Phase Transitions at Unusual Values of $\theta$

Csaba Cs\'aki; Hitoshi Murayama; Ofri Telem; Teruhiko Kawano

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 1 cited by

Phase Transitions at Unusual Values of $\theta$

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Quark flavors shift theta-phase transitions to fractional pi.

desk verdict Solid exact calculation of theta-dependent vacuum energies in near-SUSY SU(2) with flavors; the one genuinely soft spot is that the N_F=3 transition locations at pi/4 sit at next order in the expansion. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.14879 v2 pith:YVH5D4QM submitted 2025-06-17 hep-th hep-ph

Csaba Csáki , Teruhiko Kawano , Hitoshi Murayama , Ofri Telem This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-thhep-ph

keywords thetadependencefirst-orderphasetransitionN=2supersymmetricgaugetheoryanomaly-mediatedsupersymmetrybreakingdyoncondensationvacuumenergybranchesWitteneffectconfinement

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 show that a calculable stand-in for QCD—N=2 SU(2) gauge theory with zero to three fundamental flavors, deformed to N=1 and then slightly broken by anomaly-mediated supersymmetry breaking—has a vacuum energy whose theta-dependence is a branched function, with each branch generated by the condensation of a particular dyon. The branches cross in first-order phase transitions at theta=pi for N_F=0, at theta=0 and pi for N_F=1, at theta=pi/2 and 3pi/2 for N_F=2, and at theta=pi/4, 3pi/4, 5pi/4, and 7pi/4 for N_F=3. A sympathetic reader would care because this is a rare example where the nonperturbative theta-dependence of a confining gauge theory is computed explicitly, confirming that the vacuum potential is not a simple instanton cosine but a branched structure tied to the confinement mechanism itself.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the near-singularity effective field theory on the Coulomb branch of the $N=2$ theory. At each singularity, labeled by a dyon with magnetic and electric charges $(n_m,n_e)$, the light dyon condenses; anomaly-mediated supersymmetry breaking lifts the degeneracy of these dyon vacua and assigns each branch its cosine vacuum energy. The calculation uses explicit local sections $(a_D^{(N_F,k)},a^{(N_F,k)})$ and prepotentials $F^{(N_F,k)}$ near every singularity, including a newly derived local section for the second $N_F=3$ singularity, to control the Kähler potential and the IR gauge coupling, and it relies on the Witten effect, the shift of a dyon's physical electric charge by $-\theta_{\rm IR}n_m/\pi$, to guarantee $2\pi$-periodicity in $\theta$.

What would settle it

Compute the $O(m\mu^2\Lambda_3)$ correction to $V_{3,1}^{\rm min}$ from the full low-energy curve near $u=0$, or evaluate the leading-order vacuum energy of both $N_F=3$ branches at $\theta=\pi/4+\epsilon$; if $V_{3,1}$ is not lower on both sides of the claimed crossing, the transition angle shifts away from $\pi/4$.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that, with the hierarchy $m\ll\mu\ll\Lambda$ ensuring the validity of the low-energy analysis, the vacuum energy $V(\theta)$ of near-supersymmetric $N=2$ $SU(2)$ gauge theory is, to leading order in the supersymmetry-breaking scale $m$, exactly a set of cosine branches $V_{\rm min}=-6m\mu|\Lambda_{N_F}|^2\cos(\ldots)$ labeled by the dyons that condense at each strong-coupling singularity. The global minimum jumps between branches at first-order phase transitions located at the values listed above; for $N_F=2$ and $N_F=3$ there is no transition at $\theta=\pi$. The paper also establishes that $2\pi$-periodicity in $\theta$ is restored nontrivially through the Witten effect, the shift of a dyon's physical electric charge with the IR $\theta$ angle, and that the $N_F=3$ case contains a new local solution near $u=\Lambda_3^2$ where a magnetic-charge-two dyon condenses, producing a $\mathbb{Z}_2$ gauge-theory phase.

Load-bearing premise

The assumption that carries the argument is that the leading-order low-energy description near each singularity, kept only to first order in the small supersymmetry-breaking scale and projected onto the flat direction of equal monopole magnitudes, fixes the global minimum exactly, so that the uncomputed higher-order term in the three-flavor vacuum energy near the origin cannot change which vacuum is lower near $\theta=\pi/4$.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For $N_F=0$ the known first-order transition at $\theta=\pi$ is reproduced, with $(1,0)$ monopole condensation giving way to $(1,2)$ dyon condensation.
For $N_F=1,2,3$ the global vacuum switches at $\theta=0$ and $\pi$, at $\theta=\pi/2$ and $3\pi/2$, and at $\theta=\pi/4,3\pi/4,5\pi/4,7\pi/4$, respectively, so for two and three flavors there is no transition at $\theta=\pi$.
In every case the branched potential is $2\pi$-periodic only after the Witten effect shifts the physical charges of the condensing dyons.
For $N_F=3$ the transition between the $u=0$ vacuum and the $u=\Lambda_3^2$ vacuum connects a chiral-symmetry-breaking phase to a chirally symmetric phase with a $\mathbb{Z}_2$ gauge theory, since the condensing dyon has magnetic charge two.
Promoting $\theta$ to a dynamical axion changes the domain-wall number: for $N_F=2$ the crossing branches make $N_{DW}=2$ rather than the single-branch value $N_{DW}=1$.

Reading between the lines

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

If the leading-order result is not corrected at $O(m\mu^2)$, the same construction should produce phase transitions at other fractional multiples of $\pi$ when the gauge group is $SU(N)$ or at multi-monopole points; the paper's method extends to those settings without new ingredients.
The $N_F=3$ phase structure suggests that adding enough fundamental matter can eliminate the $\theta=\pi$ transition that pure Yang-Mills has; checking the mixed-anomaly argument at $\theta=\pi/4$ would test whether this is a general feature or an artifact of the near-supersymmetric limit.
Because the vacuum energy has degenerate branches at multiple $\theta$ values, a dynamical axion in this theory would see a multi-branch potential with domain walls at more than one location; the paper works out $N_F=2$ but not the richer $N_F=3$ case.
A next-order computation of the uncomputed $O(m\mu^2\Lambda_3)$ term in $V_{3,1}^{\rm min}$ would reveal whether the $N_F=3$ transition angles are exact or only leading-order locations.

