Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 3 cited by

Dilaton Weyl multiplets for $N = 3$ conformal supergravity in four dimensions

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper builds an off-shell dilaton Weyl multiplet for N=3 conformal supergravity by using a vector multiplet's field equations as algebraic constraints on the standard Weyl multiplet.

desk verdict First N=3 dilaton Weyl multiplet, two versions, with explicit transformations; the construction is systematic and probably right, but the off-shell closure claim is carried by assertion and the required nonvanishing dilaton is never stated. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.14874 v3 pith:TDQSEA63 submitted 2024-12-19 hep-th

Soumya Adhikari , Aravind Aikot , Madhu Mishra , Bindusar Sahoo This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-th
keywords dilatonWeylmultipletN=3conformalsupergravitysuperconformaltensorcalculusoff-shellR-symmetrybreakingvectordualgaugefieldssoftalgebra
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 aims to supply the dilaton Weyl multiplet that was missing for N=3 conformal supergravity in four dimensions. It starts from the standard N=3 Weyl multiplet, couples it to an on-shell vector multiplet, and treats the vector multiplet's field equations as algebraic constraints that determine many of the standard multiplet's auxiliary fields. The remaining fields, together with the vector multiplet fields and two dual gauge fields, form a dilaton Weyl multiplet with R-symmetry $SU(2) \times U(1) \times U(1)$, and a further gauge choice $\xi=\bar{\xi}$ produces a second version with $SU(2) \times U(1)$. A sympathetic reader should care because an off-shell dilaton Weyl multiplet gives a working basis for constructing invariant N=3 conformal supergravity actions, including higher-derivative actions, and an alternative route to N=3 Poincaré supergravity.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the superconformal tensor calculus with a soft superconformal algebra, in which the structure functions depend on covariant matter fields. The decisive object is the dilaton field $\xi$ from the N=3 vector multiplet: gauging away its SU(2) partners, $\xi_i=0$, breaks the R-symmetry and turns the vector multiplet's field equations into algebraic formulas for most of the standard Weyl multiplet's auxiliaries. Fields written with a ring, such as $\mathring{\chi}^i$, $\mathring{\zeta}_L$, $\mathring{D}$, $\mathring{T}^{\pm}_{ab}$ and $\mathring{v}_a$, are composite in the dilaton multiplet. Two extra gauge fields, the one-form $\tilde{C}_\mu$ and the two-form $B_{\mu\nu}$, convert the remaining differential field equations into Bianchi identities, so the system can close without equations of motion. The Q-supersymmetry is redefined by adding a field-dependent compensating $SU(3)$ transformation, and the soft algebra is used to determine the Q and S transformations of the new independent fields.

