Timelike Entanglement First Law and Linearized Field Equations in Higher Curvature Gravity

Guo-Ying Li; Jia-Rui Sun; Mei-Hui Xiao; Song He

REVIEW 1 major objections 4 minor 97 references

Timelike Entanglement First Law and Linearized Field Equations in Higher Curvature Gravity

T0 review · 1 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-02 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper establishes that, in the hyperbolic perturbative regime, the timelike entanglement first law is equivalent to the linearized field equations of Lovelock gravity.

desk verdict Solid cubic Lovelock check; the arbitrary-order proof has an unsupported step — cite the cubic example, not the general theorem. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.12834 v2 pith:UNXQ576T submitted 2026-07-14 hep-th gr-qc

Mei-Hui Xiao , Guo-Ying Li , Song He , Jia-Rui Sun This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-thgr-qc

keywords timelikeentanglemententropyfirstlawLovelockgravityJacobson-MyersfunctionalmodularHamiltonianlinearizedfieldequationsAdS/CFTcorrespondenceholographic

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 asks whether the timelike entanglement first law—that for small perturbations of a timelike hyperbolic region the change in entanglement entropy equals the change in the modular Hamiltonian—survives when the bulk dual is a higher-curvature Lovelock gravity instead of Einstein gravity. It answers yes in a restricted but precise sense: for normalizable perturbations around AdS in Fefferman-Graham gauge, both ΔS and Δ⟨H⟩ equal the Einstein-gravity results multiplied by the same coupling-dependent factor, (1 − Σ_{m≥2} m λ_m f∞^{m−1}). Because that factor also renormalizes the effective Newton constant in the linearized Lovelock field equations, the paper concludes that the timelike entanglement first law is equivalent to the linearized field equations of Lovelock gravity about the maximally symmetric background. This matters because it extends a known Einstein-gravity equivalence between entanglement dynamics and bulk gravity to an entire class of higher-curvature theories, isolating the single coefficient that carries the higher-curvature correction.

What carries the argument

Three ingredients carry the argument. First, the Jacobson-Myers entropy functional, which for Lovelock gravity depends only on the intrinsic curvature of the bulk surface and is therefore tractable under double Wick rotation. Second, the double Wick rotation prescription that converts a timelike hyperbolic subregion into a spacelike problem in a continued geometry, fixing the extremal surface and the modular Hamiltonian. Third, the Fefferman-Graham gauge with normalizable, transverse-traceless perturbations, which makes the boundary divergent terms vanish as O(ϵ²). The paper shows that the spherical embedding remains extremal at arbitrary Lovelock order through a first-integral condition on

What would settle it

Compute the first-integral condition (5.54) explicitly at quartic Lovelock order (m = 4) for a rotationally symmetric embedding: if ∂S/∂(dlog f/du) at g = 0 is not independent of u, the spherical solution is not extremal, and ΔS would deviate from the Einstein result times the claimed factor. A direct numerical extremization of the JM functional for a tiny non-spherical perturbation at nonzero λ₄ would settle the question.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that, in the hyperbolic and perturbative regime studied, the timelike entanglement first law holds in Lovelock gravity and is governed by one universal factor: ΔS and Δ⟨H⟩ each equal their Einstein-gravity counterparts multiplied by (1 − Σ_{m≥2} m λ_m f∞^{m−1}). The paper proves this by computing the variation of the Jacobson-Myers entropy functional on a double-Wick-rotated extremal surface and the variation of the modular Hamiltonian from the holographic stress tensor, showing both reduce to the Einstein results times the same factor for normalizable Fefferman-Graham perturbations, while the generalized boundary term vanishes in the conformal limit. Since this factor a

Load-bearing premise

The spherical embedding f = const is assumed to extremize the Jacobson-Myers functional at arbitrary Lovelock order; the paper derives a first-integral condition but does not prove that the constant solution is uniquely selected by the boundary conditions.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For cubic Lovelock gravity, low-energy thermal excitations obey ΔS = Δ⟨H⟩, generalizing the known Einstein-gravity result to a higher-curvature theory.
For arbitrary Lovelock order, normalizable Fefferman-Graham perturbations around AdS give ΔS and Δ⟨H⟩ equal to the Einstein results times the universal factor (1 − Σ_{m≥2} m λ_m f∞^{m−1}).
The generalized boundary term of the Jacobson-Myers functional does not contribute in the conformal limit for the considered class of perturbations.
Consequently, in the hyperbolic perturbative sector, the timelike entanglement first law is equivalent to the linearized Lovelock field equations about the maximally symmetric AdS background.
The effective entanglement temperature remains proportional to the inverse temporal size, matching the Einstein-gravity result, because the higher-curvature factor cancels between ΔS and Δ⟨H⟩.

