Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 6 minor 63 references

Dirac Singleton as a Relativistic Field Beyond Standard Model

T0 review · 4 major / 6 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 Dirac singletons, previously boundary conformal fields, are proposed as Lorentz-covariant nonlocal relativistic fields in (A)dS$_{d+1}$, with explicit equations and Lagrangians.

desk verdict Vasiliev's singleton paper offers a genuinely new Lagrangian formulation, but the d-form action is under-verified; it deserves a careful referee rather than desk rejection. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.01915 v2 pith:ZCAY24DQ submitted 2025-05-03 hep-th astro-ph.HEgr-qchep-ph

M.A. Vasiliev This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-thastro-ph.HEgr-qchep-ph
keywords DiracsingletonRacDiunfoldeddynamicsconformalfieldtheoryAdS/CFTcorrespondencedeSitterspacedarkmatter
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 sets out to establish that Dirac singletons—the conformal scalar (Rac) and conformal spinor (Di) fields of Dirac's 1963 work—can be described as genuine relativistic fields in a $(d+1)$-dimensional space-time with cosmological constant, with Lorentz-covariant equations and Lagrangians. This formulation differs from the Flato-Fronsdal dipole construction, because it does not factor out bulk modes. If the construction holds, a singleton is a legitimate field coexisting with Standard Model fields: it is nonlocal from the $d+1$-dimensional perspective, so it does not affect local scattering experiments, yet it can interact with gravity and other fields. The paper also speculates that, in the presence of dark energy, such fields could contribute to dark matter and to baryon asymmetry generation.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is unfolded dynamics, which rewrites a system of partial differential equations as $dW=G(W)$ for differential forms and requires compatibility $G\partial G=0$, so that gauge-invariant functionals correspond to cohomology classes of the operator $Q=G\partial/\partial W$. The paper uses the flat connection of the conformal algebra to reinterpret a conformal field on the boundary as a field in a $(d+1)$-dimensional bulk, with the central equations (6.57) and the Lagrangians (6.58)-(6.59). The $d$-forms are claimed to be closed and invariant up to exact terms because of the general properties of unfolded systems, which is what carries the relativistic covariance of the construction.

What would settle it

Compute the variation of the action built from (6.58)-(6.59) under the global (A)dS transformations generated by (3.27) and check whether the variation is an exact form, and whether the resulting Euler-Lagrange equations reproduce the unfolded system (6.57) with the singleton's on-shell content. A nonzero bulk variation, or a mismatch between the variational and unfolded equations, would refute the central claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the new result is the formulation of singleton dynamics directly in the $(d+1)$-dimensional space-time, without the factorization of bulk modes required by the dipole approach of [2]. Starting from the unfolded description of conformal scalar and spinor in $d$ dimensions, the paper extends the equations to $D_x C=0$ and $D_x C_\alpha=0$ in (A)dS$_{d+1}$ and writes the actions as integrals of the closed $d$-forms (6.58) and (6.59). Because the $(d+1)$-dimensional Lorentz group acts through an infinite-dimensional module, the singleton cannot be localized at a point; from the $d$-dimensional perspective it is everywhere. The paper further claims that in the de Sitter case, doublets of mutually conjugate fields render the Lagrangian Hermitian, and that the infinite-dimensional Lorentz representation makes gravitational and other interactions possible in the frame formulation.

