Einstein Gravity and Lorentz Generators,”Phys. Rev. Lett.131(2023), no. 11, 111402,2305.05436

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  2. [2]

    Gravitational waves in general relativity. 7. Waves from axisymmetric isolated systems,

    H. Bondi, M. G. J. van der Burg, and A. W. K. Metzner, “Gravitational waves in general relativity. 7. Waves from axisymmetric isolated systems,”Proceedings of the Royal Society of LondonA269(1962) 21–52

    1962

  3. [3]

    Gravitational waves in general relativity. 8. Waves in asymptotically flat space-times,

    R. K. Sachs, “Gravitational waves in general relativity. 8. Waves in asymptotically flat space-times,”Proceedings of the Royal Society of LondonA270(1962) 103–126

    1962

  4. [4]

    Asymptotic symmetries in gravitational theory,

    R. Sachs, “Asymptotic symmetries in gravitational theory,”Physical Review128 (1962) 2851–2864

    1962

  5. [5]

    Central Charges in the Canonical Realization of Asymptotic Symmetries: An Example from Three-Dimensional Gravity,

    J. D. Brown and M. Henneaux, “Central Charges in the Canonical Realization of Asymptotic Symmetries: An Example from Three-Dimensional Gravity,”Commu- nications in Mathematical Physics104(1986) 207–226

    1986

  6. [6]

    Symmetries of asymptotically flat 4-dimensional spacetimesatnullinfinityrevisited,

    G. Barnich and C. Troessaert, “Symmetries of asymptotically flat 4-dimensional spacetimesatnullinfinityrevisited,”Phys. Rev. Lett.105(2010)111103,0909.2617

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  7. [7]

    Aspects of the BMS/CFT correspondence,

    G. Barnich and C. Troessaert, “Aspects of the BMS/CFT correspondence,”JHEP 05(2010) 062,1001.1541

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  8. [8]

    BMS charge algebra,

    G. Barnich and C. Troessaert, “BMS charge algebra,”JHEP12(2011) 105, 1106.0213

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  9. [9]

    New Symmetries of Massless QED,

    T. He, P. Mitra, A. P. Porfyriadis, and A. Strominger, “New Symmetries of Massless QED,”JHEP10(2014) 112,1407.3789

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  10. [10]

    Strominger,Lectures on the Infrared Structure of Gravity and Gauge Theory

    A. Strominger,Lectures on the Infrared Structure of Gravity and Gauge Theory. Princeton University Press, 3, 2017

    2017

  11. [11]

    Radiation of gravitational waves by a cluster of superdense stars,

    Y. B. Zel’dovich and A. Polnarev, “Radiation of gravitational waves by a cluster of superdense stars,”Sov. Astron.18(1974) 17

    1974

  12. [12]

    Kinematic Resonance and Memory Effect in Free Mass Gravitational Antennas,

    V. B. Braginsky and L. P. Grishchuk, “Kinematic Resonance and Memory Effect in Free Mass Gravitational Antennas,”Sov. Phys. JETP62(1985) 427–430. [Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz.89,744(1985)]

    1985

  13. [13]

    Gravitational-wave bursts with memory: The Christodoulou effect,

    K. S. Thorne, “Gravitational-wave bursts with memory: The Christodoulou effect,” Phys. Rev.D45(1992), no. 2, 520–524

    1992

  14. [14]

    The Electromagnetic Christodoulou Memory Effect and its Application to Neutron Star Binary Mergers,

    L. Bieri, P. Chen, and S.-T. Yau, “The Electromagnetic Christodoulou Memory Effect and its Application to Neutron Star Binary Mergers,”Class. Quant. Grav.29 (2012) 215003,1110.0410

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  15. [15]

    On BMS Invariance of Gravitational Scattering,

    A. Strominger, “On BMS Invariance of Gravitational Scattering,”JHEP07(2014) 152,1312.2229

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  16. [16]

    BMS supertranslations and Wein- berg’s soft graviton theorem,

    T. He, V. Lysov, P. Mitra, and A. Strominger, “BMS supertranslations and Wein- berg’s soft graviton theorem,”JHEP05(2015) 151,1401.7026. 11

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  17. [17]

    Soft theorems and spontaneous symmetry breaking,

    S. Agrawal and K. Nguyen, “Soft theorems and spontaneous symmetry breaking,” Phys. Rev. D112(2025), no. 2, L021903,2504.10577

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  18. [18]

