Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 88 references

A four-dimensional dyonic black hole can be represented as a T-fold, with non-geometric data entering only through global patching and the entropy and BPS index unchanged from the geometric seed.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

A four-charge type-IIB black hole is embedded in a T-duality-patched T-fold compactification; entropy, BPS index, and the O(6,6) charge invariant are exactly preserved.

T0 review reviewed 2026-08-01 challenge →

load-bearing objection A clear, honest paper that constructs a T-fold representative of a known black-hole charge orbit; the entropy statement is essentially duality invariance restated, and the main unresolved point is the 'no gauging' claim, which is asserted rather than shown. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2607.19443 v1 pith:EBSMC6UJ submitted 2026-07-21 hep-th

A T-Fold Black Hole in Doubled Type IIB

Mir Faizal , Arshid Shabir This is my paper
classification hep-th
keywords T-folddouble field theoryT-duality monodromyblack hole entropyquartic charge invariantEinstein-Maxwell-dilatonReissner-Nordströmnear-horizon AdS2×S2
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

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 constructs a T-fold representative of a dyonic black hole in doubled type-IIB theory, starting from the ordinary F1-P-NS5-KKM toroidal seed and imposing an integral parabolic T-duality monodromy on an active doubled three-torus. It claims the non-geometric data enter only through global patching, so the local equations, the attractor, and the entropy are exactly those of the geometric seed; entropy is set by the O(6,6)-invariant quartic form Δ(Q,P), not by the monodromy integer. The construction separates the global monodromy from the conserved four-dimensional charges that source the Reissner-Nordström-type metric, and displays a minimal Einstein-Maxwell-dilaton slice with a running scalar and an equal-charge constant-scalar branch. If correct, this gives a concrete example of a non-geometric compactification supporting an asymptotically flat black hole with unchanged thermodynamic and supersymmetric data.

Core claim

The central claim is that applying the integral parabolic beta-shift g_Q(n) as a global transition function on T^3_Q, embedded into O(6,6;Z), maps the type-IIB F1-P-NS5-KKM black hole to a T-fold representative of the same charge orbit. Because h_Q preserves the Narain bilinear products, the quartic invariant obeys Δ(Q_Q,P_Q)=Δ(Q,P), and with the entropy formula S_BH=(π/G4)√|Δ| the horizon area, the BPS index, and the near-horizon AdS2×S2 attractor are unchanged. The four-dimensional gauge fields become sections of a doubled Kaluza-Klein/winding bundle; the non-geometric monodromy does not act as a stress-tensor source. The equal-charge EMD slice is explicitly solved and shown to be the stan

What carries the argument

The key object is the parabolic T-duality element g_Q(n) = [[1, n ε23],[0, 1]] in O(3,3;Z), embedded diagonally into O(6,6;Z) as h_Q(n). Used as a transition function on the doubled three-torus, it defines the T-fold patching; the invariant statement is that h_Q leaves the Narain products Q^2, P^2, and Q·P unchanged, hence Δ is invariant. The exact T-duality patching theorem transports the local seed solution to a global T-fold: local equations transform covariantly, the stress-tensor contraction and generalized metric patch tensorially, and the cocycle condition holds for integer n.

Load-bearing premise

The construction assumes that imposing the parabolic T-duality only as a global transition function, without a generalized Scherk-Schwarz reduction, leaves the four-dimensional equations exactly those of the geometric seed, introducing no gauging or scalar potential.

