Uplifting supersymmetric $AdS_6$ black holes to type II supergravity

Minwoo Suh

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Uplifting supersymmetric $AdS_6$ black holes to type II supergravity

T0 review · 3 major / 5 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 This paper uplifts supersymmetric AdS6 black holes from six-dimensional F(4) gauged supergravity to massive type IIA and type IIB supergravity, and reports that in the IIA case the holographic entanglement entropy exactly equals the…

desk verdict New entropy match for AdS6 black holes, but the IIA sign flip lacks a derivation. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.09846 v3 pith:VOV5XBNG submitted 2019-08-26 hep-th

Minwoo Suh This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-th

keywords AdS6blackholesmassivetypeIIAsupergravityIIBF(4)gaugedupliftformulaeholographicentanglemententropyBekenstein-HawkingBrandhuber-Ozsolution

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

This paper takes supersymmetric black holes found in six-dimensional F(4) gauged supergravity and elevates them to genuine ten-dimensional solutions of massive type IIA and type IIB supergravity using uplift formulae. In massive type IIA, the resulting black holes asymptote to the Brandhuber-Oz vacuum; in type IIB, they asymptote to the non-Abelian T-dual of that vacuum. The author then computes the holographic entanglement entropy of the entangling surface on the horizon. In the IIA case, that entropy exactly equals the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy of the seed black holes, the same value already reproduced microscopically by the topologically twisted index of five-dimensional USp(2N) gauge theory. The IIB entanglement entropy is computed explicitly and awaits a dual field theory for comparison.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is the pair of uplift formulae that map F(4) gauged supergravity solutions into ten dimensions: the [25] formula to massive type IIA and the [29] formula to type IIB. The IIB formula is steered by two holomorphic functions $A_\pm$ that select which AdS6 vacuum the solution approaches; the author uses $A_\pm = \frac{1}{216z^3} \mp \frac{i}{4z} - \frac{i}{108}$, the choice that gives the non-Abelian T-dual of the Brandhuber-Oz solution. The seed is the supersymmetric AdS6 black hole family of [31], with magnetic charges twisted over two Riemann surfaces, a two-form field, a running scalar, and horizon AdS2 × Σ_{g1} × Σ_{g2}. The entropy checks use the standard holographic entanglement entropy formula on the horizon, where the minimal surface degenerates to a point because of the AdS2 factor.

What would settle it

Re-evaluate the massive type IIA equations of motion and Bianchi identities of appendix B.1 with the four-form flux $F_{(4)}$ kept in the original sign of [25] instead of the corrected sign; if the uncorrected sign also solves the equations of motion, the sign change is not needed, and if the corrected sign fails any of (B.3)-(B.6) or $dF_{(4)}=F_{(2)}\wedge H_{(3)}$, the IIA black hole solutions and the entropy match collapse. Independently, the IIB Einstein equations were verified only at sampled coordinate values (Section 3.2.2), so a symbolic check at generic $(\rho,\xi)$ would remove that residual uncertainty.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the uplifted solutions are genuine supersymmetric black hole geometries of massive type IIA and type IIB supergravity, not merely formal rearrangements: they interpolate between the supersymmetric AdS6 fixed point at infinity and an AdS2 × Σ_{g1} × Σ_{g2} horizon. On the IIA side, the holographic entanglement entropy computed on the horizon, $S_{\text{EE}} = \frac{8\sqrt{2}\pi(g_1-1)(g_2-1)N^{5/2}}{5\sqrt{8-N_f}}$, exactly equals the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy of the seed black holes of [31], which is independently accounted for by the topologically twisted index of 5d USp(2N) gauge theory. On the IIB side, the paper produces new explicit supersymmetric black hole solutions asymptotic to the non-Abelian T-dual of the Brandhuber-Oz solution, with a holographic entanglement entropy given by a formula linear in $(g_1-1)(g_2-1)$ that has no microscopic comparison yet.

