Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 4 minor 2 cited by

AdS$_3$ solutions in Massive IIA with small $\mathcal{N}=(4,0)$ supersymmetry

T0 review · 1 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Under a round S2 realizing SU(2)_R and an SU(2)-structure on the internal five-manifold, the paper derives two exhaustive classes of AdS3×S2 solutions in massive IIA preserving small N=(4,0) supersymmetry.

desk verdict Genuinely new AdS3 x S2 families in massive IIA with at least small N=(4,0), but the exact 'small' claim is explicitly unproven and should be softened. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.09851 v3 pith:EBTFLOF6 submitted 2019-08-26 hep-th

Yolanda Lozano , Niall T. Macpherson , Carlos Nunez , Anayeli Ramirez This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-th
keywords AdS3/CFT2massiveIIAsupergravitysmallN=(40)supersymmetrySU(2)-structureD-braneandorientifoldfoliationsT-dualityholographiccentralchargeKählerfour-manifolds
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 claims that, once the SU(2) R-symmetry of the small N=(4,0) superconformal algebra is realized by a round two-sphere and the remaining five-manifold carries an SU(2)-structure, every massive IIA solution of the form AdS3×S2×M5 falls into one of two classes. In the first class the four-manifold M4 is a conformal Calabi-Yau two-fold and the solution generalizes the D4-brane-inside-D8-brane system; in the second M4 is merely a ρ-dependent family of Kähler manifolds and the solution contains the T-dual of D3-branes wrapping curves in the base of an elliptically fibered Calabi-Yau threefold, now with nontrivial 3-form flux. Both classes yield explicit local foliations of AdS3×S2×CY2 over an interval, bounded by D-brane and orientifold behaviours, which the paper shows can be glued with defect branes into infinite families of globally compact solutions. T-dualizing the two classes produces two new IIB families of AdS3×S3×M4 solutions. If correct, the paper supplies the first systematic holographic AdS3 backgrounds for (0,4) CFTs in massive IIA.

What carries the argument

The central object is an SU(2)-structure on the five-manifold M5, namely a real 2-form $J$ and a complex 2-form $\Omega$ with $J\wedge\Omega=0$ and $J\wedge J = \tfrac12\Omega\wedge\bar\Omega$. The load-bearing device is the polyform $\Psi_+ + i\Psi_-$ built from the two Majorana Killing spinors on the internal seven-manifold, together with the spinorial SU(2) doublets formed from Killing spinors on the round S2. Because the bosonic fields are SU(2) singlets, solving the N=1 sub-sector implies the full small N=(4,0) algebra through the spinorial Lie derivative. Feeding the SU(2)-structure data $(J,\Omega)$ on M5 into the N=1 conditions of [38] yields the necessary and sufficient conditions (2.32a)-(2.35), and requiring a nonzero Romans mass fixes the spinor norms to be equal. The two branches of the solution, $\sin\beta=0$ and $\sin\beta\neq0$, are exactly the two classes found in the paper.

What would settle it

Compute the full superconformal algebra preserved by the general local solutions (3.31) and (4.34) directly from their Killing spinors. If any of these backgrounds preserves a larger algebra, such as large N=(4,0), the paper's claim that SU(2)-structure implies the small algebra and no more — and therefore the exhaustiveness of the two classes — is falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Under the assumptions of equal spinor norms (required for nonzero Romans mass), a round S2 realizing SU(2)_R, and an SU(2)-structure on M5, supersymmetry for small N=(4,0) AdS3×S2 solutions in massive IIA is equivalent to the system of algebraic and differential conditions (2.32a)-(2.35), with Bianchi identities (2.36) away from sources. The paper solves this system in the two branches $\sin\beta=0$ and $\sin\beta\neq0$. The first branch forces M4 to be conformally Calabi-Yau and contains a generalisation of the D4-D8 system; the second forces M4 to be a ρ-dependent family of Kähler manifolds and contains a generalisation of the IIB F-theory solutions based on D3-branes wrapping curves in the base of an elliptically fibered CY3, obtained after T-duality with non-trivial 3-form flux. The paper also exhibits many explicit local compact foliations of AdS3×S2×CY2 over an interval and proves that these can be glued with D8-D6, D4-D2 and D6-D4 defect branes to form infinite classes of globally compact solutions.

