Anomalous symmetries in K\"ahler geometry

Andrew Kuzovchikov; Dmitri Bykov

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 17 references

Anomalous symmetries in K\"ahler geometry

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper proves that Kähler manifolds with centrally extended Abelian isometries are locally Kähler quotients of a universal model, and that these anomalous symmetries can be gauged in generalized Kähler geometry by introducing twisted…

desk verdict Solid new local classification of centrally extended Abelian Kähler isometries; the advertised general gauging is asserted rather than proved, so the paper needs a targeted revision before I'd trust the headline claim. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.10861 v1 pith:K4TLH7S6 submitted 2026-08-11 hep-th math-phmath.DGmath.MP

Dmitri Bykov , Andrew Kuzovchikov This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-thmath-phmath.DGmath.MP MSC 53C5553D2081T60 PACS 02.40.Ky11.30.Pb

keywords centralextensionsKählergeometrygeneralizedmomentmapsHeisenbergalgebratwistedchiralsuperfieldsgaugedsigmamodelsT-duality

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

Kähler manifolds with Abelian isometries can have a classical analogue of an anomaly: the moment-map algebra closes only up to constants, i.e. is centrally extended. The paper proves that, locally, any such geometry is a Kähler quotient of a single canonical model built from independent Heisenberg blocks, and that the Kähler potential of this model can be made invariant by a generalized Kähler transformation with twisted chiral superfields. It then exhibits the gauging of the full centrally extended symmetry using a combined real-plus-semi-chiral multiplet, thereby bypassing a long-standing obstruction to gauging in ordinary Kähler superspace. The result turns anomalous symmetries into explicit recipes for generalized Kähler quotients and T-duals.

What carries the argument

The central object is the central-extension cocycle $C(W,V)=i(\nabla_V f_W-\nabla_W f_V+f_{[W,V]})$ measuring the failure of moment-map Poisson brackets to close; for Abelian algebras the paper block-diagonalizes it to $C_{k,n}$, a sum of copies of the Heisenberg algebra. The canonical Kähler potential (3.30) is the explicit local model carrying that extension. The second mechanism is the generalized Kähler transformation: non-invariant holomorphic shifts are absorbed into total-derivative terms built from twisted chiral superfields, producing an invariant potential. Gauging then uses the $(V,X)$ multiplet, with $V$ a real gauge superfield and $X$ a semi-chiral superfield.

What would settle it

Take the canonical model $N$ with $k=2$ Heisenberg blocks, write the Section 4.4 gauged potential by superimposing the two block gauged potentials, and compute the equations of motion for the two gauge fields; cross-block terms or a failure of the Kähler quotient by the kernel Killing fields to commute with the gauged potential would falsify the general claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Proposition 6 is the geometric core: any Kähler manifold with an isometric holomorphic action of an Abelian algebra $\mathfrak{g}$ whose central extension is $C_{k,n}$ is, locally, a Kähler quotient of the canonical geometry $N$ by $\mathbb{R}^m$ of Killing fields in $\mathrm{Ker}\,C$. The model $N$ has the explicit Kähler potential (3.30), in which the anomalous part is a sum of $k$ Heisenberg terms and the remaining freedom is an invariant function $K_0$. Proposition 7 then states that this potential can be made invariant under the full symmetry by a generalized Kähler transformation that introduces $k$ twisted chiral superfields, one per Heisenberg block; once invariant, the symmetry is gauged in generalized Kähler geometry using the $(V,X)$ multiplet, a real gauge superfield paired with a semi-chiral superfield. The paper works out the gauged potentials, quotients, and T-duals explicitly for the two Heisenberg cases, and reduces the general case to these blocks.