Reading between the lines

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

If the spherical embedding fails to extremize the Jacobson-Myers functional at some higher Lovelock order, the claimed factorization would break; this is directly testable by evaluating the first-integral condition at quartic order (m = 4).
The same coupling factor likely appears in other holographic first-law-type relations for Lovelock gravity, such as pseudo entropy or non-hyperbolic regions, offering a quick diagnostic of where the equivalence persists.
The result suggests that the equivalence between entanglement first laws and linearized bulk dynamics is not unique to Einstein gravity but holds for any theory whose linearized equations about a maximally symmetric background are Einstein-like with a rescaled coupling.
A natural next test is to allow non-normalizable perturbations or a non-conformally-flat boundary: the paper predicts the O(ϵ²) suppression, and hence the equivalence, may fail there.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Colleague,

The short version: the cubic Lovelock computation is a genuine piece of work, but the arbitrary-order generalization has a load-bearing gap. I would not cite the general theorem as established; I would cite the cubic example.

What's actually new: the paper gives an explicit check of the timelike entanglement first law for hyperbolic subregions in cubic Lovelock gravity. The variation of the JM functional and the boundary stress tensor are computed to first order in the thermal excitation, and both carry the same factor, so ΔS = Δ⟨H⟩. That part is coherent and the algebra is documented in enough detail to follow. The reduction to the Einstein result is a clean way to see the physics: Lovelock terms only rescale the effective Newton constant at linearized order.

The general analysis in §5 extends the same factor to arbitrary Lovelock order, and the modular-Hamiltonian side (5.31) is straightforward once the stress tensor is known. The entropy side (5.77) depends on the claim in §5.2 that the spherical embedding extremizes the JM functional. That is the soft spot. The paper reduces the action to a functional of g = d log f/du, gets the first-integral condition d/du(∂S/∂g)=0, and states this is solved by f=const. But the condition only says ∂S/∂g is constant in u. To show g=0 solves it, you need ∂S/∂g at g=0 to be u-independent, and the paper never computes that. The higher-curvature terms do contain derivatives of g through the R_{u a u b} components, so this is not an empty check. If the extremum were not the sphere, the factorization in (5.77) would fail. The cubic order does not rescue the general claim, because it cites known results for m=2,3 rather than proving the arbitrary-order case.

The paper is honest about the other limitation: the double Wick rotated JM prescription is adopted, not derived from a Lorentzian replica. That is fine as a working prescription, but it narrows the claim. The authors say as much in §2.2 and the conclusions.

Overall: solid execution of a specific example, natural conjecture for the general case, but the general theorem is not yet proven. A referee should require the missing computation of ∂S/∂g at g=0, or a symmetry argument that forces it to be constant. The cubic computation deserves publication; the general claim needs that gap closed.

Referee Report

1 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper claims that the timelike entanglement first law holds in Lovelock gravity for hyperbolic timelike subregions, within a perturbative regime around AdS. Using the double Wick rotation prescription together with the Jacobson–Myers entropy functional, the authors compute the first-order variation of holographic timelike entanglement entropy and compare it with the modular Hamiltonian obtained from the boundary stress tensor. In cubic Lovelock gravity the two variations agree and equal the Einstein-gravity result multiplied by a single coupling-dependent factor. For general Lovelock order and normalizable Fefferman–Graham perturbations around AdS, the paper argues that both ΔS and Δ⟨H⟩ are proportional to their Einstein counterparts with the same factor 1 − Σ_{m≥2} m λ_m f∞^{m−1}, which also renormalizes G_eff in the linearized Lovelock field equations. The generalized surface term is claimed to vanish in the conformal limit for this restricted class of perturbations.

Significance. If the general-order part is completed, the result is significant: it extends the known equivalence between the timelike entanglement first law and linearized Einstein equations to the entire Lovelock family, with no fitted parameters and with a single universal factor controlling both the entropy variation and the modular Hamiltonian. The cubic example in §3 is explicit and internally coherent: the JM variation, the surface term, the stress tensor, and the modular Hamiltonian are computed independently and the matching is nontrivial. The paper is also candid about its restrictions: normalizable FG perturbations, conformally flat fixed boundary, hyperbolic subregions, and the double-Wick-rotated JM prescription as a working rule rather than a derived Lorentzian replica prescription. However, the general-order proof rests on an incompletely justified claim that the spherical embedding f=const extremizes the JM functional at arbitrary Lovelock order; until that lemma is supplied, the factorization in (5.77) is conditional.

major comments (1)

[§5.2, Eq. (5.54)] The step from the first-integral condition to f=const is not demonstrated. For a functional S(g,u) with g=dlog f/du, the Euler–Lagrange equation is d/du(∂S/∂g)=0, i.e. ∂S/∂g is constant in u. This does not imply g=0 unless one shows that ∂S/∂g evaluated at g=0 is u-independent and equals the integration constant fixed by the boundary conditions. The paper states that f=const solves (5.54) but does not provide this check. This is load-bearing: if the extremal surface were not the maximally symmetric embedding, the induced metric would not be (5.55)–(5.56) and the reduction ΔS = factor × ΔS_Einstein in (5.77) would fail. The missing check is likely straightforward — the induced metric (5.39) depends on g through γ_uu=(L²/sin²w)(g²+1/T0²), so the curvature invariants are plausibly even in g — but it should be written out explicitly rather than asserted.

