G-structures for AdS$_2$ solutions

Achilleas Passias; Niall T. Macpherson

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 31 references

G-structures for AdS$_2$ solutions

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper derives a G-structure classification of minimally supersymmetric AdS2 solutions in Type II supergravity and constructs two new families: one in massive IIA with a weak G2 manifold and an interval, and one in IIB preserving…

desk verdict Useful proceedings summary of the authors' AdS2 classification, but the one new branch is asserted rather than demonstrated, so treat it as a pointer to [2] rather than a standalone result. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.19346 v1 pith:VT757CNQ submitted 2025-04-27 hep-th

Niall T. Macpherson , Achilleas Passias This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-th PACS 04.65.+e11.25.-w

keywords AdS2solutionsTypeIIsupergravityG-structuresweakG2manifoldmassiveIIAIIBD3-D7branesnear-horizongeometry

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 aims to organize all minimally supersymmetric $AdS_2$ solutions of Type II supergravity by the G-structure on their eight-dimensional internal space, and to show that this organization produces genuinely new solutions. In massive Type IIA, it constructs a warped product of $AdS_2$, a weak $G_2$ manifold, and an interval whose local data reduce to a degree-three polynomial. In Type IIB, it constructs a foliation of $AdS_2$, $S^2$, and a Calabi-Yau twofold over a Riemann surface, preserving small $N=4$ supersymmetry and governed by a harmonic function together with D3-D7-like equations. A sympathetic reader should care because $AdS_2$ is the near-horizon geometry of extremal black holes, and controlled supersymmetric examples are needed to sharpen the $AdS_2/CFT_1$ correspondence.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the G-structure on the internal eight-manifold: generically an SU(3)-structure, i.e. a pair of forms ($J$, $\Omega$) with two distinguished vielbein directions ($u$, $v$), which enhances to a $G_2$-structure with real 3-form $\Phi_3=-(J\wedge v+\mathrm{Re}\,\Omega)$ when a certain phase equals one. Supersymmetry is recast as the differential conditions (8) on polyforms, formal sums of forms of mixed degree, built from these structure forms and the fluxes, and a cited integrability theorem is used to promote those conditions plus (9) to the full equations of motion. In the IIA construction the engine is a weak $G_2$-manifold, defined by $d\Phi_{WG_2}=4\star_{WG_2}\Phi_{WG_2}$, whose non-closed 3-form can enter the RR fluxes but not the NSNS sector and is what keeps supersymmetry at $N=1$. In the IIB construction the engine is the foliation data: functions $h_3$, $h_7$ on the Riemann surface and two primitive $(1,1)$-forms $B_1$, $B_2$ on the Calabi-Yau twofold, with a harmonic equation imposed globally on the surface and the D3-D7-like system (27)-(28) imposed away from sources.