Load-bearing premise

The whole massive type IIA construction rests on an unsupported sign change the author suspects in the four-form flux formula of [25] (footnote 3, Section 2.1); if the original sign is the correct one, the IIA uplifted black holes and the entropy match are not established.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The IIA black holes are genuine ten-dimensional solutions asymptotic to the unique Brandhuber-Oz vacuum, so the AdS6/CFT5 entropy match now lives inside string theory rather than only in a six-dimensional truncation.
Because the holographic entanglement entropy on the horizon equals the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy for the IIA solution, the topologically twisted index counting, the black hole entropy, and the entanglement entropy all point to the same number.
The IIB uplift produces explicit supersymmetric black holes asymptotic to the non-Abelian T-dual vacuum, with a computable entanglement entropy that becomes testable once the dual field theory is identified.
The successful use of the [25] and [29] uplift formulae on black hole backgrounds suggests the same machinery can embed other F(4) solutions into ten dimensions whenever a consistent truncation exists.

Reading between the lines

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

Beyond the paper's own claims, the exact IIA entropy match strengthens the case that the Brandhuber-Oz vacuum is a reliable anchor for quantitative AdS6/CFT5 checks, since any mismatch in higher-genus or charge extensions would now be visible in ten dimensions.
The IIB entanglement entropy depends on the product $(g_1-1)(g_2-1)$; one could test whether it satisfies the same attractor or extremality relations as the IIA value once a candidate dual theory is proposed.
The same uplift route, applied to other six-dimensional solutions such as domain walls or flows in F(4) supergravity, could generate a broader class of ten-dimensional string backgrounds without solving the full ten-dimensional equations from scratch.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Colleague,

Read the Suh paper on uplifting AdS6 black holes to IIA/IIB. The genuinely new piece is the explicit uplift of the specific F(4) black holes of [31] to both massive IIA and IIB, plus the holographic entanglement entropy computation. The IIA entropy matches the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy of the seed exactly—a real quantitative check in a corner where explicit string embeddings are rare. The IIB construction is also new, and the fixed-point limit reproduces the known non-Abelian T-dual, which builds some confidence.

The soft spot is the sign change in the IIA F(4) flux (footnote 3, §2.1). The author suspects a typo in [25] and flips the sign of the *6 F~(2) term, but gives no derivation. That term is not inert for the black hole seed: B_tr is nonzero, so F~(2) = (2/3)gB contributes. The check that the ansatz solves the IIA equations of motion verifies the solution, but not that it is the reduction of the 6D theory. If [25]'s sign was actually correct (e.g., due to Hodge-star conventions), the IIA geometry presented here is not an uplift of the seed. That's a load-bearing issue for the central claim.

The IIB section has a milder gap: Einstein equations are checked only at numerical points in (rho, xi). That's weaker than an analytic check, though the similarity to the fixed-point calculation makes me less worried there. Also, the paper says 'explicitly checked' but doesn't show the algebra; that's a presentation choice, not a flaw by itself.

On balance, the IIA entropy match is the strongest result and it is suspiciously clean—makes me think the sign change is likely correct in practice, but 'likely' is not a proof. The paper deserves refereeing: a referee should ask for a derivation, or at least a consistency argument, for the sign flip. If that gets resolved, this is a solid contribution to the AdS6/CFT5 toolkit.

Would I bring it to reading group? Maybe—it's a good case study for the difference between checking equations of motion and verifying an uplift. I wouldn't cite it in my own work until the sign issue is clarified.

Recommendation: accept for peer review, but with heavy scrutiny on the sign point; conditional on that being resolved, publish.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper uplifts the supersymmetric AdS6 black holes of F(4) gauged supergravity found in [31] to ten-dimensional massive type IIA and type IIB supergravity, using the uplift formulae of [25] and [29]. The IIA solution is claimed to be asymptotic to the Brandhuber-Oz vacuum and to preserve supersymmetry; the holographic entanglement entropy computed on the horizon, eq. (2.27), is shown to equal the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy of the seed black holes. The IIB solution is claimed to be asymptotic to the non-Abelian T-dual of Brandhuber-Oz, with a holographic entanglement entropy given in eq. (3.51). The paper also reviews the relevant uplift formulae and collects the supergravity equations of motion in appendices.

