Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Towards a String Realization of the Dark Dimension via T-folds

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A T-fold compactification of type II strings produces a scalar potential that scales as the fourth power of the Kaluza–Klein scale, matching the Dark Dimension Scenario.

desk verdict The paper builds an explicit T-fold flux construction aimed at the Dark Dimension scaling, but the angular 'stabilization' that yields V ∝ m_KK^4 is a coordinate artifact: the trajectory is flat in canonically normalized fields, so the central scaling relation is imposed rather than derived. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.19216 v3 pith:4EQNAR2B submitted 2024-11-28 hep-th gr-qchep-ph

Guo-En Nian , Stefan Vandoren This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-thgr-qchep-ph
keywords DarkDimensionScenarioT-foldcompactificationScherk-Schwarzreductiondualitytwistmodulistabilizationnon-geometricfluxesKaluza-Kleinscaledynamicalenergy
topics Dark Energy
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

This paper argues that a T-fold compactification of type II string theory—six internal dimensions arranged as $T^5$ times a Scherk–Schwarz circle—generates exactly the scalar potential that the Dark Dimension Scenario demands: a dark-energy potential scaling as $V \propto m_{\rm KK}^4$, the fourth power of the Kaluza–Klein scale of that circle. If correct, it supplies a concrete string model in which the smallness of dark energy is tied, through Swampland distance conjectures, to one mesoscopic extra dimension rather than to a tuned cosmological constant. The paper splits the internal five-torus into $T^3 \times T^2$, uses elliptic duality twists to freeze the volumes at Minkowski minima, and leaves two runaway directions—the circle radion and a complex-structure modulus—whose combined trajectory reproduces the required scaling. The authors themselves note that flat directions remain and that the angular stabilization selecting the trajectory is imposed rather than dynamically derived.

What carries the argument

The machinery is Scherk–Schwarz reduction with a duality twist. A field on the internal circle is twisted by a monodromy matrix $M=e^{\mathcal M}$ in the T-duality group; the reduction yields the potential $V = 2e^{2(\alpha-\beta)\phi}\mathrm{Tr}(\mathcal M^2/(2\pi R)^2 + \mathcal M^T H^{-1}\mathcal M H/(2\pi R))$. The conjugacy class of the twist governs the outcome: elliptic twists stabilize moduli at Minkowski minima, parabolic twists create runaway fields, and hyperbolic twists contribute trivially. The second ingredient is the polar-coordinate reparametrization $e^{\sqrt{3}\phi}=r\cos\vartheta$, $(\tau_2)^2=r\sin\vartheta$, which combines the two runaway exponentials into a trajectory field $r$ and an angular factor; selecting $\vartheta=\pi/4$ (and $\tan\varphi=(f_B/f_A)^{2/3}$ in the four-dimensional case) yields $V\propto r^{-2}\propto m_{\rm KK}^4$. The T-fold itself is the internal $T^5$ fibered over the $S^1$ with T-duality transition functions, generating non-geometric H-, f-, and Q-fluxes that satisfy the Bianchi identities.

What would settle it

Compute the Hessian of the full scalar potential, without truncating off-diagonal moduli, at the claimed stabilization point for the $O(3,3;\mathbb{Z})$ twist with flux numbers $h_{12}=q_{12}=h_{13}=q_{13}=1$, $h_{23}=q_{23}=-1$: if the point $b_{12}=-b_{13}=b_{23}=-1/2$, $g_{ij}=\frac12\delta_{ij}$ is not a Minkowski minimum, or if the angular direction $\vartheta=\pi/4$ has a nonzero gradient, then the $V\propto m_{\rm KK}^4$ trajectory is not dynamically realized. A zero eigenvalue in the angular Hessian would likewise confirm that the direction is flat rather than stabilized.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Eq. (5.5): after the Kähler moduli of two $T^2$ factors are stabilized by elliptic T-duality twists, the remaining potential is $V = 2e^{-2\sqrt{3}\phi}(f_A^{4/3}+f_B^{4/3})^{3/2}$, exactly proportional to $m_{\rm KK}^4$ of the Scherk–Schwarz circle. To reach this formula, the paper classifies monodromies of $\mathrm{SL}(2,\mathbb{Z})$ in terms of H-, f-, and Q-flux numbers, shows that parabolic twists produce runaway directions while elliptic twists produce Minkowski minima, and gives a numerical elliptic $O(3,3;\mathbb{Z})$ twist for which the $T^3$ volume is stabilized at zero potential. Reparametrizing the two surviving runaway scalars in polar coordinates selects the angular direction $\vartheta=\pi/4$, along which the potential falls as $1/r^2$ and therefore as $m_{\rm KK}^4$. The paper concludes that this T-fold realizes the Dark Dimension Scenario with the $S^1$ acting as the dark dimension.

