Holographic interpolations of codimension-2 defect CFTs

Dimitrios Zoakos; George Georgiou

arxiv: 2605.14726 · v1 · pith:NM54PGF3new · submitted 2026-05-14 · ✦ hep-th

Holographic interpolations of codimension-2 defect CFTs

George Georgiou , Dimitrios Zoakos This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-30 20:35 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-th

keywords codimension-2 defectsdefect CFTsholographic dualityprobe branesbubbling geometriesone-point functionsD3/D5 branessupersymmetric defects

0 comments

The pith

Holographic calculations agree with field theory results for codimension-2 defect CFTs across coupling regimes.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

This review examines codimension-2 defects in conformal field theories through holographic methods. It begins with the classification of 1/2-BPS supersymmetric defects realized by probe branes and bubbling supergravity geometries. The discussion extends to non-supersymmetric D3/D5 brane configurations that allow interpolations between regimes. Calculations of one-point functions for the stress-energy tensor and chiral primary operators match between weak and strong coupling.

Core claim

The paper establishes through review that the holographic description of codimension-2 defect CFTs, using probe branes and bubbling geometries for both supersymmetric and non-supersymmetric D3/D5 setups, yields matching results for key observables in the two coupling regimes.

What carries the argument

Holographic interpolations of D3/D5 brane configurations connecting supersymmetric and non-supersymmetric defect CFTs.

If this is right

One-point functions of the stress-energy tensor can be computed consistently in both weak and strong coupling.
One-point functions of chiral primary operators agree across the two regimes.
The classification of 1/2-BPS defects extends through holography to non-supersymmetric cases.
Bubbling geometries supply dual descriptions that match field theory expectations for these systems.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The same interpolation approach may apply to defects of other codimensions.
Certain observables could admit exact coupling-independent results.
The framework could identify new defect configurations in related string theory setups.

Load-bearing premise

The holographic dictionary remains valid for the non-supersymmetric D3/D5 configurations as invoked for the observable calculations.

What would settle it

A mismatch between the one-point function values computed in the weak-coupling field theory regime and those from the strong-coupling holographic regime would settle the claim of agreement.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.14726 by Dimitrios Zoakos, George Georgiou.

**Figure 1.** Figure 1: The regions of the (σ, ρ) parametric space where the proposed solution remains valid. The left panel covers the range σ ∈ [0, 2 √ 2] with 1 < ρ ≤ 3, while the right panel illustrates the domain σ ≥ 2 √ 2 and 1 < ρ ≤ 3.5. causing the D5-brane to effectively reduce to a D3-like configuration with an induced metric of the form ds2 ind = 1 r 2σ 2 " − d⃗x2 0,1 + (1 + σ 2 )dr2 # + 1 + 1 σ 2 dγ˜ 2 with κ = 0 … view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: Left panel: One-point function of the energy-momentum tensor in a defect CFT. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_2.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

We provide a comprehensive overview of the current status of higher-codimension defect systems. We review the holographic description and field theoretic properties of codimension-2 defects within the framework of defect Conformal Field Theories (dCFTs). Starting from the well-established classification of $1/2$-BPS supersymmetric defects, we examine their realisation through probe branes and bubbling supergravity geometries. Special emphasis is placed on recent developments involving non-supersymmetric D3/D5 configurations and their holographic interpolations. We discuss the calculation of important physical observables, such as one-point functions of the stress-energy tensor and chiral primary operators, across both weak and strong coupling regimes. The agreement of the results in the two regimes exhibits the full power of the holographic principle. This is a proceedings contribution to the Athens Workshop in Theoretical Physics: 10th Anniversary, held at the National and Kapodistrian University of Athens on December 17-19 2025.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

This is a review that organizes existing holographic results on codimension-2 defect CFTs with no new calculations or derivations.

read the letter

This is a review paper summarizing the holographic description of codimension-2 defect CFTs, with focus on both supersymmetric and non-supersymmetric D3/D5 configurations. It has no new results.

It does well in providing an overview of the 1/2-BPS classifications, probe brane and bubbling geometry realizations, and the one-point function calculations that match across coupling regimes. The discussion organizes the material from the literature in a coherent way.

The soft spots are that the agreement for non-supersymmetric cases is stated without new derivations or stability checks in this text, so the claim that it shows the full power of holography rests on the validity of the dictionary in those cases, which may be less secure without supersymmetry. The stress-test concern holds up here because the review doesn't supply independent support for the non-SUSY interpolations. Citations are appropriate and point to the original works.

