Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 2 minor 2 cited by

Crosscap Defects

T0 review · 3 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-05-19 · grok-4.3

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

Pith's one-line read Crosscap defects arise from Z2 quotients of spacetime and generalize CFT on real projective space to higher codimensions.

desk verdict The paper defines crosscap defects from a Z2 quotient with p-dimensional fixed locus and gives explicit O(N) epsilon-expansion data showing absent displacement operators. read the letter →

arxiv 2604.19868 v2 pith:LM6BV2PO submitted 2026-04-21 hep-th cond-mat.stat-mech

Nadav Drukker , Shota Komatsu , Anders Wallberg This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-thcond-mat.stat-mech
keywords crosscapdefectsconformalfieldtheoryZ2quotientdefectCFTO(N)modelcrossingequationsblocksepsilonexpansion
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 establishes a new type of defect in conformal field theories called crosscap defects. These come from quotienting the spacetime manifold by a Z2 symmetry. They generalize the well-known setup of CFT on real projective space to defects of arbitrary codimension. This construction leads to specific symmetry preservation and multiple operator product channels that must satisfy crossing relations. Studying them in the O(N) model provides concrete examples where certain operators are absent.

What carries the argument

Crosscap defect from Z2 spacetime automorphism with p-dimensional fixed locus preserving SO(p+1,1) × PO(d-p) subgroup

What would settle it

Demonstrating that the conformal blocks fail to match defect CFT blocks after cross-ratio redefinition, or finding inconsistent crossing equations among the bulk, image, and defect channels, would invalidate the construction.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

We introduce a novel class of defects, termed crosscap defects, in conformal field theory (CFT) in general dimensions. These arise from quotienting the spacetime by a Z_2 automorphism, and provide higher-codimension generalisations of CFT on real projective space (RP^d). Crosscap defects extend along a p-dimensional fixed locus of the Z_2 action and preserve an SO(p+1,1)×PO(d-p) subgroup of the conformal group. The two-point functions of operators in this setup exhibit three operator product expansion channels: bulk, image, and defect. These lead to several crosscap crossing equations, which we present.

Load-bearing premise

The Z2 automorphism admits a p-dimensional fixed locus that preserves an SO(p+1,1)×PO(d-p) subgroup of the conformal group.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Two-point functions exhibit three OPE channels (bulk, image, defect) that yield crosscap crossing equations.
  • Conformal blocks match defect CFT blocks exactly after redefining cross ratios.
  • In the O(N) model, explicit CFT data at Gaussian and Wilson-Fisher points can be computed in the epsilon expansion as a function of p.
  • Displacement and tilt operators are absent for generic p, yielding defect conformal manifolds without exactly marginal operators.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The construction may extend to other quotient symmetries or orbifold backgrounds in CFT.
  • Absence of displacement operators could simplify bootstrap analyses of such defects in additional models.
  • Numerical checks in low dimensions or lattice realizations could verify the predicted CFT data.
  • These defects might connect to existing work on defects in curved or non-orientable spacetimes.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

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 / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces a novel class of defects termed crosscap defects in CFTs in general dimensions. These are constructed by quotienting spacetime by a Z2 automorphism with a p-dimensional fixed locus, preserving an SO(p+1,1)×PO(d-p) subgroup of the conformal group. The setup yields three OPE channels (bulk, image, defect) and associated crossing equations. Conformal blocks are shown to match those of defect CFT up to cross-ratio redefinition. Explicit computations of CFT data as a function of p are performed in the O(N) model at the Gaussian and Wilson-Fisher fixed points in the ε-expansion, with the result that displacement and tilt operators are absent for generic p and that these defects realize conformal manifolds without exactly marginal operators.