Load-bearing premise

The result rests on assuming that the two runaway scalar fields lock into a fixed 45-degree ratio in their polar-coordinate description, even though the potential along that ratio is a flat direction rather than a genuine minimum.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The $S^1$ base of the T-fold plays the role of the dark dimension: its radius grows like $e^{\sqrt{3}\phi}$, matching the runaway scalar, while the $T^5$ volume stays fixed.
  • Supersymmetry breaking sits at the Kaluza–Klein scale, $M_{3/2}\propto m_{\rm KK}$, so the gravitino mass and the dark-dimension scale are locked together.
  • The classical Scherk–Schwarz potential dominates the one-loop Casimir energy, $V_{\rm Casimir}\ll V_{\rm classical}$, so the $V\propto m_{\rm KK}^4$ relation is not spoiled by that quantum correction.
  • The effective exponent $\lambda\simeq 2\sqrt{3}$ is too steep for eternal acceleration, but with more runaway directions, or with a kinetic coupling of the type in Appendix B, the model permits transient accelerated expansion.
  • The non-geometric H-, f-, and Q-flux configuration satisfies the Bianchi identities, so the T-fold background is consistent at the two-derivative level of the effective theory.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: the angular stabilization at $\vartheta=\pi/4$ is selected by hand, not produced by a potential barrier; the direction $\tau_2^2=e^{a\phi}$ is a flat valley. The paper therefore shows that a T-fold can be compatible with $V\propto m_{\rm KK}^4$, not that the Dark Dimension exponent is dynamically inevitable.
  • Editorial inference: the same polar-coordinate move with $N$ runaway fields would soften the effective exponent toward values that allow cosmic acceleration while keeping only the $S^1$ large; this suggests a concrete template for multi-field quintessence from T-folds.
  • Editorial inference: because the $z^5$ direction and several off-diagonal moduli remain flat, the construction is best read as a proof of principle for the flux pattern; a complete Dark Dimension model would need additional stabilization, plausibly from RR fluxes or higher-order corrections.
  • Editorial inference: in the pure elliptic case the one-loop Casimir energy is negative, while the classical f-flux potential is positive, so a decisive test is to compute the worldsheet or Casimir correction for $f\neq 0$ and check whether the $m_{\rm KK}^4$ scaling survives quantum effects.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a type II string compactification on T^5 × S^1 with Scherk–Schwarz twists in O(5,5;Z), aiming to realize the Dark Dimension Scenario relation V ∝ m_KK^4. After deriving the general Scherk–Schwarz potential, the authors classify O(2,2;Z) monodromies in terms of H-, f-, and Q-fluxes in a T^2 × S^1 toy model. In that model, a parabolic twist generates a runaway potential in τ_2, and a polar-coordinate reparameterization of (e^{aφ}, τ_2^2) is claimed to stabilize the angular variable at θ = π/4, giving V ∝ m_KK^4. The four-dimensional construction repeats this with two T^2 factors, and adds a T^3 twist with a numerically found Minkowski minimum. The paper also checks the relevant Bianchi identities and discusses supersymmetry breaking, Casimir corrections, and multi-field quintessence behavior.