Load-bearing premise

The general gauging claim rests on the assertion, made in Section 4.4 without proof, that the gauged potentials for the separate Heisenberg blocks can be superimposed block by block and that this superposition is compatible with the Kähler quotient by the kernel Killing fields.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Every local anomalous Abelian geometry is built from the universal model (3.30) by an ordinary Kähler quotient, so the obstruction to gauging is a property of the model and not of the individual geometry.
Adding exactly $k$ twisted chiral superfields turns the non-invariant Kähler potential into a generalized-Kähler-invariant one, one field per Heisenberg block.
The $(V,X)$ multiplet gauges the full centrally extended symmetry, so quotients and T-duals of these models are well-defined in generalized Kähler geometry.
Both Heisenberg cases (independent and dependent holomorphic parts) have explicit gauged potentials, and the general case is obtained by superimposing the block potentials.

Reading between the lines

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

The local classification suggests a fuller global statement: if the Kähler quotient in Proposition 6 can be performed with complete metrics, the canonical model (3.30) would generate complete anomalous geometries; completeness of the quotient is not addressed in the paper.
The block-superposition step in Section 4.4 is the natural place to test the general gauging claim, since whether gauge fields from different Heisenberg blocks interact through $K_0$ is left implicit.
The same twisted-chiral mechanism may extend to non-Abelian solvable symmetry algebras whose central extensions decompose into Heisenberg factors, although the paper only proves the Abelian case.
A concrete check of the classification would be to apply the quotient formula (4.22) to the $\mathrm{SL}(2,\mathbb{R})\ltimes\mathbb{C}$ example of Section 3.1.1 and compare with the known geometry of the universal elliptic curve.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Short version: Proposition 6 is a real result and worth having; the general gauging in Section 4.4 is asserted rather than proved, and that gap is the difference between a paper that establishes its advertised claim and one that sketches it.

The local classification of Kähler metrics with an Abelian centrally extended isometry algebra is the paper's core contribution. Proposition 3 (vanishing central extension implies trivial cocycle for Abelian g) is clean, the cohomological framing in Section 2.1 is useful, and the flat-space examples make the obstruction concrete. Proposition 6, which realizes any such M as a Kähler quotient of the canonical geometry N by an R^m of Killing fields in Ker C, is a genuinely new local normal form; the proof by adding m extra u-directions and then quotienting follows the pattern of Section 3.2 and looks correct. Proposition 7, constructing an invariant potential with k twisted chiral fields via a generalized Kähler transformation, also goes beyond the special cases in [BKK25] and is the right tool for the gauging.

The soft spot is exactly where your stress-test put it: Section 4.4. The paper claims that the full gauged potential for arbitrary M is obtained by superimposing the per-block gauged potentials on N and then taking the R^m quotient, but that compatibility is never shown. The U' moment-map equations involve the same K0 that appears in the gauged potential (4.14), and integrating out the U' gauge multiplets could in principle modify the effective potential for the g gauge fields. Proposition 7 similarly constructs K2 on N; its behavior under the quotient is not checked. This is not a fatal flaw in the local classification, but it is a real gap in the advertised general gauging recipe. A referee should ask for either a proof of the commutation of the quotient and the gauging, or a clear statement that the general gauging is a conjecture/sketch with the single-block cases fully worked out.

Also worth noting: the superspace machinery is taken from the authors' own [BKK25], and the parametrization of solutions to the covariant chirality constraints is delegated there. For a paper that aims to be self-contained, that is a downside, though not a damning one given the companion paper exists. Some of the computations in Case 2 are terse enough that I could not verify them line by line; the reader mentions a possible factor-of-two issue, which I did not confirm, but it reinforces that the Case-2 section deserves a close read.

Overall: the local geometry half is solid and new; the gauging half is plausible but under-proved. I would send this to a referee with a request to focus on Section 4.4 and the Case 2 computations. The paper deserves serious referee time, and the authors should be able to fill the gap.