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

Short version: this is a good paper. It takes the old N_F=0 Seiberg-Witten plus soft-breaking calculation, extends it cleanly to N_F=1,2,3 using the AMSB formalism from [59], and reports first-order transitions at theta=0, pi/2, and pi/4 families. The new technical content is real: the N_F=3 k=2 local section and prepotential appear to be new, and the theta-dependent vacuum energies for N_F=1,2,3 are not in the literature. The N_F=0 result reproduces [51,52], which is the right cross-check. The paper is also honest about what is old and what is new, and the literature comparison in section 5 is genuinely useful.

The formal structure is sound: they map SUSY breaking via the conformal compensator, expand near each dyon singularity, minimize the D-flat projected potential, and check 2pi periodicity through the Witten effect. I do not see circular reasoning; the transition locations are computed from effective actions, not fitted. The cross-check against [59] for N_F=0 is appropriate.

The one load-bearing soft spot is N_F=3. Equation (4.18) gives V_{3,1}^min = O(m mu^2 Lambda_3) and V_{3,2}^min = -6 m mu |Lambda_3|^2 cos(2 theta) + O(m mu^2 Lambda_3). At the claimed transitions theta=pi/4, 3pi/4, 5pi/4, 7pi/4, cos(2 theta)=0, so both vacuum energies vanish at leading order. The displayed leading term does not select the crossing; the uncomputed O(m mu^2 Lambda_3) coefficients do. Those are suppressed only by mu/Lambda_3, not by m/mu, so the printed calculation does not by itself fix the location of the N_F=3 transitions. The paper says a mixed anomaly involving a discrete R-remnant and time reversal protects exactly these angles, but the details are deferred to future work. That is an omitted argument for the most novel case. I would not call it disqualifying—the claim may well be true—but it needs to be supplied or the claim softened to "up to O(mu/Lambda_3)".

Two smaller things. The abstract says "fractional values of pi" for N_F=1, but the transitions are at 0 and pi; that is just imprecise wording. Also, the new Appendix A section is verified by a stated monodromy check rather than a shown one; a one-line analytic continuation would tighten it.

Who is this for: hep-th people working on theta dependence, axion potentials, or Seiberg-Witten theory. It deserves a serious referee. The right outcome is probably major revision asking for the N_F=3 symmetry argument or an explicit next-order computation.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. This paper studies the θ-dependence of the vacuum energy in N=2 SU(2) gauge theory with N_F=0,1,2,3 massless fundamental flavors, deformed to N=1 by an adjoint superpotential μu and coupled to anomaly-mediated supersymmetry breaking with m≪μ≪Λ. The authors use known Seiberg-Witten prepotentials and Kähler data (and a new local section for one N_F=3 singularity) to compute the leading-order scalar potential in each monopole/dyon vacuum, find the global minimum as a function of θ, and identify first-order phase transitions at θ=π for N_F=0, θ=0,π for N_F=1, θ=π/2,3π/2 for N_F=2, and θ=π/4,3π/4,5π/4,7π/4 for N_F=3. They also verify 2π periodicity via the Witten effect and connect the transitions to mixed-anomaly arguments. The central claim is that dyon condensation produces a branched vacuum energy whose global minimum switches at these specific values of θ.

Significance. The paper is a genuine calculable realization of Witten's branched-vacuum picture: the θ-dependence arises from dyon condensation rather than instantons, and the N_F=0 case correctly reproduces earlier results of Konishi and of Evans-Hsu-Schwetz. The use of AMSB gives a first-principles map of soft breaking, and the new N_F=3 local section is a potentially useful contribution. The Witten-effect consistency check strengthens the 2π-periodicity argument. However, the most novel quantitative predictions—the N_F=3 transitions at odd multiples of π/4—are not derived by the printed calculation: at those angles the displayed leading terms vanish, so the global minimum is decided by uncomputed subleading corrections. The same parametric issue affects the exact locations at θ=π and θ=π/2 for N_F=0 and N_F=2 unless a symmetry argument is supplied. Because the anomaly/symmetry argument is postponed to future work, the headline claims are currently supported only at leading order, not exactly.

major comments (3)

[Section 4.1, Eq. (4.18)] The claimed N_F=3 first-order transitions at θ=π/4, 3π/4, 5π/4, 7π/4 do not follow from the calculation as printed. At these angles cos(2θ)=0, so the displayed O(m μ Λ_3^2) term in V_{3,2}^{min} vanishes and V_{3,1}^{min} is only O(m μ^2 Λ_3). The global minimum is then decided by the uncomputed O(m μ^2 Λ_3) terms in both branches; relative to the displayed scale these corrections are O(μ/Λ_3), not O(m/μ). The paper's conclusion explicitly postpones the symmetry/anomaly argument that would protect the exact locations, so the most novel result is unsupported. The authors should compute the subleading terms or give the symmetry proof before claiming transitions at these angles.
[Section 4.1, Eqs. (4.7), (4.10), (4.13); Section 6] The same issue affects the claimed transition angles for N_F=0,1,2. At θ=π both leading terms in Eq. (4.7) vanish; at θ=π/2,3π/2 both leading terms in Eq. (4.13) vanish; at θ=0 and θ=π the two competing branches in Eq. (4.10) are degenerate at leading order. In each case the crossing point can shift by subleading corrections unless an exact symmetry enforces degeneracy. The introduction states that a mixed-anomaly argument explains the N_F=0−2 transitions, but Section 6 says the details are left to future work. The paper should either provide that argument or explicitly qualify the transition locations as valid only up to O(μ/Λ) corrections.
[Appendix A, Eqs. (A.10)-(A.11)] The new local section (a_D^{(3,2)}, a^{(3,2)}) is an original contribution and is used for the N_F=3 potential, but its verification is only asserted: the text says the solutions have the correct monodromies 'as can be checked' without showing the check. Please include the explicit analytic-continuation computation, or at least the resulting monodromy matrices, so that the most novel input is verifiable.

minor comments (3)