Significance. If the constructions are correct, the IIA result provides a concrete ten-dimensional embedding of asymptotically AdS6 black holes and gives a direct holographic entanglement entropy derivation of their Bekenstein-Hawking entropy, strengthening the AdS6/CFT5 correspondence and the microscopic counting of [37]. The IIB solutions are new examples of supersymmetric AdS6 black holes in type IIB, though their field-theory interpretation is less developed. A positive feature is that the entropy match in (2.27) is not obtained by fitting parameters; it follows from the geometry and the horizon data. However, the significance is contingent on resolving the sign ambiguity in the IIA uplift and on providing full verification of the equations of motion.

major comments (3)

[§2.1, footnote 3, eq. (2.7)] The sign change in the F(4) flux is a load-bearing modification of the uplift formula of [25] that is not derived. In the seed solution the U(1) gauge field vanishes but B_tr is nonzero, so F~(2) = (2/3)g B and the ∗6 F~(2) term in eq. (2.7) contributes; the sign is not inert. If the original sign in [25] is correct, for example because of a different orientation of the Hodge star, the IIA solution presented is not the uplift and may fail the massive IIA equations. The author should either derive the corrected formula from the dimensional reduction or verify it by comparing with the reduction of the Brandhuber-Oz solution. The assertion in §2.2 that the solution solves the massive IIA equations of motion is also not substantiated: the check is not shown, and checking the ansatz with the corrected sign does not establish the correctness of the uplift formula itself.
[§3.2.2] In §3.2.2, the Einstein equations of the IIB solution are checked only at 'numerous specific numerical values' of (ρ, ξ). This does not prove that the solution satisfies the IIB equations of motion identically, which is a central claim of the paper. The text states that the uplifted solution 'explicitly checked' the equations of motion, but then qualifies the Einstein equations as numerical only. The author should provide an analytic verification of the Einstein equations, or show that the uplift formula of [29] is a consistent truncation so that the F(4) seed solution automatically solves the IIB equations.
[§3.3, eq. (3.51)] In §3.3, eq. (3.51), the holographic entanglement entropy in IIB is computed with an integral over ρ from 0 to R, where R is also the constant in the uplift formula (3.33). The Riemann surface Σ in the non-Abelian T-dual solution is non-compact (see Appendix C), so the volume of Σ is divergent; the area of the entangling surface is therefore infinite without a cutoff. The result depends on R^7, and the physical origin of the cutoff is not explained. The quantity in (3.51) is not a well-defined entanglement entropy unless a proper regularization is specified, and the paper should clarify the range of the coordinate ρ and the meaning of the cutoff.

minor comments (5)

[§2.3, after (2.27)] The value 'e^{2g1+2g2}=2/33' is inconsistent with the normalization quoted in (2.17); using m=√2 and g=3m/2 one obtains e^{4g1}=1/(g^3 m)=2/27, which is the value that gives the final result (2.27).
[§1, paragraph 4] The word 'supergrvity' should be 'supergravity'.
[§3.2, below (3.43)] The expression 'λ± 1' should be 'λ = ±1'.
[§2.3, (2.28)] The notation 'volΣ_{g≠1}' should be 'volΣ_g'.
[§3.3, (3.51)] The symbol R is used both as a constant in the uplift formula and as the upper limit of the ρ-integration; a different symbol for the cutoff would avoid ambiguity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the entropy match is a computed consistency check, and the main caveats are verification gaps rather than circular reductions.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. The paper takes the F(4) seed solutions of [31] (restated in Sections 2.2 and 3.2.2) as inputs, applies the uplift formulae of [25] and [29], and then verifies the resulting ten-dimensional fields against the relevant equations of motion; the verification uses the F(4) supersymmetry equations of [23,31] and the IIA/IIB field equations, so the ten-dimensional solutions are not asserted merely by construction. The holographic entanglement entropy (2.27) is computed from the uplifted metric and dilaton using the standard Ryu-Takayanagi/Klebanov-Kutasov-Murugan prescription and the holographic dictionary (2.21)-(2.24) from [49]; no parameter is fitted to the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy of [31,39], and the microscopic comparison is to the external twisted-index result [37]. The self-citations [31,39] supply the seed geometry and the BH entropy, but the uplift and the entanglement-entropy computation are independent of those target numbers, so the self-citation is not load-bearing for circularity. The paper's stated limitations are verification gaps, not circular steps: footnote 3 in Section 2.1 changes the sign of the *6 F~(2) term in F(4) with only 'We suspect a typographical error in [25]', which is an unproven assumption that affects the IIA solution's status if wrong; and in Section 3.2.2 the IIB Einstein equations are checked only at 'numerous specific numerical values' of (rho, xi), rather than analytically. Neither reduces a prediction to an input. Overall, the central claims have independent content, so the circularity score is low.