Load-bearing premise

The classification stands on the assumption that the SU(2) R-symmetry is realized by a round two-sphere and that an SU(2)-structure on the five-manifold implies exactly the small N=(4,0) algebra and no larger superconformal algebra.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Any solution in the assumed round-S2/SU(2)-structure class must belong to class I or class II, so the paper gives a complete classification of these backgrounds rather than a list of examples.
  • The local interval foliations give compact internal spaces when CY2 is T4 or K3, with explicit integer Page charges and holographic central charges such as $c_{\mathrm{hol}} = n_6 N_4 N_5^2$ for the D8/O8-D4-bounded solution.
  • T-duality of class I yields IIB AdS3×S3×CY2 solutions with D5 branes and KK monopoles backreacted on the D1-D5 near horizon; in the A=0, h5 constant limit supersymmetry is enhanced to N=(4,4).
  • Class II T-dualizes to a parametric deformation of the F-theory D3-on-curve solutions of [28] with non-trivial 3-form flux, controlled by the same geometric condition $i\partial\bar\partial\log h = \hat{R}$.
  • D8-D6 and D4-D2 defect branes, and D6-D4 defects for class II, can be inserted at arbitrary points of the interval, yielding infinite families of globally compact solutions from a common linear function $u$.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural next step the paper leaves open is to relax the SU(2)-structure assumption to an identity-structure on M5; the authors expect larger superconformal algebras there, so that regime should contain the large N=(4,0) solutions this paper deliberately avoids.
  • The defect-brane gluing construction is an AdS3 analogue of the AdS7 strategy the paper cites; a testable extension is to map the infinite families to (0,4) quiver gauge theories, along lines the authors announce in follow-up work.
  • The D6/O6-bounded solution (3.44) is reported by the authors to be strongly curved for all parameter values, so it should likely be read as a formal solution rather than a trustworthy holographic background until higher-curvature corrections are understood.
  • If the relation $c_{\mathrm{hol}} = 6k$ holds after the one-loop correction that the paper notes is unknown in massive IIA, then the leading-order central charges computed here become quantitative predictions against which candidate dual (0,4) CFTs can be matched.
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.

Referee Report

1 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper studies AdS3×S2 solutions in massive IIA that preserve small N=(4,0) supersymmetry, using an SU(2)-structure on the internal five-manifold M5. The authors construct N=(4,0) Killing spinors from Killing spinors on a round S2 and a single N=1 subsector, then apply the N=1 AdS3 classification of [38] to derive necessary and sufficient conditions (2.32a)-(2.35) on the geometry and fluxes. They identify two classes: Class I with M4 a conformal Calabi-Yau 2-fold, and Class II with M4 a ρ-dependent family of Kähler four-manifolds. They T-dualize to IIB to obtain AdS3×S3×M4 solutions generalizing the D1-D5 near horizon and the F-theory solutions of [28], and they construct local compact solutions foliated over an interval with various D-brane/O-plane boundary behaviors, proposing to glue them into global solutions with defect branes.

Significance. If the results hold, the paper provides a systematic and explicit classification of a broad class of massive IIA AdS3 solutions with chiral supersymmetry, which is a significant step given the scarcity of small N=(4,0) holographic duals. The derivation is self-contained modulo the prior N=1 classification, and the final conditions are explicit enough to be checked directly, with two classes and their T-duals given in closed form. The paper is unusually transparent about its assumptions and limitations, including the candid admission that SU(2)-structure does not rigorously guarantee the small algebra. The local foliations and defect-gluing proposal open a concrete path to infinite families of global compact solutions and will likely be useful for future AdS3/CFT2 studies.