[Section 4.1, Eq. (4.13)] The remainder in Eq. (4.13) is quoted as O(m^2 μ^2), whereas the pre-minimization potential in Eq. (4.11) has O(m μ^2 Λ_2); please clarify which subleading term actually controls the N_F=2 transition.
[Section 6] The statement that the mixed-anomaly argument is left to upcoming work appears inconsistent with the introduction's claim that the phase transitions for N_F=0−2 are explained by a mixed-anomaly argument; the two statements should be reconciled.
[Figure 1] The figure caption refers to blue, yellow, and green curves, but the curves may be difficult to distinguish in printed or grayscale versions; please add line styles or direct labels.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the phase-transition locations are read off independently computed branch energies, not fitted or imported from prior work.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain starts from the Seiberg-Witten curves and monodromy data of [13,14], constructs the local sections (Appendix A), Kähler data, and the AMSB scalar potential via the standard compensator formula (4.3), then minimizes each branch and compares the resulting V_min expressions (4.7), (4.10), (4.13), and (4.18) to locate level crossings. The θ values at which branches cross are outputs of these expressions, not inputs; no parameter is fitted to the claimed transition positions. The AMSB mapping is checked against the independent formalism of [59] in Section 5, and the N_F=0 result reproduces [51,52], providing external benchmarks. The Witten-effect consistency check in Section 2.2 verifies 2π periodicity using the computed IR θ angles rather than assuming it. The only caveats are non-circular: Section 6 defers the mixed-anomaly explanation of the N_F=3 transitions to future work ('We leave the details of this analysis to upcoming work by some of the present authors'), and Eq. (4.18) leaves the O(m μ^2 Λ_3) terms undetermined, so the exactness of the θ=π/4 crossings for N_F=3 relies on a symmetry argument not shown there. These are completeness and correctness concerns, not reductions of the predictions to the inputs.

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

The calculation uses established SW data, a standard AMSB mapping, and leading-order expansions. No free parameters are fitted. The main dependency is the correctness of the newly derived N_F=3 section, which is checked by monodromy consistency. No new physical entities are postulated.

assumptions (5)

domain assumption Seiberg-Witten curves, monodromies, and prepotentials for N_F=0..3 are correct as given in [13,14] and the appendix.
The entire IR analysis uses these as input; errors here would propagate to all vacuum energies.
domain assumption The AMSB conformal compensator coupling (Eq. 4.3) exactly maps UV soft terms to the IR theory.
This mapping, from [99,100,112] and prior works by the authors, is the mechanism that generates the theta-dependent potentials.
domain assumption Leading-order near-singularity expansions of the Kaehler potential derivatives and gauge couplings are sufficient to determine the global minima.
The phase transition locations are stated at leading order; subleading terms are not computed for the N_F=3 origin.
domain assumption The dyon flavor representations in Tables 3-4 are correctly identified.
Used for chiral symmetry breaking and TQFT claims, though not for the vacuum energy values themselves.
standard math The hypergeometric solutions in Appendix A have the stated monodromies.
The new N_F=3 section relies on standard analytic continuation of Gauss hypergeometric functions; the check is stated but not shown.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Phase Transitions at Unusual Values of $\theta$." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/YVH5D4QM

@misc{pith2026250614879,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Phase Transitions at Unusual Values of $\theta$},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/YVH5D4QM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.14879}
}

abstract

We calculate the $\theta$ dependence in a cousin of QCD, where the vacuum structure can be analyzed exactly. The theory is $\mathcal{N}=2$ $SU(2)$ gauge theory with $N_F=0,1,2,3$ flavors of fundamentals, explicitly broken to $\mathcal{N}=1$ via an adjoint superpotential, and coupled to anomaly mediated supersymmetry breaking (AMSB). The hierarchy $m_{AMSB}\ll \mu_{\mathcal{N}=1}\ll \Lambda$ ensures the validity of our IR analysis. As expected from ordinary QCD, the vacuum energy is a function of $\theta$ which undergoes 1st order phase transitions between different vacua where the various dyons condense. For $N_F=0$ we find the expected phase transition at $\theta=\pi$, while for $N_F=1,2,3$ we find phase transitions at fractional values of $\pi$.

Review history (2 revisions) →

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

Anomaly mediation in Seiberg-Witten theories
hep-th 2026-07 accept novelty 6.5 of 10

AMSB on SU(2) Seiberg-Witten theories matches the N=1 SW deformation only perturbatively; nonperturbative effects force different condensates and a vacuum shift across the strong-coupling scale without a phase transition.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

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

[59]

Soft supersymmetry breaking in deformed moduli spaces, conformal theories, and N=2 Yang-Mills theory,

M. A. Luty and R. Rattazzi, “Soft supersymmetry breaking in deformed moduli spaces, conformal theories, and N=2 Yang-Mills theory,” JHEP11(1999) 001, arXiv:hep-th/9908085

arXiv 1999
[1]

Instantons, the Quark Model, and the 1/n Expansion,

E. Witten, “Instantons, the Quark Model, and the 1/n Expansion,” Nucl. Phys. B149 (1979) 285–320

1979
[2]

Chiral Dynamics in the Large n Limit,

P. Di Vecchia and G. Veneziano, “Chiral Dynamics in the Large n Limit,” Nucl. Phys. B171(1980) 253–272

1980
[3]

Vacuum Structure and Chiral Charge Quantization in the LargeNLimit,

N. Ohta, “Vacuum Structure and Chiral Charge Quantization in the LargeNLimit,” Prog. Theor. Phys.66(1981) 1408. [Erratum: Prog.Theor.Phys. 67, 993 (1982)]

1981
[4]

Some features of chiral symmetry breaking,

R. F. Dashen, “Some features of chiral symmetry breaking,” Phys. Rev. D3(1971) 1879–1889

1971
[5]

Topology of the Gauge Condition and New Confinement Phases in Nonabelian Gauge Theories,

G. ’t Hooft, “Topology of the Gauge Condition and New Confinement Phases in Nonabelian Gauge Theories,” Nucl. Phys. B190(1981) 455–478

1981
[6]

Phase structure of Zp models in the presence of aθ parameter,

J. L. Cardy and E. Rabinovici, “Phase structure of Zp models in the presence of aθ parameter,” Nucl. Phys. B205(1982) 1–16

1982
[7]

Theta, Time Reversal, and Temperature,

D. Gaiotto, A. Kapustin, Z. Komargodski, and N. Seiberg, “Theta, Time Reversal, and Temperature,” JHEP05(2017) 091,arXiv:1703.00501

arXiv 2017

Show all 116 references

[8]

An Effective Lagrangian for the Pure N=1 Supersymmetric Yang-Mills Theory,

G. Veneziano and S. Yankielowicz, “An Effective Lagrangian for the Pure N=1 Supersymmetric Yang-Mills Theory,” Phys. Lett. B113(1982) 231. – 27 –

1982
[9]

Supersymmetric QCD and Its Massless Limit: An Effective Lagrangian Analysis,

T. R. Taylor, G. Veneziano, and S. Yankielowicz, “Supersymmetric QCD and Its Massless Limit: An Effective Lagrangian Analysis,” Nucl. Phys. B218(1983) 493–513

1983
[10]

Dynamical Supersymmetry Breaking in Chiral Theories,

I. Affleck, M. Dine, and N. Seiberg, “Dynamical Supersymmetry Breaking in Chiral Theories,” Phys. Lett. B137(1984) 187

1984
[11]