minor comments (4)

[§2.2 / §6] The double-Wick-rotated JM prescription is explicitly acknowledged as a working assumption, not derived from a Lorentzian replica construction. This is appropriate, but the abstract and conclusions could state more prominently that the physical interpretation of the result is conditional on this prescription.
[§5.2] The notation S(g,u) is introduced only through the sentence preceding (5.54). Please define g explicitly as dlog f/du and state the endpoint conditions under which the first-integral constant is fixed. The phrase 'solved by f=const with the boundary conditions imposed above' is too terse for a lemma that is central to the general argument.
[§3.2, Eqs. (3.28)–(3.31)] The explicit expressions for K, R∂K, R∂abK^{ab}, etc., are central to the cubic check but are presented as results of substitution with no intermediate algebra. A short appendix entry or a few displayed intermediate steps would improve verifiability.
[Text and typos] There are numerous typographical and grammatical slips: 'R´enyi' in the Introduction, 'et al and their holographic descriptions' in §1, 'formax=3' in §4, 'the parameter m_z affects only terms of order O(w_ϵ²)' with a missing verb, and inconsistent spacing around equations. These do not affect the physics but should be cleaned up.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the Lovelock prefactors multiplying the Einstein entropy and modular Hamiltonian are independently computed, and the match with the linearized equations is a derived consequence rather than a fitted input.

full rationale

No significant circularity found. The central claim is obtained by computing two separate quantities in Lovelock gravity — the variation of the Jacobson-Myers entropy functional (eq. 5.77) and the variation of the holographic modular Hamiltonian from the boundary stress tensor (eq. 5.31) — and showing that each equals its Einstein-gravity counterpart multiplied by the same coupling-dependent factor 1 - Σ_{m≥2} m λ_m f∞^{m-1}. That factor is obtained algebraically from the Lovelock action and the maximally symmetric AdS background; it is not fitted to the equality ΔS = Δ⟨H⟩. The same factor appears independently in the linearized Lovelock field equations (eqs. 4.9-4.10), so the claimed equivalence is a logical consequence of the calculations, not a definitional identity. The paper does rely on [74], a prior paper by the same group, for the Einstein-gravity timelike entanglement first law and the double-Wick-rotated modular Hamiltonian; this is self-citation, but it is a separate published theorem and is used as a base case, not as an input tuned to reproduce the Lovelock result. The paper also explicitly states its domain assumptions — the double Wick rotation prescription, normalizable Fefferman-Graham perturbations, and hyperbolic subregions — and these are limitations on scope rather than hidden circular assumptions. The extremal-surface proof in §5.2 derives the spherical embedding f=const from the first-integral condition rather than imposing it as an input. Overall, no step in the derivation reduces to an equivalent form of the claimed conclusion by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No numbers are fitted: the Lovelock couplings are theory inputs, and the first-law equality holds for arbitrary values in the perturbative regime. The main axioms are the choice of entropy functional, the timelike continuation prescription, and the normalizable/FG/hyperbolic domain restrictions. The spherical-embedding extremality is used as a premise because the proof in §5.2 is incomplete as written.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption Jacobson-Myers functional (2.9) is the correct holographic entanglement entropy for Lovelock gravity
Supported by anomaly tests in refs. [79,81]; assumed throughout, not re-derived.
domain assumption Timelike entanglement entropy is obtained by double Wick rotation and extremizing the continued JM functional
Adopted as working prescription in §2.2; the paper states no Lorentzian replica derivation is attempted.
domain assumption Perturbations are small, normalizable, in FG gauge, with fixed conformally flat boundary metric; then δh̃μν = z^d δh̃(d)μν + ...
Section 5, eqs. (5.2)-(5.3); the paper explicitly restricts its theorem to this class.
domain assumption The modular Hamiltonian for the hyperbolic timelike region is (2.14), taken from [74]
Fixed by conformal transformation; the same form as the Einstein case because the boundary is conformally flat.
ad hoc to paper The spherical embedding f=const extremizes the JM functional at arbitrary Lovelock order
Claimed and sketched in §5.2; the first-integral derivation does not fully justify the solution, so the premise is load-bearing.
domain assumption Lovelock couplings λ_m are small so the AdS root f∞ is continuously connected to the Einstein root f∞=1
Section 2.1; needed for the perturbative expansion and identification of the correct vacuum branch.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Timelike Entanglement First Law and Linearized Field Equations in Higher Curvature Gravity." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/UNXQ576T