Significance. The construction is a serious attempt to make the Dark Dimension Scenario concrete through non-geometric T-fold compactifications, and the Scherk–Schwarz potential derivation, the flux identification, and the Bianchi-identity checks are useful and mostly correct. The honesty of the paper about its remaining flat directions and unknown quantum corrections is also a strength. However, the central dynamical claim is not established: the angular 'stabilization' that produces V ∝ m_KK^4 is a coordinate-level statement rather than a solution of the equations of motion, and the T^3 stabilization rests on a single numerical example. The significance is therefore conditional on a dynamical analysis that the manuscript does not provide.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4.2, Eqs. (4.28)–(4.30); §5, Eqs. (5.3)–(5.5)] The central step of the paper is the claim that the angular variables are stabilized at ϑ = π/4 (and the analogous value in the toy model), yielding V ∝ m_KK^4. This is not a dynamical stabilization. After the standard field redefinitions s_A = 2 ln τ_2^A and s_B = 2 ln τ_2^B, the potential (5.2) is V = 2 f_A^2 e^{-√3 φ - s_A} + 2 f_B^2 e^{-√3 φ - s_B}, which depends only on u_A = √3 φ + s_A and u_B = √3 φ + s_B. The orthogonal combination has ∂V = 0, so the Hessian has a zero eigenvalue and there is no potential gradient that drives the system onto the surface (5.3). The polar-coordinate minimum is a minimum with respect to angle changes at fixed r; because the field-space kinetic term is not analyzed in these coordinates, this does not imply that the equations of motion select that trajectory. For an exponential potential the asymptotic ratio of field velocities is set by the field-space metric and the exponential vector, not by a coordinate choice, and the paper does not show that this ratio equals the value used in (4.28)/(5.3). The conclusion in §6 in fact concedes that the exponent was 'achieved by aligning other scalar fields with the radion.' Thus the V ∝ m_KK^4 relation is imposed by the ansatz rather than derived from the dynamics.
  2. [§5, Eq. (5.7) and following paragraph] The stabilization of the T^3 factor rests on a single numerical example: h12 = q12 = h13 = q13 = 1, h23 = q23 = −1, with the minimum at (5.8). The preceding statement, 'numerical cases indicate that the only possible values might be...', is not a proof or a systematic scan. This matters because the claim that exactly one dimension becomes large requires the T^3 volume to be fixed. Moreover, the manuscript itself concedes that z5 and several off-diagonal fields remain flat. Please provide an exhaustive or conclusive treatment of the O(3,3;Z) elliptic twist, or explicitly state that the T^3 stabilization is an assumption rather than a derived result.
  3. [§6, Conclusion] The concluding paragraph states that 'we achieved the required exponent by aligning other scalar fields with the radion' and that the scalars 'can move along a non-geodesic trajectory before approaching the steepest direction.' This is an accurate description of the paper, but it also means that the Dark Dimension relation is not a prediction of the compactification. The paper should either supply a dynamical proof of an attractor, including the field-space metric and a stability analysis around the claimed trajectory, or downgrade the central claim to an existence statement for a trajectory selected by fine-tuned initial conditions.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§5, Eq. (5.4)] The minimization over φ is stated without the second-derivative check; please include the explicit computation, since the expression (5.5) is the main quantitative result.
  2. [§4.1, Eq. (4.21)] The use of an 'imaginary monodromy' for hq ≥ 4 needs a brief justification; complexified generators of the duality group are not introduced earlier and their physical interpretation is not self-evident.
  3. [§5, after Eq. (5.5)] The sentence 'the complexified volumes of the two subtori are fixed' is imprecise: what is fixed is the Kähler modulus, while the complex-structure saxions run away.
  4. [Appendix B] The claim that λ_eff can evolve from zero to slightly above √3 is qualitative; a concrete two-field example or a phase-plane reference would strengthen the argument.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The V ∝ m_KK^4 scaling in Eqs. (4.30) and (5.5) is imposed by the polar-coordinate ansatz: the angular 'stabilization' chooses a motion along a flat direction, so the dark-dimension exponent is an input rather than a derived output.

  1. self definitional [Sec. 4.2, Eqs. (4.28)-(4.30)]
    "we perform a reparameterization of the scalar fields as follows: e^{aϕ}=x=r cos ϑ, τ_2^2=y=r sin ϑ, a=2(β−α). ... V = 2f^2/r^2 1/(cos ϑ sin ϑ), which stabilizes the modulus ϑ at ϑ=π/4, corresponding to the opposite direction of the gradient of the potential. Consequently, as the system evolves over time, the potential approaches: Vstab. = 4f^2/r^2 = 4f^2e^{-2aϕ} ∝ m^4_KK."