Significance. If the symmetry preservation and consistency of the quotient construction can be established, the work offers a higher-codimension generalization of CFT on RP^d that may prove useful for classifying defects with reduced conformal symmetry. The block equivalence simplifies future calculations, and the O(N) results supply concrete, p-dependent data together with the distinctive feature that displacement and tilt operators are absent. The absence of exactly marginal operators on the defect conformal manifold is also noteworthy.

major comments (3)
  1. [Construction of crosscap defects] The explicit form of the Z2 involution, its action on coordinates, and the direct verification that the fixed locus is precisely p-dimensional while the preserved subalgebra is exactly SO(p+1,1)×PO(d-p) are not supplied. This verification is load-bearing for the definition of the defect and the claimed symmetry reduction.
  2. [Crossing equations] The derivation of the three OPE channels and the associated crossing equations from the quotient is stated but not derived in detail; in particular, consistency of the operator algebra along the fixed locus (absence of extra singularities or anomalies) is not checked explicitly.
  3. [O(N) model computations] In the O(N) model section, the ε-expansion results for the CFT data are given as functions of p, yet no error estimates, comparison with known limits (e.g., p=0 or p=d-1), or explicit checks confirming the absence of displacement and tilt operators for generic p are provided.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Symmetry discussion] Clarify the precise meaning of PO(d-p) in the preserved symmetry group, as the notation can be ambiguous between projective and parity-including orthogonal groups.
  2. [Introduction] Add a brief comparison table or limiting-case discussion showing how the crosscap defect reduces to the standard RP^d case when p=d-1.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

3 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thorough review and insightful comments on our manuscript. We address each of the major comments in detail below and outline the revisions we intend to implement.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The explicit form of the Z2 involution, its action on coordinates, and the direct verification that the fixed locus is precisely p-dimensional while the preserved subalgebra is exactly SO(p+1,1)×PO(d-p) are not supplied. This verification is load-bearing for the definition of the defect and the claimed symmetry reduction.

    Authors: We agree with the referee that providing an explicit construction would clarify the setup. In the revised manuscript, we will include a new subsection that specifies the Z2 involution explicitly in coordinates, demonstrates that the fixed locus is p-dimensional, and verifies the preserved symmetry subgroup by computing the action on the conformal generators. revision: yes

  2. Referee: The derivation of the three OPE channels and the associated crossing equations from the quotient is stated but not derived in detail; in particular, consistency of the operator algebra along the fixed locus (absence of extra singularities or anomalies) is not checked explicitly.

    Authors: We acknowledge that the derivation could benefit from more detail. We will expand the relevant section to derive the three OPE channels (bulk, image, and defect) step by step from the quotient. For the consistency along the fixed locus, we will add a discussion explaining why no extra singularities or anomalies arise, based on the properties of the Z2 quotient and the conformal invariance. revision: yes

  3. Referee: In the O(N) model section, the ε-expansion results for the CFT data are given as functions of p, yet no error estimates, comparison with known limits (e.g., p=0 or p=d-1), or explicit checks confirming the absence of displacement and tilt operators for generic p are provided.

    Authors: We appreciate this suggestion for improving the robustness of our results. In the revised version, we will add error estimates to the ε-expansion computations, include comparisons with the special cases p=0 and p=d-1 where possible, and provide explicit checks or arguments (such as through Ward identities or coefficient vanishing) to confirm the absence of displacement and tilt operators for generic p. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: construction and block analysis are self-contained

full rationale

The paper defines crosscap defects by quotienting spacetime by a Z2 automorphism with a p-dimensional fixed locus, derives the preserved subgroup SO(p+1,1)×PO(d-p), presents three OPE channels and associated crossing equations, and shows that the conformal blocks match standard defect blocks after cross-ratio redefinition. These steps are direct mathematical consequences of the quotient construction and standard CFT kinematics; they do not reduce to fitted parameters or prior self-citations. Explicit computations in the O(N) model at Gaussian and Wilson-Fisher fixed points are perturbative expansions that produce new CFT data (including absence of displacement/tilt operators for generic p) without circular reuse of the target results. No load-bearing step relies on a self-citation chain or renames a known result as a derivation.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 1 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The paper rests on standard CFT axioms and introduces the crosscap defect as the primary new element; p is treated as a free parameter.