What would settle it

Carry out the explicit four-dimensional reduction of the doubled theory with the beta-monodromy transition function and compare the resulting action with (6.1). If a scalar potential, a gauged derivative, or any extra source term appears, the explicit EMD solution (6.6)-(6.10) will not solve the twisted compactification's equations, and the T-fold representative would not be a solution of the doubled theory as claimed.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • The T-fold representative is a genuine solution of the doubled theory with the same entropy and BPS index as the geometric seed, so non-geometric monodromy does not change the black-hole thermodynamics.
  • The Reissner-Nordström-type term in the external metric is sourced by ordinary four-dimensional electric and magnetic field strengths in the doubled vector bundle, not by an internal algebraic Q-flux, so non-geometric flux need not act as a local stress tensor.
  • In the equal-charge limit the EMD slice reduces to a constant-scalar Reissner-Nordström-like metric with heat capacity positive between Θ and √3 Θ and negative above √3 Θ.
  • The extremal near-horizon geometry is locally AdS2 × S2 times the compact tori, with the active three-torus globally patched by T-duality; the attractor moduli depend only on charges.
  • Since the indexed degeneracy is constant on the integral duality orbit, microscopic counting in the geometric frame transfers unchanged to the T-fold representative.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the pure-patching assumption is correct, the construction supplies a general template for building T-fold black holes from any toroidal seed carrying a Narain charge orbit; this prediction is testable by performing the full four-dimensional reduction of the doubled theory with the beta monodromy and checking that no gauging or scalar potential appears.
  • A probe charged under the doubled Kaluza-Klein/winding bundle would see patch-dependent gauge potentials, so the monodromy could in principle be detected by scattering or Wilson-loop type observables; this distinguishes the T-fold from an ordinary geometric compactification.
  • The entropy invariance here is orbit-level; an independent check would compute the BPS index directly in the non-geometric frame rather than transporting it from the seed.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper constructs a T-fold representative of a four-dimensional dyonic black-hole charge orbit in doubled type-IIB theory. Starting from the geometric F1-P-NS5-KKM toroidal seed, the authors impose an integral parabolic O(3,3;Z) beta-shift monodromy on an active doubled three-torus and use it purely as a global transition function. They argue that the local equations, the N=4 quartic invariant, the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy, and the BPS index are unchanged because the transformation is an exact T-duality. The paper also displays an Einstein-Maxwell-dilaton (EMD) slice, including a running-scalar branch and an equal-charge Reissner-Nordström-like limit, and computes the extremal near-horizon geometry as locally AdS2 × S2 with the compact factor globally T-duality patched.