    Large gauge symmetries and asymptotic states in QED,

    B. Gabai and A. Sever, “Large gauge symmetries and asymptotic states in QED,” JHEP12(2016) 095,1607.08599

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  19. [19]

    Infrared Divergences in QED, Revisited,

    D. Kapec, M. Perry, A.-M. Raclariu, and A. Strominger, “Infrared Divergences in QED, Revisited,”Phys. Rev. D96(2017), no. 8, 085002,1705.04311

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  20. [20]

    Soft Factorization in QED from 2D Kac- Moody Symmetry,

    A. Nande, M. Pate, and A. Strominger, “Soft Factorization in QED from 2D Kac- Moody Symmetry,”JHEP02(2018) 079,1705.00608

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  21. [21]

    BMS Supertranslation Symmetry Implies Faddeev-Kulish Amplitudes,

    S. Choi and R. Akhoury, “BMS Supertranslation Symmetry Implies Faddeev-Kulish Amplitudes,”JHEP02(2018) 171,1712.04551

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  22. [22]

    Unified geometric framework for boundary charges and particle dressings,

    H. Gomes and A. Riello, “Unified geometric framework for boundary charges and particle dressings,”Phys. Rev. D98(2018), no. 2, 025013,1804.01919

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  23. [23]

    Dressed states from gauge invariance,

    H. Hirai and S. Sugishita, “Dressed states from gauge invariance,”JHEP06(2019) 023,1901.09935

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  24. [24]

    IR finite S-matrix by gauge invariant dressed states,

    H. Hirai and S. Sugishita, “IR finite S-matrix by gauge invariant dressed states,” JHEP02(2021) 025,2009.11716

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  25. [25]

    Dress code for infrared safe scattering in QED,

    H. Hirai and S. Sugishita, “Dress code for infrared safe scattering in QED,”PTEP 2023(2023), no. 5, 053B04,2209.00608

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  26. [26]

    Dressed asymptotic states and QED infrared physics,

    H. Furugori and S. Nojiri, “Dressed asymptotic states and QED infrared physics,” Phys. Rev. D104(2021), no. 12, 125004,2007.02518

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  27. [27]

    Logarithmic supertranslations and supertranslation-invariant Lorentz charges,

    O. Fuentealba, M. Henneaux, and C. Troessaert, “Logarithmic supertranslations and supertranslation-invariant Lorentz charges,”JHEP02(2023) 248,2211.10941

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  28. [28]

    A note on the asymptotic symme- tries of electromagnetism,

    O. Fuentealba, M. Henneaux, and C. Troessaert, “A note on the asymptotic symme- tries of electromagnetism,”JHEP03(2023) 073,2301.05989

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  29. [29]

    Logarithmic angle-dependent gauge transforma- tions at null infinity,

    O. Fuentealba and M. Henneaux, “Logarithmic angle-dependent gauge transforma- tions at null infinity,”JHEP07(2025) 112,2504.05385

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    Kac-Moody symmetry in the light front of gauge theories,

    H. A. González, O. Labrin, and O. Miskovic, “Kac-Moody symmetry in the light front of gauge theories,”JHEP06(2023) 165,2304.03211

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  31. [31]

    Gauge invariant formulation of quantum electrodynamics,

    P. A. Dirac, “Gauge invariant formulation of quantum electrodynamics,”Can. J. Phys.33(1955) 650

    1955

  32. [32]

    Asymptotic conditions and infrared diver- gences in quantum electrodynamics,

    P. P. Kulish and L. D. Faddeev, “Asymptotic conditions and infrared diver- gences in quantum electrodynamics,”Theor. Math. Phys.4(1970) 745. [Teor. Mat. Fiz.4,153(1970)]

    1970

  33. [33]

    Infrared Divergence in Quantum Electrodynamics,

    V. Chung, “Infrared Divergence in Quantum Electrodynamics,”Phys. Rev.140 (1965) B1110–B1122

    1965

  34. [34]

    Coherent Soft-Photon States and Infrared Divergences. I. Classical Currents,

    T. W. B. Kibble, “Coherent Soft-Photon States and Infrared Divergences. I. Classical Currents,”J. Math. Phys.9(1968), no. 2, 315–324

    1968

  35. [35]

    Coherent soft-photon states and infrared divergences. ii. mass-shell singularities of green’s functions,

    T. W. B. Kibble, “Coherent soft-photon states and infrared divergences. ii. mass-shell singularities of green’s functions,”Phys. Rev.173(1968) 1527–1535. 12