@misc{pith2026260712834,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Timelike Entanglement First Law and Linearized Field Equations in Higher Curvature Gravity},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/UNXQ576T}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.12834}
}

abstract

We investigate the timelike entanglement first law in holographic conformal field theories whose bulk dual is Lovelock gravity. Using the double Wick rotation formulation of timelike entanglement entropy together with the Jacobson-Myers entropy functional, we compute the linear variation of holographic timelike entanglement entropy for hyperbolic subregions. For cubic Lovelock gravity, we explicitly show that a single, universal multiplicative renormalization factor governs how higher curvature interactions enter the variations of both the entropy and the modular Hamiltonian, leading to $\Delta S=\Delta\langle H\rangle$ for low-energy thermal excitations. We then extend the analysis to Lovelock gravity of arbitrary order around the anti-de Sitter spacetime in the Fefferman-Graham gauge. For normalizable perturbations, the variation of the Jacobson-Myers functional reduces to the Einstein gravity's result multiplied by the same coupling-dependent factor that renormalizes the effective Newtonian constant in the linearized field equations of Lovelock gravity. We further show that the boundary contribution vanishes in the conformal limit for the class of perturbations considered. Consequently, the timelike entanglement first law is equivalent to the linearized field equations of Lovelock gravity about the maximally symmetric background, within the hyperbolic and perturbative regime considered in the present paper.

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

97 extracted references · 78 linked inside Pith

[1]

Calabrese and J.L

P. Calabrese and J.L. Cardy,Entanglement entropy and quantum field theory,J. Stat. Mech. 0406(2004) P06002 [hep-th/0405152]

arXiv 2004
[2]

Levin and X.-G

M. Levin and X.-G. Wen,Detecting Topological Order in a Ground State Wave Function, Phys. Rev. Lett.96(2006) 110405 [cond-mat/0510613]

arXiv 2006
[3]

Kitaev and J

A. Kitaev and J. Preskill,Topological entanglement entropy,Phys. Rev. Lett.96(2006) 110404 [hep-th/0510092]

arXiv 2006
[4]

Casini and M

H. Casini and M. Huerta,Lectures on entanglement in quantum field theory,PoST ASI2021 (2023) 002 [2201.13310]

arXiv 2023
[5]

Van Raamsdonk,Building up spacetime with quantum entanglement,Gen

M. Van Raamsdonk,Building up spacetime with quantum entanglement,Gen. Rel. Grav.42 (2010) 2323 [1005.3035]

arXiv 2010
[6]

Maldacena and L

J. Maldacena and L. Susskind,Cool horizons for entangled black holes,Fortsch. Phys.61 (2013) 781 [1306.0533]

arXiv 2013
[7]

Almheiri, T

A. Almheiri, T. Hartman, J. Maldacena, E. Shaghoulian and A. Tajdini,The entropy of Hawking radiation,Rev. Mod. Phys.93(2021) 035002 [2006.06872]. – 36 –

arXiv 2021
[8]

Maldacena,The LargeNlimit of superconformal field theories and supergravity,Adv

J.M. Maldacena,The LargeNlimit of superconformal field theories and supergravity,Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.2(1998) 231 [hep-th/9711200]

arXiv 1998

Show all 97 references

[9]

Gubser, I.R

S.S. Gubser, I.R. Klebanov and A.M. Polyakov,Gauge theory correlators from noncritical string theory,Phys. Lett. B428(1998) 105 [hep-th/9802109]

1998 arXiv
[10]

Witten,Anti de Sitter space and holography,Adv

E. Witten,Anti de Sitter space and holography,Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.2(1998) 253 [hep-th/9802150]

1998 arXiv
[11]

Ryu and T

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

2006 arXiv
[12]

Hubeny, M

V.E. Hubeny, M. Rangamani and T. Takayanagi,A Covariant holographic entanglement entropy proposal,JHEP07(2007) 062 [0705.0016]

2007 arXiv
[13]

Lewkowycz and J

A. Lewkowycz and J. Maldacena,Generalized gravitational entropy,JHEP08(2013) 090 [1304.4926]

2013 arXiv
[14]

Casini, M

H. Casini, M. Huerta and R.C. Myers,Towards a derivation of holographic entanglement entropy,JHEP05(2011) 036 [1102.0440]

2011 arXiv
[15]

X. Dong, A. Lewkowycz and M. Rangamani,Deriving covariant holographic entanglement, JHEP11(2016) 028 [1607.07506]

2016 arXiv
[16]

Swingle,Entanglement Renormalization and Holography,Phys

B. Swingle,Entanglement Renormalization and Holography,Phys. Rev. D86(2012) 065007 [0905.1317]

2012 arXiv
[17]

Pastawski, B

F. Pastawski, B. Yoshida, D. Harlow and J. Preskill,Holographic quantum error-correcting codes: Toy models for the bulk/boundary correspondence,JHEP06(2015) 149 [1503.06237]