Significance. If the construction is fully justified, the paper provides a clean example separating the global non-geometric monodromy of a compactification from the conserved four-dimensional charges sourcing a black hole, and it offers a useful reminder that the monodromy integer does not by itself fix the horizon area. The linear-algebra core is transparent and correct: the invariance of Δ(Q,P) under h_Q in Eqs. (5.2)-(5.5), the symplectic pairing preservation in Eq. (3.10), and the standard EMD/entropy-function calculations in §9 and Appendix A are all executed carefully. The paper also makes its limitations explicit, for instance restricting the stability statement in §8 to a neutral probe scalar. The main value is pedagogical and conceptual: it formulates a well-known duality-orbit statement in T-fold language and identifies the EMD slice explicitly.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3, Theorem 1 and following paragraph] The central premise that the constant parabolic monodromy, imposed purely as a transition function, induces no 4D gauging, scalar potential, or additional source terms is asserted but not demonstrated. The proof of Theorem 1 shows local O(3,3) covariance and tensor patching of the stress tensor (3.11) and generalized metric (3.22), but it does not perform the actual reduction of the doubled theory on the T-fold to verify that the effective 4D action is the ungauged EMD action (6.1). Standard reductions with constant duality twists can generically generate gaugings and potentials; the fact that the seed's constant generalized metric is not invariant under g_Q(n) makes this a non-trivial point. Without a proof or an explicit reference establishing that this flat-bundle construction has vanishing potential on the EMD slice, the EMD solution (6.6)-(6.10) has not been shown to solve the T-fol
  2. [§9, Eq. (9.15)] The equality of the indexed degeneracy d(Q_Q,P_Q)=d(Q,P) is asserted rather than derived. A T-fold with a non-trivial O(3,3;Z) monodromy is not obtained from the geometric toroidal compactification by a single global duality transformation; it is a different global background. Local T-duality covariance of the equations does not by itself imply that the microscopic BPS index in the T-fold background equals the index in the geometric F1-P-NS5-KKM counting frame. The macroscopic entropy claim follows from the invariant Δ and the standard entropy formula without this additional assumption, but the paper's informal theorem explicitly includes the BPS index. Please either provide an index computation in the T-fold frame, or cite a theorem establishing index invariance under such monodromies, or weaken the claim.
  3. [§6 and §3, Eqs. (3.15)-(3.18)] The consistency of the EMD truncation is not established. The paper verifies that the proposed fields (6.6)-(6.10) solve the EMD equations of motion in Appendix A, but this is not the same as showing that the one-scalar/one-vector slice is a consistent truncation of the full T-fold reduced theory. If additional moduli or vector fields couple to the active section v^M_Q through the generalized metric M_MN, setting them to zero could be inconsistent. The paper should either demonstrate that the reduced theory decouples these modes on the chosen slice, or state more carefully that the EMD solution is only a formal slice of the local doubled vector system rather than a proven solution of the full compactified theory.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§2, Eqs. (2.23)-(2.25)] The coordinate-dependent local representative U_Q(σ1) and the associated Q^1_{23}=n are potentially confusing. If taken literally as a field redefinition on a patch, the fields acquire σ1-dependence and the local equations are not those of the seed. The paper should state explicitly that this is a formal representative of the monodromy and that the actual construction uses constant local patches with transition functions g_Q(n).
  2. [§3, Theorem 1 proof] The statement that on triple overlaps the transition functions are 'powers of a single integral element, so the cocycle condition is satisfied' is too terse. A generic atlas with several patches requires a careful assignment of powers of g_Q(n) (with orientation-dependent signs) to satisfy the cocycle condition. The authors should spell out the atlas or replace this with a standard flat-bundle argument.
  3. [§2, Eq. (2.26)] The notation h_Q(n)=diag(g_Q(n),1_6) is correct for active doubled (6-dimensional) and spectator doubled (6-dimensional) blocks, but the text should clarify that the spectator block is the identity on the spectator *doubled* three-torus, not on six spectator directions in the physical section.
  4. [Appendix A, Eq. (A.14)] The flux index convention is inconsistent: Eq. (2.25) writes Q^1_{23} while Eq. (A.14) writes F^{23}_1=n. Please fix a single convention for the Q-flux indices and define the antisymmetrization once.
  5. [Conclusion] The reference cluster [75,76,82,87,88] is cited for 'swampland bounds', but refs. [75,76] are Wald and Iyer-Wald on Noether charge entropy. Please correct the citation grouping.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the entropy-invariance claim is a direct O(6,6) identity with independently imported entropy formulas, and no fitted parameter or author self-citation is load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper's central chain is: seed F1-P-NS5-KKM charges define Δ(Q,P) = Q²P² − (Q·P)²; an integral parabolic duality h_Q preserves the bilinear form L, so (5.2)–(5.5) give Δ(Q_Q,P_Q) = Δ(Q,P); the entropy formula S = (π/G₄)√|Δ| is imported from standard four-charge black-hole literature (Eqs. 2.13–2.14), not derived from the T-fold construction. Thus the entropy equality is a direct group-theoretic identity, not a fitted or renamed input. The EMD slice (6.6)–(6.10) is verified against the equations of motion in Appendix A, and the near-horizon entropy function (9.9)–(9.13) independently reproduces the same entropy. The monodromy integer n is not used to determine the horizon area, and the paper explicitly disclaims that n fixes the entropy. No self-citation chain is load-bearing: the references are standard external literature, and no uniqueness theorem from the authors is invoked. The weakest point is the §3 premise that a pure transition-function monodromy induces no scalar potential or gauging; but that is an unproven correctness assumption, not a circular reduction to the paper's target result. The paper even explicitly cautions that the construction is deliberately not based on a Scherk-Schwarz potential. Therefore no definitional, fitted, or self-citation circularity is present.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 6 axioms · 0 invented entities

The paper's own mathematical input is minimal: a known seed, a known duality transformation, and a known EMD solution. The physics (entropy formula, index invariance, DFT framework, EMD family) is inherited from the cited literature. Free choices are the integer monodromy n (inert for the invariants) and the continuous EMD parameters; the constants c_A that would make charges dimensionful are left unspecified. The only paper-specific premise is the pure-patching no-gauging assumption. No new particles, forces, fields, or conserved quantities are introduced: the T-fold representative, Q-frame and doubled charge local system are presentations of existing structures, not new entities with independent falsifiable handles.