    With the paper's own kinetic metric (B.3), the canonical field is χ=2 ln τ2, so the potential is 2f^2 e^{-aϕ-χ} and depends only on u=aϕ+χ. The orthogonal combination w=ϕ-aχ has ∂V/∂w=0 and obeys w¨+3Hw˙=0, so it is a flat direction whose generic solution is a constant, not a value set by minimizing V. The polar-coordinate minimum ϑ=π/4 is precisely the relation τ2^2=e^{aϕ}, i.e. χ=aϕ, which makes w=(1-a^2)ϕ time-dependent. That motion along the flat direction is not a solution of the equations of motion; the V∝m_KK^4 exponent is therefore injected by the coordinate choice rather than produced by the dynamics.

  2. self definitional [Sec. 5, Eqs. (5.3)-(5.5)]
    "Similarly to (4.29), the potential can be further stabilized by reparametrizing the remaining moduli into spherical coordinates e^{√3ϕ}=r cos ϑ, (τ_2^A)^2=r sin ϑ cos φ, (τ_2^B)^2=r sin ϑ sin φ ... which attains a minimum at ϑ=π/4, tan φ=(f_B/f_A)^{2/3}, where V = 4/r^2 (f_A^{4/3}+f_B^{4/3})^{3/2} = 2e^{-2√3ϕ}(f_A^{4/3}+f_B^{4/3})^{3/2} ∝ m^4_KK."

    In canonical variables χ_A=2 ln τ2^A, χ_B=2 ln τ2^B, the potential (5.2) is 2e^{-√3ϕ}(f_A^2 e^{-χ_A}+f_B^2 e^{-χ_B}), which depends only on u_A=√3ϕ+χ_A and u_B=√3ϕ+χ_B. The remaining combination w=√3ϕ+(χ_A+χ_B)/2 is flat: its potential gradient vanishes and its equation of motion forces it to a constant. The stated minimum imposes χ_A=√3ϕ+ln cos φ and χ_B=√3ϕ+ln sin φ, so w=2√3ϕ+const, i.e. the flat combination is forced to run with ϕ. No restoring force exists to enforce this, so Eq. (5.5)'s V∝m_KK^4 is an ansatz for the flat direction, not a prediction derived from the potential.

full rationale

All cited inputs (Scherk-Schwarz reduction, conjugacy classes, Casimir formula) are standard or clearly referenced, and no load-bearing self-citation chain appears; the circularity is internal to the construction. The paper honestly notes remaining flat directions and that the asymptotic exponent is too steep for acceleration, which lowers the severity. Nevertheless, the central claim that the potential is stabilized so that V∝m_KK^4 is not dynamically derived: both in the toy model and in the 4D model, the 'angular stabilization' amounts to choosing a particular relation between the radion and the T^2 complex-structure moduli on a flat direction, and the equations of motion for the flat direction do not drive the system to that relation. The target scaling is therefore an input ansatz, making the derivation partially circular (score 6).

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central construction rests on the standard Scherk-Schwarz potential, the truncation of RR and dilaton fields, the assumption that the T-fold with f-flux is a valid string background, and on two hand-made choices: a numerical O(3,3) monodromy for T^3 stabilization and a flat field-space trajectory that produces V proportional to m_KK^4. The flux integers are free choices, not data fits.