    1968

  36. [36]

    Coherent soft-photon states and infrared divergences. iii. asymp- totic states and reduction formulas,

    T. W. B. Kibble, “Coherent soft-photon states and infrared divergences. iii. asymp- totic states and reduction formulas,”Phys. Rev.174(1968) 1882–1901

    1968

  37. [37]

    Coherent soft-photon states and infrared divergences. iv. the scattering operator,

    T. W. B. Kibble, “Coherent soft-photon states and infrared divergences. iv. the scattering operator,”Phys. Rev.175(1968) 1624–1640

    1968

  38. [38]

    On Unitary Representations of the Inhomogeneous Lorentz Group,

    E. P. Wigner, “On Unitary Representations of the Inhomogeneous Lorentz Group,” Ann. Math.40(1939) 149–204. [Reprint: Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl.6,9(1989)]

    1939

  39. [39]

    Asymptotically flat space-times and elementary particles,

    P. J. McCarthy, “Asymptotically flat space-times and elementary particles,”Phys. Rev. Lett.29(1972) 817–819

    1972

  40. [40]

    Structure of the Bondi-Metzner-Sachs Group,

    P. J. McCarthy, “Structure of the Bondi-Metzner-Sachs Group,”J. Math. Phys.13 (1972), no. 11, 1837–1842

    1972

  41. [41]

    Representations of the Bondi-Metzner-Sachs Group. I. Determina- tion of the Representations,

    P. J. McCarthy, “Representations of the Bondi-Metzner-Sachs Group. I. Determina- tion of the Representations,”Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond.A330(1972), no. 1583, 517–535

    1972

  42. [42]

    Representations of the Bondi-Metzner-Sachs Group. II. Proper- ties and Classification of the Representations,

    P. J. McCarthy, “Representations of the Bondi-Metzner-Sachs Group. II. Proper- ties and Classification of the Representations,”Proceedings of the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences333(1973), no. 1594, 317–336

    1973

  43. [43]

    Representations of the Bondi-Metzner-Sachs Group. III. Poincaré Spin Multiplicities and Irreducibility,

    P. J. McCarthy and M. Crampin, “Representations of the Bondi-Metzner-Sachs Group. III. Poincaré Spin Multiplicities and Irreducibility,”Proceedings of the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences335(1973), no. 1602, 301–311

    1973

  44. [44]

    BMSparticles,

    X.Bekaert, L. Donnay, and Y.Herfray, “BMSparticles,”Phys. Rev. Lett.135(2025), no. 13, 131602,2412.06002

    arXiv 2025

  45. [45]

    BMS Representations for Generic Supermomentum,

    X. Bekaert and Y. Herfray, “BMS Representations for Generic Supermomentum,” Commun. Math. Phys.407(2026), no. 2, 35,2505.05368

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  46. [46]

    Extended BMS representations and strings,

    R. Ruzziconi and P. West, “Extended BMS representations and strings,”preprint(1, 2026)2601.00662

    arXiv 2026

  47. [47]

    Classical central extension for asymptotic symmetries at null infinity in three spacetime dimensions,

    G. Barnich and G. Compère, “Classical central extension for asymptotic symmetries at null infinity in three spacetime dimensions,”Class. Quant. Grav.24(2007) F15– F23,gr-qc/0610130

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  48. [48]

    Notes on the BMS group in three dimensions: I. Induced representations,

    G. Barnich and B. Oblak, “Notes on the BMS group in three dimensions: I. Induced representations,”Journal of High-Energy Physics06(2014) 129,1403.5803

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  49. [49]

    Notes on the BMS group in three dimensions: II. Coad- joint representation,

    G. Barnich and B. Oblak, “Notes on the BMS group in three dimensions: II. Coad- joint representation,”Journal of High-Energy Physics03(2015) 033,1502.00010

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  50. [50]

    Geometric actions for three- dimensional gravity,

    G. Barnich, H. A. Gonzalez, and P. Salgado-Rebolledo, “Geometric actions for three- dimensional gravity,”Class. Quant. Grav.35(2018), no. 1, 014003,1707.08887

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  51. [51]

    Oblak,BMS Particles in Three Dimensions

    B. Oblak,BMS Particles in Three Dimensions. Springer Theses, 2017

    2017

  52. [52]

    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. 13

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  53. [53]

    Magnetic Corrections to the Soft Photon Theorem,

    A. Strominger, “Magnetic Corrections to the Soft Photon Theorem,”Phys. Rev. Lett. 116(2016), no. 3, 031602,1509.00543

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  54. [54]