free parameters (3)
  • n (monodromy integer) = arbitrary integer n ∈ Z
    Parabolic beta-shift monodromy (Eq. 2.20) labelling the T-fold compactification. The paper shows the invariants do not depend on n (§5), so it is a free choice of the construction, not a fitted quantity.
  • M (EMD ADM mass) = free (continuous)
    Parameter of the non-extremal EMD family (Eq. 6.8); related to charges via 2MΣ = P²−Q² and to the extremal equal-charge branch by M = Θ. A standard solution parameter, not fitted.
  • c_A (harmonic-function coefficients) = unspecified
    Coefficients in r_A = c_A N_A (Appendix A), "determined by the compactification units and the type of charge" but never specified; the paper's invariant statements are designed to be independent of them.
axioms (6)
  • domain assumption T-duality (O(d,d;Z)) is an exact symmetry of string theory, and duality-patched local solutions define consistent T-fold backgrounds.
    Used throughout; Theorem 1's existence claim rests on this.
  • domain assumption Local DFT equations are O(3,3)-covariant and the strong constraint holds patchwise.
    Section 3: "The local DFT equations are covariant under constant O(3,3) transformations"; needed for the patching argument.
  • domain assumption The entropy of the four-charge type-II orbit is S = (π/G₄)√|Δ| with Δ = Q²P² − (Q·P)².
    Imported from refs [47-50, 58-64], Eqs. (2.13)-(2.14); the paper derives none of it.
  • domain assumption The F1-P-NS5-KKM seed is mutually BPS with one-eighth preserved supersymmetry and the stated projector algebra (App. A, Eqs. A.37-A.39).
    The projector set and the asserted "one product relation" are stated, not derived.
  • domain assumption The BPS index is constant on the exact-duality orbit O(Q,P).
    Section 9, Eq. (9.15); stated as standard, no theorem cited for the T-fold setting.
  • ad hoc to paper Pure-patching monodromy induces no 4D gauging, scalar potential, or back-reaction on the external fields.
    Section 3 after Theorem 1: "No scalar potential associated with a literal lower-dimensional gauging is assumed." Load-bearing and asserted, not demonstrated — this is the weakest premise (see weakest_assumption).

reviewed 2026-08-01 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A T-Fold Black Hole in Doubled Type IIB." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/EBSMC6UJ

@misc{pith2026260719443,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A T-Fold Black Hole in Doubled Type IIB},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/EBSMC6UJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.19443}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
abstract

We construct an asymptotically flat T-fold representative of a four-dimensional dyonic black-hole charge orbit in doubled type-IIB theory. Starting from the F1-P-NS5-KKM toroidal seed, an integral parabolic T-duality monodromy is imposed on an active doubled three-torus. The non-geometric data enter only through this global patching: the Reissner-Nordstr\"om-type term is sourced by conserved four-dimensional electric and magnetic field strengths in the doubled Kaluza-Klein/winding local system, not by an internal algebraic \(Q\)-flux alone. Exact duality preserves the local equations, the BPS index, and the \(O(6,6)\)-invariant of the NS-NS/\(N=4\) charge sublattice governing the entropy. The minimal Einstein-Maxwell-dilaton slice contains a running-scalar branch and an equal-charge Reissner-Nordstr\"om limit; the extremal near-horizon region is locally \(\mathrm{AdS}_2\times S^2\), with the compact factor globally T-duality patched.

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

88 extracted references · 1 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Casimir Effects in Superstring Theories,

    K. Kikkawa and M. Yamasaki, “Casimir Effects in Superstring Theories,”Phys. Lett. B 149(1984) 357–360

    1984

  2. [2]

    Vacuum energies of string compactified on torus,

    N. Sakai and I. Senda, “Vacuum energies of string compactified on torus,”Prog. Theor. Phys.75(1986) 692

    1986

  3. [3]

    New heterotic string theories in uncompactified dimensions less than ten,

    K. S. Narain, “New heterotic string theories in uncompactified dimensions less than ten,” Phys. Lett. B169(1986) 41–46

    1986

  4. [4]