Dynamical Supersymmetry Breaking in Supersymmetric QCD,

I. Affleck, M. Dine, and N. Seiberg, “Dynamical Supersymmetry Breaking in Supersymmetric QCD,” Nucl. Phys.B241(1984) 493–534

1984
[12]

Dynamical Supersymmetry Breaking in Four-Dimensions and Its Phenomenological Implications,

I. Affleck, M. Dine, and N. Seiberg, “Dynamical Supersymmetry Breaking in Four-Dimensions and Its Phenomenological Implications,” Nucl. Phys. B256(1985) 557–599

1985
[13]

Electric - magnetic duality, monopole condensation, and confinement in N=2 supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory,

N. Seiberg and E. Witten, “Electric - magnetic duality, monopole condensation, and confinement in N=2 supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory,” Nucl. Phys. B426(1994) 19–52,arXiv:hep-th/9407087. [Erratum: Nucl.Phys.B 430, 485–486 (1994)]

1994 arXiv
[14]

Monopoles, duality and chiral symmetry breaking in N=2 supersymmetric QCD,

N. Seiberg and E. Witten, “Monopoles, duality and chiral symmetry breaking in N=2 supersymmetric QCD,” Nucl. Phys. B431(1994) 484–550,arXiv:hep-th/9408099

1994 arXiv
[15]

Exact results on the space of vacua of four-dimensional SUSY gauge theories,

N. Seiberg, “Exact results on the space of vacua of four-dimensional SUSY gauge theories,” Phys. Rev.D49(1994) 6857–6863,arXiv:hep-th/9402044

1994 arXiv
[16]

Electric - magnetic duality in supersymmetric nonAbelian gauge theories,

N. Seiberg, “Electric - magnetic duality in supersymmetric nonAbelian gauge theories,” Nucl. Phys. B435(1995) 129–146,arXiv:hep-th/9411149

1995 arXiv
[17]

Dynamics of SU(N) supersymmetric gauge theory,

M. R. Douglas and S. H. Shenker, “Dynamics of SU(N) supersymmetric gauge theory,” Nucl. Phys. B447(1995) 271–296,arXiv:hep-th/9503163

1995 arXiv
[18]

On the quantum moduli space of vacua of N=2 supersymmetric SU(N(c)) gauge theories,

A. Hanany and Y. Oz, “On the quantum moduli space of vacua of N=2 supersymmetric SU(N(c)) gauge theories,” Nucl. Phys. B452(1995) 283–312,arXiv:hep-th/9505075

1995 arXiv
[19]

Duality, monopoles, dyons, confinement and oblique confinement in supersymmetric SO(N(c)) gauge theories,

K. A. Intriligator and N. Seiberg, “Duality, monopoles, dyons, confinement and oblique confinement in supersymmetric SO(N(c)) gauge theories,” Nucl. Phys. B444(1995) 125–160,arXiv:hep-th/9503179

1995 arXiv
[20]

Exactly marginal operators and duality in four-dimensional N=1 supersymmetric gauge theory,

R. G. Leigh and M. J. Strassler, “Exactly marginal operators and duality in four-dimensional N=1 supersymmetric gauge theory,” Nucl. Phys. B447(1995) 95–136,arXiv:hep-th/9503121

1995 arXiv
[21]

Duality in SUSY SU(N) with an antisymmetric tensor,

P. Pouliot, “Duality in SUSY SU(N) with an antisymmetric tensor,” Phys. Lett. B 367(1996) 151–156,arXiv:hep-th/9510148

1996 arXiv
[22]

A Comment on duality in N=1 supersymmetric nonAbelian gauge theories,

D. Kutasov, “A Comment on duality in N=1 supersymmetric nonAbelian gauge theories,” Phys. Lett. B351(1995) 230–234,arXiv:hep-th/9503086

1995 arXiv
[23]

Instanton calculations versus exact results in four-dimensional SUSY gauge theories,

D. Finnell and P. Pouliot, “Instanton calculations versus exact results in four-dimensional SUSY gauge theories,” Nucl. Phys. B453(1995) 225–239, arXiv:hep-th/9503115. – 28 –

1995 arXiv
[24]

On duality in supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory,

D. Kutasov and A. Schwimmer, “On duality in supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory,” Phys. Lett. B354(1995) 315–321,arXiv:hep-th/9505004

1995 arXiv
[25]

Exact superpotentials, quantum vacua and duality in supersymmetric SP(N(c)) gauge theories,

K. A. Intriligator and P. Pouliot, “Exact superpotentials, quantum vacua and duality in supersymmetric SP(N(c)) gauge theories,” Phys. Lett. B353(1995) 471–476, arXiv:hep-th/9505006

1995 arXiv
[26]

New phenomena in SU(3) supersymmetric gauge theory,

P. C. Argyres and M. R. Douglas, “New phenomena in SU(3) supersymmetric gauge theory,” Nucl. Phys. B448(1995) 93–126,arXiv:hep-th/9505062

1995 arXiv
[27]

The vacuum structure and spectrum of N=2 supersymmetric SU(n) gauge theory,

P. C. Argyres and A. E. Faraggi, “The vacuum structure and spectrum of N=2 supersymmetric SU(n) gauge theory,” Phys. Rev. Lett.74(1995) 3931–3934, arXiv:hep-th/9411057

1995 arXiv
[28]

The Coulomb phase of N=2 supersymmetric QCD,

P. C. Argyres, M. R. Plesser, and A. D. Shapere, “The Coulomb phase of N=2 supersymmetric QCD,” Phys. Rev. Lett.75(1995) 1699–1702, arXiv:hep-th/9505100

1995 arXiv
[29]

Instantons and recursion relations in N=2 SUSY gauge theory,

M. Matone, “Instantons and recursion relations in N=2 SUSY gauge theory,” Phys. Lett. B357(1995) 342–348,arXiv:hep-th/9506102

1995 arXiv
[30]

Simple singularities and N=2 supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory,

A. Klemm, W. Lerche, S. Yankielowicz, and S. Theisen, “Simple singularities and N=2 supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory,” Phys. Lett. B344(1995) 169–175, arXiv:hep-th/9411048

1995 arXiv
[31]

Studying noncalculable models of dynamical supersymmetry breaking,

H. Murayama, “Studying noncalculable models of dynamical supersymmetry breaking,” Phys. Lett. B355(1995) 187–192,arXiv:hep-th/9505082

1995 arXiv
[32]