Load-bearing premise

The whole construction depends on the claim that a $d$-form Lagrangian integrated over a $d$-dimensional cycle, rather than a genuine $(d+1)$-form action over the bulk, defines a valid field theory whose invariance and equivalence to the unfolded equations (6.57) actually hold; these properties are asserted from general unfolded dynamics rather than demonstrated by explicit computation.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the construction is right, a singleton is a legitimate (A)dS$_{d+1}$ relativistic field whose dynamics needs no dipole factorization or fourth-order equation.
  • Because the singleton transforms in an infinite-dimensional Lorentz representation, it is delocalized and therefore invisible to local Standard Model scattering and radiation processes.
  • The presence of the singleton requires a nonzero cosmological constant, so the proposal ties the dark matter candidate to dark energy; in dS$_4$, field doubling makes the Lagrangian Hermitian.
  • Through the Flato-Fronsdal product structure, bilinears of singletons contain the graviton and a singlet scalar, so nonlinear or condensate effects could induce an invisible, dark-matter-like gravitational field.
  • The same mechanism should lift other conformal fields, such as the 4d Maxwell field, to singleton-type fields in (A)dS$_5$.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A concrete, testable consequence of the dark-matter speculation is that a cosmological distribution of singletons would produce a smooth, non-clustering gravitational potential; galaxy rotation curves and weak-lensing maps could constrain its magnitude even though collider searches would see nothing.
  • The action principle in (8.71) is a natural starting point for adding non-minimal interactions, but whether the consistency condition (2.3) survives nonlinear couplings is an open problem; the first nontrivial check would be a self-interacting Rac scalar.
  • If the method generalizes as suggested, conformal fields in even dimensions form a hierarchy of singleton-type fields in successively higher (A)dS spaces, possibly connecting to higher-spin holography without invoking the usual dipole picture.
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.

Referee Report

4 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes a new interpretation of Dirac singletons (Rac and Di), normally viewed as free conformal fields on a d-dimensional boundary, as relativistic fields in (A)dS_{d+1}. The construction uses the unfolded dynamics formalism: the conformal unfolded equations (4.36)/(5.51) are extended by replacing the flat conformal connection with the (A)dS connection (3.28), giving the system (6.57). The paper claims that the d-form Lagrangians (6.58)-(6.59), built from the singleton fields and their trace or Dirac components, are closed and invariant up to total derivatives under global (A)dS symmetries, and that they describe the singleton as a non-localizable relativistic field in d+1 dimensions. A second, speculative part suggests that in de Sitter space the singletons, possibly doubled into C^+-/C^- pairs, could be relevant to dark matter and baryon asymmetry. The stated new result is the formulation of singleton dynamics directly in the 4d space-time, without the factorization used in the Flato-Fronsdal dipole construction.