    A note on toroidal compactification of heterotic string theory,

    K. S. Narain, M. H. Sarmadi, and E. Witten, “A note on toroidal compactification of heterotic string theory,”Nucl. Phys. B279(1987) 369–379

    1987

  5. [5]

    A symmetry of the string background field equations,

    T. H. Buscher, “A symmetry of the string background field equations,”Phys. Lett. B 194(1987) 59–62

    1987

  6. [6]

    Path integral derivation of quantum duality in nonlinear sigma models,

    T. H. Buscher, “Path integral derivation of quantum duality in nonlinear sigma models,” Phys. Lett. B201(1988) 466–472

    1988

  7. [7]

    Symmetries of cosmological superstring vacua,

    K. A. Meissner and G. Veneziano, “Symmetries of cosmological superstring vacua,”Phys. Lett. B267(1991) 33–36

    1991

  8. [8]

    Target space duality in string theory,

    A. Giveon, M. Porrati, and E. Rabinovici, “Target space duality in string theory,”Phys. Rept.244(1994) 77–202. – 24 –

    1994

  9. [9]

    Noncompact symmetries in string theory,

    J. Maharana and J. H. Schwarz, “Noncompact symmetries in string theory,”Nucl. Phys. B390(1993) 3–32

    1993

  10. [10]

    A geometry for non-geometric string backgrounds,

    C. M. Hull, “A geometry for non-geometric string backgrounds,”JHEP10(2005) 065

    2005

  11. [11]

    Generalised T-duality and non-geometric backgrounds,

    A. Dabholkar and C. Hull, “Generalised T-duality and non-geometric backgrounds,” JHEP05(2006) 009

    2006

  12. [12]

    Duality symmetric closed string theory and interacting chiral scalars,

    A. A. Tseytlin, “Duality symmetric closed string theory and interacting chiral scalars,” Nucl. Phys. B350(1991) 395–440

    1991

  13. [13]

    Duality symmetric string theory and the cosmological constant problem,

    A. A. Tseytlin, “Duality symmetric string theory and the cosmological constant problem,”Phys. Rev. Lett.66(1991) 545–548

    1991

  14. [14]

    Two vierbein formalism for string inspired axionic gravity,

    W. Siegel, “Two vierbein formalism for string inspired axionic gravity,”Phys. Rev. D47 (1993) 5453–5459

    1993

  15. [15]

    Superspace duality in low-energy superstrings,

    W. Siegel, “Superspace duality in low-energy superstrings,”Phys. Rev. D48(1993) 2826–2837

    1993

  16. [16]

    Double field theory,

    C. Hull and B. Zwiebach, “Double field theory,”JHEP09(2009) 099

    2009

  17. [17]

    Background independent action for double field theory,

    O. Hohm, C. Hull, and B. Zwiebach, “Background independent action for double field theory,”JHEP07(2010) 016

    2010

  18. [18]

    Generalized metric formulation of double field theory,

    O. Hohm, C. Hull, and B. Zwiebach, “Generalized metric formulation of double field theory,”JHEP08(2010) 008

    2010

  19. [19]

    Frame-like geometry of double field theory,

    O. Hohm and S. K. Kwak, “Frame-like geometry of double field theory,”J. Phys. A44 (2011) 085404

    2011

  20. [20]

    On the riemann tensor in double field theory,

    O. Hohm and B. Zwiebach, “On the riemann tensor in double field theory,”JHEP05 (2012) 126

    2012

  21. [21]

    Double field theory: a pedagogical review,

    G. Aldazabal, D. Marques, and C. Nunez, “Double field theory: a pedagogical review,” Class. Quant. Grav.30(2013) 163001

    2013

  22. [22]

    Dirac manifolds,

    T. J. Courant, “Dirac manifolds,”Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.319(1990) 631–661

    1990

  23. [23]

    Generalized calabi-yau manifolds,

    N. Hitchin, “Generalized calabi-yau manifolds,”Quart. J. Math.54no. 3, (2003) 281–308

    2003

  24. [24]

    Generalized complex geometry,

    M. Gualtieri, “Generalized complex geometry,”Ann. Math.174no. 1, (2011) 75–123

    2011

  25. [25]