    Soft Charges and Electric- Magnetic Duality,

    V. Hosseinzadeh, A. Seraj, and M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, “Soft Charges and Electric- Magnetic Duality,”JHEP08(2018) 102,1806.01901

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  55. [55]

    New dual gravitational charges,

    H. Godazgar, M. Godazgar, and C. N. Pope, “New dual gravitational charges,”Phys. Rev. D99(2019), no. 2, 024013,1812.01641

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  56. [56]

    Dual gravitational charges and soft theorems,

    H. Godazgar, M. Godazgar, and C. N. Pope, “Dual gravitational charges and soft theorems,”JHEP10(2019) 123,1908.01164

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  57. [57]

    Properties of Dual Supertranslation Charges in Asymptot- ically Flat Spacetimes,

    U. Kol and M. Porrati, “Properties of Dual Supertranslation Charges in Asymptot- ically Flat Spacetimes,”Phys. Rev. D100(2019), no. 4, 046019,1907.00990

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  58. [58]

    Charges in the Extended BMS Algebra: Definitions and Applications,

    M. Porrati, “Charges in the Extended BMS Algebra: Definitions and Applications,” in4th International Conference on Holography, String Theory and Discrete Approach in Hanoi, Vietnam. 10, 2020.2010.12151

    arXiv 2020

  59. [59]

    Supertranslation-invariant dressed Lorentz charges,

    R. Javadinezhad, U. Kol, and M. Porrati, “Supertranslation-invariant dressed Lorentz charges,”JHEP04(2022) 069,2202.03442

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  60. [60]

    Asymptotic symmetries of electromagnetism at spatial infinity,

    M. Henneaux and C. Troessaert, “Asymptotic symmetries of electromagnetism at spatial infinity,”JHEP05(2018) 137,1803.10194

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  61. [61]

    From the Lorentz Group to the Celestial Sphere,

    B. Oblak, “From the Lorentz Group to the Celestial Sphere,” 8, 2015.1508.00920

    arXiv 2015

  62. [62]

    Massless scalars and higher-spin BMS in any dimension,

    X. Bekaert and B. Oblak, “Massless scalars and higher-spin BMS in any dimension,” JHEP11(2022) 022,2209.02253

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  63. [63]

    The energy–momentum tensor(s) in classical gauge theories,

    D. N. Blaschke, F. Gieres, M. Reboud, and M. Schweda, “The energy–momentum tensor(s) in classical gauge theories,”Nucl. Phys. B912(2016) 192–223, 1605.01121

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  64. [64]

    BMS Group at Spatial Infinity: the Hamiltonian (ADM) approach,

    M. Henneaux and C. Troessaert, “BMS Group at Spatial Infinity: the Hamiltonian (ADM) approach,”JHEP03(2018) 147,1801.03718

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  65. [65]

    ‘Log BMS as Symmetries of Gravitational Scattering,

    O. Fuentealba, M. Henneaux, S. Robert, and C. Zwikel, “‘Log BMS as Symmetries of Gravitational Scattering,”to appear(2026)

    2026

  66. [66]

    G. W. Mackey,Induced representations of groups and quantum mechanics. Publi- cazioni della Classe di Scienze della Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa. W. A. Ben- jamin, 1968

    1968

  67. [67]

    Infrared finite scattering theory in quantum field theory and quantum gravity,

    K. Prabhu, G. Satishchandran, and R. M. Wald, “Infrared finite scattering theory in quantum field theory and quantum gravity,”Phys. Rev. D106(2022), no. 6, 066005,2203.14334

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  68. [68]

    Positivity with Long-Range Interactions,

    B. Bellazzini, J. Berman, G. Isabella, F. Riva, M. Romano, and F. Sciotti, “Positivity with Long-Range Interactions,”preprint(12, 2025)2512.13780

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  69. [69]

    Coadjoint representation of the BMS group on celes- tial Riemann surfaces,

    G. Barnich and R. Ruzziconi, “Coadjoint representation of the BMS group on celes- tial Riemann surfaces,”JHEP06(2021) 079,2103.11253

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  70. [70]

    Geometric action for extended Bondi- Metzner-Sachs group in four dimensions,

    G. Barnich, K. Nguyen, and R. Ruzziconi, “Geometric action for extended Bondi- Metzner-Sachs group in four dimensions,”JHEP12(2022) 154,2211.07592. 14

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022