major comments (1)
  1. [Section 2.1 (page 3) and Section 3.3 (Eq. (3.22))] The paper's central characterization that the solutions preserve 'small N=(4,0)' supersymmetry is not established for all members of the two classes. The authors explicitly concede on page 3 that 'SU(2)-structure implies the small algebra and no more is certainly not a theorem', and in Section 3.3, Eq. (3.22) with A=0, h5=constant and a round S3 reduces to the D1-D5 near horizon, which preserves N=(4,4). Thus the construction proves only that the solutions preserve at least a small N=(4,0) subalgebra; absence of enhancement to large N=(4,0) or N=(4,4) is not proven for generic class members. The abstract, introduction and Section 6 should either prove minimality away from the enhanced loci or consistently state that the solutions preserve 'at least small N=(4,0)', with the enhancement loci identified. The geometric classification of solutions containing this subalgebra is not affected by this point.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 2.2 (Eqs. (2.32a)-(2.35))] The reduction from the seven-dimensional bi-spinors to the five-dimensional conditions is summarized only as 'after significant massaging' on page 11; please provide the intermediate steps in an appendix or as a supplementary file, since these conditions are the technical core of the classification.
  2. [Section 3.1 (Eq. (3.5))] The functions g1,g2,g3 parametrizing H2 are introduced, but the condition dH2=0 is not translated into explicit PDEs for these functions; please state these equations explicitly or note that they are left implicit.
  3. [Section 3.4 (around Eq. (3.41))] In the D8/O8-D4 example, the Page charge N5 is reported as n6/N8; please clarify how integrality of N5 is ensured given that n6 and N8 are integers, or add the appropriate divisibility condition, since NS5 charge quantization is required for a string-theory solution.
  4. [Section 4.4 and 6] There are several typos and minor language issues, e.g. 'non trival' in the abstract, 'exhaustN' in Section 6, and 'expand up section 3.4' in the opening of Section 4.4; a careful proofreading pass is needed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the derivation is self-contained once the independent N=1 AdS3 classification [38] is accepted; minor self-citations are to future work and do not carry the argument.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The authors construct spinors transforming in the (2, 2⊕2) representation of SL(2)×SU(2)_R, then reduce to an N=1 sub-sector using the SU(2)_R action, and import the necessary and sufficient geometric conditions from the independent N=1 AdS3 classification of [38]. The two solution classes follow by direct computation from those conditions, with Bianchi identities imposed separately. No parameter is fitted to data, and no 'prediction' is a renamed input of the construction. The self-citations [62,67,68] point to future work and are not load-bearing for the existence or form of the new solutions; [39], cited for the proof that an N=1 sub-sector implies the full N=(4,0) sector, is a separate published construction whose assumptions do not include the target result. The paper explicitly concedes, at Section 2 (page 3), that 'SU(2)-structure implies the small algebra and no more is certainly not a theorem' — this is an admitted limitation on the exactness of the 'small N=(4,0)' characterization, not a circular step, and it is weighed here as a correctness caveat rather than as circularity.

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

No data fitting is involved; the constants c_i and functions h4, h8, u, v, w are integration data defining the families of solutions, not fitted parameters. No new particles or forces are introduced; D-branes, O-planes, and KK monopoles are standard string theory objects. The main axiomatic load is the SU(2)-structure ansatz and the unproven identification of the superconformal algebra as small N=(4,0).

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The N=1 AdS3 classification of [38] is correct and applicable.
    Used as the foundational classification to derive the necessary and sufficient conditions for supersymmetry in Section 2.2.
  • domain assumption The SU(2) R-symmetry is realized geometrically by a round 2-sphere in the metric ansatz (2.2).
    This restricts the allowed geometries to those with a round S2 factor, stated in Section 2.
  • domain assumption The internal five-manifold M5 supports an SU(2)-structure.
    Explicitly assumed in Section 2 to narrow the classification and to ensure small N=(4,0) rather than a larger algebra.
  • domain assumption Equal spinor norms, c_- = 0, are required for non-zero Romans mass.
    Stated before (2.18) and again in Section 6; this is a necessary condition for massive IIA solutions in this ansatz.
  • ad hoc to paper An SU(2)-structure implies the small N=(4,0) algebra and not a larger one.
    The authors explicitly say this is "certainly not a theorem but experience suggests" (Section 2, p.3). This is load-bearing for the claim that the solutions preserve exactly small N=(4,0).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of AdS$_3$ solutions in Massive IIA with small $\mathcal{N}=(4,0)$ supersymmetry." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/EBTFLOF6

@misc{pith2026190809851,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: AdS$_3$ solutions in Massive IIA with small $\mathcalN=(4,0)$ supersymmetry},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/EBTFLOF6}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.09851}
}
abstract

We study AdS$_3\times \text{S}^2$ solutions in massive IIA that preserve small ${\cal N}=(4,0)$ supersymmetry in terms of an SU(2)-structure on the remaining internal space. We find two new classes of solutions that are warped products of the form AdS$_3\times \text{S}^2\times \text{M}_4\times \mathbb{R}$. For the first, M$_4$=CY$_2$ and we find a generalisation a D4-D8 system involving possible additional branes. For the second, M$_4$ need only be Kahler, and we find a generalisation of the T-dual of solutions based on D3-branes wrapping curves in the base of an elliptically fibered Calabi-Yau 3-fold. Within these classes we find many new locally compact solutions that are foliations of AdS$_3\times \text{S}^2\times\text{CY}_2$ over an interval, bounded by various D brane and O plane behaviours. We comment on how these local solutions may be used as the building blocks of infinite classes of global solutions glued together with defect branes. Utilising T-duality we find two new classes of AdS$_3\times \text{S}^3\times \text{M}_4$ solutions in IIB. The first backreacts D5s and KK monopoles on the D1-D5 near horizon. The second is a generalisation of the solutions based on D3-branes wrapping curves in the base of an elliptically fibered CY$_3$ that includes non trivial 3-form flux.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Circle compactifications of Minkowski$_D$ solutions, flux vacua and solitonic branes

    hep-th 2024-12 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A 'supersymmetry generating' circle compactification technique for type II supergravity is derived and applied to construct new Minkowski flux vacua and generalized solitonic branes.