2015 arXiv
[18]

X. Dong, D. Harlow and A.C. Wall,Reconstruction of Bulk Operators within the Entanglement Wedge in Gauge-Gravity Duality,Phys. Rev. Lett.117(2016) 021601 [1601.05416]

2016 arXiv
[19]

Lin, J.-R

Y.-Y. Lin, J.-R. Sun and Y. Sun,Surface growth scheme for bulk reconstruction and tensor network,JHEP12(2020) 083 [2010.01907]

2020 arXiv
[20]

Liang, J.-R

H.-C. Liang, J.-R. Sun and Y. Sun,Surface growth scheme for bulk reconstruction andT ¯T deformation,2507.18435

arXiv
[21]

Bhattacharya, M

J. Bhattacharya, M. Nozaki, T. Takayanagi and T. Ugajin,Thermodynamical property of entanglement entropy for excited states,Physical Review Letters110(2013) 091602

2013
[22]

Swingle and M

B. Swingle and M. Van Raamsdonk,Universality of Gravity from Entanglement,1405.2933

arXiv
[23]

Nozaki, T

M. Nozaki, T. Numasawa, A. Prudenziati and T. Takayanagi,Dynamics of Entanglement Entropy from Einstein Equation,Phys. Rev. D88(2013) 026012 [1304.7100]

2013 arXiv
[24]

He, J.-R

S. He, J.-R. Sun and H.-Q. Zhang,On Holographic Entanglement Entropy with Second Order Excitations,Nucl. Phys. B928(2018) 160 [1411.6213]

2018 arXiv
[25]

de Boer, M.P

J. de Boer, M.P. Heller, R.C. Myers and Y. Neiman,Holographic de Sitter Geometry from Entanglement in Conformal Field Theory,Phys. Rev. Lett.116(2016) 061602 [1509.00113]

2016 arXiv
[26]

de Boer, F.M

J. de Boer, F.M. Haehl, M.P. Heller and R.C. Myers,Entanglement, holography and causal diamonds,JHEP08(2016) 162 [1606.03307]

2016 arXiv
[27]

Haehl, E

F.M. Haehl, E. Hijano, O. Parrikar and C. Rabideau,Higher Curvature Gravity from Entanglement in Conformal Field Theories,Phys. Rev. Lett.120(2018) 201602 [1712.06620]. – 37 –

2018 arXiv
[28]

W.-z. Guo, S. He and J. Tao,Note on Entanglement Temperature for Low Thermal Excited States in Higher Derivative Gravity,JHEP08(2013) 050 [1305.2682]

2013 arXiv
[29]

Blanco, H

D.D. Blanco, H. Casini, L.-Y. Hung and R.C. Myers,Relative Entropy and Holography, JHEP08(2013) 060 [1305.3182]

2013 arXiv
[30]

Bhattacharya and T

J. Bhattacharya and T. Takayanagi,Entropic Counterpart of Perturbative Einstein Equation, JHEP10(2013) 219 [1308.3792]

2013 arXiv
[31]

Lashkari, M.B

N. Lashkari, M.B. McDermott and M. Van Raamsdonk,Gravitational dynamics from entanglement ’thermodynamics’,JHEP04(2014) 195 [1308.3716]

2014 arXiv
[32]

Faulkner, M

T. Faulkner, M. Guica, T. Hartman, R.C. Myers and M. Van Raamsdonk,Gravitation from Entanglement in Holographic CFTs,JHEP03(2014) 051 [1312.7856]

2014 arXiv
[33]

Bekenstein,Black holes and entropy,Phys

J.D. Bekenstein,Black holes and entropy,Phys. Rev. D7(1973) 2333

1973
[34]

Bardeen, B

J.M. Bardeen, B. Carter and S.W. Hawking,The Four laws of black hole mechanics, Commun. Math. Phys.31(1973) 161

1973
[35]

Hawking,Particle Creation by Black Holes,Commun

S.W. Hawking,Particle Creation by Black Holes,Commun. Math. Phys.43(1975) 199

1975
[36]

Jacobson,Thermodynamics of space-time: The Einstein equation of state,Phys

T. Jacobson,Thermodynamics of space-time: The Einstein equation of state,Phys. Rev. Lett.75(1995) 1260 [gr-qc/9504004]

1995 arXiv
[37]

Faulkner, F.M

T. Faulkner, F.M. Haehl, E. Hijano, O. Parrikar, C. Rabideau and M. Van Raamsdonk, Nonlinear Gravity from Entanglement in Conformal Field Theories,JHEP08(2017) 057 [1705.03026]

2017 arXiv
[38]

E. Oh, I.Y. Park and S.-J. Sin,Complete Einstein equations from the generalized First Law of Entanglement,Phys. Rev. D98(2018) 026020 [1709.05752]

2018 arXiv
[39]