free parameters (1)
  • p
    Dimension of the fixed locus of the Z2 action, chosen freely in the construction and varied in the O(N) examples.
assumptions (1)
  • standard math Standard axioms of conformal field theory including conformal invariance and the existence of operator product expansions.
    Invoked to define the bulk, image, and defect channels and to equate blocks to defect CFT blocks.
invented entities (1)
  • crosscap defect
    purpose: Higher-codimension generalization of RP^d obtained by Z2 quotient.
    Newly postulated in this work; no independent evidence outside the paper is provided.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Crosscap Defects." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LM6BV2PO

@misc{pith2026260419868,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Crosscap Defects},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LM6BV2PO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2604.19868}
}
abstract

We introduce a novel class of defects, termed crosscap defects, in conformal field theory (CFT) in general dimensions. These arise from quotienting the spacetime by a $Z_2$ automorphism, and provide higher-codimension generalisations of CFT on real projective space ($RP^{d}$). Crosscap defects extend along a $p$-dimensional fixed locus of the $Z_2$ action and preserve an $SO(p+1,1)\times PO(d-p)$ subgroup of the conformal group. The two-point functions of operators in this setup exhibit three operator product expansion channels: bulk, image, and defect. These lead to several crosscap crossing equations, which we present. We analyse conformal block decompositions and show that the blocks are identical to defect CFT blocks up to a redefinition of cross ratios. As concrete examples, we study crosscap defects in the $O(N)$ model at the Gaussian and Wilson--Fisher fixed points in the $\varepsilon$-expansion. We compute explicitly the associated CFT data as a function of $p$ and find that, unlike standard defects, displacement and tilt operators are absent for generic $p$. They provide examples of defect conformal manifolds without exactly marginal operators.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.19868 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The three different operator product expansion channels. We indicate [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Plot of the one-point function of SJ (4.15) in d = 4 as a function of J, in the limit N → ∞ with N− held fixed. The exact expression is pictured in purple, while the large J asymptotics (4.17) is given by the dashed grey line. This statement also holds for the interacting O(N) model at all orders in the ε expansion. We expect this to be true more generally, beyond the examples studied in this paper. Namely, we expec… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The interacting Feynman diagrams contributing to the one point func [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p024_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The interacting Feynman diagram can be represented (on the left) in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p028_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The counterterm (4.3) for p = 2 gives the additional Feynman diagrams represented on the left in the covering space and on the right in the quotient. in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p030_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The first order correction in ε to the conformal dimension (5.40) of the transverse spin-0 operator Oˆ + ı 0 , as defined in (5.36). This is a function of p and shown for N → ∞ with N− fixed. We clearly observe the pole in the anomalous dimension at p = 2. -1 1 2 3 -0.…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The first order correction in ε to the conformal dimensions ∆ (5.40) and bulk–defect couplings B2 (5.41), as defined in (5.36). Those are evaluated for N → ∞ with N− fixed. The left plot are made for sˆ = {1, . . . , 7} (the case of sˆ = 0 is in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figur…
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The first order correction in ε to the one-point function coefficient of the scalar operator S (5.46) is plotted on the left, while the corresponding correction for the operator SJ (5.49) with J = {2, 4, . . . , 14} is on the right. both are plotted as a function of p …
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The large J asymptotics (5.52) are pictured by the dashed grey line in the limit N → ∞ with N− fixed. The purple lines are the range of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p037_9.png]

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Aspects of Witten Diagrams for Holographic Defects

    hep-th 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    Derives explicit OPE coefficients for contact and exchange Witten diagrams and closed-form defect-to-bulk crossing kernels for zero- and surface defects in specific dimensions.