What would settle it

Take the massive IIA ansatz with the constant branch equal to $-1/5$ and any compact weak $G_2$ manifold, and evaluate the full Type II Bianchi identities and Einstein equations directly; a single nonzero component away from sources would disprove the claim that (13) implies (9). Similarly, for the IIB class, showing that (27)-(28) miss a required component of the equations of motion, or finding no compact Riemann surface with acceptable sources satisfying the global constraint on the harmonic function, would refute the classification.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper claims that every minimally supersymmetric $AdS_2$ solution of Type II supergravity can be described by an SU(3)-structure on the internal $M_8$, with enhancement to a $G_2$-structure when a certain phase equals one, and that the supersymmetry conditions (8) together with the conditions (9) imply the full Type II equations of motion away from sources. This classification is then used to build two new families. The massive Type IIA family is a warped product $AdS_2 \times M_{WG_2}\times I$ whose fields are fixed by two functions of the interval coordinate; the on-shell PDEs reduce, when one function is constant, to $h''''=0$ with the constant taking values $0$ or $-1/5$, so $h$ is locally a degree-three polynomial. The $-1/5$ branch remains $N=1$ even when the weak $G_2$ manifold is $S^7$, because the weak $G_2$ form appears in the RR fluxes and blocks enhancement. The IIB family is a foliation of $AdS_2\times S^2\times CY_2$ over a Riemann surface; it preserves small $N=4$ supersymmetry, requires a globally harmonic function on the surface, and its remaining equations constrain two primitive $(1,1)$-forms on the Calabi-Yau twofold and reproduce PDEs reminiscent of localized D3-branes inside D7-branes.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the supersymmetry conditions (8) together with the three extra conditions (9) imply all Type II equations of motion away from sources; if that implication fails, neither proposed family is established as a solution.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The $\hat g_0=-1/5$ branch gives new $N=1$ $AdS_2$ solutions even when the weak $G_2$ manifold is $S^7$, since the RR fluxes keep the non-closed weak $G_2$ form and prevent enhancement to $N=8$.
For weak $G_2$ manifolds built as foliations over nearly-Kahler bases, the IIA family is bounded between conical $G_2$ singularities except in the $S^7$ case, and piecewise-constant $h'''$ signals D8-brane sources along the interval.
The IIB family contains previously known $AdS_2\times S^2\times CY_2\times\Sigma_2$ classes as limits where the two primitive $(1,1)$-forms vanish and warp factors do not depend on the Calabi-Yau directions.
Only the $\hat g=$ constant limit reproduces the round $AdS_2\times S^2$ near-horizon of the extremal Reissner-Nordstrom black hole, while the broader class allows relative warping between the $AdS_2$ and $S^2$ factors.
The same G-structure tools extend to M-theory, so the paper presents the construction of $AdS_2$ solutions of string theory as fully reduced to geometric G-structure data.

Reading between the lines

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

The paper leaves implicit that the same machinery should generate further families: non-constant $\hat g$ solving (13) would be new massive IIA solutions, and the paper says it expects them to exist at least numerically.
A testable extension is to build explicit compact source configurations for the IIB class and check that the brane charges of $h_3$ and $h_7$ match localized D3 and D7 warping.
A natural follow-up is to verify the on-shell claim directly by computing the full Bianchi identities and Einstein equations for the $-1/5$ branch, independent of the cited integrability theorem.
The suggestion to replace the round $AdS_2\times S^2$ factor by any BPS solution of $N=2$ minimal supergravity in four dimensions extrapolates from the $\hat g=$ constant slice and, if true, would embed all BPS extremal black holes of that theory into string theory.

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, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Quick take: this is a clean, honest proceedings summary of the G-structure classification worked out with Legramandi in [2] last year, plus two explicit solution families. The genuinely new item here is the y0 = -1/5 branch of the massive IIA class: for that value the weak G2 structure does not drop out, so even on S^7 supersymmetry stays at N=1. That is worth checking. The IIB foliation in Section 4 is broader than the earlier classes of [16,17] and is presented with full flux formulas, which is useful for reference.

What the paper does well: it is compact and well organized. The consistency checks that set y0=0 back to Dibitetto-Passias and recover the Lozano-Nunez-Ramirez limits when the B^(1,1)'s vanish are the right sanity checks. The authors are transparent about what they omit: twice they point to [2] for details, and they label the integrability step as 'generically true'. That honesty is worth something.

Where the weakness is: the on-shell status of both families is asserted, not shown. Equations (13) and (28) are said to 'imply (9)', but that implication is the load-bearing step, and it is not derived in this text. The integrability theorem of [4] is imported as a black box. The paper's checks exercise only the known limits; none hit the new y0=-1/5 branch or the general IIB warping, so the new claims are unverified here. Also, the global issue with (26) — no delta sources, so on a compact Sigma2, k is forced constant — is real. The paper does not discuss whether the interesting foliations require non-compact Sigma2 and what boundary conditions are needed. These are not necessarily fatal; they likely are answered in [2]. But as a standalone proceedings, the reader has to take the conclusions on faith.