Hung, R.C

L.-Y. Hung, R.C. Myers, M. Smolkin and A. Yale,Holographic Calculations of Renyi Entropy,JHEP12(2011) 047 [1110.1084]

2011 arXiv
[40]

Dong,The Gravity Dual of Renyi Entropy,Nature Commun.7(2016) 12472 [1601.06788]

X. Dong,The Gravity Dual of Renyi Entropy,Nature Commun.7(2016) 12472 [1601.06788]

2016 arXiv
[41]

Takayanagi and K

T. Takayanagi and K. Umemoto,Entanglement of purification through holographic duality, Nature Phys.14(2018) 573 [1708.09393]

2018 arXiv
[42]

Lin, J.-R

Y.-Y. Lin, J.-R. Sun and Y. Sun,Bit thread, entanglement distillation, and entanglement of purification,Phys. Rev. D103(2021) 126002 [2012.05737]

2021 arXiv
[43]

Wen,Fine structure in holographic entanglement and entanglement contour,Phys

Q. Wen,Fine structure in holographic entanglement and entanglement contour,Phys. Rev. D 98(2018) 106004 [1803.05552]

2018 arXiv
[44]

Lin, J.-R

Y.-Y. Lin, J.-R. Sun, Y. Sun and J.-C. Jin,The PEE aspects of entanglement islands from bit threads,JHEP07(2022) 009 [2203.03111]

2022 arXiv
[45]

L.-H. Mo, Y. Zhou, J.-R. Sun and P. Ye,The hyperfine structure of quantum entanglement, Commun. Theor. Phys.78(2026) 085103 [2311.01997]

2026 arXiv
[46]

Nakata, T

Y. Nakata, T. Takayanagi, Y. Taki, K. Tamaoka and Z. Wei,New holographic generalization of entanglement entropy,Phys. Rev. D103(2021) 026005 [2005.13801]

2021 arXiv
[47]

Mollabashi, N

A. Mollabashi, N. Shiba, T. Takayanagi, K. Tamaoka and Z. Wei,Pseudo Entropy in Free Quantum Field Theories,Phys. Rev. Lett.126(2021) 081601 [2011.09648]

2021 arXiv
[48]

Mollabashi, N

A. Mollabashi, N. Shiba, T. Takayanagi, K. Tamaoka and Z. Wei,Aspects of pseudoentropy in field theories,Phys. Rev. Res.3(2021) 033254 [2106.03118]. – 38 –

2021 arXiv
[49]

K. Doi, J. Harper, A. Mollabashi, T. Takayanagi and Y. Taki,Pseudoentropy in dS/CFT and Timelike Entanglement Entropy,Phys. Rev. Lett.130(2023) 031601 [2210.09457]

2023 arXiv
[50]

K. Doi, J. Harper, A. Mollabashi, T. Takayanagi and Y. Taki,Timelike entanglement entropy,JHEP05(2023) 052 [2302.11695]

2023 arXiv
[51]

Narayan,de Sitter space, extremal surfaces, and time entanglement,Phys

K. Narayan,de Sitter space, extremal surfaces, and time entanglement,Phys. Rev. D107 (2023) 126004 [2210.12963]

2023 arXiv
[52]

Narayan,Further remarks on de Sitter space, extremal surfaces, and time entanglement, Phys

K. Narayan,Further remarks on de Sitter space, extremal surfaces, and time entanglement, Phys. Rev. D109(2024) 086009 [2310.00320]

2024 arXiv
[53]

Nanda, K

K.K. Nanda, K. Narayan, S. Porey and G. Yadav,dSextremal surfaces, replicas, boundary Renyi entropies indS/CF Tand time entanglement,2509.02775
[54]

Li, Z.-Q

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

2023 arXiv
[55]

He and H.-Q

P.-Z. He and H.-Q. Zhang,Holographic timelike entanglement entropy from Rindler method*, Chin. Phys. C48(2024) 115113 [2307.09803]

2024 arXiv
[56]

Jiang, P

X. Jiang, P. Wang, H. Wu and H. Yang,Timelike entanglement entropy in dS 3/CFT2,JHEP 08(2023) 216 [2304.10376]

2023 arXiv
[57]

Jiang, P

X. Jiang, P. Wang, H. Wu and H. Yang,Timelike entanglement entropy and TT¯ deformation,Phys. Rev. D108(2023) 046004 [2302.13872]

2023 arXiv
[58]

W.-z. Guo, S. He and Y.-X. Zhang,Relation between time- and spacelike entanglement entropy,Phys. Rev. D112(2025) 086020 [2402.00268]

2025
[59]

Xu and W.-z

J. Xu and W.-z. Guo,Imaginary part of timelike entanglement entropy,JHEP02(2025) 094 [2410.22684]

2025 arXiv
[60]

Maulik and S

S. Maulik and S. Pari,Effective dynamics and quantum information in de Sitter wedge holography,2607.11848

arXiv
[61]