  2. Thermal conformal partial waves from flat-space and defect CFT

    hep-th 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

    Establishes correspondence between flat, thermal, and defect conformal partial waves via shadow formalism, obtaining thermal blocks from flat four-point and defect two-point functions and reducing the Casimir equation...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

75 extracted references · 75 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    The Conformal Bootstrap: Theory, Numerical Techniques, and Applications

    D. Poland, S. Rychkov, and A. Vichi, “The conformal bootstrap: Theory, numerical techniques, and applications,” Rev. Mod. Phys. 91 (2019) 015002 , arXiv:1805.04405

    work page Pith review arXiv 2019

  2. [2]

    The Bootstrap Program for Boundary CFT_d

    P. Liendo, L. Rastelli, and B. C. van Rees, “The bootstrap program for boundary CFTd,” JHEP 07 (2013) 113 , arXiv:1210.4258

    work page Pith review arXiv 2013

  3. [3]

    Boundary and Interface CFTs from the Conformal Bootstrap,

    F. Gliozzi, P. Liendo, M. Meineri, and A. Rago, “Boundary and interface CFTs from the conformal bootstrap,” JHEP 05 (2015) 036 , arXiv:1502.07217. [Erratum: JHEP 12, 093 (2021)]

    work page arXiv 2015

  4. [4]

    Defects in conformal field theory

    M. Billò, V. Gonçalves, E. Lauria, and M. Meineri, “Defects in conformal field theory,” JHEP 04 (2016) 091 , arXiv:1601.02883

    work page Pith review arXiv 2016

  5. [5]

    The Conformal Bootstrap at Finite Temperature

    L. Iliesiu, M. Koloğlu, R. Mahajan, E. Perlmutter, and D. Simmons-Duffin, “The conformal bootstrap at finite temperature,” JHEP 10 (2018) 070 , arXiv:1802.10266

    work page Pith review arXiv 2018

  6. [6]

    Bootstrapping critical Ising model on three-dimensional real projective space

    Y. Nakayama, “Bootstrapping critical Ising model on three-dimensional real projective space,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 no. 14, (2016) 141602 , arXiv:1601.06851

    work page Pith review arXiv 2016

  7. [7]

    $\epsilon$-Expansion in Critical $\phi^3$-Theory on Real Projective Space from Conformal Field Theory

    C. Hasegawa and Y. Nakayama, “ ϵ-expansion in critical ϕ3-theory on real projective space from conformal field theory,” Mod. Phys. Lett. A 32 no. 07, (2017) 1750045 , arXiv:1611.06373. 46

    work page Pith review arXiv 2017

  8. [8]

    Crossing Kernels for Boundary and Crosscap CFTs

    M. Hogervorst, “Crossing kernels for boundary and crosscap CFTs,” arXiv:1703.08159

    work page Pith review arXiv

Show all 75 references
  1. [9]

    Three ways to solve critical ϕ4 theory on 4 −ϵ dimensional real projective space: perturbation, bootstrap, and Schwinger-Dyson equation,

    C. Hasegawa and Y. Nakayama, “Three ways to solve critical ϕ4 theory on 4 −ϵ dimensional real projective space: perturbation, bootstrap, and Schwinger-Dyson equation,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 33 no. 08, (2018) 1850049 , arXiv:1801.09107

    2018 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Aspects of CFTs on real projective space,

    S. Giombi, H. Khanchandani, and X. Zhou, “Aspects of CFTs on real projective space,” J. Phys. A 54 no. 2, (2021) 024003 , arXiv:2009.03290

    2021

  3. [11]

    Klein bottles and simple currents,

    L. R. Huiszoon, A. N. Schellekens, and N. Sousa, “Klein bottles and simple currents,” Phys. Lett. B 470 (1999) 95–102 , hep-th/9909114

    1999 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Boundaries, crosscaps and simple currents,

    J. Fuchs, L. R. Huiszoon, A. N. Schellekens, C. Schweigert, and J. Walcher, “Boundaries, crosscaps and simple currents,” Phys. Lett. B 495 (2000) 427–434 , hep-th/0007174

    2000 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Notes on orientifolds of rational conformal field theories,

    I. Brunner and K. Hori, “Notes on orientifolds of rational conformal field theories,” JHEP 07 (2004) 023 , hep-th/0208141

