Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

More on thermal holographic RG flows in a 3D gauged supergravity

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper establishes that slowly changing scalar fields turn thermal holographic RG flows into exact non-rotating BTZ black holes, with a hypergeometric scalar profile from horizon to boundary.

desk verdict The near-horizon thermodynamics hold together, but the headline analytic scalar profile (4.16) is misnormalized and the boundary-to-horizon claim fails its own boundary condition. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.06536 v1 pith:SBSEM325 submitted 2024-12-09 hep-th gr-qc

Anastasia A. Golubtsova , Eric Gourgoulhon , Mikhail A. Podoinitsyn This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-thgr-qc PACS 04.70.Dy11.25.Tq
keywords thermalholographicRGflows3DgaugedsupergravityBTZblackholehypergeometricscalarsolutionrenormalizationgroupthermodynamicsasymptoticallyAdS3slowlychangingfield
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 studies finite-temperature holographic renormalization-group flows in a three-dimensional gauged supergravity with a single scalar field whose potential has either one or three extrema. Its central claim is that when the scalar changes slowly along the flow, the spacetime metric is exactly the non-rotating BTZ black hole and the scalar profile is given by a hypergeometric function that runs from the horizon to the AdS boundary. The authors also provide near-horizon analytic solutions for general horizon values of the scalar, together with closed-form temperature, entropy, and free energy, and they show that the thermodynamics becomes conformal at the potential extrema. If correct, this gives explicit analytic examples of thermal holographic RG flows in a top-down supergravity model, rather than purely numerical constructions.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the constraint $X^2\approx0$ for $X=d\varphi/dA$, which the paper interprets as a slowly changing scalar field. Imposing it reduces the autonomous dynamical system (2.22)-(2.24) to the simplified system (4.2)-(4.4), makes the scale factor obey the linear relation $A=c_A w$, and converts the scalar equation into the hypergeometric equation (4.7) after the substitution $r=\exp(2(A-A_h))$ and $\Phi=\varphi-\varphi_h+\Lambda^{(h)}/K^{(h)}$. The solution is the hypergeometric function $_2F_1(a_h,1-a_h,1,1-r)$, written in $w$ as (4.16), and this is what turns the metric into the non-rotating BTZ geometry while keeping a nontrivial scalar profile.

What would settle it

Numerically integrate the full unconstrained dynamical system (2.22)-(2.24) for the same horizon value $\varphi_h$ used in the constrained solution and compare the resulting metric function $A(w)$ and scalar profile $\varphi(w)$ with the analytic BTZ-plus-hypergeometric solution (4.13)-(4.16). If the deviation grows beyond the near-horizon region for any $\varphi_h$ in the claimed range, then the exact BTZ class is empty and the constraint is only an approximation.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

For the potential (2.2), with parameter $a^2$ controlling the number of extrema, the paper claims that imposing $X^2\approx0$, where $X=d\varphi/dA$ measures the rate of change of the scalar relative to the scale factor, selects a class of thermal holographic RG flows whose metric matches the non-rotating BTZ black hole (3.1)-(3.2) and whose scalar field solves the hypergeometric equation (4.7), with explicit solution (4.16). The constraint forces the scale factor $A$ to be linear and decouples the blackening function, so the geometry is BTZ while the scalar remains nontrivial. The analytic scalar solution extends from the horizon to the boundary and reproduces the expected boundary expansion (4.17) with the correct conformal dimensions. In addition, the near-horizon solutions (3.17)-(3.20) yield closed thermodynamic expressions (3.21)-(3.26), which reduce to the conformal BTZ thermodynamics at the extrema of the potential.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that the constraint $X^2\approx0$ and the first-order Taylor expansion of $V_\varphi/V$ around the horizon value $\varphi_h$ remain accurate all the way from the horizon to the AdS boundary; if the linearization error grows away from the horizon, the analytic hypergeometric profile does not solve the full nonlinear scalar equation and the BTZ metric is being imposed by hand rather than derived.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For $a^2\le 1/2$ the potential has one extremum and monotonic thermal RG flows exist for any horizon value $\varphi_h$; near the extremum the thermodynamics reduces to the conformal BTZ result (3.3).
  • For $1/2<a^2<1$ the potential has three extrema and there are also non-monotonic flows, associated with deformations by a non-zero VEV of the dual operator; these exist only in the three-extremum case.
  • Under the slow-scalar constraint the scalar field from horizon to boundary is given by the hypergeometric solution (4.16), and its boundary expansion (4.17) has the expected conformal dimensions and coefficients.
  • The near-horizon analytic solutions give closed forms for temperature (3.21), entropy (3.24), and free energy (3.26), which become conformal ($F\sim T^2$) at the potential extrema.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: the slow-scalar constraint $X^2\approx0$ is effectively a probe limit in which the scalar does not backreact on the geometry; testing it against the unconstrained system for $\varphi_h$ away from the extremum would quantify how wide the 'exactly BTZ' class really is.
  • Editorial inference: since the hypergeometric scalar is the general solution for a scalar field on a fixed BTZ background, these flows can be reinterpreted as a probe scalar in a thermal CFT; if so, the dual description is a weakly-coupled scalar operator rather than a genuine deformation of the geometry.
  • Editorial inference: the relation noted in the paper's context between $X^2\approx0$ and a vanishing holographic c-function suggests these flows sit at a special critical point; one could check whether the c-function along unconstrained flows stops changing at the same $\varphi_h$ where the constraint becomes accurate.
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