    Double field theory andN = 4gauged supergravity,

    D. Geissbuhler, “Double field theory andN = 4gauged supergravity,”JHEP11(2011) 116

    2011

  26. [26]

    Gauged double field theory,

    M. Grana and D. Marques, “Gauged double field theory,”JHEP04(2012) 020

    2012

  27. [27]

    Generalized geometry andM theory,

    D. S. Berman and M. J. Perry, “Generalized geometry andM theory,”JHEP06(2011) 074. – 25 –

    2011

  28. [28]

    Exceptional field theory I: E6(6) covariant form of M-theory and type IIB,

    O. Hohm and H. Samtleben, “Exceptional field theory I: E6(6) covariant form of M-theory and type IIB,”Phys. Rev. D89(2014) 066016

    2014

  29. [29]

    Moduli stabilization from fluxes in a simple IIB orientifold,

    S. Kachru, M. B. Schulz, and S. Trivedi, “Moduli stabilization from fluxes in a simple IIB orientifold,”JHEP10(2003) 007

    2003

  30. [30]

    Flux compactifications in string theory: A comprehensive review,

    M. Grana, “Flux compactifications in string theory: A comprehensive review,”Phys. Rept.423(2006) 91–158

    2006

  31. [31]

    Flux compactification,

    M. R. Douglas and S. Kachru, “Flux compactification,”Rev. Mod. Phys.79(2007) 733–796

    2007

  32. [32]

    Geometric constructions of nongeometric string theories,

    S. Hellerman, J. McGreevy, and B. Williams, “Geometric constructions of nongeometric string theories,”JHEP01(2004) 024

    2004

  33. [33]

    Constructing nongeometric vacua in string theory,

    A. Flournoy, B. Wecht, and B. Williams, “Constructing nongeometric vacua in string theory,”Nuclear Physics B706no. 1, (2005) 127–149

    2005

  34. [34]

    Nongeometric flux compactifications,

    J. Shelton, W. Taylor, and B. Wecht, “Nongeometric flux compactifications,”JHEP10 (2005) 085

    2005

  35. [35]

    Flux compactifications of string theory on twisted tori,

    C. M. Hull and R. A. Reid-Edwards, “Flux compactifications of string theory on twisted tori,”Fortsch. Phys.57(2009) 862–894

    2009

  36. [36]

    N = 4gauged supergravity and a IIB orientifold with fluxes,

    R. D’Auria, S. Ferrara, and S. Vaula, “N = 4gauged supergravity and a IIB orientifold with fluxes,”New J. Phys.4(2002) 71

    2002

  37. [37]

    More dual fluxes and moduli fixing,

    G. Aldazabal, A. Font, D. Marques, and C. Nunez, “More dual fluxes and moduli fixing,” JHEP05(2006) 070

    2006

  38. [38]

    A ten-dimensional action for non-geometric fluxes,

    D. Andriot, M. Larfors, D. Lust, and P. Patalong, “A ten-dimensional action for non-geometric fluxes,”JHEP09(2011) 134

    2011

  39. [39]

    Non-geometric fluxes, asymmetric strings and nonassociative geometry,

    R. Blumenhagen, A. Deser, D. Lust, E. Plauschinn, and F. Rennecke, “Non-geometric fluxes, asymmetric strings and nonassociative geometry,”J. Phys. A44(2011) 385401

    2011

  40. [40]

    Consistent compactification of double field theory on non-geometric flux backgrounds,

    F. Hassler and D. Lust, “Consistent compactification of double field theory on non-geometric flux backgrounds,”JHEP05(2014) 085

    2014

  41. [41]

    Non-geometric backgrounds in string theory,

    E. Plauschinn, “Non-geometric backgrounds in string theory,”Phys. Rept.798(2019) 1–122

    2019

  42. [42]

    U-duality and M-theory,

    N. A. Obers and B. Pioline, “U-duality and M-theory,”Phys. Rept.318(1999) 113–225

    1999

  43. [43]

    NS5-branes, T duality and world sheet instantons,

    D. Tong, “NS5-branes, T duality and world sheet instantons,”JHEP07(2002) 013

    2002

  44. [44]