  2. Non-conformal branes wrapped on a disk

    hep-th 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Disk solutions from non-conformal Dp/NS5-brane spindles are classified by charge sectors; compact disks mostly show monopoles and smeared branes, while non-compact disks mostly do not.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

69 extracted references · 30 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [38]

    AdS 3 So- lutions with Exceptional Supersymmetry,

    G. Dibitetto, G. Lo Monaco, A. Passias, N. Petri and A. Tomasiello, “AdS 3 So- lutions with Exceptional Supersymmetry,” Fortsch. Phys. 66 (2018) no.10, 1800060 doi:10.1002/prop.201800060 [arXiv:1807.06602 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2018

  2. [28]

    F-theory and AdS_3/CFT_2

    C. Couzens, C. Lawrie, D. Martelli, S. Schafer-Nameki and J. M. Wong, “F-theory and AdS3/CFT2,” JHEP 1708 (2017) 043 doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2017)043 [arXiv:1705.04679 [hep-th]]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2017

  3. [1]

    Conformal Field Theory

    P. Di Francesco, P. Mathieu and D. Senechal, “Conformal Field Theory”, Springer (1997)

    work page 1997

  4. [2]

    Strings in AdS(3) and SL(2,R) WZW model 1.: The Spectrum,

    J. M. Maldacena and H. Ooguri, “Strings in AdS(3) and SL(2,R) WZW model 1.: The Spectrum,” J. Math. Phys. 42 (2001) 2929 doi:10.1063/1.1377273 [hep-th/0001053]

    arXiv 2001

  5. [3]

    Strings in AdS(3) and the SL(2,R) WZW model. Part 2. Euclidean black hole,

    J. M. Maldacena, H. Ooguri and J. Son, “Strings in AdS(3) and the SL(2,R) WZW model. Part 2. Euclidean black hole,” J. Math. Phys. 42 (2001) 2961 doi:10.1063/1.1377039 [hep- th/0005183]

    work page arXiv 2001

  6. [4]

    The Large N limit of superconformal field theories and supergrav- ity,

    J. M. Maldacena, “The Large N limit of superconformal field theories and supergrav- ity,” Int. J. Theor. Phys. 38 (1999) 1113 [Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2 (1998) 231] doi:10.1023/A:1026654312961, 10.4310/ATMP.1998.v2.n2.a1 [hep-th/9711200]

    arXiv 1999

  7. [5]

    Comments on string theory on AdS(3),

    A. Giveon, D. Kutasov and N. Seiberg, “Comments on string theory on AdS(3),” Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2 (1998) 733 doi:10.4310/ATMP.1998.v2.n4.a3 [hep-th/9806194]

    arXiv 1998

  8. [6]

    Lifting of D1-D5-P states,

    S. Hampton, S. D. Mathur and I. G. Zadeh, “Lifting of D1-D5-P states,” JHEP 1901 (2019) 075 doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2019)075 [arXiv:1804.10097 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2019

Show all 69 references
  1. [7]

    Tensionless string spectra on AdS 3,

    M. R. Gaberdiel and R. Gopakumar, “Tensionless string spectra on AdS 3,” JHEP 1805 (2018) 085 doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2018)085 [arXiv:1803.04423 [hep-th]]

    2018 arXiv

  2. [8]

    Superstrings on AdS 3 at k= 1,

    G. Giribet, C. Hull, M. Kleban, M. Porrati and E. Rabinovici, “Superstrings on AdS 3 at k= 1,” JHEP 1808, 204 (2018) doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2018)204 [arXiv:1803.04420 [hep- th]]

    2018 arXiv

  3. [9]

    The Worldsheet Dual of the Symmetric Product CFT,

    L. Eberhardt, M. R. Gaberdiel and R. Gopakumar, “The Worldsheet Dual of the Symmetric Product CFT,” JHEP 1904 (2019) 103 doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2019)103 [arXiv:1812.01007 [hep-th]]

    2019 arXiv

  4. [10]

    String theory on AdS 3 and the symmetric orbifold of Liouville theory,

    L. Eberhardt and M. R. Gaberdiel, “String theory on AdS 3 and the symmetric orbifold of Liouville theory,” arXiv:1903.00421 [hep-th]