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies finite-temperature holographic RG flows in a 3D gauged supergravity with a single scalar field. It constructs numerical black-hole solutions, derives a near-horizon analytic approximation for the metric and scalar field, computes temperature, entropy, and free energy from this approximation, and then proposes, under a 'slowly changing scalar' constraint X^2 ~ 0, an analytic continuation of the scalar profile to the AdS boundary written in terms of a hypergeometric function. The paper also presents numerical flows for one-extremum and three-extremum potentials and discusses monotonic and non-monotonic scalar behavior. The central new claim is that, under the constraint (4.1), the metric is exactly the non-rotating BTZ black hole and the scalar field is the hypergeometric profile (4.16) valid from horizon to boundary.

Significance. If the central claim were correct, the paper would provide explicit closed-form scalar profiles and thermodynamic quantities for a family of finite-temperature RG flows in an otherwise numerically studied 3D supergravity model, a useful addition to the holographic RG-flow literature. The paper has genuine strengths: the near-horizon derivation (3.6)-(3.12), the temperature formula (3.21), entropy (3.24), and free energy (3.26) are internally consistent; the authors ship a SageMath notebook; and the comparison with numerical flows gives the reader a concrete check. However, the headline analytic result, Eq. (4.16), is algebraically incorrect as written: it violates the horizon boundary condition and is not the solution of the linearized equation with the paper's own near-horizon data. Because this profile is the basis for the boundary expansion (4.17) and for the claimed exact scalar field in a BTZ background, the main analytic claim needs substantial correction before the paper can be accepted.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4.1, Eq. (4.16)] Substituting w = w_h into Eq. (4.16) gives phi(w_h) = phi_h + 1, because the hypergeometric function 2F1(a,b;1;0) equals 1. This directly contradicts the boundary condition (2.13), phi(w_h) = phi_h. Moreover, differentiating (4.16) with respect to A at the horizon gives dphi/dA = Delta(h), whereas the near-horizon solution (3.9)-(3.10) requires dphi/dA(A_h) = -Lambda(h). Thus the displayed profile is not the solution of the linearized equation with the correct horizon data.
  2. [§4.1, Eqs. (4.7)-(4.10)] The correct solution of the linearized equation (4.7) with the horizon conditions phi(A_h)=phi_h and phi'(A_h)=-Lambda(h) is phi = phi_h + (Lambda(h)/K(h))(2F1(a_h,1-a_h;1;1-r) - 1), not the expression in (4.16). The paper's solution omits the prefactor Lambda/K and the constant shift -Lambda/K, and it replaces K(h) in the hypergeometric parameters with Delta(h). In addition, the argument of the hypergeometric function in (4.16), 1 - exp(c_A(w-w_h)), is inconsistent with the definition r = exp(2(A-A_h)) = exp(2c_A(w-w_h)) from (4.9): the correct argument is 1-r, not 1-sqrt(r). These algebraic errors affect the boundary expansion (4.17) and any quantitative comparison with the numerical flows.
  3. [§4.1, Eq. (4.1)] The constraint X^2 ~ 0 is not derived from the equations of motion; it is adopted because numerical flows appear to satisfy it. The paper's own Fig. 7 shows that the deviation between the constrained and unconstrained flows grows as phi_h moves away from the extremum, so the validity of the constraint is limited to a neighborhood of the fixed point. Under the constraint, Eq. (4.12) gives A''=0, so the linear BTZ scale factor follows by construction; the BTZ geometry is therefore an input of the slow-roll approximation rather than an independent consequence. The paper does not provide a quantitative estimate of the linearization error in Eq. (3.7) over the integration range from horizon to boundary, so the claim of an analytic scalar profile that extends from horizon to boundary is not fully established even after the normalization of Eq. (4.16) is corrected.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§4.1, after Eq. (4.15)] There is a typo: 'thee scalar field' should be 'the scalar field'.
  2. [§3.2, Eq. (3.15)] The phrase 'from the which is found' is grammatically broken and should be rewritten, e.g., 'with the integration constant c_g fixed from the Einstein equations as follows'.
  3. [§4.1, Eqs. (4.11) and (4.16)] The notation Delta(h) versus K(h) is used inconsistently: Eq. (4.11) defines a_h in terms of K(h), while Eq. (4.16) uses Delta(h) in the hypergeometric parameters. The authors should state explicitly how Eq. (4.16) follows from Eq. (4.10) and which of K or Delta is the correct coefficient in the linearized equation.
  4. [Fig. 7] The caption says 'solid curves' correspond to holographic RG flows of (2.22)-(2.24) and dashed curves to (4.2)-(4.4), but the legend in the figure is not described; please clarify the color/solid-dashed correspondence in the caption.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 3.0 of 10