What would settle it

Compute, on any independent field of (3.22) or (4.8), the commutator of two Q-supersymmetry transformations and require the result to match the superconformal algebra using the composite definitions (3.9), (3.10), (3.12) and (3.17) only as definitions. The central claim is falsified if any component needs a vector multiplet equation of motion to close, or if a denominator containing $\xi$ is allowed to vanish.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the standard N=3 Weyl multiplet, coupled to a single N=3 vector multiplet whose field equations have been solved, reorganizes into a new off-shell dilaton Weyl multiplet. The vector multiplet's field equations are reinterpreted as constraints: the fermionic equations determine the auxiliary fields $\mathring{\chi}^i$, $\mathring{\chi}_L$ and $\mathring{\zeta}_L$ algebraically, the $\xi^i$ equation determines $\mathring{D}^i$, and the real part of the $\xi$ equation determines $\mathring{D}$. The Maxwell equation is read as a Bianchi identity for a dual gauge field $\tilde{C}_\mu$, and the imaginary part of the $\xi$ equation as a Bianchi identity for a two-form gauge field $B_{\mu\nu}$, so the multiplet acquires two additional gauge fields. Gauge fixing the vector multiplet scalar to $\xi_i=0$ breaks $SU(3)$ to $SU(2) \times U(1) \times U(1)$; imposing $\xi=\bar{\xi}$ breaks one more $U(1)$ and yields the $SU(2) \times U(1)$ dilaton Weyl multiplet. In both versions the full Q and S supersymmetry transformation rules are written explicitly, with the dilaton $\xi$ transforming nontrivially under dilatations.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the redefined supersymmetry transformations in equations (3.22) and (4.8) close on the new field set without ever using the vector multiplet's equations of motion; the paper takes this to follow from the soft superconformal algebra but does not display the calculation, and the construction also silently requires the dilaton $\xi$ to be nonzero wherever it divides a composite field.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The $SU(2) \times U(1) \times U(1)$ multiplet gives an explicit off-shell basis for N=3 conformal supergravity actions, and the $SU(2) \times U(1)$ version follows from the single gauge choice $\xi=\bar{\xi}$.
  • Actions built from the dilaton Weyl multiplet can in principle contain more than four derivatives, with inverse powers of the dilaton maintaining Weyl invariance, unlike actions built only from the standard Weyl multiplet.
  • The construction offers an alternative route to N=3 Poincaré supergravity, and the $SU(2) \times U(1)$ version is expected to match a supersymmetric truncation of the N=4 dilaton Weyl multiplet.
  • The paper notes that a variant obtained by coupling two vector multiplets already exists, and that a three-vector variant, if its leftover fermionic equations can be solved, could eliminate all standard auxiliaries and support a fully off-shell Poincaré supergravity.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The composite fields marked with a ring are the most fragile part of the construction, since each is defined by dividing by $\xi$ or $|\xi|^2$; an action built on this multiplet will therefore be valid only away from the zero locus of the dilaton.
  • The two dual gauge fields that enter the multiplet should appear in invariant actions through Chern-Simons-type couplings of the form $F \wedge F$ and $G \wedge G$, so they are likely propagating degrees of freedom rather than inert auxiliary fields.
  • If the $SU(2) \times U(1)$ version is genuinely a truncation of the N=4 dilaton Weyl multiplet, the smaller N=3 system could be a test bed for the truncation logic and action construction before repeating them at N=4; this extrapolation is not argued in the paper.
  • The paper's component count for three vector multiplets, 48 fermionic equations against 36 auxiliary fermion components, suggests the obstruction to an auxiliary-free multiplet is structural; a counting argument on the remaining equations would show what additional field is needed.
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

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper constructs a dilaton Weyl multiplet for N=3 conformal supergravity in four dimensions. The construction starts from the standard N=3 Weyl multiplet and one on-shell vector multiplet, imposes ξ^i = 0 to break SU(3) to SU(2) × U(1), solves the vector-multiplet field equations algebraically for a subset of the standard Weyl multiplet auxiliary fields (T, χ, ζ, D, and one U(1) gauge field), and promotes the remaining fields together with the vector multiplet fields and dual gauge fields B_μν and C̃_μ to a new multiplet with R-symmetry SU(2) × U(1) × U(1). The Q and S transformation rules are written out in full in (3.22). Section 4 imposes ξ = ξ̄ to reduce the R-symmetry to SU(2) × U(1), with transformation rules in (4.8). The central claim is that Tables 3 and 4 define off-shell multiplets, so that they can serve as a basis for constructing invariant actions.