    2004 arXiv

  6. [14]

    New crosscap states,

    W. Harada, J. Kaidi, Y. Kusuki, and Y. Liu, “New crosscap states,” arXiv:2508.18357

  7. [15]

    Half-BPS crosscap defects in N = 4 super Yang–Mills

    N. Drukker, S. Komatsu, and A. Wallberg, “Half-BPS crosscap defects in N = 4 super Yang–Mills. ” In progress

  8. [16]

    Spinning conformal correlators,

    M. S. Costa, J. Penedones, D. Poland, and S. Rychkov, “Spinning conformal correlators,” JHEP 11 (2011) 071 , arXiv:1107.3554

    2011 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Dynamical derivation of vacuum operator-product expansion in Euclidean conformal quantum field theory,

    V. K. Dobrev, V. B. Petkova, S. G. Petrova, and I. T. Todorov, “Dynamical derivation of vacuum operator-product expansion in Euclidean conformal quantum field theory,” Physical Review D 13 no. 4, (Feb., 1976) 887–912

    1976

  10. [18]

    Line defects in the 3d Ising model,

    M. Billó, M. Caselle, D. Gaiotto, F. Gliozzi, M. Meineri, and R. Pellegrini, “Line defects in the 3d Ising model,” JHEP 07 (2013) 055 , arXiv:1304.4110

    2013 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Bootstrapping the 3d Ising twist defect,

    D. Gaiotto, D. Mazac, and M. F. Paulos, “Bootstrapping the 3d Ising twist defect,” JHEP 03 (2014) 100 , arXiv:1310.5078

    2014 arXiv

  12. [20]

    The ϵ-expansion of the codimension two twist defect from conformal field theory,

    S. Yamaguchi, “The ϵ-expansion of the codimension two twist defect from conformal field theory,” PTEP 2016 no. 9, (2016) 091B01 , arXiv:1607.05551

    2016 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Monodromy defects from hyperbolic space,

    S. Giombi, E. Helfenberger, Z. Ji, and H. Khanchandani, “Monodromy defects from hyperbolic space,” JHEP 02 (2022) 041 , arXiv:2102.11815

    2022

  14. [22]

    Entanglement entropy and conformal field theory,

    P. Calabrese and J. Cardy, “Entanglement entropy and conformal field theory,” J. Phys. A 42 (2009) 504005 , arXiv:0905.4013

    2009 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Continuous family of conformal field theories and exactly marginal operators,

    S. Komatsu, Y. Kusuki, M. Meineri, and H. Ooguri, “Continuous family of conformal field theories and exactly marginal operators,” arXiv:2512.11045

  16. [24]

    Probing magnetic line defects with two-point functions,

    A. Gimenez-Grau, “Probing magnetic line defects with two-point functions,” arXiv:2212.02520

  17. [25]

    Local bulk operators in AdS/CFT: A Holographic description of the black hole interior,

    A. Hamilton, D. N. Kabat, G. Lifschytz, and D. A. Lowe, “Local bulk operators in AdS/CFT: A Holographic description of the black hole interior,” Phys. Rev. D 75 (2007) 106001 , hep-th/0612053. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 75, 129902 (2007)]. 47

    2007 arXiv

  18. [26]

    A Stereoscopic Look into the Bulk,

    B. Czech, L. Lamprou, S. McCandlish, B. Mosk, and J. Sully, “A Stereoscopic Look into the Bulk,” JHEP 07 (2016) 129 , arXiv:1604.03110

    2016 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Operator product expansion for conformal defects,

    M. Fukuda, N. Kobayashi, and T. Nishioka, “Operator product expansion for conformal defects,” JHEP 01 (2018) 013 , arXiv:1710.11165

    2018 arXiv

  20. [28]

    A tale of two uplifts: Parisi-Sourlas with defects,

    K. Ghosh and E. Trevisani, “A tale of two uplifts: Parisi-Sourlas with defects,” JHEP 03 (2026) 067 , arXiv:2508.18356

    2026

  21. [29]