Recommendation: engage, but condition acceptance on a complete derivation of the general gauging.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies Kähler manifolds equipped with an Abelian algebra of holomorphic Killing fields whose moment maps form a centrally extended Lie algebra, termed 'anomalous symmetries'. The main results are: (1) for Abelian g, a vanishing central extension is equivalent to the possibility of making the Kähler potential invariant (Corollary 1); (2) a local normal form theorem (Proposition 6): every such geometry is locally a Kähler quotient of a canonical model N, with potential (3.30) and central extension C_{k,n+m}, by an R^m subgroup generated by fields in Ker C; (3) a generalized Kähler construction (Proposition 7) that renders the potential invariant by introducing k twisted chiral superfields, followed by a gauging recipe in generalized Kähler geometry using the (V,X) multiplet. Section 4 works out the two Heisenberg cases explicitly and gives quotient and T-duality formulas, and Section 4.4 sketches the general case by 'superimposing' block-wise gauged pieces.

Significance. The local classification is well executed and is the paper's strongest asset: the normal form (3.30) and the quotient statement in Proposition 6 are explicitly formulated and mostly proved in the text, and Corollary 1 cleanly captures when the usual Kähler gauge-invariance obstruction is absent. If the gauging construction is valid, the paper opens the way to quotient and T-duality computations for a class of geometries that were previously thought to resist off-shell gauging. The paper does not ship code or machine-checked proofs, but the local-geometry part is checkable by direct computation. The main caveat is the gauging part: the general recipe depends on an unproven commutation of block-wise gauging with the R^m quotient, and the (V,X) multiplet technology is imported from a companion preprint. These points are load-bearing for the advertised claim that the symmetries 'may be gauged' in generalized Kähler geometry.

major comments (2)

[Section 4.4] The step 'the full gauged potential is obtained by superimposing these pieces' is asserted without proof. Proposition 6 realizes a general M as a Kähler quotient N /// R^m with U'_ℓ ∈ Ker C, and the canonical potential (3.30) has K0 depending on the U'_ℓ coordinates as well as on the g gauge-invariant combinations. When the U'_ℓ gauge fields are integrated out after gauging g, the moment-map condition for U'_ℓ can in principle depend on the g gauge fields, and the paper does not show that the staged reduction commutes with the gauging. A Legendre-transform argument or an explicit check for a nontrivial K0 is needed; without it the advertised general gauging is not demonstrated.
[Section 4.2, Eq. (4.14)] The construction of the gauged potential uses the fact that the solutions of the covariant chirality constraints (4.13) are parametrized by standard (twisted) chiral fields plus the gauge superfields V^z, V^w and semi-chiral X, and that the superconnections are expressed through those fields. This is the central mechanism of the gauging, but it is delegated to the companion preprint [BKK25] and not reproduced. Since the present paper claims to show that the symmetries 'may be gauged', the reader should be able to verify this step, or the paper should state explicitly which results are imported.

minor comments (4)

[Eq. (3.6)] The displayed formula for K in case (2) is missing a division or parentheses; it should presumably read K = -(ic/2)(z-\bar z)^2/(\lambda-\bar\lambda)+K0, as confirmed by Eq. (A.9).
[Abstract] The word 'sypersymmetry' should be 'supersymmetry'.
[Proposition 7 proof] The verification that K2 in (4.9) is invariant under the full symmetry algebra is only sketched; the action of the real vector fields on the twisted chiral fields S_A and the commutation of the exponentiated operators with the K1-invariance are not spelled out. Adding the two-line computation would improve readability and self-containedness.
[Section 2.1] The cohomological reformulation (2.7)-(2.9) is terse; a one-sentence explanation of why f is a 1-cochain with values in holomorphic functions and why the constancy of C places the cocycle in H^2(g,R) would help readers not familiar with Chevalley-Eilenberg cohomology.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Local classification is self-contained, but the advertised gauging recipe leans on the same authors' [BKK25] for the (V,X) multiplet and chirality-constraint solution, with an additional unproven superimposing step in Section 4.4.

self citation load bearing [Section 4.2, after Eq. (4.13); see also Section 4.1 and Section 4.4]
"One can then show that the solutions to (4.13) are parametrized by standard (twisted) chiral fields and additional gauge superfields: the real superfields V^z, V^w and the semi-chiral superfield X. The superconnections may be expressed through the latter [BKK25]."