Significance. If correct, the construction fills a genuine gap: no dilaton Weyl multiplet was previously known for N=3 conformal supergravity. The paper is genuinely constructive: it gives the complete field content and the complete Q and S transformation rules in (3.22) and (4.8), and it is explicit about the composite equations and the dual gauge fields. The strategy of using the vector-multiplet field equations as algebraic identities is coherent, and the introduction of B_μν and C̃_μ is concretely motivated by the Maxwell equation and the imaginary part of the ξ field equation. The main caveat is that the off-shell closure of the algebra is asserted rather than demonstrated; as a basis for future action constructions, the value of the paper depends on that check.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3, after eq. (3.19); §4, eqs. (4.8)] The central claim that Tables 3 and 4 define off-shell multiplets is not verified. The paper only says that the superconformal soft algebra 'suffices' to find the transformations of B_μν, but it does not display the commutators [δ_Q(ϵ_1), δ_Q(ϵ_2)], [δ_S(η), δ_Q(ϵ)], or the other superconformal generators on the independent fields, nor does it state that they close without using field equations. This matters especially for the composite fields defined by inverting the vector-multiplet field equations: eqs. (3.9)–(3.12) and (3.17) define ˚T, ˚χ, ˚ζ, ˚D, and ˚v, and their supersymmetry variations must be compatible with those definitions. For example, the variation of the field strength of the new gauge field C̃ must match the variation of G^+ − G^- implied by (2.7) and (3.9), and the variation of (3.17) must reproduce (3.18)–(3.19). No such consistency check is shown. Without it, the construction may be only a gauge-fixed on-shell formulation rather than an off-shell multiplet.
  2. [§3, eqs. (3.9), (3.10), (3.12), (3.17); §4, eq. (4.6)] All composite definitions divide by ξ, ξ̄, or |ξ|^2, but the restriction ξ ≠ 0 is never stated. In particular, (3.9) divides by ξ, (3.10a)–(3.10c) divide by ξ̄ or ξ, (3.12) divides by |ξ|^2, (3.17) divides by 2ξξ̄, and (4.6) divides by ξ^2 after the gauge choice ξ = ξ̄. The same restriction underlies the compensating parameter u(ϵ)^i in (3.4), which contains 1/|ξ|^2. The multiplet is therefore only defined on field configurations with nonvanishing dilaton. This restriction should be stated explicitly, and its compatibility with the gauge-fixing conditions (3.2) and (4.1), and with the intended use of the multiplet in constructing actions, should be discussed.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§3, eq. (3.22i)] The term written as C̃_[μ δC_ν] should presumably be C̃_[μ δC̃_ν], in analogy with (3.20); please correct it.
  2. [§3, eq. (3.12)] The term '1/4 F^- · ˚T^- θ_R' does not match the corresponding source term in (3.8f), where the analogous term has no θ_R; please check whether this is a typo and align the notation.
  3. [§3 and §4, notation] The symbol δ_Q is redefined twice, in (3.3) and again in (4.3), and each time the superscript 'new' is subsequently dropped. This makes it hard to tell which δ_Q appears in (3.22) versus (4.8). Please introduce distinct notation for the two redefined supersymmetry variations.
  4. [Tables 3 and 4] Some SU(2) representation labels for fields carrying an i = 1, 2 index appear inconsistent; for example, T^i_ab is listed as a singlet even though it should transform in the fundamental 2 of the SU(2) that rotates the i index. Please verify all representation entries in both tables.
  5. [§4, final paragraph; §5] The statement that the SU(2) × U(1) multiplet can be obtained by a supersymmetric truncation of the N=4 dilaton Weyl multiplet of [23] is not shown, and the paper itself says 'we do not show explicitly'. Please mark this as a conjecture or supply the truncation, rather than presenting it as part of the established result.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the dilaton Weyl multiplet is obtained by a constructive field elimination from the standard Weyl and vector multiplets, not by assuming the target result; missing Q/S closure is an omitted proof, not circularity.