free parameters (4)
  • f_A, f_B (f-flux numbers on two T^2 factors) = arbitrary nonzero integers, e.g. f in the toy model
    Chosen by hand; they set the constant prefactor in V proportional to m_KK^4 but not the exponent.
  • h, q (T^2 H- and Q-flux numbers) = h=2, q=1 in the example
    Chosen to put the Kähler modulus monodromy in an elliptic Z4 class, stabilizing it at a Minkowski minimum.
  • h_ij, q_ij (T^3 H- and Q-flux numbers) = h12=q12=h13=q13=1, h23=q23=-1
    Chosen so the T^3 volume is stabilized at a minimum; only numerical evidence is given, around Eq. (5.8).
  • runaway trajectory slope c in tau2^2=e^{c phi} = c=a=sqrt(3)
    The Dark Dimension target V proportional to m_KK^4 fixes c=a; this direction is flat in the canonical potential, so it is an input rather than a derived attractor.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math The Scherk-Schwarz reduction formula for the scalar potential, Eq. (3.14), is correct and applicable to duality twists.
    Central tool; taken from standard literature [19,20,21].
  • domain assumption RR fields, the dilaton, and graviphotons can be consistently truncated in the T-fold models.
    Used in Secs. 4 and 5; if these fields mix with the stabilized moduli, the potential could change.
  • domain assumption Non-geometric T-fold backgrounds with H, f, and Q flux and no R-flux satisfy the relevant Bianchi identities and admit a string-theory completion.
    Sec. 5 checks the Bianchi identities but does not give a worldsheet construction for f not equal to 0.
  • ad hoc to paper The chosen O(3,3;Z) monodromy (5.7) with h12=q12=h13=q13=1 and h23=q23=-1 stabilizes T^3 at a Minkowski minimum.
    Supported only by 'numerical cases indicate' and one example; no general proof is provided.
  • ad hoc to paper The two runaway scalars can be treated with polar coordinates and the angular minimum yields the Dark Dimension trajectory.
    This is the weakest premise; the canonical kinetic metric is not used and the direction is flat.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Towards a String Realization of the Dark Dimension via T-folds." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4EQNAR2B

@misc{pith2026241119216,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Towards a String Realization of the Dark Dimension via T-folds},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4EQNAR2B}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.19216}
}
abstract

In this work, we explore the feasibility of realizing the Dark Dimension Scenario through T-fold compactifications on $T^5 \times S^1$, where the base of the internal space $S^1$ naturally acts as the requisite mesoscopic extra dimension. Utilizing Scherk--Schwarz reduction from 5D to 4D, and applying duality twists from both elliptic and parabolic conjugacy classes of subgroups of the T-duality group associated with $T^5$, we stabilize the volume of $T^5$ and several other moduli. This approach generates a potential characterized by two runaway directions, one aligned with the Scherk--Schwarz radion. Further stabilization efforts yield a decreasing potential trajectory demanded by the Dark Dimension Scenario.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. The dark dimension, proton decay, and the length of the M-theory interval

    hep-th 2025-10 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Proton decay limits force the M-theory interval in heterotic E8×E8 compactifications to be R ≲ 2.7×10^-28 m, ruling it out as a micron-sized dark dimension.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    DESI collaboration, A. G. Adame et al., DESI 2024 VI: Cosmological Constraints from the Measurements of Baryon Acoustic Oscillations , 2404.03002

    arXiv 2024

  2. [2]

    DESI collaboration, A. G. Adame et al., DESI 2024 VII: Cosmological Constraints from the Full-Shape Modeling of Clustering Measurements , 2411.12022

    arXiv 2024

  3. [3]

    Montero, C

    M. Montero, C. Vafa and I. Valenzuela, The dark dimension and the Swampland , JHEP 02 (2023) 022, [ 2205.12293]

    arXiv 2023

  4. [4]

    Blumenhagen, M

    R. Blumenhagen, M. Brinkmann and A. Makridou, The dark dimension in a warped throat, Phys. Lett. B 838 (2023) 137699, [ 2208.01057]

    arXiv 2023

  5. [5]

    Danielsson, O

    U. Danielsson, O. Henriksson and D. Panizo, Stringy realization of a small and positive cosmological constant in dark bubble cosmology , Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023) 026020, [2211.10191]

    arXiv 2023

  6. [6]

    Cui and S

    C. Cui and S. Ning, Casimir Energy Stabilization of Standard Model Landscape in Dark Dimension, 2310.19592

    work page arXiv

  7. [7]

    L. A. Anchordoqui, I. Antoniadis, N. Cribiori, D. Lust and M. Scalisi, The Scale of Supersymmetry Breaking and the Dark Dimension , JHEP 05 (2023) 060, [ 2301.07719]

    arXiv 2023

  8. [8]