The advertised gauging of centrally extended (anomalous) symmetries rests on solving the modified chirality constraints (4.13) and expressing the superconnections in terms of the (V,X) multiplet. That solution is not derived in this paper; it is cited to [BKK25], a preprint by the same authors (Bykov, Kutsubin, Kuzovchikov). The general recipe in Section 4.4 then uses this block formula (4.14) as its building block. Thus the central gauging claim is supported by a self-citation rather than by a self-contained derivation: without [BKK25], Eqs. (4.14)/(4.19) would be unproved ansaetze. This is load-bearing self-citation, even though the local classification (Prop. 6) and the invariant-potential construction (Prop. 7) are derived in the present paper.

full rationale

The paper's local classification (Propositions 4-6) is derived from standard symplectic and Poisson-geometric arguments: the moment-map Poisson bracket, the cocycle C, and the explicit normal forms (3.5)/(3.6) are obtained by solving the relevant PDEs, and Proposition 6 constructs N as M x C^m with a trivial quadratic extension, so the Kaehler quotient returns M. This part is self-contained and not circular. Proposition 7 gives an explicit formula (4.9) for an invariant potential using twisted chiral fields, and the difference K2 - K1 is exhibited as a generalized Kaehler transformation; this is also an independent construction. The main circularity concern is the gauging step: the multiplet (V,X), the solution of the modified chirality constraints, and the resulting gauged potentials (4.14)/(4.19) are imported from the same authors' preprint [BKK25]. Since this citation is load-bearing for the advertised claim that anomalous symmetries may be gauged, the paper's gauging result is not fully self-contained. Additionally, Section 4.4 asserts without proof that the full gauged potential is obtained by superimposing the block-wise gauged pieces and that this survives the R^m Kaehler quotient of Proposition 6; this is a gap in the argument rather than a circular reduction to inputs, and it is flagged here for completeness. Overall, the classification has independent content, but the gauging claim is partially dependent on a same-author citation, so a moderate score of 4 is appropriate.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no fitted constants; its numerical parameters are inputs. The main external load is the gauge-multiplet construction from [BKK25], here treated as an axiom. The only new mathematical object, the canonical geometry N, is a construction rather than a postulated physical entity.

free parameters (2)

central charge c = real constant
Input value of the central extension C(V,W)=c; not fitted to data.
FI parameters xi, zeta = real constants
Fayet-Iliopoulos parameters in the quotient and T-duality constructions; chosen by hand.

assumptions (4)

standard math Moment-map Poisson bracket formula with central term C(W,V)=i(∇_V f_W − ∇_W f_V + f_[W,V])
Cited to [Sou97, LM87, Hul86, Arn78]; used as the starting point for all central-extension computations.
domain assumption The no-go theorem that non-trivial central extensions obstruct naive gauging in N=(2,2) Kähler superspace
Motivates the need for generalized Kähler gauging; not rederived in the paper.
domain assumption The extended gauge multiplet (V,X) with real gauge superfield V and semi-chiral X exists and solves the covariant chirality constraints (4.13)
Section 4.2 delegates the parametrization of solutions to [BKK25]; this is load-bearing for all gauging formulas.
standard math Kähler quotient via Legendre transform produces the quotient Kähler potential
Used in Proposition 5 and Appendix A; standard construction cf. [Hit87, Lin12].