full rationale

The paper's chain is: take the independent N=3 standard Weyl multiplet and the vector multiplet (2.1)-(2.5); impose gauge condition (3.2); rewrite the vector-multiplet field equations (3.8); algebraically solve selected standard-Weyl auxiliaries as composite fields (3.9)-(3.12), (3.17); introduce dual gauge fields for the Maxwell-type and scalar equations; list the remaining independent fields in Table 3 and give their Q/S transformations in (3.22). This is a constructive reduction: the composite fields are defined by the field equations, and the target multiplet is not an input anywhere. The central claim (Section 3, 'The remaining fields ... constitute the dilaton Weyl multiplet ...') is a new identification, not a restatement of the inputs; Eq. (3.9) is an algebraic solution for ˚T, not a tautology. The obvious weakness is that the paper never presents the closure computation for (3.22)/(4.8) and merely says the soft algebra 'suffice[s]' (text after (3.19)); that is an omitted proof and a correctness risk, and the 1/ξ and 1/|ξ|^2 definitions restrict to nonzero ξ, but neither is a circular-equivalence issue. Self-citations ([28], [30], [32]) provide the input standard Weyl multiplet, the input vector multiplet, and motivating variants; they are prior constructions used as ingredients, not as evidence for the new multiplet, so they are not load-bearing for the target claim. Score 2 reflects the minor self-citation presence, not circularity.

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

No free parameters appear; this is an algebraic construction. The inputs are prior multiplets and gauge-fixing choices, listed as axioms. The new fields in Table 3 are pieces of the new multiplet, not independent physical entities.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The N=3 standard Weyl multiplet of [27,28] and the N=3 vector multiplet of [30] are correct and provide the starting point.
    Used throughout Section 2 and in the field equations (2.6) that are solved in Section 3.
  • domain assumption The superconformal soft algebra remains valid after R-symmetry breaking and fixes the new transformations.
    Invoked after eq (3.19) to determine delta B_mu_nu and in the definitions of D_new (eq (3.7)).
  • ad hoc to paper The vector multiplet field equations can be solved algebraically for the eliminated Weyl multiplet components after gauge fixing xi_i=0.
    This is the construction method; the solutions are displayed in eqs (3.9) to (3.12) and (3.17).
  • ad hoc to paper The gauge-fixing conditions xi_i=0 and xi=xibar can be imposed with field-dependent compensating SU(3) and U(1) transformations.
    Equations (3.2), (3.3), (4.1), and (4.3); necessary for the R-symmetry reduction.
  • ad hoc to paper The dilaton field xi is nonzero wherever the composite fields are defined.
    Composite definitions in (3.9), (3.10), (3.12), (3.17), and (4.6) contain 1/xi or 1/|xi|^2; the paper does not state this condition.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dilaton Weyl multiplets for $N = 3$ conformal supergravity in four dimensions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TDQSEA63

@misc{pith2026241214874,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dilaton Weyl multiplets for $N = 3$ conformal supergravity in four dimensions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TDQSEA63}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.14874}
}
abstract

We construct a dilaton Weyl multiplet for $N = 3$ conformal supergravity in four dimensions. We couple an on-shell vector multiplet to the standard Weyl multiplet and use the field equations of the vector multiplet to replace some of the components of the auxiliary fields of the standard Weyl multiplet with the fields of the vector multiplet and some dual gauge fields. The R-symmetry of the multiplet is $SU(2) \times U(1) \times U(1)$. Furthermore, we gauge fix one of the two $U(1)$ symmetries and rewrite the result for the dilaton Weyl multiplet with $SU(2) \times U(1)$ R-symmetry.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

  1. Six-dimensional $\mathcal{N}=(2,0)$ Conformal Superspace

    hep-th 2025-06 conditional novelty 8.0 of 10

    A new off-shell 6D N=(2,0) conformal superspace is constructed, and its unique Bach tensor superfield is derived up to overall scaling.

  2. ${\mathcal N}=3$ nonlinear multiplet and supergravity

    hep-th 2025-01 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A new N=3 Einstein superspace is built from a proposed nonlinear multiplet, and the resulting equations of motion reduce to chi=0, implying the N=3 super-Bach tensor vanishes.