Nonperturbative effective actions of N=2 supersymmetric gauge theories,

A. Klemm, W. Lerche, and S. Theisen, “Nonperturbative effective actions of N=2 supersymmetric gauge theories,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A11(1996) 1929–1974, arXiv:hep-th/9505150

1996 arXiv
[33]

New N=2 superconformal field theories in four-dimensions,

P. C. Argyres, M. R. Plesser, N. Seiberg, and E. Witten, “New N=2 superconformal field theories in four-dimensions,” Nucl. Phys. B461(1996) 71–84, arXiv:hep-th/9511154

1996 arXiv
[34]

The Moduli space of vacua of N=2 SUSY QCD and duality in N=1 SUSY QCD,

P. C. Argyres, M. R. Plesser, and N. Seiberg, “The Moduli space of vacua of N=2 SUSY QCD and duality in N=1 SUSY QCD,” Nucl. Phys. B471(1996) 159–194, arXiv:hep-th/9603042

1996 arXiv
[35]

Supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory and integrable systems,

R. Donagi and E. Witten, “Supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory and integrable systems,” Nucl. Phys. B460(1996) 299–334,arXiv:hep-th/9510101

1996 arXiv
[36]

Lectures on supersymmetric gauge theories and electric-magnetic duality,

K. A. Intriligator and N. Seiberg, “Lectures on supersymmetric gauge theories and electric-magnetic duality,” Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl.45BC(1996) 1–28, arXiv:hep-th/9509066

1996 arXiv
[37]

Chiral rings, singularity theory and – 29 – electric - magnetic duality,

D. Kutasov, A. Schwimmer, and N. Seiberg, “Chiral rings, singularity theory and – 29 – electric - magnetic duality,” Nucl. Phys. B459(1996) 455–496, arXiv:hep-th/9510222

1996 arXiv
[38]

A Chiral SU(n) gauge theory and its nonchiral spin(8) dual,

P. Pouliot and M. J. Strassler, “A Chiral SU(n) gauge theory and its nonchiral spin(8) dual,” Phys. Lett. B370(1996) 76–82,arXiv:hep-th/9510228

1996 arXiv
[39]

Duality and dynamical supersymmetry breaking in Spin(10) with a spinor,

P. Pouliot and M. J. Strassler, “Duality and dynamical supersymmetry breaking in Spin(10) with a spinor,” Phys. Lett. B375(1996) 175–180,arXiv:hep-th/9602031

1996 arXiv
[40]

Dynamical supersymmetry breaking on quantum moduli spaces,

K. A. Intriligator and S. D. Thomas, “Dynamical supersymmetry breaking on quantum moduli spaces,” Nucl. Phys. B473(1996) 121–142,arXiv:hep-th/9603158

1996 arXiv
[41]

Aspects of N=2 supersymmetric gauge theories in three-dimensions,

O. Aharony, A. Hanany, K. A. Intriligator, N. Seiberg, and M. J. Strassler, “Aspects of N=2 supersymmetric gauge theories in three-dimensions,” Nucl. Phys. B499(1997) 67–99,arXiv:hep-th/9703110

1997 arXiv
[42]

Chiral rings and anomalies in supersymmetric gauge theory,

F. Cachazo, M. R. Douglas, N. Seiberg, and E. Witten, “Chiral rings and anomalies in supersymmetric gauge theory,” JHEP12(2002) 071,arXiv:hep-th/0211170

2002 arXiv
[43]

Seiberg-Witten prepotential from instanton counting,

N. A. Nekrasov, “Seiberg-Witten prepotential from instanton counting,” Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.7(2003) no. 5, 831–864,arXiv:hep-th/0206161

2003 arXiv
[44]

NonAbelian superconductors: Vortices and confinement in N=2 SQCD,

R. Auzzi, S. Bolognesi, J. Evslin, K. Konishi, and A. Yung, “NonAbelian superconductors: Vortices and confinement in N=2 SQCD,” Nucl. Phys. B673(2003) 187–216,arXiv:hep-th/0307287

2003 arXiv
[45]

Dynamical SUSY breaking in meta-stable vacua,

K. A. Intriligator, N. Seiberg, and D. Shih, “Dynamical SUSY breaking in meta-stable vacua,” JHEP04(2006) 021,arXiv:hep-th/0602239

2006 arXiv
[46]

Localization of gauge theory on a four-sphere and supersymmetric Wilson loops,

V. Pestun, “Localization of gauge theory on a four-sphere and supersymmetric Wilson loops,” Commun. Math. Phys.313(2012) 71–129,arXiv:0712.2824

2012 arXiv
[47]

Exotic nonsupersymmetric gauge dynamics from supersymmetric QCD,

O. Aharony, J. Sonnenschein, M. E. Peskin, and S. Yankielowicz, “Exotic nonsupersymmetric gauge dynamics from supersymmetric QCD,” Phys. Rev. D52 (1995) 6157–6174,arXiv:hep-th/9507013

1995 arXiv
[48]

Exact results in softly broken supersymmetric models,

N. J. Evans, S. D. H. Hsu, and M. Schwetz, “Exact results in softly broken supersymmetric models,” Phys. Lett. B355(1995) 475–480,arXiv:hep-th/9503186

1995 arXiv
[49]

Gauge symmetry breaking through soft masses in supersymmetric gauge theories,

E. D’Hoker, Y. Mimura, and N. Sakai, “Gauge symmetry breaking through soft masses in supersymmetric gauge theories,” Phys. Rev. D54(1996) 7724–7740, arXiv:hep-th/9603206

1996 arXiv
[50]

Softly broken N=2 QCD,

L. Álvarez-Gaumé, J. Distler, C. Kounnas, and M. Marino, “Softly broken N=2 QCD,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A11(1996) 4745–4777,arXiv:hep-th/9604004

1996 arXiv
[51]

Confinement, supersymmetry breaking and theta parameter dependence in the Seiberg-Witten model,

K. Konishi, “Confinement, supersymmetry breaking and theta parameter dependence in the Seiberg-Witten model,” Phys. Lett. B392(1997) 101–105,arXiv:hep-th/9609021. – 30 –

1997 arXiv
[52]

Phase transitions in softly broken N=2 SQCD at nonzero theta angle,

N. J. Evans, S. D. H. Hsu, and M. Schwetz, “Phase transitions in softly broken N=2 SQCD at nonzero theta angle,” Nucl. Phys. B484(1997) 124–140, arXiv:hep-th/9608135

1997 arXiv
[53]

More on softly broken N=2 QCD,

L. Álvarez-Gaumé and M. Marino, “More on softly broken N=2 QCD,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A12(1997) 975–1002,arXiv:hep-th/9606191