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Anomalous symmetries in K\"ahler geometry." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/K4TLH7S6

@misc{pith2026260810861,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Anomalous symmetries in K\"ahler geometry},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/K4TLH7S6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.10861}
}

abstract

We initiate a study of centrally extended ($\textit{anomalous}$) symmetries in K\"ahler geometry, focusing on the simplest, and most ubiquitous, Abelian case. In particular, we provide a local description of the geometry admitting such isometries. A long-standing no-go theorem asserts that there is an obstruction to gauging such symmetries in the purely K\"ahler framework. Utilizing the language of sypersymmetry, we then show that these symmetries may be gauged within the setup of generalized K\"ahler geometry. Our results may be applied to quotients, T-dualities, etc.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

17 extracted references · 9 canonical work pages

[1]

An Introduction to T duality in string theory

[AAGL95] E. Alvarez, L. Alvarez-Gaume, and Y. Lozano. “An Introduction to T duality in string theory”.Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl.41 (1995), pp. 1–20. arXiv:hep-th/9410237. [Arn78] V. I. Arnold.Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics. Springer New York,

arXiv 1995
[8]

Generalized K¨ ahler manifolds and off-shell supersymmetry

arXiv:0705.3201 [hep-th]. [Lin`07b] U. Lindstr¨ om, M. Roˇ cek, R. von Unge, and M. Zabzine. “Generalized K¨ ahler manifolds and off-shell supersymmetry”.Commun. Math. Phys.269 (2007), pp. 833–849. arXiv: hep-th/0512164. [Lin`09] U. Lindstr¨ om, M. Roˇ cek, I. Ryb, R. von Unge, and M. Zabzine. “Nonabelian Gener- alized Gauge Multiplets”.JHEP02 (2009), p

arXiv 2007
[9]

NonlinearσModels and Their Gauging in and Out of Superspace

[Hul`86] C. M. Hull, A. Karlhede, U. Lindstr¨ om, and M. Roˇ cek. “NonlinearσModels and Their Gauging in and Out of Superspace”.Nucl. Phys. B266 (1986), pp. 1–44. [K¨ ah03] E. K¨ ahler.Mathematische Werke / Mathematical Works. Ed. by R. Berndt and O. Riemenschneider. Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter,

work page 1986
[10]

Raum–Zeit–Individuum

[K¨ ah92] E. K¨ ahler. “Raum–Zeit–Individuum”.Rendiconti dell’Accademia Nazionale delle Scienze detta dei XL. Memorie di Matematica. 5th ser. 16 (1992), pp. 115–177. [Lan`95] P. V. Landshoff, D. R. Nelson, D. W. Sciama, and S. Weinberg.Lie groups, lie algebras, cohomology and some applications in physics. Cambridge monographs on mathematical physics. Camb...

work page 1992
[20]

Supersymmetric Sigma Model Geometry

arXiv:0808.1535 [hep-th]. [Lin12] U. Lindstr¨ om. “Supersymmetric Sigma Model Geometry”.Symmetry4.3 (Aug. 2012), 474–506. [Lit19] A. V. Litvinov. “Integrableglpn|nqToda field theory and its sigma-model dual”.Pisma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz.110.11 (2019), pp. 723–726. arXiv:1901.04799 [hep-th]. [LL63] J.-M. Levy-Leblond. “Galilei Group and Nonrelativistic Quantu...

arXiv 2019
[31]

Central Charges in the Canonical Realization of Asymptotic Symmetries: An Example from Three-Dimensional Gravity

[BH86] J. D. Brown and M. Henneaux. “Central Charges in the Canonical Realization of Asymptotic Symmetries: An Example from Three-Dimensional Gravity”.Commun. Math. Phys.104 (1986), pp. 207–226. [BK26] D. Bykov and V. Krivorol. “Holomorphic Quantization in Constant Curvature Back- grounds” (Feb. 2026). arXiv:2602.22984 [hep-th]. [BKK25] D. Bykov, S. Kutsu...

work page arXiv 1986
[35]

AdS$_5$ vacua from type IIB supergravity on $T^{1,1}$

arXiv:1611.02982 [hep-th]. [LM87] P. Libermann and C.-M. Marle.Symplectic Geometry and Analytical Mechanics. Springer Netherlands,

work page Pith review arXiv
[86]