    1903 arXiv

  5. [11]

    Lifting 1 4-BPS States on K3 and Mathieu Moonshine,

    C. A. Keller and I. G. Zadeh, “Lifting 1 4-BPS States on K3 and Mathieu Moonshine,” arXiv:1905.00035 [hep-th]

    1905 arXiv

  6. [12]

    String theory in magnetic monopole back- grounds,

    D. Kutasov, F. Larsen and R. G. Leigh, “String theory in magnetic monopole back- grounds,” Nucl. Phys. B 550 (1999) 183 doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(99)00144-3 [hep- th/9812027]. 45

    1999

  7. [13]

    N = (0,4) quiver SCFT(2) and supergravity on AdS(3) x S**2,

    Y. Sugawara, “N = (0,4) quiver SCFT(2) and supergravity on AdS(3) x S**2,” JHEP 9906 (1999) 035 doi:10.1088/1126-6708/1999/06/035 [hep-th/9903120]

    1999 arXiv

  8. [14]

    Currents and moduli in the (4,0) theory,

    F. Larsen and E. J. Martinec, “Currents and moduli in the (4,0) theory,” JHEP 9911 (1999) 002 doi:10.1088/1126-6708/1999/11/002 [hep-th/9909088]

    1999 arXiv

  9. [15]

    D1-D5 on ALE space,

    K. Okuyama, “D1-D5 on ALE space,” JHEP 0512 (2005) 042 doi:10.1088/1126- 6708/2005/12/042 [hep-th/0510195]

    2005 arXiv

  10. [16]

    Gauge fields and D-branes,

    M. R. Douglas, “Gauge fields and D-branes,” J. Geom. Phys. 28 (1998) 255 doi:10.1016/S0393-0440(97)00024-7 [hep-th/9604198]

    1998 arXiv

  11. [17]

    Black hole entropy in M theory,

    J. M. Maldacena, A. Strominger and E. Witten, “Black hole entropy in M theory,” JHEP 9712 (1997) 002 doi:10.1088/1126-6708/1997/12/002 [hep-th/9711053]

    1997 arXiv

  12. [18]

    Black holes and Calabi-Yau threefolds,

    C. Vafa, “Black holes and Calabi-Yau threefolds,” Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2 (1998) 207 doi:10.4310/ATMP.1998.v2.n1.a8 [hep-th/9711067]

    1998 arXiv

  13. [19]

    Calabi-Yau black holes and (0,4) sigma models,

    R. Minasian, G. W. Moore and D. Tsimpis, “Calabi-Yau black holes and (0,4) sigma models,” Commun. Math. Phys. 209 (2000) 325 [hep-th/9904217]

    2000 arXiv

  14. [20]

    String Theory Effects on Five-Dimensional Black Hole Physics,

    A. Castro, J. L. Davis, P. Kraus and F. Larsen, “String Theory Effects on Five-Dimensional Black Hole Physics,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 23 (2008) 613 doi:10.1142/S0217751X08039724 [arXiv:0801.1863 [hep-th]]

    2008 arXiv

  15. [21]

    F-Theory, Spinning Black Holes and Multi-string Branches,

    B. Haghighat, S. Murthy, C. Vafa and S. Vandoren, “F-Theory, Spinning Black Holes and Multi-string Branches,” JHEP 1601 (2016) 009 doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2016)009 [arXiv:1509.00455 [hep-th]]

    2016 arXiv

  16. [22]

    Black Holes and (0,4) SCFTs from Type IIB on K3,

    C. Couzens, H. h. Lam, K. Mayer and S. Vandoren, “Black Holes and (0,4) SCFTs from Type IIB on K3,” arXiv:1904.05361 [hep-th]

    1904 arXiv

  17. [23]

    M-Strings,

    B. Haghighat, A. Iqbal, C. Kozcaz, G. Lockhart and C. Vafa, “M-Strings,” Commun. Math. Phys. 334 (2015) no.2, 779 doi:10.1007/s00220-014-2139-1 [arXiv:1305.6322 [hep- th]]

    2015 arXiv

  18. [24]

    Orbifolds of M-strings,

    B. Haghighat, C. Kozcaz, G. Lockhart and C. Vafa, “Orbifolds of M-strings,” Phys. Rev. D 89 (2014) no.4, 046003 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.89.046003 [arXiv:1310.1185 [hep-th]]

    2014 arXiv

  19. [25]

    Little strings and T-duality,

    J. Kim, S. Kim and K. Lee, “Little strings and T-duality,” JHEP 1602 (2016) 170 doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2016)170 [arXiv:1503.07277 [hep-th]]. 46