Significance. If the central claims are correct, this would provide a new, manifestly (A)dS-covariant Lagrangian description of singletons, distinct from the Flato-Fronsdal dipole construction, and would open a novel, albeit speculative, route to dark matter and baryogenesis scenarios. The paper is valuable as a concise exposition of the unfolded approach to conformal scalar and spinor fields and of the space-time metamorphosis mechanism. However, the physical significance is not yet established: the key claims about closure, invariance, and equivalence of the proposed Lagrangians (6.58)-(6.59) to the unfolded equations (6.57) are asserted rather than demonstrated, and the action is integrated over a d-cycle rather than over the (d+1)-dimensional bulk. These gaps are load-bearing for the central claim of a new relativistic field theory, so the paper in its present form does not fully support that claim.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section 6, Eqs. (6.58)-(6.59)] The text states that the Lagrangians (6.58)-(6.59) 'are closed and, as a consequence of the general properties of the unfolded equations, invariant up to exact forms' under global (A)dS symmetries, but no computation or proof is supplied. Since the Lagrangians are d-forms built from the vielbein E^a (3.29) and from fields whose transformation law under d+1 Lorentz transformations is nonlocal, as exemplified by (7.69), the claimed invariance is nontrivial. Please provide the explicit Q-closure computation, the transformation of C and C' under the full o(d,2) connection, and the verification that the variation is an exact form.
  2. [Section 6, Eqs. (6.57) and (6.58)-(6.59)] The paper does not show that the Euler-Lagrange equations of the Lagrangians (6.58)-(6.59) are equivalent to the unfolded system (6.57). In the d-dimensional off-shell formulation, the relation C' = \Box C follows from the unfolded equations and is an identity, as explained after Eq. (4.44). After the extension to (A)dS_{d+1}, however, Eq. (6.57) determines the dependence of the field on the additional coordinate z, so C' is fixed by the equations of motion rather than by an off-shell algebraic relation. Thus the variational principle appears to be defined only on-shell. Section 7 explicitly states that the off-shell extension 'will be elaborated elsewhere'. This missing equivalence is central to the claimed Lagrangian formulation and must be supplied.
  3. [Section 8, Eqs. (8.70)-(8.71)] The proposed action is a sum of d-form singleton Lagrangians integrated over d-dimensional cycles Sigma_3 together with the standard 4-form SM and GR Lagrangians integrated over M_4. Because L_Rac and L_Di are closed forms, the singleton actions are insensitive to variations of the cycle in the bulk direction, making them hypersurface actions rather than bulk actions for a d+1-dimensional field theory. The paper does not explain how a single variational principle is defined when different terms are integrated over different cycles, nor how the combined system respects the claimed (A)dS_{d+1} Lorentz symmetry. This issue directly affects the claim that the singleton 'coexists with Standard Model fields' as a relativistic field in the same space-time.
  4. [Section 6 and Section 8, de Sitter extension] For the dS case, lambda is pure imaginary and the paper states that Hermiticity can be restored by introducing doublets C^+- and C^+-_alpha, but the explicit doubled Lagrangian is not written down. The later speculation about baryon asymmetry relies on complex coefficients in the Lagrangian implying CP violation, yet no concrete dS Lagrangian with real action is exhibited. Please provide the explicit doubled Hermitian Lagrangian and demonstrate that its complex structure leads to CP violation in the intended manner. Without this, the dS extension and the associated dark-matter/baryogenesis applications remain unsupported assertions.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Eq. (8.71)] The use of two distinct cycles Sigma_3^Rac and Sigma_3^Di for forms living on the same space-time manifold should be explained; if they are arbitrary, a general prescription for choosing them should be given.
  2. [Eq. (3.30)] The statement 'Lambda = -# lambda^2 with some positive number #' is imprecise; please provide the actual coefficient in the conventions of (3.27)-(3.28).
  3. [Eqs. (5.56) and (6.59)] The spinor index contraction in \bar C^\alpha C'_\alpha should be spelled out, including the charge-conjugation conventions used for the Dirac conjugate spinor.
  4. [Section 9] The phrase 'singleton ... carries less than one usual relativistic field' is imprecise; please state the number of propagating degrees of freedom per spatial point or per boundary mode.
  5. [Introduction and Section 8] The statement that singletons are 'unobservable via local scattering/radiation phenomena' is presented as a consequence of non-localizability, but a more precise argument separating kinematic suppression from dynamical effects would be helpful.
  6. [Eq. (7.66)] The coordinate map x^{\alpha\dot\alpha} = (x^{\alpha\dot\alpha}, -i/2 \epsilon^{\alpha\dot\alpha} z^{-1}) is unusual; please clarify the relation to standard Poincar\'e coordinates of AdS_4.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Central 'd+1 relativistic singleton' claim is the known conformal singleton system re-parameterized by the O(d,2) connection; Lorentz covariance is definitional and the Lagrangian is the original d-form on a d-cycle.

  1. self definitional [Sec. 3, Eqs. (3.27)-(3.28); Sec. 6, Eq. (6.57)]
    "To identify the d+1-dimensional space with (a local chart of) AdS_{d+1} it suffices to redefine o(d,2) generators as Pν = ((Pa + λ^2Ka), 2λD), Mνμ = (Lab, 1/2λ(Pa − λ^2Ka)δdν, −1/2λ(Pb − λ^2Kb)δdμ) ... The respective connections are W = hν Pν + 1/2 ωνμ Mνμ. ... Now we are in a position to extend the d-dimensional singleton systems to AdS_{d+1}. To this end we replace equations (4.36), (5.51) by analogous equations DxC(x) = 0, DxCα(x) = 0, Dx := dx + W (6.57) with W (3.28)."

    The advertised property that the singleton is a d+1-dimensional Lorentz-covariant field is not derived from new physics; it is inserted by re-labeling the O(d,2) generators as AdS_{d+1} translations and Lorentz generators in (3.27), and then writing the same conformal unfolded equations with the flat connection replaced by W. Thus the statement that the singleton 'respects d+1 dimensional relativistic symmetries' is true by construction from the choice of connection, not by an independent dynamical derivation.