The BTZ geometry result is built into the X^2≈0 ansatz; otherwise the derivations are self-contained.

  1. self definitional [Section 4.1, eqs. (4.1), (4.12)-(4.16)]
    "These solutions can be obtained using an additional condition X^2∼0, (4.1) ... As for the metric function A, the constraint (4.1) leads to the fact that the equations of motion (2.15)-(2.17) are simplified and we have for A ¨A = 0. (4.12) ... It is interesting to note that the constraint (4.1) brings us that the metric of the solution matches with the metric of the non-rotating BTZ black hole (3.1)-(3.2)."

    The claimed BTZ geometry is not derived from the full field equations: it follows directly from imposing X^2≈0. Since X=dϕ/dA, the constraint states that the scalar is slowly varying, and via eq. (3.11) it forces ¨A≈0 and hence the linear scale factor (4.13), which is exactly the BTZ scale factor (3.1)-(3.2). The conclusion is therefore contained in the premise. The only stated justification for the premise is the observed behavior of the numerical flows of the same model, so the analytic class is an ansatz motivated by, rather than independently predicting, those flows.

full rationale

The paper is largely a self-contained analytic continuation of earlier numerical work: the dynamical-system reduction, near-horizon expansions, and thermodynamic integrals are derived from the stated equations of motion without external fitting to data. The main circularity concern is confined to Section 4: the special class of flows with exact BTZ metric is obtained by imposing X^2≈0, an additional condition whose validity is justified only by the numerical flows it is then used to describe. This makes the BTZ-geometry part of the central claim an ansatz-consistency result rather than a prediction of the full dynamics. The hypergeometric scalar profile is a genuine closed-form solution of the reduced scalar equation, so the central claim retains independent algebraic content. I note separately, as a correctness risk rather than a circularity, that eq. (4.16) appears to replace K(h) by Δ(h) and does not satisfy the stated horizon condition φ(wh)=φ_h; this does not enter the circularity score. The self-citations to prior work of the same authors are used for numerical context and not as a uniqueness argument, so they are not load-bearing in a circular way.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's analytic results rest on the standard supergravity truncation and on two ad hoc analytic inputs: the slow-roll constraint X^2 is approximately zero and the linear Taylor expansion of V_phi/V near the horizon. The solution family is labeled by the horizon position w_h and the horizon value phi_h, with the model parameter a and the potential normalization Lambda_uv set by hand. No new particles, forces, or conserved quantities are introduced.