    2016 arXiv

  20. [26]

    6d String Chains,

    A. Gadde, B. Haghighat, J. Kim, S. Kim, G. Lockhart and C. Vafa, “6d String Chains,” JHEP 1802 (2018) 143 doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2018)143 [arXiv:1504.04614 [hep-th]]

    2018 arXiv

  21. [27]

    Chiral 2d theories from N = 4 SYM with varying coupling,

    C. Lawrie, S. Schafer-Nameki and T. Weigand, “Chiral 2d theories from N = 4 SYM with varying coupling,” JHEP 1704 (2017) 111 doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2017)111 [arXiv:1612.05640 [hep-th]]

    2017 arXiv

  22. [29]

    Results of the classification of superconformal algebras in two-dimensions,

    E. S. Fradkin and V. Y. Linetsky, “Results of the classification of superconformal algebras in two-dimensions,” Phys. Lett. B282 (1992) 352 doi:10.1016/0370-2693(92)90651-J [hep- th/9203045]

    1992

  23. [30]

    (0,4) brane box models,

    A. Hanany and T. Okazaki, “(0,4) brane box models,” JHEP 1903 (2019) 027 doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2019)027 [arXiv:1811.09117 [hep-th]]

    2019 arXiv

  24. [31]

    AdS(3) solutions of IIB supergravity from D3-branes,

    N. Kim, “AdS(3) solutions of IIB supergravity from D3-branes,” JHEP 0601 (2006) 094 doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2006/01/094 [hep-th/0511029]

    2006 arXiv

  25. [32]

    Supersym- metric AdS(3) solutions of type IIB supergravity,

    J. P. Gauntlett, O. A. P. Mac Conamhna, T. Mateos and D. Waldram, “Supersym- metric AdS(3) solutions of type IIB supergravity,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 97 (2006) 171601 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.97.171601 [hep-th/0606221]

    2006 arXiv

  26. [33]

    Supersymmetric AdS(3), AdS(2) and Bubble Solutions,

    J. P. Gauntlett, N. Kim and D. Waldram, “Supersymmetric AdS(3), AdS(2) and Bubble Solutions,” JHEP 0704 (2007) 005 doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2007/04/005 [hep-th/0612253]

    2007 arXiv

  27. [34]

    The Backreacted K´ ahler Geometry of Wrapped Branes,

    N. Kim, “The Backreacted K´ ahler Geometry of Wrapped Branes,” Phys. Rev. D86 (2012) 067901 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.86.067901 [arXiv:1206.1536 [hep-th]]

    2012 arXiv

  28. [35]

    Large super- conformal near-horizons from M-theory,

    O. Kelekci, Y. Lozano, J. Montero, E. ´O. Colg´ ain and M. Park, “Large super- conformal near-horizons from M-theory,” Phys. Rev. D 93 (2016) no.8, 086010 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.086010 [arXiv:1602.02802 [hep-th]]

    2016 arXiv

  29. [36]

    Supersymmetric AdS 3 supergravity backgrounds and holography,

    L. Eberhardt, “Supersymmetric AdS 3 supergravity backgrounds and holography,” JHEP 1802 (2018) 087 doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2018)087 [arXiv:1710.09826 [hep-th]]

    2018 arXiv

  30. [37]

    F-theory and AdS 3/CFT2 (2, 0),

    C. Couzens, D. Martelli and S. Schafer-Nameki, “F-theory and AdS 3/CFT2 (2, 0),” JHEP 1806 (2018) 008 doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2018)008 [arXiv:1712.07631 [hep-th]]. 47

    2018 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Type II solutions on AdS3× S3× S3 with large superconformal symme- try,

    N. T. Macpherson, “Type II solutions on AdS3× S3× S3 with large superconformal symme- try,” JHEP 1905 (2019) 089 doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2019)089 [arXiv:1812.10172 [hep-th]]

    2019 arXiv

  32. [40]

    N = (8, 0) AdS vacua of three-dimensional supergravity,

    N. S. Deger, C. Eloy and H. Samtleben, “ N = (8, 0) AdS vacua of three-dimensional supergravity,” arXiv:1907.12764 [hep-th]

    1907 arXiv

  33. [41]

    1/4-BPS M-theory bubbles with SO(3) x SO(4) symme- try,

    H. Kim, K. K. Kim and N. Kim, “1/4-BPS M-theory bubbles with SO(3) x SO(4) symme- try,” JHEP 0708 (2007) 050 doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2007/08/050 [arXiv:0706.2042 [hep- th]]

    2007 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Supersymmetric AdS3 X S2 M-theory geome- tries with fluxes,