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

The central construction inherits the uplift formulas, the seed black hole solutions, and the entanglement entropy formula from prior work. The paper's own contribution is to apply these formulas and perform the entropy integrals. No new particles or forces are introduced; the free parameters listed are conventional choices that fix the AdS6 radius and match known backgrounds.

free parameters (4)

m (mass parameter in IIA uplift) = sqrt(2)
Set in Section 2.2 to make the AdS6 radius L=1; fixes the overall scale of the black hole solution.
g and m (IIB) = g = 3m = 2*sqrt(2)
Set in (3.31) to match the non-Abelian T-dual background; used in all IIB uplifted solutions.
c6 and R (IIB constants) = c6=1, R=3/2
Set in (3.33); constants in the IIB uplift formula.
tilde g = sqrt(2)
Derived from (3.30) using the chosen g and m; affects the coordinate on the Riemann surface.

assumptions (5)

domain assumption The massive type IIA uplift formulas (2.3)-(2.7) from F(4) gauged supergravity, including the author's sign correction to F(4), are a valid consistent truncation.
Cited from [25]; the sign change in footnote 3 is not derived in the paper.
domain assumption The type IIB uplift formulas (3.13)-(3.15) from F(4) gauged supergravity with vector multiplets are a valid consistent truncation for the chosen A-plus functions.
Cited from [28,29]; the paper only numerically checks the resulting Einstein equations.
domain assumption The supersymmetry equations of F(4) gauged supergravity (appendix A) imply that the uplifted solution solves all equations of motion of the ten-dimensional theory.
The paper states this check but does not show the intermediate algebra.
domain assumption Holographic entanglement entropy is given by (2.25) with a point-like minimal surface on the AdS2 horizon.
Follows from [50] and [51]; underpins the entropy matching result.
domain assumption The seed AdS6 black holes of [31] satisfy the F(4) gauged supergravity equations of motion.
Used as the starting point; the paper does not rederive them.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Uplifting supersymmetric $AdS_6$ black holes to type II supergravity." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VOV5XBNG

@misc{pith2026190809846,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Uplifting supersymmetric $AdS_6$ black holes to type II supergravity},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VOV5XBNG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.09846}
}

abstract

Employing uplift formulae, we uplift supersymmetric $AdS_6$ black holes from $F(4)$ gauged supergravity to massive type IIA and type IIB supergravity. In massive type IIA supergravity, we obtain supersymmetric $AdS_6$ black holes asymptotic to the Brandhuber-Oz solution. In type IIB supergravity, we obtain supersymmetric $AdS_6$ black holes asymptotic to the non-Abelian T-dual of the Brandhuber-Oz solution. For the uplifted black hole solutions, we calculate the holographic entanglement entropy. In massive type IIA supergravity, it precisely matches the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy of the black hole solutions.

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

Exact results for 5d SCFTs of long quiver type
hep-th 2019-09 conditional novelty 8.0 of 10

Analytic saddle-point solutions of the squashed S5 localization matrix model yield exact large-N free energies for long-quiver 5d SCFTs, matching holographic predictions.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

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

[31]

Suh, Supersymmetric AdS6 black holes from F(4) gauged supergravity, JHEP 1901, 035 (2019) [arXiv:1809.03517 [hep-th]]

M. Suh, Supersymmetric AdS6 black holes from F(4) gauged supergravity, JHEP 1901, 035 (2019) [arXiv:1809.03517 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2019
[25]