free parameters (4)
  • a (curvature parameter of the scalar target manifold) = a^2 = 0.25 and a^2 = 0.8 in the examples
    Model parameter from the supergravity truncation, not fitted to data; the number of potential extrema and the flow classes depend on it.
  • Lambda_uv (cosmological constant / potential normalization) = set to -1 in the figures and expansions
    Overall scale that fixes the AdS radius; chosen by hand.
  • w_h (radial coordinate of the horizon) = w_h = 0.01 in the figures
    Labels the black hole size and temperature; thermodynamic functions (3.21)-(3.26) depend on it.
  • phi_h (scalar field value at the horizon) = varies over the flows; for example, runs over (phi_2, phi_3) for a^2=0.8
    Labels the family of thermal RG flows; the entire construction is parameterized by it.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The action (2.1) and potential (2.2) are a valid consistent truncation of 3D N=2 matter-coupled gauged supergravity.
    Inherited from [26,27]; the paper does not re-derive the truncation.
  • domain assumption The metric ansatz (2.7) with f=0 at a single horizon captures all asymptotically AdS black hole solutions of interest.
    Used from Section 2.1; the paper does not prove uniqueness or generality of this ansatz.
  • standard math The Poincare compactification (2.25) and the radial reparametrization (2.31) preserve the topology of the flow.
    Standard dynamical systems tool from [36].
  • ad hoc to paper The slow-roll constraint X^2 is approximately zero (4.1) selects a physically meaningful subset of flows.
    Motivated by numerical observations; it reduces the equations and forces the linear-A/BTZ metric.
  • ad hoc to paper The first-order Taylor expansion of V_phi/V around phi_h (3.7) remains accurate over the integration range from horizon to boundary.
    Needed to obtain the hypergeometric equation (4.7) and the global-looking solution (4.16); no error bound is given.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of More on thermal holographic RG flows in a 3D gauged supergravity." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SBSEM325

@misc{pith2026241206536,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: More on thermal holographic RG flows in a 3D gauged supergravity},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SBSEM325}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.06536}
}
abstract

We continue our studies of holographic renormalization group (RG) flows for a 3d truncated supergravity model, the scalar potential of which can have either one or three extrema depending on the radius of the target manifold. We construct numerically and analytically thermal holographic RG flows, which are described by asymptotically AdS$_3$ black holes (non-rotating BTZ) characterized by the value of the scalar field on the horizon. We find two classes of RG flows with monotonic and non-monotonic behavior of the scalar field. The first one exists for both types of the potential, while the second one appears only for the potential with three extrema. For the slowly changing scalar field we find a special class of RG flows, which are described by the scalar field in the BTZ black hole geometry. For such flows we present an analytic solution for the scalar field from the horizon to the boundary. We discuss thermodynamical properties of the constructed holographic RG flows.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2412.06536 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The potential (2.2) against the scalar field ϕ for different values of a. For all we set Λuv = −1. We focus on holographic RG flows at finite temperature for the model (2.1) for these reasons we consider the following ansatz of the metric in the domain wall coordinates ds2 = e 2A(w)  −f(w)dt2 + dx2  + dw2 f(w) , (2.7) with the radial coordinate running the region w ∈ (wh, +∞), such that wh is a position of the hor… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Three different types of numerical trajectories near the horizon for the component [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Hawking temperature (3.21) as a function of ϕh: a) a 2 = 0.25, b) a 2 = 0.8; for all we set wh = 0.01. expanding in series (3.21) by small Λ (h) . Thus, near the extremum of the potential V with Λ (h) ≃ 0 the temperature reads TH,Λ(h)→0 = e wh/cA 2πcA + e wh/cA (2cA − wh)wh(Λ (h) ) 2 4πa2c 3 A . (3.23) Using (2.10) one finds that the entropy of the black hole solution (3.17) with (3.18) is given by s = 4πMpB 1 κ . (… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (6 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Entropy density (3.24) as a function of ϕh: a) a 2 = 0.25, b) a 2 = 0.8; for all we set wh = 0.01. We show the behaviour of the entropy s (3.24) as a function of TH (3.21) in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Entropy density (3.24) vs Hawking temperature (3.21) for a) a 2 = 0.25, b) a 2 = 0.8; for all we set wh = 0.01 . It is useful to look on the product of the temperature and the entropy sTH = 2Mp cA  1 + κ cA wh 2+κ κ = 2Mp cA B 2+κ κ . (3.25) Taking into account (3.21…
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Free energy (3.26) as a function of Hawking temperature (3.21) for a) a 2 = 0.25, b) a 2 = 0.8; for all we set wh = 0.01 4 From the near-horizon region to the boundary 4.1 Analytic solutions from the horizon to the boundary In this section we will discuss analytic asym…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The numerical trajectories of the dynamical systems ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The numerical trajectories of the dynamical systems ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: a)The dependence of the parameter ah (4.11) on a; b) The behaviour of 2F1(ah, 1 − ah, 1, 1 − r) on r for a 2 = 0.25 (solid), a 2 = 0.8 (dashed). with M2 = Vϕϕ(ϕ1), i.e. we used 1 ± q 1 − 2∆(h) = 1 ± q 1 + M2 ϕ ℓ 2 . (4.20) Moreover, the coefficients in (4.17) coincide …