  2. renaming known result [Sec. 6, Eqs. (6.58)-(6.59); Sec. 8, Eq. (8.71); Sec. 9]
    "The AdS_{d+1} invariant Lagrangians still have the form (4.44) for scalar and (5.56) for spinor but now being d-forms in (A)dS_{d+1} with the fields C and C′ rescaled by (3.25) and E^a (3.29), L_Rac = 1/2 ǫa1...ad Ea1(x)...Ead(x) C(x) C′(x), L_Di = 1/2 ǫa1...ad Ea1(x)...Ead(x) ¯Cα(x) C′α(x). ... S = ∫Σ3 Rac L_Rac + ∫Σ3 Di L_Di + ∫M4 (LSM + LGR + ...). Because the Lagrangians are closed forms, the respective actions are insensitive to the local variations of the three-cycles..."

    Equation (6.58) is exactly the known d-dimensional conformal Lagrangian (4.44) with e^a replaced by E^a and C rescaled by (3.25); (6.59) is likewise (5.56). The action is integrated over a d-cycle rather than the bulk, and because L is closed it is insensitive to the extra (bulk) direction. Hence the claimed 'new result' of Section 9, 'the formulation of its dynamics directly in the 4d space-time,' is a re-parameterization of the known conformal singleton system in AdS coordinates, not a new bulk dynamics.

full rationale

The paper's technical construction starts from the known unfolded formulation of conformal scalar and spinor in d dimensions (Secs. 4-5), which is legitimate and self-contained. The step from d to d+1 is made by replacing the flat O(d,2) connection with the (A)dS connection W of Eq. (3.28), obtained by linear re-definition of the same O(d,2) generators. Consequently, the claim that the singleton is a d+1-dimensional Lorentz-covariant field follows by construction from the identification of the isometry algebra, not from an independent physical input. The Lagrangians (6.58)-(6.59) are literally the d-dimensional conformal Lagrangians (4.44) and (5.56) with the vielbein and fields rescaled; they remain d-forms, and the action (8.71) integrates them over d-cycles inside (A)dS_{d+1}. Because L is asserted to be closed, the action does not depend on the extra bulk direction, so the 'd+1-dimensional dynamics' is a re-parameterization of the known d-dimensional singleton system. At the same time, the paper does not merely rename an existing result: it does provide a concrete off-shell and on-shell unfolded description, and the question of whether the d-form action reproduces the unfolded equations is a separate correctness issue rather than a circularity. However, the central advertised novelty -- that the singleton is a relativistic field in the bulk -- reduces to the choice of the AdS connection and to the identity of the Lagrangians in d dimensions. This is partial circularity, not a fully vacuous derivation, hence score 6.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 2 invented entities

No data are fitted and no free parameters are introduced; the construction depends on the conformal-to-AdS dictionary and the unfolded dynamics formalism, plus ad hoc devices for the speculative dS and baryogenesis claims.

assumptions (6)
  • standard math The conformal algebra o(d,2) is isomorphic to the isometry algebra of (A)dS_{d+1}, and the connection W of (3.22)-(3.28) is flat and represents (A)dS_{d+1}.
    Invoked in Section 3 to reinterpret d-dimensional conformal fields as fields in d+1 dimensions; this is the standard conformal-to-AdS dictionary.
  • domain assumption The unfolded dynamics formalism with universal compatibility (2.3) and Q-closed invariants (2.5)-(2.8) is valid as established in [21,29].
    The claimed invariance of Lagrangians (6.58)-(6.59) rests on this framework, which is assumed without reproof.
  • domain assumption The space-time metamorphosis mechanism of (3.13), (3.22)-(3.26) reconstructs the added-coordinate dependence and yields (A)dS_{d+1} equations from a d-dimensional conformal system.
    Applied in Section 6 to produce equations (6.57) from (4.36)/(5.51); the mechanism is from the author's earlier work [30].
  • standard math The Flato-Fronsdal theorem (8.72) holds, so the tensor product of two singletons contains the graviton and a scalar.
    Used in Section 8 to argue that singletons can induce gravitational and dark matter-like effects.
  • ad hoc to paper In dS, taking lambda imaginary and doubling fields as C+/- yields a Hermitian Lagrangian.
    Introduced in Section 6 without a proof of Hermiticity, dynamics, or unitarity.
  • ad hoc to paper Complex coefficients in the singleton Lagrangian imply CP violation and, with the Sakharov conditions, baryon asymmetry.
    Speculative chain in Section 8; no interaction or computation is provided.
invented entities (2)
  • C+/- field doublets in de Sitter
    purpose: Render the dS singleton Lagrangians Hermitian when lambda is pure imaginary.
    Proposed in Section 6; no mass spectrum, interactions, or observable predictions are given.
  • Dirac singleton as a dark matter and baryogenesis field
    purpose: Proposed to explain dark matter and baryon asymmetry while coupling to gravity.
    The paper labels these as speculations; no falsifiable prediction or concrete mechanism is provided.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Dirac Singleton as a Relativistic Field Beyond Standard Model." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/ZCAY24DQ