Verdict: for a proceedings record, this is fine. For someone wanting to use these solutions, go to [2] and check (13) and (28). I'd send it to a referee only to verify the new branch, and the referee should ask the authors to either include a short derivation of the sufficiency claim or state loudly that it is proved in [2]. A serious editor could also reasonably let it through as an extended abstract. I'd recommend engaging, but with clear eyes that the original paper is the real source.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. This proceedings paper reports on a G-structure classification of minimally supersymmetric AdS2 solutions of Type II supergravity and presents two new solution families. Section 2 quotes the SU(3)-structure/G2 conditions (8) and the additional conditions (9) that, via the integrability theorem of [4], are claimed to imply all Type II field equations. Section 3 constructs a massive Type IIA class with internal space AdS2 × M_WG2 × I, locally determined by functions h and y and a weak G2 manifold; the PDE system (13) is asserted to imply (9), and for constant y it reduces to h'''' = 0 with branches y0 = 0 and y0 = -1/5. Section 4 constructs a Type IIB foliation AdS2 × S2 × CY2 × Σ2 with NSNS sector (20)-(21), RR fluxes (24), the global constraint (26), and PDEs (27)-(28) claimed to impose (9) away from sources. The paper shows that y0 = 0 recovers the class of [5] and that limits of the IIB class reproduce the classes of [16-19]; details of the derivations are deferred to the authors' earlier work [2].

Significance. If the two families are indeed on-shell, they are new supersymmetric AdS2 backgrounds in Type II supergravity and broaden the landscape relevant to AdS2/CFT1 and black-hole near-horizon physics. The G-structure framework is a useful organizing tool, and the explicit PDE systems provide falsifiable conditions that can be checked. Strengths of the paper include the precise presentation of the ansätze, the identification of the y0 = -1/5 branch as a genuinely new massive IIA family, and the demonstration that known classes arise as limits. However, the on-shell status of the new branches rests on the asserted sufficiency of (13) and (28), which is not demonstrated in this text; the consistency checks do not exercise the new branches. The significance of the results is therefore conditional on the missing verification.

major comments (4)

[§3, Eq. (13)] The statement following (13) that these PDEs 'imply (9)' is the only argument that the new y0 = -1/5 branch satisfies the Type II equations of motion. No derivation is given and the details are deferred to [2]. If (13) is only necessary, or if a term generated by the interval warp factor or the weak G2 flux is missing, the y0 = -1/5 background is supersymmetric but not a solution. Please provide a proof or a precise theorem statement (with equation numbers in [2]) demonstrating sufficiency, and state explicitly how the 'generically true' caveat in §2 applies to this class.
[§4, Eqs. (27)-(28)] The same sufficiency gap occurs in the IIB class: (27)-(28) are introduced as a system that 'imposes (9)' away from sources, but no derivation is shown. Because the NSNS sector (20)-(21) contains k-dependent B-field terms and relative warpings Δ1 and Δ2, it is not immediately evident that (28) captures all components of (9). Please include the reduction from (9) to (27)-(28), or at least a complete statement of the computation, so the claim can be checked. If only one direction of the implication has been verified, that should be stated.
[§4, Eq. (26)] The global constraint □2 k = 0 is stated to hold without delta-function sources. On a compact Σ2 the maximum principle forces k constant, so the advertised non-trivial foliation necessarily has non-compact Σ2; however the manuscript does not specify the allowed global structure, boundary conditions, or fall-off requirements for Σ2 and the functions h3 and h7. This affects the domain of validity of the new class and should be clarified.
[§3, Eq. (18); §4, limits] The consistency checks (y0 = 0 recovering [5], and the IIB limits recovering classes of [16-19]) set the new data to trivial values (y0 = 0 or vanishing B^{(1,1)} and CY-independent warp factors). They therefore do not test the sufficiency of (13) or (28) on the new branches. At least one explicit check of (9) on a non-trivial example of the y0 = -1/5 branch, or on a non-trivial IIB foliation, would de-risk the central claim.

minor comments (4)