Cvetic, H

M. Cvetic, H. Lu and C. N. Pope, Gauged six-dimensional supergravity from massive type IIA, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 5226 (1999) [hep-th/9906221]. 21

arXiv 1999
[29]

Malek, H

E. Malek, H. Samtleben and V. Vall Camell, Supersymmetric AdS7 and AdS6 vacua and their consistent truncations with vector multiplets, JHEP 1904, 088 (2019) [arXiv:1901.11039 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2019
[37]

S. M. Hosseini, I. Yaakov and A. Zaﬀaroni, Topologically twisted indices in ﬁve dimensions and holography, JHEP 1811, 119 (2018) [arXiv:1808.06626 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2018
[1]

J. M. Maldacena, The large N limit of superconformal ﬁeld theories and supergravity, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2, 231 (1998) [Int. J. Theor. Phys. 38, 1113 (1999)] [arXiv:hep- th/9711200]

arXiv 1998
[2]

Brandhuber and Y

A. Brandhuber and Y. Oz, The D-4 - D-8 brane system and ﬁve-dimensional ﬁxed points, Phys. Lett. B 460, 307 (1999) [hep-th/9905148]

arXiv 1999
[3]

Ferrara, A

S. Ferrara, A. Kehagias, H. Partouche and A. Zaﬀaroni, AdS(6) interpretation of 5-D su- perconformal ﬁeld theories, Phys. Lett. B 431, 57 (1998) [hep-th/9804006]

arXiv 1998
[4]

Seiberg, Five-dimensional SUSY ﬁeld theories, nontrivial ﬁxed points and string dynam- ics, Phys

N. Seiberg, Five-dimensional SUSY ﬁeld theories, nontrivial ﬁxed points and string dynam- ics, Phys. Lett. B 388, 753 (1996) [hep-th/9608111]

arXiv 1996

Show all 56 references

[5]

D. R. Morrison and N. Seiberg, Extremal transitions and ﬁve-dimensional supersymmetric ﬁeld theories, Nucl. Phys. B 483, 229 (1997) [hep-th/9609070]

1997 arXiv
[6]

K. A. Intriligator, D. R. Morrison and N. Seiberg, Five-dimensional supersymmetric gauge theories and degenerations of Calabi-Yau spaces, Nucl. Phys. B 497, 56 (1997) [hep- th/9702198]

1997
[7]

Passias, A note on supersymmetric AdS 6 solutions of massive type IIA supergravity, JHEP 1301, 113 (2013) [arXiv:1209.3267 [hep-th]]

A. Passias, A note on supersymmetric AdS 6 solutions of massive type IIA supergravity, JHEP 1301, 113 (2013) [arXiv:1209.3267 [hep-th]]

2013 arXiv
[8]

Lozano, E

Y. Lozano, E. O Colgain, D. Rodriguez-Gomez and K. Sfetsos, SupersymmetricAdS6 via T Duality, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, no. 23, 231601 (2013) [arXiv:1212.1043 [hep-th]]

2013 arXiv
[9]

Apruzzi, M

F. Apruzzi, M. Fazzi, A. Passias, D. Rosa and A. Tomasiello, AdS6 solutions of type II supergravity, JHEP 1411, 099 (2014) Erratum: [JHEP 1505, 012 (2015)] [arXiv:1406.0852 [hep-th]]

2014 arXiv
[10]

H. Kim, N. Kim and M. Suh, Supersymmetric AdS6 Solutions of Type IIB Supergravity, Eur. Phys. J. C 75, no. 10, 484 (2015) [arXiv:1506.05480 [hep-th]]

2015 arXiv
[11]

Kim and N

H. Kim and N. Kim, Comments on the symmetry of AdS 6 solutions in string/M-theory and Killing spinor equations, Phys. Lett. B 760, 780 (2016) [arXiv:1604.07987 [hep-th]]

2016 arXiv
[12]

D’Hoker, M

E. D’Hoker, M. Gutperle, A. Karch and C. F. Uhlemann, WarpedAdS6×S2 in Type IIB supergravity I: Local solutions, JHEP 1608, 046 (2016) [arXiv:1606.01254 [hep-th]]. 20

2016 arXiv
[13]