  3. Scalar-Tensor multiplet in four dimensional N=2 conformal supergravity

    hep-th 2024-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A new off-shell 8+8 scalar-tensor multiplet for N=2 conformal supergravity is constructed by supersymmetric truncation of N=3 multiplets and elimination of central charge multiplet fields using hypermultiplet field equations.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

33 extracted references · 11 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Cremmer, S

    E. Cremmer, S. Ferrara, L. Girardello and A. Van Proeyen, Yang-Mills Theories with Local Supersymmetry: Lagrangian, Transformation Laws and SuperHiggs Effect , Nucl. Phys. B 212 (1983) 413. – 23 –

    work page 1983

  2. [2]

    Nilles, Supersymmetry, Supergravity and Particle Physics , Phys

    H.P. Nilles, Supersymmetry, Supergravity and Particle Physics , Phys. Rept. 110 (1984) 1

    1984

  3. [3]

    Wess and J

    J. Wess and J. Bagger, Supersymmetry and supergravity, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA (1992)

    1992

  4. [4]

    Martin, A Supersymmetry primer , Adv

    S.P. Martin, A Supersymmetry primer , Adv. Ser. Direct. High Energy Phys. 18 (1998) 1 [hep-ph/9709356]

    arXiv 1998

  5. [5]

    The complete N=3 Kaluza Klein spectrum of 11D supergravity on AdS_4 x N^{010}

    P. Termonia, The Complete N=3 Kaluza-Klein spectrum of 11-D supergravity on AdS(4) x N** 010 , Nucl. Phys. B 577 (2000) 341 [ hep-th/9909137]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2000

  6. [6]

    Cassani and P

    D. Cassani and P. Koerber, Tri-Sasakian consistent reduction, JHEP 01 (2012) 086 [1110.5327]

    arXiv 2012

  7. [7]

    Karndumri, Supersymmetric Janus solutions in four-dimensional N=3 gauged supergravity, Phys

    P. Karndumri, Supersymmetric Janus solutions in four-dimensional N=3 gauged supergravity, Phys. Rev. D 93 (2016) 125012 [ 1604.06007]

    arXiv 2016

  8. [8]

    Haag, J.T

    R. Haag, J.T. Lopuszanski and M. Sohnius, All Possible Generators of Supersymmetries of the s Matrix , Nucl. Phys. B 88 (1975) 257

    work page 1975

Show all 33 references
  1. [9]

    Ferrara, C.A

    S. Ferrara, C.A. Savoy and L. Girardello, Spin Sum Rules in Extended Supersymmetry , Phys. Lett. B 105 (1981) 363

    1981

  2. [10]

    Freedman and A

    D.Z. Freedman and A. Van Proeyen, Supergravity, Cambridge Univ. Press, Cambridge, UK (5, 2012)

    2012

  3. [11]

    Ferrara and B

    S. Ferrara and B. Zumino, Structure of Conformal Supergravity , Nucl. Phys. B 134 (1978) 301

    1978

  4. [12]

    de Wit, J.W

    B. de Wit, J.W. van Holten and A. Van Proeyen, Transformation Rules of N=2 Supergravity Multiplets, Nucl. Phys. B167 (1980) 186

    1980

  5. [13]

    Bergshoeff, M

    E. Bergshoeff, M. de Roo and B. de Wit, Extended Conformal Supergravity, Nucl. Phys. B 182 (1981) 173

    1981

  6. [14]

    Bergshoeff, E

    E. Bergshoeff, E. Sezgin and A. Van Proeyen, Superconformal Tensor Calculus and Matter Couplings in Six-dimensions , Nucl. Phys. B 264 (1986) 653

    1986

  7. [15]

    Fujita and K

    T. Fujita and K. Ohashi, Superconformal tensor calculus in five-dimensions , Prog. Theor. Phys. 106 (2001) 221 [ hep-th/0104130]

    2001 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Butter, S.M

    D. Butter, S.M. Kuzenko, J. Novak and G. Tartaglino-Mazzucchelli, Conformal supergravity in three dimensions: Off-shell actions , JHEP 10 (2013) 073 [ 1306.1205]