1997 arXiv
[54]

Softly broken N=2 QCD with massive quark hypermultiplets. 1.,

L. Álvarez-Gaumé, M. Marino, and F. Zamora, “Softly broken N=2 QCD with massive quark hypermultiplets. 1.,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A13(1998) 403–430, arXiv:hep-th/9703072

1998 arXiv
[55]

Softly broken N=2 QCD with massive quark hypermultiplets. 2.,

L. Álvarez-Gaumé, M. Marino, and F. Zamora, “Softly broken N=2 QCD with massive quark hypermultiplets. 2.,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A13(1998) 1847–1880, arXiv:hep-th/9707017

1998 arXiv
[56]

Duality in the presence of supersymmetry breaking,

H.-C. Cheng and Y. Shadmi, “Duality in the presence of supersymmetry breaking,” Nucl. Phys. B531(1998) 125–150,arXiv:hep-th/9801146

1998 arXiv
[57]

Chiral symmetry breaking and effective Lagrangians for softly broken supersymmetric QCD,

S. P. Martin and J. D. Wells, “Chiral symmetry breaking and effective Lagrangians for softly broken supersymmetric QCD,” Phys. Rev. D58(1998) 115013, arXiv:hep-th/9801157

1998 arXiv
[58]

Supersymmetry breaking loops from analytic continuation into superspace,

N. Arkani-Hamed, G. F. Giudice, M. A. Luty, and R. Rattazzi, “Supersymmetry breaking loops from analytic continuation into superspace,” Phys. Rev. D58(1998) 115005,arXiv:hep-ph/9803290

1998 arXiv
[60]

Mapping Anomalous Currents in Supersymmetric Dualities,

S. Abel, M. Buican, and Z. Komargodski, “Mapping Anomalous Currents in Supersymmetric Dualities,” Phys. Rev. D84(2011) 045005,arXiv:1105.2885

2011 arXiv
[61]

Candidate Phases for SU(2) Adjoint QCD4 with Two Flavors fromN= 2Supersymmetric Yang-Mills Theory,

C. Córdova and T. T. Dumitrescu, “Candidate Phases for SU(2) Adjoint QCD4 with Two Flavors fromN= 2Supersymmetric Yang-Mills Theory,”arXiv:1806.09592

arXiv
[62]

Some Exact Results in Chiral Gauge Theories,

C. Csáki, H. Murayama, and O. Telem, “Some Exact Results in Chiral Gauge Theories,”arXiv:2104.10171

arXiv
[63]

More Exact Results on Chiral Gauge Theories: the Case of the Symmetric Tensor,

C. Csáki, H. Murayama, and O. Telem, “More Exact Results on Chiral Gauge Theories: the Case of the Symmetric Tensor,”arXiv:2105.03444

arXiv
[64]

Demonstration of Confinement and Chiral Symmetry Breaking inSO(Nc)Gauge Theories,

C. Csáki, A. Gomes, H. Murayama, and O. Telem, “Demonstration of Confinement and Chiral Symmetry Breaking inSO(Nc)Gauge Theories,”arXiv:2106.10288

arXiv
[65]

Some Exact Results in QCD-like Theories,

H. Murayama, “Some Exact Results in QCD-like Theories,” Phys. Rev. Lett.126 (2021) no. 25, 251601,arXiv:2104.01179. – 31 –

2021 arXiv
[66]

The Phases of Non-supersymmetric Gauge Theories: theSO(Nc)Case Study,

C. Csáki, A. Gomes, H. Murayama, and O. Telem, “The Phases of Non-supersymmetric Gauge Theories: theSO(Nc)Case Study,”arXiv:2107.02813

arXiv
[67]

Broken Conformal Window,

D. Kondo, H. Murayama, B. Noether, and D. R. Varier, “Broken Conformal Window,” arXiv:2111.09690

arXiv
[68]

On the derivation of chiral symmetry breaking in QCD-like theories and S-confining theories,

A. Luzio and L.-X. Xu, “On the derivation of chiral symmetry breaking in QCD-like theories and S-confining theories,” JHEP08(2022) 016,arXiv:2202.01239

2022 arXiv
[70]

Challenges to Obtaining Results for Real QCD from SUSY QCD,

M. Dine and Y. Yu, “Challenges to Obtaining Results for Real QCD from SUSY QCD,”arXiv:2205.00115

arXiv
[71]

On the Possibility of Demonstrating Confinement in Non-Supersymmetric Theories by Deforming Confining Supersymmetric Theories,

M. Dine, “On the Possibility of Demonstrating Confinement in Non-Supersymmetric Theories by Deforming Confining Supersymmetric Theories,”arXiv:2211.17134

arXiv
[72]

Tumbling Gauge Theories,

S. Raby, S. Dimopoulos, and L. Susskind, “Tumbling Gauge Theories,” Nucl. Phys. B 169(1980) 373–383

1980
[73]

Hooft,Naturalness, Chiral Symmetry, and Spontaneous Chiral Symmetry Breaking, pp

G. Hooft,Naturalness, Chiral Symmetry, and Spontaneous Chiral Symmetry Breaking, pp. 135–157. Springer US, Boston, MA, 1980. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4684-7571-5_9

1980 doi
[74]

Light Composite Fermions,

S. Dimopoulos, S. Raby, and L. Susskind, “Light Composite Fermions,” Nucl. Phys. B 173(1980) 208–228

1980
[75]

Discrete anomaly matching,

C. Csáki and H. Murayama, “Discrete anomaly matching,” Nucl. Phys. B515(1998) 114–162,arXiv:hep-th/9710105

1998 arXiv
[76]

Vacuum structure of bifundamental gauge theories at finite topological angles,

Y. Tanizaki and Y. Kikuchi, “Vacuum structure of bifundamental gauge theories at finite topological angles,” JHEP06(2017) 102,arXiv:1705.01949

2017 arXiv
[77]

Time-reversal breaking in QCD4, walls, and dualities in 2 + 1 dimensions,

D. Gaiotto, Z. Komargodski, and N. Seiberg, “Time-reversal breaking in QCD4, walls, and dualities in 2 + 1 dimensions,” JHEP01(2018) 110,arXiv:1708.06806

2018 arXiv
[78]

Anomaly constraints on deconfinement and chiral phase transition,

H. Shimizu and K. Yonekura, “Anomaly constraints on deconfinement and chiral phase transition,” Phys. Rev. D97(2018) no. 10, 105011,arXiv:1706.06104

2018 arXiv
[79]