    J. J. Heckman, C. Vafa, T. Weigand and F. Xu, Dark dimension and the grand unification of forces, Phys. Rev. D 111 (2025) 046014, [ 2409.01405]

    arXiv 2025

Show all 43 references
  1. [9]

    Basile and D

    I. Basile and D. Lust, Dark dimension with (little) strings attached , 2409.12231

    arXiv

  2. [10]

    Plauschinn, Moduli Stabilization with Non-Geometric Fluxes — Comments on Tadpole Contributions and de-Sitter Vacua , Fortsch

    E. Plauschinn, Moduli Stabilization with Non-Geometric Fluxes — Comments on Tadpole Contributions and de-Sitter Vacua , Fortsch. Phys. 69 (2021) 2100003, [ 2011.08227]

    2021 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Prieto, J

    D. Prieto, J. Quirant and P. Shukla, On the limitations of non-geometric fluxes to realize dS vacua , JHEP 05 (2024) 008, [ 2402.13899]

    2024 arXiv

  4. [12]

    L¨ ust, E

    D. L¨ ust, E. Palti and C. Vafa,Ads and the swampland , Physics Letters B 797 (Oct.,

  5. [13]

    Ooguri and C

    H. Ooguri and C. Vafa, On the Geometry of the String Landscape and the Swampland , Nucl. Phys. B 766 (2007) 21–33, [ hep-th/0605264]

    2007 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Higuchi, Forbidden Mass Range for Spin-2 Field Theory in De Sitter Space-time , Nucl

    A. Higuchi, Forbidden Mass Range for Spin-2 Field Theory in De Sitter Space-time , Nucl. Phys. B 282 (1987) 397–436

    1987

  7. [15]

    S.-J. Lee, W. Lerche and T. Weigand, Emergent strings from infinite distance limits , JHEP 02 (2022) 190, [ 1910.01135]

    2022 arXiv

  8. [16]

    J. G. Lee, E. G. Adelberger, T. S. Cook, S. M. Fleischer and B. R. Heckel, New Test of the Gravitational 1/r2 Law at Separations down to 52 µm, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124 (2020) 101101, [2002.11761]. 21

    2020 arXiv

  9. [17]

    P. D. Group, P. A. Zyla, R. M. Barnett, J. Beringer, O. Dahl, D. A. Dwyer et al., Review of particle physics, Progress of Theoretical and Experimental Physics 2020 (08, 2020) 083C01, [https://academic.oup.com/ptep/article-pdf/2020/8/083C01/34673722/ptaa104.pdf]

    2020

  10. [18]

    Hannestad and G

    S. Hannestad and G. G. Raffelt, Supernova and neutron-star limits on large extra dimensions reexamined, Phys. Rev. D 67 (Jun, 2003) 125008

    2003

  11. [19]

    Scherk and J

    J. Scherk and J. H. Schwarz, Spontaneous Breaking of Supersymmetry Through Dimensional Reduction, Phys. Lett. B 82 (1979) 60–64

    1979

  12. [20]

    Scherk and J

    J. Scherk and J. H. Schwarz, How to Get Masses from Extra Dimensions , Nucl. Phys. B 153 (1979) 61–88

    1979

  13. [21]

    Dabholkar and C

    A. Dabholkar and C. Hull, Duality twists, orbifolds, and fluxes , Journal of High Energy Physics 2003 (Sept., 2003) 054–054

    2003

  14. [22]

    C. M. Hull, Massive string theories from M theory and F theory , JHEP 11 (1998) 027, [hep-th/9811021]

    1998 arXiv

  15. [23]

    DeWolfe, T

    O. DeWolfe, T. Hauer, A. Iqbal and B. Zwiebach, Uncovering infinite symmetries on [p, q] 7-branes: Kac-Moody algebras and beyond , Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 3 (1999) 1835–1891, [hep-th/9812209]

    1999 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Bergshoeff, C

    E. Bergshoeff, C. M. Hull and T. Ortin, Duality in the type II superstring effective action , Nucl. Phys. B 451 (1995) 547–578, [ hep-th/9504081]

    1995 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Hassan, transformations of ramond–ramond fields and space–time spinors , Nuclear Physics B 583 (Sept., 2000) 431–453