This paper is for people who want a consolidated summary of defect CFT holography rather than cutting-edge advances. A reader new to the area or needing a reference for observables would find it useful.

I would not cite it in my own work as it introduces nothing original. It shows clear thinking in how it presents the literature. For peer review, I would not send it to referees for a research journal because it is a proceedings review with no original content; it is better left as a workshop contribution.

Referee Report

1 major / 0 minor

Summary. This proceedings contribution reviews the holographic description of codimension-2 defects in dCFTs. It covers the classification of 1/2-BPS supersymmetric defects realized through probe branes and bubbling supergravity geometries, and recent developments on non-supersymmetric D3/D5 configurations. The paper discusses one-point functions of the stress-energy tensor and chiral primary operators at weak and strong coupling, asserting that their agreement demonstrates the full power of the holographic principle.

Significance. The review synthesizes key literature on defect holography, with value in compiling probe-brane and bubbling-geometry results for the 1/2-BPS cases. The claimed agreement between regimes for non-supersymmetric configurations would, if robust, illustrate holography's reach, but the manuscript itself introduces no new derivations or checks.

major comments (1)

[non-supersymmetric D3/D5 configurations] Discussion of non-supersymmetric D3/D5 configurations: The central claim that observable agreement (one-point functions of stress tensor and chiral primaries) between weak-coupling field theory and strong-coupling gravity exhibits the full power of the holographic principle depends on the validity of the holographic dictionary for these non-supersymmetric cases. The manuscript invokes this extension without providing or citing a stability analysis, counterterm discussion, or independent verification, leaving the claim load-bearing on an unexamined assumption from the referenced literature.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their report on our proceedings contribution. We address the single major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

Referee: Discussion of non-supersymmetric D3/D5 configurations: The central claim that observable agreement (one-point functions of stress tensor and chiral primaries) between weak-coupling field theory and strong-coupling gravity exhibits the full power of the holographic principle depends on the validity of the holographic dictionary for these non-supersymmetric cases. The manuscript invokes this extension without providing or citing a stability analysis, counterterm discussion, or independent verification, leaving the claim load-bearing on an unexamined assumption from the referenced literature.

Authors: As a proceedings review, the manuscript summarizes results from the existing literature on non-supersymmetric D3/D5 configurations rather than deriving new checks. The one-point function agreement is reported in the cited works that introduce these holographic setups. We agree that the manuscript would benefit from more explicit pointers to the references addressing the holographic dictionary, stability, and counterterms for these configurations. We will revise the relevant section to include such citations and a short clarifying statement on the scope of the review. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: review summarizes external literature

full rationale

This is a proceedings review paper that summarizes the established classification of 1/2-BPS defects, probe-brane constructions, bubbling geometries, and one-point function calculations from prior literature. No new derivations, fitted parameters, or predictions are generated within the paper's own equations; the claimed agreement between weak- and strong-coupling regimes is presented as a summary of existing results rather than a self-contained computation that reduces to its inputs by construction. Self-citations, if present, are not load-bearing for any central claim.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

As a review paper summarizing prior literature, no new free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are introduced by the authors.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5693 in / 968 out tokens · 24198 ms · 2026-06-30T20:35:48.366698+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

Thermal conformal partial waves from flat-space and defect CFT
hep-th 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

Establishes correspondence between flat, thermal, and defect conformal partial waves via shadow formalism, obtaining thermal blocks from flat four-point and defect two-point functions and reducing the Casimir equation...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

16 extracted references · 12 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

Karch and L

A. Karch and L. Randall,JHEP06(2001) 063,arXiv:hep-th/0105132

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001
[2]

Georgiou, G

G. Georgiou, G. Linardopoulos and D. Zoakos,JHEP09(2025) 105, arXiv:2506.14505 [hep-th]

arXiv 2025
[3]

Georgiou and D

G. Georgiou and D. Zoakos,JHEP04(2026) 201,arXiv:2512.14853 [hep-th]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026
[4]

Gomis and S

J. Gomis and S. Matsuura,JHEP06(2007) 025,arXiv:0704.1657 [hep-th]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007
[5]

Drukker, J

N. Drukker, J. Gomis and S. Matsuura,JHEP10(2008) 048,arXiv:0805.4199 [hep-th]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008
[6]