On classicalq-deformations of integrable sigma- models

arXiv:2002.11144 [hep-th]. [DMV13] F. Delduc, M. Magro, and B. Vicedo. “On classicalq-deformations of integrable sigma- models”.JHEP11 (2013), p

arXiv 2013

Show all 17 references

[150]

The Large Vector Multiplet and Gauging p2,2qσ-models

arXiv:2005.01812 [hep-th]. [BLR26] D. Bykov, U. Lindstr¨ om, and M. Roˇ cek. “The Large Vector Multiplet and Gauging p2,2qσ-models” (May 2026). arXiv:2605.18536 [hep-th]. [BLR88] T. Buscher, U. Lindstr¨ om, and M. Roˇ cek. “New SupersymmetricσModels With Wess- Zumino Terms”.Ph...

1988 arXiv
[192]

Operator Anomaly for the Gauss Law

arXiv:1308.3581 [hep-th]. [Fad84] L. D. Faddeev. “Operator Anomaly for the Gauss Law”.Phys. Lett. B145 (1984), pp. 81–84. [FS86] L. D. Faddeev and S. L. Shatashvili. “Realization of the Schwinger Term in the Gauss Law and the Possibility of Correct Quantization of a Theory wit...

1984 arXiv
[1978]

On Unitary Ray Representations of Continuous Groups

[Bar54] V. Bargmann. “On Unitary Ray Representations of Continuous Groups”.Annals of Mathematics59.1 (1954), pp. 1–46. [Ber84] R. Berndt.Some Differential Operators in the Theory of Jacobi Forms. Preprint IHES/M/84/10. Institut des Hautes ´Etudes Scientifiques (IH ´ES), 1984, p

1954
[1987]

N=2 sigma model with twisted mass and superpotential: Central charges and solitons

[LS03] A. Losev and M. Shifman. “N=2 sigma model with twisted mass and superpotential: Central charges and solitons”.Phys. Rev. D68 (2003), p. 045006. arXiv:hep - th / 0304003. [McD88] D. McDuff. “The moment map for circle actions on sympletic manifolds”.Journal of Geometry an...

2003
[1997]

Supersymmetry Algebras That Include Topological Charges

[WO78] E. Witten and D. I. Olive. “Supersymmetry Algebras That Include Topological Charges”.Phys. Lett. B78 (1978), pp. 97–101. [Zum79] B. Zumino. “Supersymmetry and K¨ ahler Manifolds”.Phys. Lett. B87 (1979), p

1978
[2003]

Generalized K¨ ahler geometry

arXiv: math/0401221. [Gua11] M. Gualtieri. “Generalized K¨ ahler geometry”.Annals of Mathematics174.1 (July 2011), 75–123. arXiv:1007.3485 [math.DG]. [Hit03] N. Hitchin. “Generalized Calabi-Yau Manifolds”.The Quarterly Journal of Mathemat- ics54.3 (Sept. 2003), 281–308. [Hit`8...

2011 arXiv
[2004]

Duality, quotients, and currents

[R V92] M. Roˇ cek and E. Verlinde. “Duality, quotients, and currents”.Nuclear Physics B373.3 (Apr. 1992), 630–646. 23 [Sou97] J. Souriau.Structure of Dynamical Systems: A Symplectic View of Physics. Progress in Mathematics - Birkh¨ auser. Birkh¨ auser,

1992
[2011]

Integrable deformation ofCP n and generalised K¨ ahler geometry

arXiv:1106.1747 [math.DG]. [Dem`20] S. Demulder, F. Hassler, G. Piccinini, and D. C. Thompson. “Integrable deformation ofCP n and generalised K¨ ahler geometry”.JHEP10 (2020), p

2020 arXiv
[2012]

New N = (2,2) vector multiplets

[Lin`07a] U. Lindstr¨ om, M. Roˇ cek, I. Ryb, R. von Unge, and M. Zabzine. “New N = (2,2) vector multiplets”.JHEP08 (2007), p