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Janus and RG-interfaces in minimal 3d gauged supergravity

    hep-th 2024-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    New numerical interface solutions in a minimal 3d supergravity model satisfy the proposed universal inequality between transmission and entanglement.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

42 extracted references · 8 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    The Large N limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity,

    J. M. Maldacena, “The Large N limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity,” Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.2 (1998) 231–252, arXiv:hep-th/9711200

    arXiv 1998

  2. [2]

    Anti-de Sitter space and holography,

    E. Witten, “Anti-de Sitter space and holography,”Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.2 (1998) 253–291, arXiv:hep-th/9802150

    arXiv 1998

  3. [3]

    Gauge theory correlators from noncritical string theory,

    S. S. Gubser, I. R. Klebanov, and A. M. Polyakov, “Gauge theory correlators from noncritical string theory,”Phys. Lett. B428 (1998) 105–114, arXiv:hep-th/9802109

    arXiv 1998

  4. [4]

    A Remark on the AdS / CFT correspondence and the renormalization group flow,

    E. T. Akhmedov, “A Remark on the AdS / CFT correspondence and the renormalization group flow,”Phys. Lett. B442 (1998) 152–158, arXiv:hep-th/9806217

    arXiv 1998

  5. [5]

    On the holographic renormalization group,

    J. de Boer, E. P. Verlinde, and H. L. Verlinde, “On the holographic renormalization group,” JHEP 08 (2000) 003, arXiv:hep-th/9912012

    arXiv 2000

  6. [6]

    Renormalization group flows from holography supersymmetry and a c theorem,

    D. Z. Freedman, S. S. Gubser, K. Pilch, and N. P. Warner, “Renormalization group flows from holography supersymmetry and a c theorem,”Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.3 (1999) 363–417, arXiv:hep-th/9904017

    arXiv 1999

  7. [7]

    Holographic reconstruction of space-time and renormalization in the AdS / CFT correspondence,

    S. de Haro, S. N. Solodukhin, and K. Skenderis, “Holographic reconstruction of space-time and renormalization in the AdS / CFT correspondence,”Commun. Math. Phys. 217 (2001) 595–622, arXiv:hep-th/0002230

    arXiv 2001

  8. [8]

    Holographic renormalization,

    M. Bianchi, D. Z. Freedman, and K. Skenderis, “Holographic renormalization,”Nucl. Phys. B631 (2002) 159–194, arXiv:hep-th/0112119

    arXiv 2002

Show all 42 references
  1. [9]

    How to go with an RG flow,

    M. Bianchi, D. Z. Freedman, and K. Skenderis, “How to go with an RG flow,”JHEP 08 (2001) 041, arXiv:hep-th/0105276

    2001 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Lecture notes on holographic renormalization,

    K. Skenderis, “Lecture notes on holographic renormalization,”Class. Quant. Grav.19 (2002) 5849–5876, arXiv:hep-th/0209067

    2002 arXiv

  3. [11]

    AdS / CFT correspondence and geometry,

    I. Papadimitriou and K. Skenderis, “AdS / CFT correspondence and geometry,”IRMA Lect. Math. Theor. Phys.8 (2005) 73–101, arXiv:hep-th/0404176