Adventure in Topological Phase Transitions in 3+1 -D: Non-Abelian Deconfined Quantum Criticalities and a Possible Duality,

Z. Bi and T. Senthil, “Adventure in Topological Phase Transitions in 3+1 -D: Non-Abelian Deconfined Quantum Criticalities and a Possible Duality,” Phys. Rev. X 9(2019) no. 2, 021034,arXiv:1808.07465

2019 arXiv
[80]

Anomaly constraint on massless QCD and the role of Skyrmions in chiral symmetry breaking,

Y. Tanizaki, “Anomaly constraint on massless QCD and the role of Skyrmions in chiral symmetry breaking,” JHEP08(2018) 171,arXiv:1807.07666

2018 arXiv
[81]

Anomaly matching for the phase – 32 – diagram of masslessZN-QCD,

Y. Tanizaki, Y. Kikuchi, T. Misumi, and N. Sakai, “Anomaly matching for the phase – 32 – diagram of masslessZN-QCD,” Phys. Rev. D97(2018) no. 5, 054012, arXiv:1711.10487

2018 arXiv
[82]

Comments on One-Form Global Symmetries and Their Gauging in 3d and 4d,

P.-S. Hsin, H. T. Lam, and N. Seiberg, “Comments on One-Form Global Symmetries and Their Gauging in 3d and 4d,” SciPost Phys.6(2019) no. 3, 039, arXiv:1812.04716

2019 arXiv
[83]

Dai-Freed anomalies in particle physics,

I. García-Etxebarria and M. Montero, “Dai-Freed anomalies in particle physics,” JHEP08(2019) 003,arXiv:1808.00009

2019 arXiv
[84]

Anomalies in the Space of Coupling Constants and Their Dynamical Applications II,

C. Córdova, D. S. Freed, H. T. Lam, and N. Seiberg, “Anomalies in the Space of Coupling Constants and Their Dynamical Applications II,” SciPost Phys.8(2020) no. 1, 002,arXiv:1905.13361

2020 arXiv
[85]

Reflection positivity and invertible topological phases,

D. S. Freed and M. J. Hopkins, “Reflection positivity and invertible topological phases,” Geom. Topol.25(2021) 1165–1330,arXiv:1604.06527

2021 arXiv
[86]

Anomalies in the Space of Coupling Constants and Their Dynamical Applications I,

C. Córdova, D. S. Freed, H. T. Lam, and N. Seiberg, “Anomalies in the Space of Coupling Constants and Their Dynamical Applications I,” SciPost Phys.8(2020) no. 1, 001,arXiv:1905.09315

2020 arXiv
[87]

Dynamics from symmetries in chiralSU(N) gauge theories,

S. Bolognesi, K. Konishi, and A. Luzio, “Dynamics from symmetries in chiralSU(N) gauge theories,” JHEP09(2020) 001,arXiv:2004.06639

2020 arXiv
[88]

Probing the dynamics of chiral SU(N) gauge theories via generalized anomalies,

S. Bolognesi, K. Konishi, and A. Luzio, “Probing the dynamics of chiral SU(N) gauge theories via generalized anomalies,”arXiv:2101.02601

arXiv
[89]

Notes on 8 Majorana Fermions,

D. Tong and C. Turner, “Notes on 8 Majorana Fermions,” SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes 14(2020) 1,arXiv:1906.07199

2020 arXiv
[90]

Gapped Chiral Fermions,

S. S. Razamat and D. Tong, “Gapped Chiral Fermions,” Phys. Rev. X11(2021) no. 1, 011063,arXiv:2009.05037

2021 arXiv
[91]

Chiral gauge dynamics: candidates for non-supersymmetric dualities,

A. Karasik, K. Önder, and D. Tong, “Chiral gauge dynamics: candidates for non-supersymmetric dualities,” JHEP11(2022) 122,arXiv:2208.07842

2022 arXiv
[92]

On discrete anomalies in chiral gauge theories,

P. B. Smith, A. Karasik, N. Lohitsiri, and D. Tong, “On discrete anomalies in chiral gauge theories,” JHEP01(2022) 112,arXiv:2106.06402

2022 arXiv
[93]

On the dynamical origin of theη′ potential and the axion mass,

C. Csáki, R. Tito D’Agnolo, R. S. Gupta, E. Kuflik, T. S. Roy, and M. Ruhdorfer, “On the dynamical origin of theη′ potential and the axion mass,” JHEP10(2023) 139,arXiv:2307.04809

2023 arXiv
[94]

Softly broken MQCD and the theta angle,

J. L. F. Barbon and A. Pasquinucci, “Softly broken MQCD and the theta angle,” Phys. Lett. B421(1998) 131–138,arXiv:hep-th/9711030

1998 arXiv
[95]

Branes and theta dependence,

Y. Oz and A. Pasquinucci, “Branes and theta dependence,” Phys. Lett. B444(1998) 318–326,arXiv:hep-th/9809173. – 33 –

1998 arXiv
[96]

Theta dependence in the large N limit of four-dimensional gauge theories,

E. Witten, “Theta dependence in the large N limit of four-dimensional gauge theories,” Phys. Rev. Lett.81(1998) 2862–2865,arXiv:hep-th/9807109

1998 arXiv
[97]

theta dependence of SU(N) gauge theories,

L. Del Debbio, H. Panagopoulos, and E. Vicari, “theta dependence of SU(N) gauge theories,” JHEP08(2002) 044,arXiv:hep-th/0204125

2002 arXiv
[98]

θand theη′ in LargeN Supersymmetric QCD,

M. Dine, P. Draper, L. Stephenson-Haskins, and D. Xu, “θand theη′ in LargeN Supersymmetric QCD,” JHEP05(2017) 122,arXiv:1612.05770

2017 arXiv
[99]

Out of this world supersymmetry breaking,

L. Randall and R. Sundrum, “Out of this world supersymmetry breaking,” Nucl. Phys. B557(1999) 79–118,arXiv:hep-th/9810155

1999 arXiv
[100]

Gaugino mass without singlets,

G. F. Giudice, M. A. Luty, H. Murayama, and R. Rattazzi, “Gaugino mass without singlets,” JHEP12(1998) 027,arXiv:hep-ph/9810442

1998 arXiv
[101]

Exact results for nonholomorphic masses in softly broken supersymmetric gauge theories,

N. Arkani-Hamed and R. Rattazzi, “Exact results for nonholomorphic masses in softly broken supersymmetric gauge theories,” Phys. Lett. B454(1999) 290–296, arXiv:hep-th/9804068