D’Hoker, M

E. D’Hoker, M. Gutperle and C. F. Uhlemann, Holographic duals for ﬁve-dimensional superconformal quantum ﬁeld theories, Phys. Rev. Lett. 118, no. 10, 101601 (2017) [arXiv:1611.09411 [hep-th]]

2017 arXiv
[14]

D’Hoker, M

E. D’Hoker, M. Gutperle and C. F. Uhlemann, WarpedAdS6×S2 in Type IIB supergravity II: Global solutions and ﬁve-brane webs, JHEP 1705, 131 (2017) [arXiv:1703.08186 [hep-th]]

2017 arXiv
[15]

D’Hoker, M

E. D’Hoker, M. Gutperle and C. F. Uhlemann, WarpedAdS6×S2 in Type IIB supergravity III: Global solutions with seven-branes, JHEP 1711, 200 (2017) [arXiv:1706.00433 [hep-th]]

2017 arXiv
[16]

Apruzzi, J

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

2018 arXiv
[17]

Lozano, E

Y. Lozano, E. O Colgain and D. Rodriguez-Gomez, Hints of 5d Fixed Point Theories from Non-Abelian T-duality, JHEP 1405, 009 (2014) [arXiv:1311.4842 [hep-th]]

2014 arXiv
[18]

Lozano, N

Y. Lozano, N. T. Macpherson and J. Montero, AdS6 T-duals and type IIB AdS 6× S2 geome- tries with 7-branes, JHEP 1901, 116 (2019) [arXiv:1810.08093 [hep-th]]

2019 arXiv
[19]

Gutperle, C

M. Gutperle, C. Marasinou, A. Trivella and C. F. Uhlemann, Entanglement entropy vs. free energy in IIB supergravity duals for 5d SCFTs, JHEP 1709, 125 (2017) [arXiv:1705.01561 [hep-th]]

2017 arXiv
[20]

Bergman, D

O. Bergman, D. Rodriguez-Gomez and C. F. Uhlemann, Testing AdS6/CFT5 in Type IIB with stringy operators, JHEP 1808, 127 (2018) [arXiv:1806.07898 [hep-th]]

2018 arXiv
[21]

Fluder and C

M. Fluder and C. F. Uhlemann, Precision Test of AdS 6/CFT5 in Type IIB String Theory, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, no. 17, 171603 (2018) [arXiv:1806.08374 [hep-th]]

2018 arXiv
[22]

C. F. Uhlemann, Exact results for 5d SCFTs of long quiver type, JHEP 11, 072 (2019) [arXiv:1909.01369 [hep-th]]

2019 arXiv
[23]

L. J. Romans, The F(4) Gauged Supergravity in Six-dimensions, Nucl. Phys. B 269, 691 (1986)

1986
[24]

Andrianopoli, R

L. Andrianopoli, R. D’Auria and S. Vaula, Matter coupled F(4) gauged supergravity La- grangian, JHEP 0105, 065 (2001) [hep-th/0104155]

2001 arXiv
[26]

Jeong, O

J. Jeong, O. Kelekci and E. O Colgain, An alternative IIB embedding of F(4) gauged super- gravity, JHEP 1305, 079 (2013) [arXiv:1302.2105 [hep-th]]

2013 arXiv
[27]

J. Hong, J. T. Liu and D. R. Mayerson, Gauged Six-Dimensional Supergravity from Warped IIB Reductions, JHEP 1809, 140 (2018) [arXiv:1808.04301 [hep-th]]

2018 arXiv
[28]

Malek, H

E. Malek, H. Samtleben and V. Vall Camell, Supersymmetric AdS7 and AdS 6 vacua and their minimal consistent truncations from exceptional ﬁeld theory, Phys. Lett. B 786, 171 (2018) [arXiv:1808.05597 [hep-th]]

2018 arXiv
[30]

Malek, Half-Maximal Supersymmetry from Exceptional Field Theory, Fortsch

E. Malek, Half-Maximal Supersymmetry from Exceptional Field Theory, Fortsch. Phys. 65, no. 10-11, 1700061 (2017) [arXiv:1707.00714 [hep-th]]