@misc{pith2026250501915,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Dirac Singleton as a Relativistic Field Beyond Standard Model},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/ZCAY24DQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.01915}
}
abstract

A new interpretation of Dirac singletons \cite{Dirac:1963ta}, i.e. free conformal fields in $d$ dimensions, as relativistic fields in a $d+1$-dimensional space-time with cosmological constant, that differs from the Flato-Fronsdal dipole construction in $AdS_{d+1}$ \cite{Flato:1986uh}, is proposed. The $d+1$-dimensional field is described at the level of both equations and Lagrangian. It forms an infinite-dimensional representation of the $d+1$-dimensional Lorentz group that relates fields at different space-time points. The associated well-known fact is that singleton cannot be localized at a point in ${d+1}$ dimensions, hence being unobservable via local scattering/radiation phenomena in the Standard Model ($d=3$). On the other hand, that singleton respects ${d+1}$ dimensional relativistic symmetries makes it possible to introduce its interactions with gravity and other relativistic fields in $d+1$ dimensions. It is speculated that the presence of singleton in a four-dimensional field theory with non-zero cosmological constant (dark energy) can be relevant to the dark matter phenomenon and baryon asymmetry generation.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references · 32 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    P. A. M. Dirac, J. Math. Phys. 4 (1963), 901-909

    work page 1963

  2. [2]

    Flato and C

    M. Flato and C. Fronsdal, Commun. Math. Phys. 108 (1987), 469

    work page 1987

  3. [3]

    Sahni and A

    V. Sahni and A. A. Starobinsky, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 9 (2000), 373-444 [arXiv:astro-ph/9904398 [astro-ph]]

    arXiv 2000

  4. [4]

    J. B. Ehrman, Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc., 53, 290 (1957)

    work page 1957

  5. [5]

    Flato and C

    M. Flato and C. Fronsdal, Lett. Math. Phys. 2 (1978), 421-426

    work page 1978

  6. [6]

    Starinets, Lett

    A. Starinets, Lett. Math. Phys. 50 (1999), 283-300 [arXiv:math-ph/9809014 [math-ph]]

    arXiv 1999

  7. [7]

    Flato, C

    M. Flato, C. Fronsdal and D. Sternheimer, [arXiv:hep-th/99010 43 [hep-th]]

    work page

  8. [8]

    Sezgin, Phys

    E. Sezgin, Phys. Lett. B 138 (1984), 57-62

    work page 1984

Show all 63 references
  1. [9]

    M. P. Blencowe and M. J. Duff, Phys. Lett. B 203 (1988), 229-236

    1988

  2. [10]

    Nicolai, E

    H. Nicolai, E. Sezgin and Y. Tanii, Nucl. Phys. B 305 (1988), 483-496

    1988

  3. [11]

    Bergshoeff, A

    E. Bergshoeff, A. Salam, E. Sezgin and Y. Tanii, Phys. Lett. B 205 (1988), 237-244

    1988

  4. [12]

    Bergshoeff, E

    E. Bergshoeff, E. Sezgin and Y. Tanii, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 5 (1990), 3599-3616. 18

    1990

  5. [13]

    Bergshoeff, A

    E. Bergshoeff, A. Salam, E. Sezgin and Y. Tanii, Nucl. Phys. B 305 (1988), 497-515

    1988

  6. [14]

    B. E. W. Nilsson, A. Padellaro and C. N. Pope, JHEP 07 (2019), 124 [arXiv:1811.06228 [hep-th]]

    2019 arXiv

  7. [15]