1999 arXiv
[102]

A Guide to AMSB QCD,

C. Csáki, A. Gomes, H. Murayama, B. Noether, D. R. Varier, and O. Telem, “A Guide to AMSB QCD,”arXiv:2212.03260

arXiv
[103]

Dynamics of Simplest Chiral Gauge Theories,

D. Kondo, H. Murayama, and C. Sylber, “Dynamics of Simplest Chiral Gauge Theories,”arXiv:2209.09287
[104]

Exact Results in Chiral Gauge Theories with Flavor,

J. M. Leedom, H. Murayama, G. Singh, B. Suter, and J. Wong, “Exact Results in Chiral Gauge Theories with Flavor,”arXiv:2503.08772

arXiv
[105]

Phases of confining SU(5) chiral gauge theory with three generations,

Y. Bai and D. Stolarski, “Phases of confining SU(5) chiral gauge theory with three generations,” JHEP03(2022) 113,arXiv:2111.11214

2022 arXiv
[106]

On s-confining SUSY-QCD with anomaly mediation,

C. H. de Lima and D. Stolarski, “On s-confining SUSY-QCD with anomaly mediation,” JHEP10(2023) 020,arXiv:2307.13154

2023 arXiv
[107]

Cutting and gluing with running couplings in N=2 QCD,

J. Aspman, E. Furrer, and J. Manschot, “Cutting and gluing with running couplings in N=2 QCD,” Phys. Rev. D105(2022) no. 2, 025021,arXiv:2107.04600

2022 arXiv
[108]

Prepotentials in N=2 SU(2) supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory with massless hypermultiplets,

K. Ito and S.-K. Yang, “Prepotentials in N=2 SU(2) supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory with massless hypermultiplets,” Phys. Lett. B366(1996) 165–173, arXiv:hep-th/9507144

1996 arXiv
[109]

Picard-Fuchs equations and prepotentials in N=2 supersymmetric QCD,

K. Ito and S.-K. Yang, “Picard-Fuchs equations and prepotentials in N=2 supersymmetric QCD,” inFrontiers in Quantum Field Theory in Honor of the 60th Birthday of Prof. K. Kikkawa, pp. 331–342. 3, 1996.arXiv:hep-th/9603073

1996 arXiv
[110]

Curves of marginal stability, and weak and strong coupling BPS spectra in N=2 supersymmetric QCD,

A. Bilal and F. Ferrari, “Curves of marginal stability, and weak and strong coupling BPS spectra in N=2 supersymmetric QCD,” Nucl. Phys. B480(1996) 589–622, arXiv:hep-th/9605101. – 34 –

1996 arXiv
[111]

The Strong coupling spectrum of the Seiberg-Witten theory,

F. Ferrari and A. Bilal, “The Strong coupling spectrum of the Seiberg-Witten theory,” Nucl. Phys. B469(1996) 387–402,arXiv:hep-th/9602082

1996 arXiv
[112]

Sparticle masses from the superconformal anomaly,

A. Pomarol and R. Rattazzi, “Sparticle masses from the superconformal anomaly,” JHEP05(1999) 013,arXiv:hep-ph/9903448

1999 arXiv
[113]

Large N Chiral Dynamics,

E. Witten, “Large N Chiral Dynamics,” Annals Phys.128(1980) 363

1980
[114]

The multiple of currents for N=2 extended supersymmetry,

M. F. Sohnius, “The multiple of currents for N=2 extended supersymmetry,” Physics Letters B81(1979) no. 1, 8–10. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0370269379907032

1979
[115]

Revisiting the multi-monopole point of SU(N)N= 2 gauge theory in four dimensions,

E. D’Hoker, T. T. Dumitrescu, E. Gerchkovitz, and E. Nardoni, “Revisiting the multi-monopole point of SU(N)N= 2 gauge theory in four dimensions,” JHEP09 (2021) 003,arXiv:2012.11843

2021 arXiv
[116]

Exploring the strong-coupling region of SU(N) Seiberg-Witten theory,

E. D’Hoker, T. T. Dumitrescu, and E. Nardoni, “Exploring the strong-coupling region of SU(N) Seiberg-Witten theory,” JHEP11(2022) 102,arXiv:2208.11502

2022 arXiv
[117]

Introduction to Seiberg-Witten theory and its stringy origin,

W. Lerche, “Introduction to Seiberg-Witten theory and its stringy origin,” Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl.55(1997) 83–117,arXiv:hep-th/9611190. – 35 –

1997 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [59]

Soft supersymmetry breaking in deformed moduli spaces, conformal theories, and N=2 Yang-Mills theory,

M. A. Luty and R. Rattazzi, “Soft supersymmetry breaking in deformed moduli spaces, conformal theories, and N=2 Yang-Mills theory,” JHEP11(1999) 001, arXiv:hep-th/9908085

arXiv 1999

[2] [1]

Instantons, the Quark Model, and the 1/n Expansion,

E. Witten, “Instantons, the Quark Model, and the 1/n Expansion,” Nucl. Phys. B149 (1979) 285–320

1979

[3] [2]

Chiral Dynamics in the Large n Limit,

P. Di Vecchia and G. Veneziano, “Chiral Dynamics in the Large n Limit,” Nucl. Phys. B171(1980) 253–272

1980

[4] [3]

Vacuum Structure and Chiral Charge Quantization in the LargeNLimit,

N. Ohta, “Vacuum Structure and Chiral Charge Quantization in the LargeNLimit,” Prog. Theor. Phys.66(1981) 1408. [Erratum: Prog.Theor.Phys. 67, 993 (1982)]

1981

[5] [4]

Some features of chiral symmetry breaking,

R. F. Dashen, “Some features of chiral symmetry breaking,” Phys. Rev. D3(1971) 1879–1889

1971

[6] [5]

Topology of the Gauge Condition and New Confinement Phases in Nonabelian Gauge Theories,

G. ’t Hooft, “Topology of the Gauge Condition and New Confinement Phases in Nonabelian Gauge Theories,” Nucl. Phys. B190(1981) 455–478

1981

[7] [6]

Phase structure of Zp models in the presence of aθ parameter,

J. L. Cardy and E. Rabinovici, “Phase structure of Zp models in the presence of aθ parameter,” Nucl. Phys. B205(1982) 1–16

1982

[8] [7]

Theta, Time Reversal, and Temperature,

D. Gaiotto, A. Kapustin, Z. Komargodski, and N. Seiberg, “Theta, Time Reversal, and Temperature,” JHEP05(2017) 091,arXiv:1703.00501

arXiv 2017