Anegawa and K

T. Anegawa and K. Tamaoka,Black hole singularity and timelike entanglement,JHEP10 (2024) 182 [2406.10968]

2024 arXiv
[62]

Gong, W.-z

X. Gong, W.-z. Guo and J. Xu,Entanglement measures for causally connected subregions and holography,2508.05158

arXiv
[63]

Nunez and D

C. Nunez and D. Roychowdhury,Timelike entanglement entropy: A top-down approach, Phys. Rev. D112(2025) 026030 [2505.20388]

2025 arXiv
[64]

Nunez and D

C. Nunez and D. Roychowdhury,Interpolating between spacelike and timelike entanglement via holography,Phys. Rev. D112(2025) L081902 [2507.17805]

2025
[65]

Nunez and D

C. Nunez and D. Roychowdhury,Holographic Timelike Entanglement Across Dimensions, 2508.13266
[66]

Jiang, H

X. Jiang, H. Wu and H. Yang,Timelike entanglement entropy Revisited,2503.19342

arXiv
[67]

Heller, F

M.P. Heller, F. Ori and A. Serantes,Geometric Interpretation of Timelike Entanglement Entropy,Phys. Rev. Lett.134(2025) 131601 [2408.15752]

2025 arXiv
[68]

Heller, F

M.P. Heller, F. Ori and A. Serantes,Temporal Entanglement from Holographic Entanglement Entropy,Phys. Rev. X15(2025) 041022 [2507.17847]

2025 arXiv
[69]

Chen,Complex-valued Holographic Pseudo Entropy via Real-time AdS/CFT Correspondence,2302.14303

Z. Chen,Complex-valued Holographic Pseudo Entropy via Real-time AdS/CFT Correspondence,2302.14303. – 39 –

arXiv
[70]

Kanda, T

H. Kanda, T. Kawamoto, Y.-k. Suzuki, T. Takayanagi, K. Tasuki and Z. Wei,Entanglement phase transition in holographic pseudo entropy,JHEP03(2024) 060 [2311.13201]

2024 arXiv
[71]

Caputa, B

P. Caputa, B. Chen, T. Takayanagi and T. Tsuda,Thermal pseudo-entropy,JHEP01(2025) 003 [2411.08948]

2025 arXiv
[72]

Kanda, T

H. Kanda, T. Takayanagi and Z. Wei,CFT derivation of entanglement phase transition in pseudo entropy,2602.22994
[73]

A. Das, S. Sachdeva and D. Sarkar,Bulk reconstruction using timelike entanglement in (A)dS,2312.16056

arXiv
[74]

Li, M.-H

G.-Y. Li, M.-H. Xiao, S. He and J.-R. Sun,Entanglement first law for timelike entanglement entropy and linearized Einstein’s equation,JHEP06(2026) 144 [2511.17098]

2026 arXiv
[75]

Fujiki, M

K. Fujiki, M. Kohara, K. Shimyo, Y.-k. Suzuki and T. Takayanagi,Entropic Interpretation of Einstein Equation in dS/CFT,2511.07915
[76]

Wald,Black hole entropy is the Noether charge,Phys

R.M. Wald,Black hole entropy is the Noether charge,Phys. Rev. D48(1993) R3427 [gr-qc/9307038]

1993 arXiv
[77]

Jacobson, G

T. Jacobson, G. Kang and R.C. Myers,On black hole entropy,Phys. Rev. D49(1994) 6587 [gr-qc/9312023]

1994 arXiv
[78]

Sun,Note on Chern-Simons Term Correction to Holographic Entanglement Entropy, JHEP05(2009) 061 [0810.0967]

J.-R. Sun,Note on Chern-Simons Term Correction to Holographic Entanglement Entropy, JHEP05(2009) 061 [0810.0967]

2009 arXiv
[79]

Hung, R.C

L.-Y. Hung, R.C. Myers and M. Smolkin,On Holographic Entanglement Entropy and Higher Curvature Gravity,JHEP04(2011) 025 [1101.5813]

2011 arXiv
[80]

Jacobson and R.C

T. Jacobson and R.C. Myers,Black hole entropy and higher curvature interactions,Phys. Rev. Lett.70(1993) 3684 [hep-th/9305016]

1993 arXiv
[81]

de Boer, M

J. de Boer, M. Kulaxizi and A. Parnachev,Holographic Entanglement Entropy in Lovelock Gravities,JHEP07(2011) 109 [1101.5781]

2011 arXiv
[82]

Z.-X. Zhao, L. Zhao and S. He,Timelike entanglement entropy in higher curvature gravity, JHEP12(2025) 156 [2509.04181]

2025
[83]

Lovelock,Divergence-free tensorial concomitants,Aequat

D. Lovelock,Divergence-free tensorial concomitants,Aequat. Math.4(1970) 127

1970
[84]