    Worldsheet instanton corrections to the kaluza-klein monopole,

    J. A. Harvey and S. Jensen, “Worldsheet instanton corrections to the kaluza-klein monopole,”JHEP10(2005) 028

    2005

  45. [45]

    Exotic branes in string theory,

    J. de Boer and M. Shigemori, “Exotic branes in string theory,”Phys. Rept.532(2013) 65–118. – 26 –

    2013

  46. [46]

    World-volume effective actions of exotic five-branes,

    T. Kimura, S. Sasaki, and M. Yata, “World-volume effective actions of exotic five-branes,”JHEP07(2014) 127

    2014

  47. [47]

    Dyonic BPS saturated black holes of heterotic string on a six-torus,

    M. Cvetič and D. Youm, “Dyonic BPS saturated black holes of heterotic string on a six-torus,”Phys. Rev. D53(1996) R584(R)–R588(R)

    1996

  48. [48]

    Four-dimensional string/ string/ string triality,

    M. Duff, J. T. Liu, and J. Rahmfeld, “Four-dimensional string/ string/ string triality,” Nuclear Physics B459no. 1, (1996) 125–159

    1996

  49. [49]

    Entropy of 4D extremal black holes,

    C. V. Johnson, R. R. Khuri, and R. C. Myers, “Entropy of 4D extremal black holes,” Phys. Lett. B378(1996) 78–86

    1996

  50. [50]

    Statistical entropy of four-dimensional extremal black holes,

    J. M. Maldacena and A. Strominger, “Statistical entropy of four-dimensional extremal black holes,”Phys. Rev. Lett.77(1996) 428–429

    1996

  51. [51]

    N=2 extremal black holes,

    S. Ferrara, R. Kallosh, and A. Strominger, “N=2 extremal black holes,”Phys. Rev. D52 (1995) R5412–R5416

    1995

  52. [52]

    Supersymmetry and attractors,

    S. Ferrara and R. Kallosh, “Supersymmetry and attractors,”Phys. Rev. D54(1996) 1514–1524

    1996

  53. [53]

    Universality of supersymmetric attractors,

    S. Ferrara and R. Kallosh, “Universality of supersymmetric attractors,”Phys. Rev. D54 (1996) 1525–1534

    1996

  54. [54]

    Macroscopic entropy of N=2 extremal black holes,

    A. Strominger, “Macroscopic entropy of N=2 extremal black holes,”Phys. Lett. B383 (1996) 39–43

    1996

  55. [55]

    Supergravity flows and d-brane stability,

    F. Denef, “Supergravity flows and d-brane stability,”JHEP08(2000) 050

    2000

  56. [56]

    Black hole thermodynamics, stringy dualities and double field theory,

    A. S. Arvanitakis and C. D. A. Blair, “Black hole thermodynamics, stringy dualities and double field theory,”Class. Quant. Grav.34(2017) 055001

    2017

  57. [57]

    Stationary solutions of N=2 supergravity,

    K. Behrndt, D. Lust, and W. A. Sabra, “Stationary solutions of N=2 supergravity,” Nucl. Phys. B510(1998) 264–288

    1998

  58. [58]

    Microscopic origin of the bekenstein-hawking entropy,

    A. Strominger and C. Vafa, “Microscopic origin of the bekenstein-hawking entropy,” Phys. Lett. B379(1996) 99–104

    1996

  59. [59]

    D-brane approach to black hole quantum mechanics,

    C. G. Callan and J. M. Maldacena, “D-brane approach to black hole quantum mechanics,”Nucl. Phys. B472(1996) 591–610

    1996

  60. [60]

    D-branes and fat black holes,

    J. M. Maldacena and L. Susskind, “D-branes and fat black holes,”Nucl. Phys. B475 (1996) 679–690

    1996

  61. [61]

    Counting states of near-extremal black holes,

    G. T. Horowitz and A. Strominger, “Counting states of near-extremal black holes,”Phys. Rev. Lett.77(1996) 2368–2371

    1996

  62. [62]

    Black hole entropy in M-theory,

    J. M. Maldacena, A. Strominger, and E. Witten, “Black hole entropy in M-theory,” JHEP12(1997) 002,arXiv:hep-th/9711053

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  63. [63]