Gukov and E

S. Gukov and E. Witten (12 2006)arXiv:hep-th/0612073

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006
[7]

Gaiotto and E

D. Gaiotto and E. Witten,J. Statist. Phys.135(2009) 789,arXiv:0804.2902 [hep-th]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009
[8]

N. R. Constable, J. Erdmenger, Z. Guralnik and I. Kirsch,Phys. Rev. D68(2003) 106007,arXiv:hep-th/0211222

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003
[9]

H. Lin, O. Lunin and J. M. Maldacena,JHEP10(2004) 025,arXiv:hep-th/0409174

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004
[10]

Georgiou, G

G. Georgiou, G. Linardopoulos and D. Zoakos,Phys. Rev. D108(2023) 046016, arXiv:2304.10434 [hep-th]. 20George Georgiou & Dimitrios Zoakos

arXiv 2023
[11]

C. G. Callan, Jr., S. R. Coleman and R. Jackiw,Annals Phys.59(1970) 42

1970
[12]

M. F. Sohnius and P. C. West,Physics Letters B100(1981) 245

1981
[13]

Nagasaki and S

K. Nagasaki and S. Yamaguchi,Phys. Rev. D86(2012) 086004,arXiv:1205.1674 [hep-th]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012
[14]

Kristjansen, G

C. Kristjansen, G. W. Semenoff and D. Young,JHEP01(2013) 117,arXiv:1210.7015 [hep-th]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013
[15]

Lewkowycz and E

A. Lewkowycz and E. Perlmutter,JHEP01(2015) 080,arXiv:1407.8171 [hep-th]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015
[16]

Georgiou (4 2026)arXiv:2604.19881 [hep-th]

G. Georgiou (4 2026)arXiv:2604.19881 [hep-th]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

[1] [1]

Karch and L

A. Karch and L. Randall,JHEP06(2001) 063,arXiv:hep-th/0105132

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

[2] [2]

Georgiou, G

G. Georgiou, G. Linardopoulos and D. Zoakos,JHEP09(2025) 105, arXiv:2506.14505 [hep-th]

arXiv 2025

[3] [3]

Georgiou and D

G. Georgiou and D. Zoakos,JHEP04(2026) 201,arXiv:2512.14853 [hep-th]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

[4] [4]

Gomis and S

J. Gomis and S. Matsuura,JHEP06(2007) 025,arXiv:0704.1657 [hep-th]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

[5] [5]

Drukker, J

N. Drukker, J. Gomis and S. Matsuura,JHEP10(2008) 048,arXiv:0805.4199 [hep-th]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

[6] [6]

Gukov and E

S. Gukov and E. Witten (12 2006)arXiv:hep-th/0612073

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

[7] [7]

Gaiotto and E

D. Gaiotto and E. Witten,J. Statist. Phys.135(2009) 789,arXiv:0804.2902 [hep-th]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

[8] [8]

N. R. Constable, J. Erdmenger, Z. Guralnik and I. Kirsch,Phys. Rev. D68(2003) 106007,arXiv:hep-th/0211222

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

[9] [9]

H. Lin, O. Lunin and J. M. Maldacena,JHEP10(2004) 025,arXiv:hep-th/0409174

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

[10] [10]

Georgiou, G

G. Georgiou, G. Linardopoulos and D. Zoakos,Phys. Rev. D108(2023) 046016, arXiv:2304.10434 [hep-th]. 20George Georgiou & Dimitrios Zoakos

arXiv 2023

[11] [11]

C. G. Callan, Jr., S. R. Coleman and R. Jackiw,Annals Phys.59(1970) 42

1970

[12] [12]

M. F. Sohnius and P. C. West,Physics Letters B100(1981) 245

1981

[13] [13]

Nagasaki and S

K. Nagasaki and S. Yamaguchi,Phys. Rev. D86(2012) 086004,arXiv:1205.1674 [hep-th]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

[14] [14]

Kristjansen, G

C. Kristjansen, G. W. Semenoff and D. Young,JHEP01(2013) 117,arXiv:1210.7015 [hep-th]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

[15] [15]

Lewkowycz and E

A. Lewkowycz and E. Perlmutter,JHEP01(2015) 080,arXiv:1407.8171 [hep-th]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

[16] [16]

Georgiou (4 2026)arXiv:2604.19881 [hep-th]

G. Georgiou (4 2026)arXiv:2604.19881 [hep-th]

Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026