Lovelock,The Einstein tensor and its generalizations,J

D. Lovelock,The Einstein tensor and its generalizations,J. Math. Phys.12(1971) 498

1971
[85]

Iyer and R.M

V. Iyer and R.M. Wald,Some properties of Noether charge and a proposal for dynamical black hole entropy,Phys. Rev. D50(1994) 846 [gr-qc/9403028]

1994 arXiv
[86]

Wald,On identically closed forms locally constructed from a field,J

R.M. Wald,On identically closed forms locally constructed from a field,J. Math. Phys.31 (1990) 2378

1990
[87]

Wald,The thermodynamics of black holes,Living Rev

R.M. Wald,The thermodynamics of black holes,Living Rev. Rel.4(2001) 6 [gr-qc/9912119]

2001 arXiv
[88]

Kay and R.M

B.S. Kay and R.M. Wald,Theorems on the uniqueness and thermal properties of stationary, nonsingular, quasifree states on spacetimes with a bifurcate killing horizon,Physics Reports 207(1991) 49

1991
[89]

Lee and R.M

J. Lee and R.M. Wald,Local symmetries and constraints,J. Math. Phys.31(1990) 725

1990
[90]

Myers,Higher Derivative Gravity, Surface Terms and String Theory,Phys

R.C. Myers,Higher Derivative Gravity, Surface Terms and String Theory,Phys. Rev. D36 (1987) 392. – 40 –

1987
[91]

Myers, R

R.C. Myers, R. Pourhasan and M. Smolkin,On Spacetime Entanglement,JHEP06(2013) 013 [1304.2030]

2013 arXiv
[92]

de Haro, S.N

S. de Haro, S.N. Solodukhin and K. Skenderis,Holographic reconstruction of space-time and renormalization in the AdS / CFT correspondence,Commun. Math. Phys.217(2001) 595 [hep-th/0002230]

2001 arXiv
[93]

Skenderis,Asymptotically Anti-de Sitter space-times and their stress energy tensor,Int

K. Skenderis,Asymptotically Anti-de Sitter space-times and their stress energy tensor,Int. J. Mod. Phys. A16(2001) 740 [hep-th/0010138]

2001 arXiv
[94]

Deruelle, M

N. Deruelle, M. Sasaki, Y. Sendouda and D. Yamauchi,Hamiltonian formulation of f(Riemann) theories of gravity,Prog. Theor. Phys.123(2010) 169 [0908.0679]

2010 arXiv
[95]

Misner, K.S

C.W. Misner, K.S. Thorne and J.A. Wheeler,Gravitation, W. H. Freeman, San Francisco (1973)

1973
[96]

H.-S. Liu, H. Lu and C.N. Pope,Holographic Heat Current as Noether Current,JHEP09 (2017) 146 [1708.02329]

2017 arXiv
[97]

Teitelboim and J

C. Teitelboim and J. Zanelli,Dimensionally continued topological gravitation theory in Hamiltonian form,Class. Quant. Grav.4(1987) L125. – 41 –

1987

Pith tools

Reviewed August 2, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Calabrese and J.L

P. Calabrese and J.L. Cardy,Entanglement entropy and quantum field theory,J. Stat. Mech. 0406(2004) P06002 [hep-th/0405152]

arXiv 2004

[2] [2]

Levin and X.-G

M. Levin and X.-G. Wen,Detecting Topological Order in a Ground State Wave Function, Phys. Rev. Lett.96(2006) 110405 [cond-mat/0510613]

arXiv 2006

[3] [3]

Kitaev and J

A. Kitaev and J. Preskill,Topological entanglement entropy,Phys. Rev. Lett.96(2006) 110404 [hep-th/0510092]

arXiv 2006

[4] [4]

Casini and M

H. Casini and M. Huerta,Lectures on entanglement in quantum field theory,PoST ASI2021 (2023) 002 [2201.13310]

arXiv 2023

[5] [5]

Van Raamsdonk,Building up spacetime with quantum entanglement,Gen

M. Van Raamsdonk,Building up spacetime with quantum entanglement,Gen. Rel. Grav.42 (2010) 2323 [1005.3035]

arXiv 2010

[6] [6]

Maldacena and L

J. Maldacena and L. Susskind,Cool horizons for entangled black holes,Fortsch. Phys.61 (2013) 781 [1306.0533]

arXiv 2013

[7] [7]

Almheiri, T

A. Almheiri, T. Hartman, J. Maldacena, E. Shaghoulian and A. Tajdini,The entropy of Hawking radiation,Rev. Mod. Phys.93(2021) 035002 [2006.06872]. – 36 –

arXiv 2021

[8] [8]

Maldacena,The LargeNlimit of superconformal field theories and supergravity,Adv

J.M. Maldacena,The LargeNlimit of superconformal field theories and supergravity,Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.2(1998) 231 [hep-th/9711200]

arXiv 1998