    Conformal field theories near a boundary in general dimensions,

    D. M. McA vity and H. Osborn, “Conformal field theories near a boundary in general dimensions,” Nucl. Phys. B 455 (1995) 522–576 , cond-mat/9505127

    1995 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Conformal four point functions and the operator product expansion,

    F. A. Dolan and H. Osborn, “Conformal four point functions and the operator product expansion,” Nucl. Phys. B 599 (2001) 459–496 , hep-th/0011040

    2001 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Surface defects in the O(N ) model,

    M. Trépanier, “Surface defects in the O(N ) model,” JHEP 09 (2023) 074 , arXiv:2305.10486

    2023

  24. [32]

    Notes on a surface defect in the O(N ) model,

    S. Giombi and B. Liu, “Notes on a surface defect in the O(N ) model,” JHEP 12 (2023) 004 , arXiv:2305.11402

    2023

  25. [33]

    Phases of surface defects in scalar field theories,

    A. Raviv-Moshe and S. Zhong, “Phases of surface defects in scalar field theories,” JHEP 08 (2023) 143 , arXiv:2305.11370

    2023

  26. [34]

    Transdimensional defects,

    E. de Sabbata, N. Drukker, and A. Stergiou, “Transdimensional defects,” arXiv:2411.17809

  27. [35]

    Line and surface defects for the free scalar field,

    E. Lauria, P. Liendo, B. C. Van Rees, and X. Zhao, “Line and surface defects for the free scalar field,” JHEP 01 (2021) 060 , arXiv:2005.02413

    2021

  28. [36]

    Bootstrapping boundary-localized interactions,

    C. Behan, L. Di Pietro, E. Lauria, and B. C. Van Rees, “Bootstrapping boundary-localized interactions,” JHEP 12 (2020) 182 , arXiv:2009.03336

    2020

  29. [37]

    Localized magnetic field in the O(N ) model,

    G. Cuomo, Z. Komargodski, and M. Mezei, “Localized magnetic field in the O(N ) model,” JHEP 02 (2022) 134 , arXiv:2112.10634

    2022

  30. [38]

    The epsilon expansion of the O(N ) model with line defect from conformal field theory,

    T. Nishioka, Y. Okuyama, and S. Shimamori, “The epsilon expansion of the O(N ) model with line defect from conformal field theory,” JHEP 03 (2023) 203 , arXiv:2212.04076

    2023

  31. [39]

    Analytic bootstrap for magnetic impurities,

    L. Bianchi, D. Bonomi, E. de Sabbata, and A. Gimenez-Grau, “Analytic bootstrap for magnetic impurities,” JHEP 05 (2024) 080 , arXiv:2312.05221

    2024

  32. [40]

    The critical O(N ) CFT: Methods and conformal data,

    J. Henriksson, “The critical O(N ) CFT: Methods and conformal data,” Phys. Rept. 1002 (2023) 1–72 , arXiv:2201.09520

    2023

  33. [41]

    A Lorentzian inversion formula for defect CFT,

    P. Liendo, Y. Linke, and V. Schomerus, “A Lorentzian inversion formula for defect CFT,” JHEP 08 (2020) 163 , arXiv:1903.05222

    2020 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Analytic bootstrap for the localized magnetic field,

    L. Bianchi, D. Bonomi, and E. de Sabbata, “Analytic bootstrap for the localized magnetic field,” JHEP 04 (2023) 069 , arXiv:2212.02524

    2023

  35. [43]

    Critical exponents in 3.99 dimensions,

    K. G. Wilson and M. E. Fisher, “Critical exponents in 3.99 dimensions,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 28 (1972) 240–243

    1972

  36. [44]

    An Approach to the evaluation of three and four point ladder diagrams,

    N. I. Usyukina and A. I. Davydychev, “An Approach to the evaluation of three and four point ladder diagrams,” Phys. Lett. B 298 (1993) 363–370

    1993

  37. [45]