    2013 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Butter, S.M

    D. Butter, S.M. Kuzenko, J. Novak and G. Tartaglino-Mazzucchelli, Conformal supergravity in three dimensions: New off-shell formulation , JHEP 09 (2013) 072 [ 1305.3132]

    2013 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Bergshoeff, T

    E. Bergshoeff, T. de Wit, R. Halbersma, S. Cucu, M. Derix and A. Van Proeyen, Weyl multiplets of N=2 conformal supergravity in five-dimensions , JHEP 06 (2001) 051 [hep-th/0104113]

    2001 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Butter, S

    D. Butter, S. Hegde, I. Lodato and B. Sahoo, N = 2 dilaton Weyl multiplet in 4D supergravity, JHEP 03 (2018) 154 [ 1712.05365]

    2018 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Hutomo, S

    J. Hutomo, S. Khandelwal, G. Tartaglino-Mazzucchelli and J. Woods, Hyperdilaton Weyl multiplets of 5D and 6D minimal conformal supergravity , Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023) 046009 [2209.05748]

    2023 arXiv

  13. [21]

    G. Gold, S. Khandelwal, W. Kitchin and G. Tartaglino-Mazzucchelli, Hyper-dilaton Weyl multiplet of 4D, N = 2 conformal supergravity , JHEP 09 (2022) 016 [ 2203.12203]. – 24 –

    2022 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Adhikari and B

    S. Adhikari and B. Sahoo, N = 2 conformal supergravity in five dimensions , JHEP 07 (2024) 028 [2312.01879]

    2024 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Ciceri, A

    F. Ciceri, A. Kleinschmidt, S. Murugesan and B. Sahoo, Torus reduction of maximal conformal supergravity, 2408.06026

    arXiv

  16. [24]

    Adhikari and B

    S. Adhikari and B. Sahoo, SU (2) × SU (2) dilaton Weyl multiplets for maximal conformal supergravity in four, five, and six dimensions , 2411.16322

    arXiv

  17. [25]

    Nahm, Supersymmetries and their Representations , Nucl

    W. Nahm, Supersymmetries and their Representations , Nucl. Phys. B 135 (1978) 149

    1978

  18. [26]

    Mishra and B

    M. Mishra and B. Sahoo, Curvature squared action in four dimensional N = 2 supergravity using the dilaton Weyl multiplet , JHEP 04 (2021) 027 [ 2012.03760]

    2021 arXiv

  19. [27]

    van Muiden and A

    J. van Muiden and A. Van Proeyen, The N = 3 Weyl multiplet in four dimensions , JHEP 01 (2019) 167 [ 1702.06442]

    2019 arXiv

  20. [28]

    The N =3 Weyl multiplet in four dimensions

    S. Hegde and B. Sahoo, Comment on “The N =3 Weyl multiplet in four dimensions” , Phys. Lett. B 791 (2019) 92 [ 1810.05089]

    2019 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Hegde, M

    S. Hegde, M. Mishra and B. Sahoo, N = 3 conformal supergravity in four dimensions , JHEP 04 (2022) 001 [ 2104.07453]

    2022 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Hegde, M

    S. Hegde, M. Mishra, D. Mukherjee and B. Sahoo, Higher derivative invariants in four dimensional N = 3 Poincar´ e supergravity, JHEP 02 (2023) 145 [ 2211.06628]

    2023 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Kuzenko and E.S.N

    S.M. Kuzenko and E.S.N. Raptakis, N = 3 conformal superspace in four dimensions , JHEP 03 (2024) 026 [ 2312.07242]

    2024 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Adhikari, A

    S. Adhikari, A. Aikot, B. Sahoo and M. Mishra, Variant dilaton Weyl Multiplet for N=3 conformal supergravity in four dimensions , 2502.13683

    arXiv

  25. [33]

    Butter, F

    D. Butter, F. Ciceri and B. Sahoo, N=4 conformal supergravity: the complete actions , 1910.11874. – 25 –

    1910 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.