    S. Hassan, transformations of ramond–ramond fields and space–time spinors , Nuclear Physics B 583 (Sept., 2000) 431–453

    2000

  18. [26]

    Giveon, E

    A. Giveon, E. Rabinovici and G. Veneziano, Duality in String Background Space , Nucl. Phys. B 322 (1989) 167–184

    1989

  19. [27]

    A. D. Shapere and F. Wilczek, Selfdual Models with Theta Terms , Nucl. Phys. B 320 (1989) 669–695

    1989

  20. [28]

    Plauschinn, Non-geometric backgrounds in string theory , Phys

    E. Plauschinn, Non-geometric backgrounds in string theory , Phys. Rept. 798 (2019) 1–122, [1811.11203]

    2019 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Kachru, M

    S. Kachru, M. B. Schulz, P. K. Tripathy and S. P. Trivedi, New supersymmetric string compactifications, JHEP 03 (2003) 061, [ hep-th/0211182]

    2003 arXiv

  22. [30]

    C. M. Hull, A geometry for non-geometric string backgrounds , Journal of High Energy Physics 2005 (oct, 2005) 065

    2005

  23. [31]

    M. Quiros, Spontaneous Scherk-Schwarz supersymmetry breaking and radion stabilization , in 11th International Conference on Supersymmetry and the Unification of Fundamental Interactions, pp. 315–322, 2, 2004. hep-ph/0402143. DOI

    2004 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Parameswaran and M

    S. Parameswaran and M. Serra, On (A)dS solutions from Scherk-Schwarz orbifolds , JHEP 10 (2024) 039, [ 2407.16781]. 22

    2024 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Achmed-Zade, M

    I. Achmed-Zade, M. J. D. Hamilton, D. L¨ ust and S. Massai, A note on t-folds and t3 fibrations, Journal of High Energy Physics 2018 (Dec., 2018)

    2018

  26. [34]

    Shelton, W

    J. Shelton, W. Taylor and B. Wecht, Nongeometric flux compactifications, JHEP 10 (2005) 085, [ hep-th/0508133]

    2005 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Kiritsis, C

    E. Kiritsis, C. Kounnas, P. M. Petropoulos and J. Rizos, Solving the decompactification problem in string theory , Phys. Lett. B 385 (1996) 87–95, [ hep-th/9606087]

    1996 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Condeescu, I

    C. Condeescu, I. Florakis and D. Lust, Asymmetric Orbifolds, Non-Geometric Fluxes and Non-Commutativity in Closed String Theory , JHEP 04 (2012) 121, [ 1202.6366]

    2012 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Gkountoumis, C

    G. Gkountoumis, C. Hull, K. Stemerdink and S. Vandoren, Freely acting orbifolds of type IIB string theory on T 5, JHEP 08 (2023) 089, [ 2302.09112]

    2023 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Abel, A dynamical mechanism for large volumes with consistent couplings , JHEP 11 (2016) 085, [ 1609.01311]

    S. Abel, A dynamical mechanism for large volumes with consistent couplings , JHEP 11 (2016) 085, [ 1609.01311]

    2016 arXiv

  31. [39]

    C. M. Hull and P. K. Townsend, Unity of superstring dualities , Nucl. Phys. B 438 (1995) 109–137, [hep-th/9410167]

    1995 arXiv

  32. [40]

    J. T. Liu and R. Minasian, U-branes and t3 fibrations , Nuclear Physics B 510 (Jan.,

  33. [41]

    Castellano, A

    A. Castellano, A. Herr´ aez and L. E. Ib´ a˜ nez,On the Species Scale, Modular Invariance and the Gravitational EFT expansion , 2310.07708

    arXiv

  34. [42]

    Cicoli, J

    M. Cicoli, J. P. Conlon, A. Maharana, S. Parameswaran, F. Quevedo and I. Zavala, String cosmology: From the early universe to today , Phys. Rept. 1059 (2024) 1–155, [2303.04819]

    2024 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Andriot, S

    D. Andriot, S. Parameswaran, D. Tsimpis, T. Wrase and I. Zavala, Exponential quintessence: curved, steep and stringy? , JHEP 08 (2024) 117, [ 2405.09323]. 23

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.