2007

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

An Introduction to T duality in string theory

[AAGL95] E. Alvarez, L. Alvarez-Gaume, and Y. Lozano. “An Introduction to T duality in string theory”.Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl.41 (1995), pp. 1–20. arXiv:hep-th/9410237. [Arn78] V. I. Arnold.Mathematical Methods of Classical Mechanics. Springer New York,

arXiv 1995

[2] [8]

Generalized K¨ ahler manifolds and off-shell supersymmetry

arXiv:0705.3201 [hep-th]. [Lin`07b] U. Lindstr¨ om, M. Roˇ cek, R. von Unge, and M. Zabzine. “Generalized K¨ ahler manifolds and off-shell supersymmetry”.Commun. Math. Phys.269 (2007), pp. 833–849. arXiv: hep-th/0512164. [Lin`09] U. Lindstr¨ om, M. Roˇ cek, I. Ryb, R. von Unge, and M. Zabzine. “Nonabelian Gener- alized Gauge Multiplets”.JHEP02 (2009), p

arXiv 2007

[3] [9]

NonlinearσModels and Their Gauging in and Out of Superspace

[Hul`86] C. M. Hull, A. Karlhede, U. Lindstr¨ om, and M. Roˇ cek. “NonlinearσModels and Their Gauging in and Out of Superspace”.Nucl. Phys. B266 (1986), pp. 1–44. [K¨ ah03] E. K¨ ahler.Mathematische Werke / Mathematical Works. Ed. by R. Berndt and O. Riemenschneider. Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter,

work page 1986

[4] [10]

Raum–Zeit–Individuum

[K¨ ah92] E. K¨ ahler. “Raum–Zeit–Individuum”.Rendiconti dell’Accademia Nazionale delle Scienze detta dei XL. Memorie di Matematica. 5th ser. 16 (1992), pp. 115–177. [Lan`95] P. V. Landshoff, D. R. Nelson, D. W. Sciama, and S. Weinberg.Lie groups, lie algebras, cohomology and some applications in physics. Cambridge monographs on mathematical physics. Camb...

work page 1992

[5] [20]

Supersymmetric Sigma Model Geometry

arXiv:0808.1535 [hep-th]. [Lin12] U. Lindstr¨ om. “Supersymmetric Sigma Model Geometry”.Symmetry4.3 (Aug. 2012), 474–506. [Lit19] A. V. Litvinov. “Integrableglpn|nqToda field theory and its sigma-model dual”.Pisma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz.110.11 (2019), pp. 723–726. arXiv:1901.04799 [hep-th]. [LL63] J.-M. Levy-Leblond. “Galilei Group and Nonrelativistic Quantu...

arXiv 2019

[6] [31]

Central Charges in the Canonical Realization of Asymptotic Symmetries: An Example from Three-Dimensional Gravity

[BH86] J. D. Brown and M. Henneaux. “Central Charges in the Canonical Realization of Asymptotic Symmetries: An Example from Three-Dimensional Gravity”.Commun. Math. Phys.104 (1986), pp. 207–226. [BK26] D. Bykov and V. Krivorol. “Holomorphic Quantization in Constant Curvature Back- grounds” (Feb. 2026). arXiv:2602.22984 [hep-th]. [BKK25] D. Bykov, S. Kutsu...

work page arXiv 1986

[7] [35]

AdS$_5$ vacua from type IIB supergravity on $T^{1,1}$

arXiv:1611.02982 [hep-th]. [LM87] P. Libermann and C.-M. Marle.Symplectic Geometry and Analytical Mechanics. Springer Netherlands,

work page Pith review arXiv

[8] [86]

On classicalq-deformations of integrable sigma- models

arXiv:2002.11144 [hep-th]. [DMV13] F. Delduc, M. Magro, and B. Vicedo. “On classicalq-deformations of integrable sigma- models”.JHEP11 (2013), p

arXiv 2013