    E. O Colgain, J. B. Wu and H. Yavartanoo, “Supersymmetric AdS3 X S2 M-theory geome- tries with fluxes,” JHEP 1008 (2010) 114 doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2010)114 [arXiv:1005.4527 [hep-th]]

    2010 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Minimal flux Minkowski classification,

    N. T. Macpherson and A. Tomasiello, “Minimal flux Minkowski classification,” JHEP 1709 (2017) 126 doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2017)126 [arXiv:1612.06885 [hep-th]]

    2017 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Mink 3×S3 solutions of type II supergrav- ity,

    N. T. Macpherson, J. Montero and D. Prins, “Mink 3×S3 solutions of type II supergrav- ity,” Nucl. Phys. B933 (2018) 185 doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2018.05.021 [arXiv:1712.00851 [hep-th]]

    2018 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Minkowski4×S2 solutions of IIB supergravity,

    F. Apruzzi, J. C. Geipel, A. Legramandi, N. T. Macpherson and M. Zagermann, “Minkowski4×S2 solutions of IIB supergravity,” Fortsch. Phys. 66 (2018) no.3, 1800006 doi:10.1002/prop.201800006 [arXiv:1801.00800 [hep-th]]

    2018 arXiv

  38. [46]

    The geometry of N = 3 AdS 4 in massive IIA,

    G. B. De Luca, G. L. Monaco, N. T. Macpherson, A. Tomasiello and O. Varela, “The geometry of N = 3 AdS 4 in massive IIA,” JHEP 1808 (2018) 133 doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2018)133 [arXiv:1805.04823 [hep-th]]

    2018 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Mink 4×S2 Solutions of 10 and 11 Dimensional Supergravity,

    A. Legramandi and N. T. Macpherson, “Mink 4×S2 Solutions of 10 and 11 Dimensional Supergravity,” arXiv:1811.11224 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  40. [48]

    A massive class of N = 2 AdS4 IIA solutions,

    A. Passias, D. Prins and A. Tomasiello, “A massive class of N = 2 AdS4 IIA solutions,” JHEP 1810 (2018) 071 doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2018)071 [arXiv:1805.03661 [hep-th]]

    2018 arXiv

  41. [49]

    All Killing Superalgebras for Warped AdS Backgrounds,

    S. Beck, U. Gran, J. Gutowski and G. Papadopoulos, “All Killing Superalgebras for Warped AdS Backgrounds,” JHEP 1812 (2018) 047 doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2018)047 [arXiv:1710.03713 [hep-th]]. 48

    2018 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Superconformal Algebras in Two-Dimensions with N=4,

    A. Sevrin, W. Troost and A. Van Proeyen, “Superconformal Algebras in Two-Dimensions with N=4,” Phys. Lett. B 208 (1988) 447. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(88)90645-4

    1988 doi

  43. [51]

    Type IIA supergravity and M -theory on manifolds with SU(4) structure,

    D. Prins and D. Tsimpis, “Type IIA supergravity and M -theory on manifolds with SU(4) structure,” Phys. Rev. D 89 (2014) 064030 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.89.064030 [arXiv:1312.1692 [hep-th]]

    2014 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Generalized geometry, calibrations and super- symmetry in diverse dimensions,

    D. Lust, P. Patalong and D. Tsimpis, “Generalized geometry, calibrations and super- symmetry in diverse dimensions,” JHEP 1101 (2011) 063 doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2011)063 [arXiv:1010.5789 [hep-th]]

    2011 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Timelike structures of ten- dimensional supersymmetry,

    A. Legramandi, L. Martucci and A. Tomasiello, “Timelike structures of ten- dimensional supersymmetry,” JHEP 1904 (2019) 109 doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2019)109 [arXiv:1810.08625 [hep-th]]

    2019 arXiv

  46. [54]

    All AdS7 solutions of type II supergrav- ity,

    F. Apruzzi, M. Fazzi, D. Rosa and A. Tomasiello, “All AdS7 solutions of type II supergrav- ity,” JHEP 1404 (2014) 064 doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2014)064 [arXiv:1309.2949 [hep-th]]

    2014 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Partially localized intersecting BPS branes,

    D. Youm, “Partially localized intersecting BPS branes,” Nucl. Phys. B 556 (1999) 222 doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(99)00384-3 [hep-th/9902208]

    1999 arXiv

  48. [56]

    On non-abelian T-dual geometries with Ramond fluxes,

    K. Sfetsos and D. C. Thompson, “On non-abelian T-dual geometries with Ramond fluxes,” Nucl. Phys. B 846 (2011) 21 doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2010.12.013 [arXiv:1012.1320 [hep- th]]