[§2, text after (8)] The phrase 'take the concise from' should read 'take the concise form'.
[§4, text after (26)] The phrase 'which much hold globally' should read 'which must hold globally'.
[§3, Eq. (14)] The list '(S6, S3×S3, CP3, F3)' is introduced without explaining the notation F3 or citing the original classification of these nearly-Kähler manifolds; please add a reference or a clarifying sentence.
[Abstract and Introduction] Several sentences are missing words or have grammatical slips, e.g. 'owing to AdS2 arising' and 'It thus worth exploring'; a careful proofread is needed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the new AdS2 families follow from the G-structure conditions and are checked against external known limits.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. The G-structure conditions (8) are quoted from the authors' earlier paper [2], but they function as necessary/sufficient supersymmetry conditions and are not defined in terms of the target solutions; the new AdS2 families in Sections 3 and 4 are obtained by imposing (8) and the on-shell conditions (9) on explicit ansätze. The reductions (13) to (17) and (27)-(28) are presented as derived consequences of those inputs, not as fitted parameters renamed as predictions. The paper also checks that limits reproduce known external solutions (y0=0 recovers [5]; the IIB limits recover [16-19]), which provides independent cross-checks. The reliance on [2] for the G-structure classification and on [4] for the integrability theorem is standard citation of prior results; [4] is an independent theorem and the asserted sufficiency of (13)/(27)-(28) is a correctness question, not a circularity. No load-bearing step reduces by construction to its own input, and no central claim is justified solely by an unverified self-citation.

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

No data are fitted and no new entities are introduced. The solution families contain integration constants (e.g., the coefficients of the degree-three polynomial h(t), the constants F and k0) that parameterize solutions but are not adjusted to external data. The central claim rests on the G-structure and integrability axioms listed above.

assumptions (5)

domain assumption Type II supergravity field equations and Bianchi identities are the background theory.
The paper constructs solutions of these equations; the theory itself is not derived here. Invoked throughout Sections 3 and 4.
domain assumption The G-structure conditions (8) and (9) are necessary and sufficient for N=1 supersymmetric AdS2 solutions, as established in [2] and [3].
Section 2 quotes (8)-(9) from [2], building on the formalism of [3]; the new families are built on these conditions.
domain assumption All Type II field equations are implied by the supersymmetry conditions plus (9), away from localized sources.
Section 2 states: 'Leveraging integrability arguments from [4] it is possible to establish that all the Type II field equations are implied if (8) hold and (9) are imposed.' The on-shell claim for the new families depends on this.
standard math Weak G2-manifolds with dPhi_WG2 = 4 * Phi_WG2 exist, with compact examples given by foliations over nearly-Kahler manifolds such as S6, S3 x S3, CP3, and F3.
Section 3, equations (11)-(16); these are background facts from the geometry literature, not derived here.
ad hoc to paper The specific ansatz for the backgrounds (warped product metric, RR/NSNS field decompositions) is a valid starting point for the G-structure analysis.
The forms in (10)-(12) and (20)-(24) are the constructed ansatze; their consistency is the content of the derivation deferred to [2].

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of G-structures for AdS$_2$ solutions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VT757CNQ

@misc{pith2026250419346,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: G-structures for AdS$_2$ solutions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VT757CNQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.19346}
}

read the original abstract

We report on the classification of supersymmetric AdS2 solutions of Type II supergravity and the discovery of new solutions

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

31 extracted references · 9 canonical work pages

[2]

G-struc tures for black hole near-horizon geometries,

A. Legramandi, N. T. Macpherson and A. Passias, “G-struc tures for black hole near-horizon geometries,” JHEP 06 (2024), 056 [arXiv:2309.01714 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2024
[4]

Timelike structures of ten-dimensional supersymmetry,

A. Legramandi, L. Martucci and A. Tomasiello, “Timelike structures of ten-dimensional supersymmetry,” JHEP 04 (2019), 109 [arXiv:1810.08625 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2019
[5]