    M. J. Duff, B. E. W. Nilsson and C. N. Pope, [arXiv:2502.07710 [hep -th]]

    arXiv

  8. [16]

    J. M. Maldacena, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2 (1998) 231 [Int. J. Theor. Phys. 38 (1999) 1113] [arXiv:hep-th/9711200]

    1998 arXiv

  9. [17]

    S. S. Gubser, I. R. Klebanov and A. M. Polyakov, Phys. Lett. B 428, 105 (1998) [arXiv:hep-th/9802109]

    1998 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Witten, Adv

    E. Witten, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2, 253 (1998) [arXiv:hep-th/9802150]

    1998 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Sezgin and P

    E. Sezgin and P. Sundell, Nucl. Phys. B 644 (2002), 303-370 [erratum: Nucl. Phys. B 660 (2003), 403-403] [arXiv:hep-th/0205131 [hep-th]]

    2002 arXiv

  12. [20]

    I. R. Klebanov and A. M. Polyakov, Phys. Lett. B550 (2002) 213, hep-th/0210114

    2002 arXiv

  13. [21]

    M. A. Vasiliev, Lect. Notes Phys. 892 (2015), 227-264 [arXiv:1404.1948 [hep-th]]

    2015 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Bellucci, E

    S. Bellucci, E. Ivanov and S. Krivonos, Phys. Rev. D 66 (2002), 086001 [erratum: Phys. Rev. D 67 (2003), 049901] [arXiv:hep-th/0206126 [hep-th]]

    2002 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Ivanov, Theor

    E. Ivanov, Theor. Math. Phys. 139 (2004), 513-528 [arXiv:hep-th/0305255 [hep-th]]

    2004 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Flato and C

    M. Flato and C. Fronsdal, Phys. Lett. B 172 (1986), 412-416

    1986

  17. [25]

    Flato and C

    M. Flato and C. Fronsdal, J. Geom. Phys. 5 (1988), 37-61

    1988

  18. [26]

    Flato and C

    M. Flato and C. Fronsdal, J. Math. Phys. 32 (1991), 524-531

    1991

  19. [27]

    Flato and C

    M. Flato and C. Fronsdal, Lett. Math. Phys. 44 (1998), 249-259

    1998

  20. [28]

    M. A. Vasiliev, Phys. Lett. B 209 (1988), 491-497

    1988

  21. [29]

    M. A. Vasiliev, Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys. 3 (2006), 37-80 [arXiv:hep-th/0504090 [hep-th]]

    2006 arXiv

  22. [30]

    M. A. Vasiliev, Phys. Rev. D 66 (2002), 066006 [arXiv:hep-th/0106149 [hep-th]]

    2002 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Misuna, [arXiv:2408.13212 [hep-th]]

    N. Misuna, [arXiv:2408.13212 [hep-th]]

  24. [32]

    C. Fronsdal, Massless Particles, Ortosymplectic Symmetry and Another Type of Kaluza- Klein Theory, Preprint UCLA/85/TEP/10, in Essays on Supersymme try, Reidel, 1986 (Mathematical Physics Studies, v.8). 19

    1986

  25. [33]

    I. A. Bandos, J. Lukierski and D. P. Sorokin, Phys. Rev. D 61 (2000), 045002 [arXiv:hep-th/9904109 [hep-th]]

    2000 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Bandos, X

    I. Bandos, X. Bekaert, J. A. de Azcarraga, D. Sorokin and M. Tsulaia, JHEP 05 (2005),

    2005

  27. [35]

    [arXiv:hep-th/0501113 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  28. [36]

    I. I. Kogan, Phys. Lett. B 458 (1999), 66-72 [arXiv:hep-th/9903162 [hep-th]]

    1999 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Ohl and C

    T. Ohl and C. F. Uhlemann, JHEP 05 (2012), 161 [arXiv:1204.2054 [hep-th]]

    2012 arXiv

  30. [38]

    O. V. Shaynkman and M. A. Vasiliev, Theor. Math. Phys. 123 (2000), 683-700 [arXiv:hep-th/0003123 [hep-th]]

    2000 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Aharony, D

    O. Aharony, D. Marolf and M. Rangamani, JHEP 02 (2011), 041 [arXiv:1011.6144 [hep-th]]

    2011 arXiv

  32. [40]