2017 arXiv
[32]

Benini and A

F. Benini and A. Zaﬀaroni, A topologically twisted index for three-dimensional supersym- metric theories, JHEP 1507, 127 (2015) [arXiv:1504.03698 [hep-th]]

2015 arXiv
[33]

Benini, K

F. Benini, K. Hristov and A. Zaﬀaroni, Black hole microstates in AdS4 from supersymmetric localization, JHEP 1605, 054 (2016) [arXiv:1511.04085 [hep-th]]

2016 arXiv
[34]

S. L. Cacciatori and D. Klemm, Supersymmetric AdS(4) black holes and attractors, JHEP 1001, 085 (2010) [arXiv:0911.4926 [hep-th]]

2010 arXiv
[35]

Dall’Agata and A

G. Dall’Agata and A. Gnecchi, Flow equations and attractors for black holes in N = 2 U(1) gauged supergravity, JHEP 1103, 037 (2011) [arXiv:1012.3756 [hep-th]]

2011 arXiv
[36]

Hristov and S

K. Hristov and S. Vandoren, Static supersymmetric black holes in AdS4 with spherical sym- metry, JHEP 1104, 047 (2011) [arXiv:1012.4314 [hep-th]]

2011 arXiv
[38]

P. M. Crichigno, D. Jain and B. Willett, 5d Partition Functions with A Twist, JHEP 1811, 058 (2018) [arXiv:1808.06744 [hep-th]]

2018 arXiv
[39]

Suh, On-shell action and the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy of supersymmetric black holes in AdS6, arXiv:1812.10491 [hep-th]

M. Suh, On-shell action and the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy of supersymmetric black holes in AdS6, arXiv:1812.10491 [hep-th]. 22

arXiv
[40]

Kim and M

N. Kim and M. Shim, Wrapped Brane Solutions in RomansF (4) Gauged Supergravity,Nucl. Phys. B 951, 114882 (2020) [arXiv:1909.01534 [hep-th]]

2020 arXiv
[41]

S. M. Hosseini, K. Hristov, A. Passias and A. Zaﬀaroni, 6D attractors and black hole mi- crostates, JHEP 1812, 001 (2018) [arXiv:1809.10685 [hep-th]]

2018 arXiv
[42]

Suh, Supersymmetric AdS6 black holes from matter coupled F (4) gauged supergravity, JHEP 1902, 108 (2019) [arXiv:1810.00675 [hep-th]]

M. Suh, Supersymmetric AdS6 black holes from matter coupled F (4) gauged supergravity, JHEP 1902, 108 (2019) [arXiv:1810.00675 [hep-th]]

2019 arXiv
[43]

Fluder, S

M. Fluder, S. M. Hosseini and C. F. Uhlemann, Black hole microstate counting in Type IIB from 5d SCFTs, JHEP 1905, 134 (2019) [arXiv:1902.05074 [hep-th]]

2019 arXiv
[44]

Ryu and T

S. Ryu and T. Takayanagi, Holographic derivation of entanglement entropy from AdS/CFT, Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 181602 (2006) [arXiv:hep-th/0603001 [hep-th]]

2006 arXiv
[45]

Ryu and T

S. Ryu and T. Takayanagi, Aspects of Holographic Entanglement Entropy, JHEP 08, 045 (2006) [arXiv:hep-th/0605073 [hep-th]]

2006 arXiv
[46]

Dibitetto and N

G. Dibitetto and N. Petri, AdS2 solutions and their massive IIA origin, JHEP 1905, 107 (2019) [arXiv:1811.11572 [hep-th]]

2019 arXiv
[47]

Bergman and D

O. Bergman and D. Rodriguez-Gomez, 5d quivers and their AdS(6) duals, JHEP 07, 171 (2012) [arXiv:1206.3503 [hep-th]]

2012 arXiv
[48]

Bergman and D

O. Bergman and D. Rodriguez-Gomez, Probing the Higgs branch of 5d ﬁxed point theories with dual giant gravitons in AdS(6), JHEP 12, 047 (2012) [arXiv:1210.0589 [hep-th]]

2012 arXiv
[49]