    Boundaries and interfaces with localized cubic interactions in the O(N ) model,

    S. Harribey, I. R. Klebanov, and Z. Sun, “Boundaries and interfaces with localized cubic interactions in the O(N ) model,” JHEP 10 (2023) 017 , arXiv:2307.00072. 48

    2023

  38. [46]

    Multiscalar critical models with localised cubic interactions,

    S. Harribey, W. H. Pannell, and A. Stergiou, “Multiscalar critical models with localised cubic interactions,” arXiv:2407.20326

  39. [47]

    Mellin space bootstrap for global symmetry,

    P. Dey, A. Kaviraj, and A. Sinha, “Mellin space bootstrap for global symmetry,” JHEP 07 (2017) 019 , arXiv:1612.05032

    2017 arXiv

  40. [48]

    The Pomeranchuk singularity in nonabelian gauge theories,

    E. A. Kuraev, L. N. Lipatov, and V. S. Fadin, “The Pomeranchuk singularity in nonabelian gauge theories,” Sov. Phys. JETP 45 (1977) 199–204

    1977

  41. [49]

    The Pomeranchuk singularity in quantum chromodynamics,

    I. I. Balitsky and L. N. Lipatov, “The Pomeranchuk singularity in quantum chromodynamics,” Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 28 (1978) 822–829

    1978

  42. [50]

    Line defect RG flows in the εexpansion,

    W. H. Pannell and A. Stergiou, “Line defect RG flows in the εexpansion,” JHEP 06 (2023) 186 , arXiv:2302.14069

    2023

  43. [51]

    Comments on gluon scattering amplitudes via AdS/CFT,

    L. F. Alday and J. Maldacena, “Comments on gluon scattering amplitudes via AdS/CFT,” JHEP 11 (2007) 068 , arXiv:0710.1060

    2007 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Wilson loop renormalization group flows,

    J. Polchinski and J. Sully, “Wilson loop renormalization group flows,” JHEP 10 (2011) 059, arXiv:1104.5077

    2011 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Non-supersymmetric Wilson loop in N = 4 SYM and defect 1d CFT,

    M. Beccaria, S. Giombi, and A. Tseytlin, “Non-supersymmetric Wilson loop in N = 4 SYM and defect 1d CFT,” JHEP 03 (2018) 131 , arXiv:1712.06874

    2018

  46. [54]

    A study of quantum field theories in AdS at finite coupling,

    D. Carmi, L. Di Pietro, and S. Komatsu, “A study of quantum field theories in AdS at finite coupling,” JHEP 01 (2019) 200 , arXiv:1810.04185

    2019 arXiv

  47. [55]

    CFT in AdS and boundary RG flows,

    S. Giombi and H. Khanchandani, “CFT in AdS and boundary RG flows,” JHEP 11 (2020) 118 , arXiv:2007.04955

    2020

  48. [56]

    Finite-coupling spectrum of O(N ) model in AdS,

    J. Dujava and P. Vaško, “Finite-coupling spectrum of O(N ) model in AdS,” JHEP 12 (2025) 036 , arXiv:2503.16345

    2025

  49. [57]

    Taming mass gaps with anti-de Sitter space,

    C. Copetti, L. Di Pietro, Z. Ji, and S. Komatsu, “Taming mass gaps with anti-de Sitter space,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 133 no. 8, (2024) 081601 , arXiv:2312.09277

    2024

  50. [58]

    The analytic bootstrap and AdS superhorizon locality,

    A. L. Fitzpatrick, J. Kaplan, D. Poland, and D. Simmons-Duffin, “The analytic bootstrap and AdS superhorizon locality,” JHEP 12 (2013) 004 , arXiv:1212.3616

    2013 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Convexity and Liberation at Large Spin,

    Z. Komargodski and A. Zhiboedov, “Convexity and Liberation at Large Spin,” JHEP 11 (2013) 140 , arXiv:1212.4103

    2013 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Universality at large transverse spin in defect CFT,