    B. E. W. Nilsson, [arXiv:1203.5090 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  33. [41]

    O. V. Shaynkman, I. Y. Tipunin and M. A. Vasiliev, Rev. Math. Phy s. 18 (2006), 823-886 [arXiv:hep-th/0401086 [hep-th]]

    2006 arXiv

  34. [42]

    O. V. Shaynkman and M. A. Vasiliev, Theor. Math. Phys. 128 (2001), 1155-1168 [arXiv:hep-th/0103208 [hep-th]]

    2001 arXiv

  35. [43]

    M. A. Vasiliev, J. Phys. A 46 (2013), 214013 [arXiv:1203.5554 [hep-th]]

    2013 arXiv

  36. [44]

    N. G. Misuna, JHEP 12 (2021), 172 [arXiv:2012.06570 [hep-th]]

    2021 arXiv

  37. [45]

    S. E. Konshtein and M. A. Vasiliev, Nucl. Phys. B 312 (1989), 402-418

    1989

  38. [46]

    S. E. Konstein and M. A. Vasiliev, Nucl. Phys. B 331 (1990), 475-499

    1990

  39. [47]

    Iazeolla and P

    C. Iazeolla and P. Sundell, JHEP 10 (2008), 022 [arXiv:0806.1942 [hep-th]]

    2008 arXiv

  40. [48]

    de Mello Koch, A

    R. de Mello Koch, A. Jevicki, K. Jin and J. P. Rodrigues, Phys. Rev . D 83 (2011), 025006

    2011

  41. [49]

    B. E. W. Nilsson, JHEP 09 (2015), 078 [arXiv:1312.5883 [hep-th]]

    2015 arXiv

  42. [50]

    B. E. W. Nilsson, JHEP 08 (2016), 142 [arXiv:1506.03328 [hep-th]]

    2016 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Joung, M

    E. Joung, M. g. Kim and Y. Kim, JHEP 12 (2021), 092 [arXiv:2108.05535 [hep-th]]

    2021 arXiv

  44. [52]

    F. Diaz, C. Iazeolla and P. Sundell, JHEP 09 (2024), 109 [arXiv:2403.02283 [hep-th]]

    2024 arXiv

  45. [53]

    F. Diaz, C. Iazeolla and P. Sundell, JHEP 10 (2024), 066 [arXiv:2403.02301 [hep-th]]

    2024 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Ponomarev, JHEP 06 (2021), 055 [arXiv:2104.02770 [hep-th]]

    D. Ponomarev, JHEP 06 (2021), 055 [arXiv:2104.02770 [hep-th]]. 20

    2021 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Bekaert, A

    X. Bekaert, A. Campoleoni and S. Pekar, Phys. Lett. B 838 (2023), 137734 [arXiv:2211.16498 [hep-th]]

    2023 arXiv

  48. [56]

    A. D. Sakharov, Pisma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz. 5 (1967), 32-35

    1967

  49. [57]

    V. A. Rubakov and M. E. Shaposhnikov, Usp. Fiz. Nauk 166 (1996), 493-537 [arXiv:hep-ph/9603208 [hep-ph]]

    1996 arXiv

  50. [58]

    P. A. M. Dirac, Nature 139 (1937), 323

    1937

  51. [59]

    Bogomolny, Universe 10 (2024) no.5, 222 [arXiv:2406.01654 [hep-th]]

    E. Bogomolny, Universe 10 (2024) no.5, 222 [arXiv:2406.01654 [hep-th]]

    2024 arXiv

  52. [60]

    P. A. M. Dirac, Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 322 (1971), 435-445

    1971

  53. [61]

    Ferrara and C

    S. Ferrara and C. Fronsdal, Class. Quant. Grav. 15 (1998), 2153-2164 [arXiv:hep-th/9712239 [hep-th]]

    1998 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Bekaert and M

    X. Bekaert and M. Grigoriev, SIGMA 6 (2010), 038 [arXiv:0907.3195 [hep-th]]

    2010 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Bekaert, [arXiv:1111.4554 [math-ph]]

    X. Bekaert, [arXiv:1111.4554 [math-ph]]. 21

    arXiv

Pith tools

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