$\textrm{AdS}_{2}\times S^7$ solutions from D0 $-$ F1 $-$ D8 intersections

G. Dibitetto and A. Passias, “AdS 2 × S7 solutions from D0-F1-D8 intersections,” JHEP 10 (2018), 190 [arXiv:1807.00555 [hep-th]]

work page Pith review arXiv 2018
[1]

Black hole micros tates in AdS4 from supersymmetric localization,

F. Benini, K. Hristov and A. Zaﬀaroni, “Black hole micros tates in AdS4 from supersymmetric localization,” JHEP 05 (2016), 054 [arXiv:1511.04085 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2016
[3]

Generalized structures of ten-dimensi onal supersymmetric solutions,

A. Tomasiello, “Generalized structures of ten-dimensi onal supersymmetric solutions,” JHEP 03 (2012), 073 [arXiv:1109.2603 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2012
[6]

On AdS 2 × S7, its Z/u1D458orbifold and their dual quantum mechanics,

Y . Lozano, N. T. Macpherson and A. Passias, “On AdS 2 × S7, its Z/u1D458orbifold and their dual quantum mechanics,” [arXiv:2503.23227 [hep-th]]

work page arXiv
[7]

1/4 BPS solutions in massive IIA supergravi ty,

Y . Imamura, “1/4 BPS solutions in massive IIA supergravi ty,” Prog. Theor. Phys. 106 (2001), 653-670 [arXiv:hep-th/0105263 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2001
[8]

All AdS 7 solutions of type II supergravity,

F. Apruzzi, M. Fazzi, D. Rosa and A. Tomasiello, “All AdS 7 solutions of type II supergravity,” JHEP 04 (2014), 064 [arXiv:1309.2949 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2014

Show all 31 references

[9]

AdS3 solutions in Massive IIA with small N = (4, 0) supersymmetry,

Y . Lozano, N. T. Macpherson, C. Nunez and A. Ramirez, “AdS3 solutions in Massive IIA with small N = (4, 0) supersymmetry,” JHEP 01 (2020), 129 [arXiv:1908.09851 [hep-th]]

2020 arXiv
[10]

1/ 4 BPS solutions and the AdS3/CFT2 correspondence,

Y . Lozano, N. T. Macpherson, C. Nunez and A. Ramirez, “1/ 4 BPS solutions and the AdS3/CFT2 correspondence,” Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020) no.2, 026014 [arXiv:1909.09636 [hep-th]]

2020 arXiv
[11]

T wo dimensional N = (0, 4) quivers dual to AdS 3 solutions in massive IIA,

Y . Lozano, N. T. Macpherson, C. Nunez and A. Ramirez, “T wo dimensional N = (0, 4) quivers dual to AdS 3 solutions in massive IIA,” JHEP 01 (2020), 140 [arXiv:1909.10510 [hep-th]]

2020 arXiv
[12]

Ad S3 solutions in massive IIA, defect CFTs and T-duality,

Y . Lozano, N. T. Macpherson, C. Nunez and A. Ramirez, “Ad S3 solutions in massive IIA, defect CFTs and T-duality,” JHEP 12 (2019), 013 [arXiv:1909.11669 [hep-th]]

2019 arXiv
[13]

N=(0,4 ) black string chains,

C. Couzens, Y . Lozano, N. Petri and S. Vandoren, “N=(0,4 ) black string chains,” Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022) no.8, 086015 [arXiv:2109.10413 [hep-th]]

2022 arXiv
[14]

On generalised D1-D5 near horizons and their spectra,

M. Lima, N. T. Macpherson, D. Melnikov and L. Ypanaque, “ On generalised D1-D5 near horizons and their spectra,” JHEP 04 (2023), 060 [arXiv:2211.02702 [hep-th]]

2023 arXiv
[15]

Partially localized intersecting BPS branes ,

D. Y oum, “Partially localized intersecting BPS branes ,” Nucl. Phys. B 556 (1999), 222-246 [arXiv:hep-th/9902208 [hep-th]]