D. L. Jaﬀeris and S. S. Pufu, Exact results for ﬁve-dimensional superconformal ﬁeld theories with gravity duals, JHEP 05, 032 (2014) [arXiv:1207.4359 [hep-th]]

2014 arXiv
[50]

I. R. Klebanov, D. Kutasov and A. Murugan, Entanglement as a probe of conﬁnement, Nucl. Phys. B 796, 274-293 (2008) [arXiv:0709.2140 [hep-th]]

2008 arXiv
[51]

Azeyanagi, T

T. Azeyanagi, T. Nishioka and T. Takayanagi, Near Extremal Black Hole Entropy as En- tanglement Entropy via AdS(2)/CFT(1), Phys. Rev. D 77, 064005 (2008) [arXiv:0710.2956 [hep-th]]

2008 arXiv
[52]

Corbino, E

D. Corbino, E. D’Hoker, J. Kaidi and C. F. Uhlemann, Global half-BPSAdS2×S6 solutions in Type IIB, JHEP 1903, 039 (2019) [arXiv:1812.10206 [hep-th]]

2019 arXiv
[53]

L. J. Romans, Massive N=2a Supergravity in Ten-Dimensions, Phys. Lett. B 169, 374 (1986). 23

1986
[54]

J. H. Schwarz, Covariant Field Equations of Chiral N=2 D=10 Supergravity, Nucl. Phys. B 226, 269 (1983)

1983
[55]

P. S. Howe and P. C. West, The Complete N=2, D=10 Supergravity, Nucl. Phys. B 238, 181 (1984)

1984
[56]

Bobev, F

N. Bobev, F. F. Gautason and J. Van Muiden, Precision Holography forN = 2∗ onS4 from type IIB Supergravity, JHEP 1804, 148 (2018) [arXiv:1802.09539 [hep-th]]. 24

2018 arXiv

Pith tools

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

[1] [31]

Suh, Supersymmetric AdS6 black holes from F(4) gauged supergravity, JHEP 1901, 035 (2019) [arXiv:1809.03517 [hep-th]]

M. Suh, Supersymmetric AdS6 black holes from F(4) gauged supergravity, JHEP 1901, 035 (2019) [arXiv:1809.03517 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2019

[2] [25]

Cvetic, H

M. Cvetic, H. Lu and C. N. Pope, Gauged six-dimensional supergravity from massive type IIA, Phys. Rev. Lett. 83, 5226 (1999) [hep-th/9906221]. 21

arXiv 1999

[3] [29]

Malek, H

E. Malek, H. Samtleben and V. Vall Camell, Supersymmetric AdS7 and AdS6 vacua and their consistent truncations with vector multiplets, JHEP 1904, 088 (2019) [arXiv:1901.11039 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2019

[4] [37]

S. M. Hosseini, I. Yaakov and A. Zaﬀaroni, Topologically twisted indices in ﬁve dimensions and holography, JHEP 1811, 119 (2018) [arXiv:1808.06626 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2018

[5] [1]

J. M. Maldacena, The large N limit of superconformal ﬁeld theories and supergravity, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2, 231 (1998) [Int. J. Theor. Phys. 38, 1113 (1999)] [arXiv:hep- th/9711200]

arXiv 1998

[6] [2]

Brandhuber and Y

A. Brandhuber and Y. Oz, The D-4 - D-8 brane system and ﬁve-dimensional ﬁxed points, Phys. Lett. B 460, 307 (1999) [hep-th/9905148]

arXiv 1999

[7] [3]

Ferrara, A

S. Ferrara, A. Kehagias, H. Partouche and A. Zaﬀaroni, AdS(6) interpretation of 5-D su- perconformal ﬁeld theories, Phys. Lett. B 431, 57 (1998) [hep-th/9804006]

arXiv 1998

[8] [4]

Seiberg, Five-dimensional SUSY ﬁeld theories, nontrivial ﬁxed points and string dynam- ics, Phys

N. Seiberg, Five-dimensional SUSY ﬁeld theories, nontrivial ﬁxed points and string dynam- ics, Phys. Lett. B 388, 753 (1996) [hep-th/9608111]

arXiv 1996