    2005 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Correlation functions in holographic RG flows,

    I. Papadimitriou and K. Skenderis, “Correlation functions in holographic RG flows,” JHEP 10 (2004) 075, arXiv:hep-th/0407071. 23

    2004 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Multi-Trace Deformations in AdS/CFT: Exploring the Vacuum Structure of the Deformed CFT,

    I. Papadimitriou, “Multi-Trace Deformations in AdS/CFT: Exploring the Vacuum Structure of the Deformed CFT,”JHEP 05 (2007) 075, arXiv:hep-th/0703152

    2007 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Holography and Thermodynamics of 5D Dilaton-gravity,

    U. Gursoy, E. Kiritsis, L. Mazzanti, and F. Nitti, “Holography and Thermodynamics of 5D Dilaton-gravity,”JHEP 05 (2009) 033, arXiv:0812.0792 [hep-th]

    2009 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Boomerang RG flows with intermediate conformal invariance,

    A. Donos, J. P. Gauntlett, C. Rosen, and O. Sosa-Rodriguez, “Boomerang RG flows with intermediate conformal invariance,”JHEP 04 (2018) 017, arXiv:1712.08017 [hep-th]

    2018 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Holographic Anisotropic Background with Confinement-Deconfinement Phase Transition,

    I. Aref’eva and K. Rannu, “Holographic Anisotropic Background with Confinement-Deconfinement Phase Transition,”JHEP 05 (2018) 206, arXiv:1802.05652 [hep-th]

    2018 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Exact holographic RG flows and the A1 × A1 Toda chain,

    I. Y. Aref’eva, A. A. Golubtsova, and G. Policastro, “Exact holographic RG flows and the A1 × A1 Toda chain,”JHEP 05 (2019) 117, arXiv:1803.06764 [hep-th]

    2019 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Exotic holographic RG flows at finite temperature,

    U. Gürsoy, E. Kiritsis, F. Nitti, and L. Silva Pimenta, “Exotic holographic RG flows at finite temperature,”JHEP 10 (2018) 173, arXiv:1805.01769 [hep-th]

    2018 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Heating up Exotic RG Flows with Holography,

    Y. Bea and D. Mateos, “Heating up Exotic RG Flows with Holography,”JHEP 08 (2018) 034, arXiv:1805.01806 [hep-th]

    2018 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Holographic renormalization group flows,

    I. Y. Aref’eva, “Holographic renormalization group flows,”Theor. Math. Phys.200 no. 3, (2019) 1313–1323

    2019

  13. [21]

    Running coupling for holographic QCD with heavy and light quarks: Isotropic case,

    I. Y. Aref’eva, A. Hajilou, P. Slepov, and M. Usova, “Running coupling for holographic QCD with heavy and light quarks: Isotropic case,”Phys. Rev. D110 no. 12, (2024) 126009, arXiv:2402.14512 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Light holographic dilatons near critical points,

    A. F. Faedo, C. Hoyos, M. Piai, R. Rodgers, and J. G. Subils, “Light holographic dilatons near critical points,”arXiv:2406.04974 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  15. [23]

    Holographic flows from CFT to the Kasner universe,

    A. Frenkel, S. A. Hartnoll, J. Kruthoff, and Z. D. Shi, “Holographic flows from CFT to the Kasner universe,”JHEP 08 (2020) 003, arXiv:2004.01192 [hep-th]

    2020 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Trans-IR flows to black hole singularities,

    E. Caceres, A. Kundu, A. K. Patra, and S. Shashi, “Trans-IR flows to black hole singularities,” Phys. Rev. D106 no. 4, (2022) 046005,arXiv:2201.06579 [hep-th]

    2022 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Shock waves, black hole interiors and holographic RG flows,

    E. Cáceres, A. K. Patra, and J. F. Pedraza, “Shock waves, black hole interiors and holographic RG flows,”JHEP 07 (2024) 052, arXiv:2311.12940 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Matter coupled AdS(3) supergravities and their black strings,

    N. S. Deger, A. Kaya, E. Sezgin, and P. Sundell, “Matter coupled AdS(3) supergravities and their black strings,”Nucl. Phys. B573 (2000) 275–290, arXiv:hep-th/9908089. 24