1999 arXiv
[16]

AdS 2 × S2 × CY2 solutions in Type IIB with 8 supersymmetries,

Y . Lozano, C. Nunez and A. Ramirez, “AdS 2 × S2 × CY2 solutions in Type IIB with 8 supersymmetries,” JHEP 04 (2021), 110 [arXiv:2101.04682 [hep-th]]. 10 G-structures for AdS2 solutions Niall T. Macpherson

2021 arXiv
[17]

New AdS 2 backgrounds and N = 4 conformal quantum mechanics,

Y . Lozano, C. Nunez, A. Ramirez and S. Speziali, “New AdS 2 backgrounds and N = 4 conformal quantum mechanics,” JHEP 03 (2021), 277 [arXiv:2011.00005 [hep-th]]

2021 arXiv
[18]

Half-BPS Solut ions locally asymptotic to AdS(3) x S**3 and interface conformal ﬁeld theories,

M. Chiodaroli, M. Gutperle and D. Krym, “Half-BPS Solut ions locally asymptotic to AdS(3) x S**3 and interface conformal ﬁeld theories,” JHEP 02 (2010), 066 [arXiv:0910.0466 [hep-th]]

2010 arXiv
[19]

Open Worlds heets for Holographic Interfaces,

M. Chiodaroli, E. D’Hoker and M. Gutperle, “Open Worlds heets for Holographic Interfaces,” JHEP 03 (2010), 060 [arXiv:0912.4679 [hep-th]]

2010 arXiv
[20]

Supersymmetric, cold and lukewarm black holes in cosmological Einstein- Maxwell theory,

L. J. Romans, “Supersymmetric, cold and lukewarm black holes in cosmological Einstein- Maxwell theory,” Nucl. Phys. B 383 (1992), 395-415 [arXiv:hep-th/9203018 [hep-th]]

1992 arXiv
[21]

N=8 superconformal mec hanics: Direct construction,

S. Krivonos and A. Nersessian, “N=8 superconformal mec hanics: Direct construction,” Phys. Lett. B 863 (2025), 139373 [arXiv:2411.18345 [hep-th]]

2025 arXiv
[22]

T wo faces of /u1D441= 7, 8 superconformal mechanics,

S. Krivonos and A. Nersessian, “T wo faces of /u1D441= 7, 8 superconformal mechanics,” [arXiv:2504.13651 [hep-th]]

arXiv
[23]

N = 6 supersymmetric AdS 2 × CP3 × Σ2,

A. Conti, Y . Lozano and N. T. Macpherson, “ N = 6 supersymmetric AdS 2 × CP3 × Σ2,” [arXiv:2503.23585 [hep-th]]
[24]

AdS3 T duality and evidence for N=5,6 superco nformal quantum mechanics,

A. Conti, “AdS3 T duality and evidence for N=5,6 superco nformal quantum mechanics,” Phys. Rev. D 108 (2023) no.12, 126007 [arXiv:2306.09139 [hep-th]]

2023 arXiv
[25]

Exact half-BPS Ty pe IIB interface solutions. I. Local solution and supersymmetric Janus,

E. D’Hoker, J. Estes and M. Gutperle, “Exact half-BPS Ty pe IIB interface solutions. I. Local solution and supersymmetric Janus,” JHEP 06 (2007), 021 [arXiv:0705.0022 [hep-th]]

2007 arXiv
[26]

Aspectsof AdS2 classiﬁcation in M-theory: solutions with mesonic and baryonic charges,

J. Hong, N. T. Macpherson and L. A. Pando Zayas, “Aspectsof AdS2 classiﬁcation in M-theory: solutions with mesonic and baryonic charges,” JHEP 11 (2019), 127 [arXiv:1908.08518 [hep- th]]

2019 arXiv
[27]

All superalgebras for warped AdS2 and black hole near horizon geometries,

U. Gran, J. Gutowski and G. Papadopoulos, “All superalgebras for warped AdS2 and black hole near horizon geometries,” Class. Quant. Grav. 36 (2019) no.23, 235009 [arXiv:1712.07889 [hep-th]]