    M. Lemos, P. Liendo, M. Meineri, and S. Sarkar, “Universality at large transverse spin in defect CFT,” JHEP 09 (2018) 091 , arXiv:1712.08185

    2018 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Analyticity in spin in conformal theories,

    S. Caron-Huot, “Analyticity in spin in conformal theories,” JHEP 09 (2017) 078 , arXiv:1703.00278

    2017 arXiv

  54. [62]

    A Conformal dispersion relation: correlations from absorption,

    D. Carmi and S. Caron-Huot, “A Conformal dispersion relation: correlations from absorption,” JHEP 09 (2020) 009 , arXiv:1910.12123

    2020

  55. [63]

    Conformal dispersion relations for defects and boundaries,

    L. Bianchi and D. Bonomi, “Conformal dispersion relations for defects and boundaries,” SciPost Phys. 15 no. 2, (2023) 055 , arXiv:2205.09775

    2023

  56. [64]

    A dispersion relation for defect CFT,

    J. Barrat, A. Gimenez-Grau, and P. Liendo, “A dispersion relation for defect CFT,” JHEP 02 (2023) 255 , arXiv:2205.09765

    2023

  57. [65]

    Superintegrability of d-dimensional Conformal Blocks,

    M. Isachenkov and V. Schomerus, “Superintegrability of d-dimensional Conformal Blocks,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 117 no. 7, (2016) 071602 , arXiv:1602.01858. 49

    2016 arXiv

  58. [66]

    Harmony of spinning conformal blocks,

    V. Schomerus, E. Sobko, and M. Isachenkov, “Harmony of spinning conformal blocks,” JHEP 03 (2017) 085 , arXiv:1612.02479

    2017 arXiv

  59. [67]

    Harmonic analysis and mean field theory,

    D. Karateev, P. Kravchuk, and D. Simmons-Duffin, “Harmonic analysis and mean field theory,” JHEP 10 (2019) 217 , arXiv:1809.05111

    2019

  60. [68]

    Gaudin models and multipoint conformal blocks: general theory,

    I. Buric, S. Lacroix, J. A. Mann, L. Quintavalle, and V. Schomerus, “Gaudin models and multipoint conformal blocks: general theory,” JHEP 10 (2021) 139 , arXiv:2105.00021

    2021

  61. [69]

    Classification of homogeneous conformally flat riemannian manifolds,

    D. V. Alekseevskii and B. N. Kimel’fel’d, “Classification of homogeneous conformally flat riemannian manifolds,” Mathematical notes of the Academy of Sciences of the USSR 24 (1978) 559–562

    1978

  62. [70]

    Holographic dual of BCFT,

    T. Takayanagi, “Holographic dual of BCFT,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 107 (2011) 101602 , arXiv:1105.5165

    2011 arXiv

  63. [71]

    Aspects of AdS/BCFT,

    M. Fujita, T. Takayanagi, and E. Tonni, “Aspects of AdS/BCFT,” JHEP 11 (2011) 043, arXiv:1108.5152

    2011 arXiv

  64. [72]

    Holography, entanglement entropy, and conformal field theories with boundaries or defects,

    K. Jensen and A. O’Bannon, “Holography, entanglement entropy, and conformal field theories with boundaries or defects,” Phys. Rev. D 88 no. 10, (2013) 106006 , arXiv:1309.4523

    2013 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Towards a C-theorem in defect CFT,

    N. Kobayashi, T. Nishioka, Y. Sato, and K. Watanabe, “Towards a C-theorem in defect CFT,” JHEP 01 (2019) 039 , arXiv:1810.06995

    2019 arXiv

  66. [74]

    Holographic defect CFTs with Dirichlet end-of-the-world branes,

    H. Nakayama and T. Nishioka, “Holographic defect CFTs with Dirichlet end-of-the-world branes,” arXiv:2509.22270

  67. [75]

    Holographic dual of crosscap conformal field theory,

    Z. Wei, “Holographic dual of crosscap conformal field theory,” JHEP 03 (2025) 086 , arXiv:2405.03755. 50

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed May 19, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.