    D-branes and spinning black holes,

    J. C. Breckenridge, R. C. Myers, A. W. Peet, and C. Vafa, “D-branes and spinning black holes,”Phys. Lett. B391(1997) 93–98. – 27 –

    1997

  64. [64]

    Black holes, black rings and their microstates,

    I. Bena and N. P. Warner, “Black holes, black rings and their microstates,” inLecture Notes in Physics, vol. 755, pp. 1–92. Springer, 2008

    2008

  65. [65]

    Black holes and membranes in higher dimensional theories with dilaton fields,

    G. W. Gibbons and K. Maeda, “Black holes and membranes in higher dimensional theories with dilaton fields,”Nucl. Phys. B298(1988) 741–775

    1988

  66. [66]

    Charged black holes in string theory,

    D. Garfinkle, G. T. Horowitz, and A. Strominger, “Charged black holes in string theory,” Phys. Rev. D43(1991) 3140

    1991

  67. [67]

    Black strings and p-branes,

    G. T. Horowitz and A. Strominger, “Black strings and p-branes,”Nucl. Phys. B360 (1991) 197–209

    1991

  68. [68]

    Rotating charged black hole solution in heterotic string theory,

    A. Sen, “Rotating charged black hole solution in heterotic string theory,”Phys. Rev. Lett.69(1992) 1006–1009

    1992

  69. [69]

    Supersymmetry as a cosmic censor,

    R. Kallosh, A. D. Linde, T. Ortin, A. W. Peet, and A. Van Proeyen, “Supersymmetry as a cosmic censor,”Phys. Rev. D46(1992) 5278–5302

    1992

  70. [70]

    Dilaton black holes near the horizon,

    R. Kallosh and A. W. Peet, “Dilaton black holes near the horizon,”Phys. Rev. D46 (1992) R5223–R5227

    1992

  71. [71]

    Entropy and action of dilaton black holes,

    R. Kallosh, T. Ortin, and A. W. Peet, “Entropy and action of dilaton black holes,”Phys. Rev. D47(1993) 5400–5407

    1993

  72. [72]

    Black holes and entropy,

    J. D. Bekenstein, “Black holes and entropy,”Phys. Rev. D7(1973) 2333–2346

    1973

  73. [73]

    The four laws of black hole mechanics,

    J. M. Bardeen, B. Carter, and S. W. Hawking, “The four laws of black hole mechanics,” Commun. Math. Phys.31(1973) 161–170

    1973

  74. [74]

    Particle creation by black holes,

    S. W. Hawking, “Particle creation by black holes,”Commun. Math. Phys.43(1975) 199–220

    1975

  75. [75]

    Black hole entropy is the noether charge,

    R. M. Wald, “Black hole entropy is the noether charge,”Phys. Rev. D48(1993) R3427–R3431

    1993

  76. [76]

    Some properties of noether charge and a proposal for dynamical black hole entropy,

    V. Iyer and R. M. Wald, “Some properties of noether charge and a proposal for dynamical black hole entropy,”Phys. Rev. D50(1994) 846–864

    1994

  77. [77]

    Stability of a schwarzschild singularity,

    T. Regge and J. A. Wheeler, “Stability of a schwarzschild singularity,”Phys. Rev.108 (1957) 1063–1069

    1957

  78. [78]

    Effective potential for even-parity regge-wheeler gravitational perturbation equations,

    F. J. Zerilli, “Effective potential for even-parity regge-wheeler gravitational perturbation equations,”Phys. Rev. Lett.24(1970) 737–738

    1970

  79. [79]

    Odd-parity stability of a Reissner-Nordström black hole,

    V. Moncrief, “Odd-parity stability of a Reissner-Nordström black hole,”Phys. Rev. D9 (1974) 2707–2709

    1974

  80. [80]

    The quasi-normal modes of the schwarzschild black hole,

    S. Chandrasekhar and S. Detweiler, “The quasi-normal modes of the schwarzschild black hole,”Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A344(1975) 441–452. – 28 –

    1975

Showing first 80 references.

This paper was first reviewed by deepseek-v4-flash on August 1, 2026.