    2011 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Field theory aspects of non-Abelian T-duality and N = 2 linear quivers,

    Y. Lozano and C. Nunez, “Field theory aspects of non-Abelian T-duality and N = 2 linear quivers,” JHEP 1605 (2016) 107 doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2016)107 [arXiv:1603.04440 [hep-th]]

    2016 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Three-dimensionalN = 4 linear quivers and non-Abelian T-duals,

    Y. Lozano, N. T. Macpherson, J. Montero and C. Nunez, “Three-dimensionalN = 4 linear quivers and non-Abelian T-duals,” JHEP 1611 (2016) 133 doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2016)133 [arXiv:1609.09061 [hep-th]]

    2016 arXiv

  51. [59]

    BMN Vacua, Superstars and Non-Abelian T- duality,

    Y. Lozano, C. Nunez and S. Zacarias, “BMN Vacua, Superstars and Non-Abelian T- duality,” JHEP 1709, 000 (2017) doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2017)008 [arXiv:1703.00417 [hep- th]]

    2017 arXiv

  52. [60]

    AdS 6 T-duals and type IIB AdS 6× S2 geometries with 7-branes,

    Y. Lozano, N. T. Macpherson and J. Montero, “AdS 6 T-duals and type IIB AdS 6× S2 geometries with 7-branes,” JHEP 1901 (2019) 116 doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2019)116 [arXiv:1810.08093 [hep-th]]. 49

    2019 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Supersymmetry and non- Abelian T-duality in type II supergravity,

    O. Kelekci, Y. Lozano, N. T. Macpherson and E. O. Colgain, “Supersymmetry and non- Abelian T-duality in type II supergravity,” Class. Quant. Grav. 32 (2015) no.3, 035014 doi:10.1088/0264-9381/32/3/035014 [arXiv:1409.7406 [hep-th]]

    2015 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Two dimensional N = (0, 4) quivers dual to AdS 3 solutions in massive IIA,

    Y. Lozano, N. T. Macpherson, C. Nunez and A. Ramirez, “Two dimensional N = (0, 4) quivers dual to AdS 3 solutions in massive IIA,” arXiv:1909.10510 [hep-th]

    1909 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Torsion of SU(2)-structures and Ricci curvature in dimension 5,

    L. Bedulli, L. Vezzoni “Torsion of SU(2)-structures and Ricci curvature in dimension 5,” Differential Geom. Appl. 27 (2009), no. 1, 85-99. [math/0702790v3]

    2009 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Supersymmetric AdS(5) solu- tions of M theory,

    J. P. Gauntlett, D. Martelli, J. Sparks and D. Waldram, “Supersymmetric AdS(5) solu- tions of M theory,” Class. Quant. Grav. 21 (2004) 4335 doi:10.1088/0264-9381/21/18/005 [hep-th/0402153]

    2004 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Supersymmetric AdS 5 solutions of massive IIA supergravity,

    F. Apruzzi, M. Fazzi, A. Passias and A. Tomasiello, “Supersymmetric AdS 5 solutions of massive IIA supergravity,” JHEP 1506 (2015) 195 doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2015)195 [arXiv:1502.06620 [hep-th]]

    2015 arXiv

  58. [66]

    AdS 4 compactifications of AdS 7 solutions in type II super- gravity,

    A. Rota and A. Tomasiello, “AdS 4 compactifications of AdS 7 solutions in type II super- gravity,” JHEP 1507 (2015) 076 doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2015)076 [arXiv:1502.06622 [hep- th]]

    2015 arXiv

  59. [67]

    1/4 BPS AdS 3/CFT2,

    Y. Lozano, N. T. Macpherson, C. Nunez and A. Ramirez, “1/4 BPS AdS 3/CFT2,” arXiv:1909.09636 [hep-th]

    1909 arXiv

  60. [68]

    AdS 3 solutions in massive IIA, defect CFTs and T-duality,

    Y. Lozano, N. T. Macpherson, C. Nunez and A. Ramirez, “AdS 3 solutions in massive IIA, defect CFTs and T-duality,” arXiv:1909.11669 [hep-th]

    1909 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Six-Dimensional Supercon- formal Theories and their Compactifications from Type IIA Supergravity,

    F. Apruzzi, M. Fazzi, A. Passias, A. Rota and A. Tomasiello, “Six-Dimensional Supercon- formal Theories and their Compactifications from Type IIA Supergravity,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 (2015) no.6, 061601 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.061601 [arXiv:1502.06616 [hep-th]]. 50

    2015 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.