    2000 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Renormalization group flows from D = 3, N=2 matter coupled gauged supergravities,

    N. S. Deger, “Renormalization group flows from D = 3, N=2 matter coupled gauged supergravities,” JHEP 11 (2002) 025, arXiv:hep-th/0209188

    2002 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Holographic RG flows in a 3D gauged supergravity at finite temperature,

    A. Golubtsova, A. Nikolaev, and M. Podoinitsyn, “Holographic RG flows in a 3D gauged supergravity at finite temperature,”Phys. Rev. D110 no. 6, (2024) 066011, arXiv:2405.06515 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Supersymmetric strings and waves in D = 3, N=2 matter coupled gauged supergravities,

    N. S. Deger and O. Sarioglu, “Supersymmetric strings and waves in D = 3, N=2 matter coupled gauged supergravities,”JHEP 12 (2004) 039, arXiv:hep-th/0409169

    2004 arXiv

  22. [30]

    New Supersymmetric Solutions in N=2 Matter Coupled AdS(3) Supergravities,

    N. S. Deger and O. Sarioglu, “New Supersymmetric Solutions in N=2 Matter Coupled AdS(3) Supergravities,”JHEP 08 (2006) 078, arXiv:hep-th/0605098

    2006 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Stability analysis of holographic RG flows in 3d supergravity,

    A. A. Golubtsova and M. K. Usova, “Stability analysis of holographic RG flows in 3d supergravity,” Eur. Phys. J. Plus138 no. 3, (2023) 260,arXiv:2208.01179 [hep-th]

    2023 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Holographic RG flows and boundary conditions in a 3D gauged supergravity,

    K. Arkhipova, L. Astrakhantsev, N. S. Deger, A. A. Golubtsova, K. Gubarev, and E. T. Musaev, “Holographic RG flows and boundary conditions in a 3D gauged supergravity,” Eur. Phys. J. C84 no. 6, (2024) 560,arXiv:2402.11586 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Dilaton domain walls and dynamical systems,

    J. Sonner and P. K. Townsend, “Dilaton domain walls and dynamical systems,”Class. Quant. Grav.23 (2006) 441–464, arXiv:hep-th/0510115

    2006 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Holographic RG flow at zero and finite temperatures,

    A. Golubtsova, “Holographic RG flow at zero and finite temperatures,”EPJ Web Conf. 191 (2018) 05012

    2018

  27. [35]

    The Sage Developers,SageMath, the Sage Mathematics Software System (Version 10.5),

  28. [36]

    Perko,Differential equations and dynamical systems

    L. Perko,Differential equations and dynamical systems. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1991

    1991

  29. [37]

    Lectures on black holes and the AdS(3) / CFT(2) correspondence,

    P. Kraus, “Lectures on black holes and the AdS(3) / CFT(2) correspondence,”Lect. Notes Phys.755 (2008) 193–247, arXiv:hep-th/0609074

    2008 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Bulk versus boundary dynamics in anti-de Sitter space-time,

    V. Balasubramanian, P. Kraus, and A. E. Lawrence, “Bulk versus boundary dynamics in anti-de Sitter space-time,”Phys. Rev. D59 (1999) 046003, arXiv:hep-th/9805171

    1999 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Correlation functions in the CFT(d) / AdS(d+1) correspondence,

    D. Z. Freedman, S. D. Mathur, A. Matusis, and L. Rastelli, “Correlation functions in the CFT(d) / AdS(d+1) correspondence,”Nucl. Phys. B546 (1999) 96–118, arXiv:hep-th/9804058

    1999 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Correlation functions in finite temperature CFT and black hole singularities,

    D. Rodriguez-Gomez and J. G. Russo, “Correlation functions in finite temperature CFT and black hole singularities,”JHEP 06 (2021) 048, arXiv:2102.11891 [hep-th] . 25

    2021 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Thermal correlation functions in CFT and factorization,

    D. Rodriguez-Gomez and J. G. Russo, “Thermal correlation functions in CFT and factorization,” JHEP 11 (2021) 049, arXiv:2105.13909 [hep-th] . 26

    2021 arXiv

  34. [2024]

    https://www.sagemath.org

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.