2019 arXiv
[28]

Roadmap on Wilson loops in 3d Chern–Simons-matter theories,

N. Drukker, D. Trancanelli, L. Bianchi, M. S. Bianchi, D . H. Correa, V . Forini, L. Griguolo, M. Leoni, F. Levkovich-Maslyuk and G. Nagaoka, et al. “Roadmap on Wilson loops in 3d Chern–Simons-matter theories,” J. Phys. A 53 (2020) no.17, 173001 [arXiv:1910.00588 [hep-th]]

2020 arXiv
[29]

The topological line of ABJ(M) theory,

N. Gorini, L. Griguolo, L. Guerrini, S. Penati, D. Semin ara and P. Soresina, “The topological line of ABJ(M) theory,” JHEP 06 (2021), 091 [arXiv:2012.11613 [hep-th]]

2021 arXiv
[30]

Wilson loops and defect RG ﬂows in ABJM,

L. Castiglioni, S. Penati, M. Tenser and D. Trancanelli , “Wilson loops and defect RG ﬂows in ABJM,” JHEP 06 (2023), 157 [arXiv:2305.01647 [hep-th]]

2023 arXiv
[31]

The near-horizon ge- ometry of supersymmetric rotating AdS 4 black holes in M-theory,

C. Couzens, E. Marcus, K. Stemerdink and D. van de Heiste eg, “The near-horizon ge- ometry of supersymmetric rotating AdS 4 black holes in M-theory,” JHEP 05 (2021), 194 [arXiv:2011.07071 [hep-th]]. 11

2021 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [2]

G-struc tures for black hole near-horizon geometries,

A. Legramandi, N. T. Macpherson and A. Passias, “G-struc tures for black hole near-horizon geometries,” JHEP 06 (2024), 056 [arXiv:2309.01714 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2024

[2] [4]

Timelike structures of ten-dimensional supersymmetry,

A. Legramandi, L. Martucci and A. Tomasiello, “Timelike structures of ten-dimensional supersymmetry,” JHEP 04 (2019), 109 [arXiv:1810.08625 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2019

[3] [5]

$\textrm{AdS}_{2}\times S^7$ solutions from D0 $-$ F1 $-$ D8 intersections

G. Dibitetto and A. Passias, “AdS 2 × S7 solutions from D0-F1-D8 intersections,” JHEP 10 (2018), 190 [arXiv:1807.00555 [hep-th]]

work page Pith review arXiv 2018

[4] [1]

Black hole micros tates in AdS4 from supersymmetric localization,

F. Benini, K. Hristov and A. Zaﬀaroni, “Black hole micros tates in AdS4 from supersymmetric localization,” JHEP 05 (2016), 054 [arXiv:1511.04085 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2016

[5] [3]

Generalized structures of ten-dimensi onal supersymmetric solutions,

A. Tomasiello, “Generalized structures of ten-dimensi onal supersymmetric solutions,” JHEP 03 (2012), 073 [arXiv:1109.2603 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2012

[6] [6]

On AdS 2 × S7, its Z/u1D458orbifold and their dual quantum mechanics,

Y . Lozano, N. T. Macpherson and A. Passias, “On AdS 2 × S7, its Z/u1D458orbifold and their dual quantum mechanics,” [arXiv:2503.23227 [hep-th]]

work page arXiv

[7] [7]

1/4 BPS solutions in massive IIA supergravi ty,

Y . Imamura, “1/4 BPS solutions in massive IIA supergravi ty,” Prog. Theor. Phys. 106 (2001), 653-670 [arXiv:hep-th/0105263 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2001

[8] [8]

All AdS 7 solutions of type II supergravity,

F. Apruzzi, M. Fazzi, D. Rosa and A. Tomasiello, “All AdS 7 solutions of type II supergravity,” JHEP 04 (2014), 064 [arXiv:1309.2949 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2014