Geometry and integrability in $\mathcal{N}=8$ supersymmetric mechanics

Armen Nersessian; Hovhannes Shmavonyan; Sergey Krivonos

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 20 references

Geometry and integrability in $\mathcal{N}=8$ supersymmetric mechanics

T0 review · 4 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 This paper constructs N=8 supersymmetric mechanics with a potential term on special Kähler manifolds of rigid type, and shows that in one complex dimension its bosonic parts are superintegrable deformations of the oscillator and Coulomb…

desk verdict Promising N=8 mechanics with potential, undermined by a factor-of-two normalization error that voids the claimed general solution as written. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.06490 v1 pith:MH2FQF4G submitted 2019-08-18 hep-th math-phmath.MP

Sergey Krivonos , Armen Nersessian , Hovhannes Shmavonyan This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-thmath-phmath.MP PACS 11.30.Pb02.30.Ik

keywords N=8supersymmetricmechanicsspecialKählermanifoldsofrigidtypecurvedWDVVequationsprepotentialequationU(1)-invariantmetricssuperintegrableoscillatorCoulombT-duality

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper aims to show that N=8 supersymmetric mechanics can be defined with a nonzero potential when the configuration space is a special Kähler manifold of rigid type, not only in the free case. The decisive condition is a differential equation on the prepotential $U$, namely $U_{a;b} - f_{abc} g^{\bar d c} \bar U_{\bar d} = 0$, whose general solution in the special coordinate frame is $U(z) = \sum_a (m_a \partial_a F + i n_a z_a)$. In one complex dimension this yields bosonic Hamiltonians that include superintegrable perturbations of the two-dimensional oscillator and Coulomb problem. The authors present the construction as the complex counterpart of $\mathcal{N}=4$ mechanics built on the curved WDVV equations, third-rank tensor equations used in the real case, unifying the two constructions.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the rigid special Kähler manifold: a Kähler manifold whose metric and curvature are encoded by a holomorphic prepotential through a symmetric third-rank tensor $f_{abc}$ satisfying the rigid special-Kähler identities. The argument runs on the prepotential equation (3.8), which selects the allowed potentials, and on the U(1)-invariant metric family $ds^2 = (1 - \kappa^2(z\bar z)^m)\, dz\, d\bar z$, whose cubic tensor is $f(z)[dz]^3 = \kappa m z^{m-1}[dz]^3$. These objects combine so that the supercharges close into the N=8 algebra and the bosonic Hamiltonians become the known superintegrable systems for $m=1$ and $m=-1/2$.

What would settle it

Take a concrete case, for instance the U(1)-invariant metric with $m=-2$, insert an admissible prepotential such as $U'(z)=\kappa a z^{-2} + \bar a$, and compute the full Poisson brackets of the supercharges (4.42) explicitly; any unavoidable extra fermionic term in the closure would show that (3.8) is not sufficient and the Hamiltonian (4.42) is not the N=8 model it claims to be.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On a rigid special Kähler manifold, the N=8 supercharges chosen in (3.6) close into the N=8 superalgebra precisely when $U_{a;b} - f_{abc} g^{\bar d c} \bar U_{\bar d} = 0$; in the special coordinate frame where $g_{a\bar b} = \mathrm{Re}\,\partial_a \partial_{\bar b} F$ and $f_{abc} = \partial_a\partial_b\partial_c F$, the general admissible prepotential is $U(z) = \sum_a (m_a \partial_a F + i n_a z_a)$. Restricting to U(1)-invariant one-complex-dimensional special Kähler metrics, $ds^2 = (1 - \kappa^2(z\bar z)^m)\, dz\, d\bar z$ with $f(z)[dz]^3 = \kappa m z^{m-1}[dz]^3$, the allowed potentials are $U'(z) = \kappa a z^m + \bar a$. The bosonic Hamiltonian is superintegrable for $m=1$ and $m=-1/2$, where it reproduces superintegrable perturbations of the oscillator and Coulomb problems, respectively.

Load-bearing premise

The construction relies on the chosen supercharge ansatz being complete enough to enforce the full N=8 algebra; if closing the brackets forces additional fermionic terms, the resulting Hamiltonian would not be the claimed N=8 extension.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

If (3.8) is the full closure condition, every rigid special Kähler manifold admits an N=8 mechanics with potential once the linear condition on the prepotential is solved.
The T-duality-type transformation (4.38)–(4.40) relates the Hamiltonian for parameters $(m,a)$ to another member of the same family, so the family contains dual pairs of integrable systems.
For $m=1$ and $m=-1/2$ the bosonic systems are superintegrable, with two functionally independent constants of motion; these reproduce known superintegrable perturbations of oscillator and Coulomb systems.
Generically the supercharges and Hamiltonian are not invariant under the U(1) rotation of the coordinate; full U(1)-invariant N=8 extensions occur only in the free $a=0$, $m=-2$ case.
The paper leaves it open whether the hidden symmetries of the superintegrable bosonic systems admit N=8 supersymmetric extensions.

Reading between the lines

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

If the closure condition is indeed sufficient, the admissible prepotentials on a fixed rigid special Kähler manifold form a finite-dimensional real vector space spanned by $\partial_a F$ and $z_a$, so classifying N=8 potentials reduces to classifying rigid special Kähler manifolds.
The duality (4.38) acts like an inversion in $z$ and connects the oscillator-type $m=1$ system with the Coulomb-type $m=-1/2$ system; one could test whether it maps the full quantum spectrum and symmetry algebra of one to the other.
The generic failure of U(1) invariance suggests that nonzero N=8 potentials sit uncomfortably with Killing isometries, so one might expect admissible potentials only on special Kähler manifolds with few or no isometries.
Solving the linear equation (3.8) on the same metric family for other values of $m$ could uncover additional integrable or superintegrable cases beyond the oscillator and Coulomb deformations.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

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,

This paper has a genuinely new construction — N=8 supersymmetric mechanics with a potential on rigid special Kähler manifolds — and a nice observation that it is the complex counterpart of the curved WDVV mechanics from [1,5]. The U(1)-invariant one-dimensional family and the superintegrable oscillator/Coulomb limits are explicit, with the constants of motion written down. If the algebra is right, this is a useful work for the supersymmetric mechanics community.

But there is a real bug in the central derivation. In (3.10) they claim Γ_{\bar a b c} = ∂_a∂_b∂_c F and f_{abc} = Γ_{\bar a b c}. With the connection defined in (1.4), the lower-index connection is actually g_{\bar a n} Γ^n_{bc} = ∂_b g_{c\bar a} = 1/2 ∂_a∂_b∂_c F, not ∂^3 F. The missing 1/2 propagates. For a one-dimensional example F = c z^3/6 + κ z^2/2, the curvature from (1.4) is -c^2/(4g), while the right side of (1.3) with f=c is -c^2/g — off by four. And substituting U = mF' + inz into (3.11) gives -mc, not zero. So (3.12) is not a solution of the equation as displayed. This is not a typo in a throwaway formula; it's the equation that classifies admissible potentials. The authors likely use a different normalization for f or the connection, but they don't say so, and the Poisson-bracket computation leading to (3.8) is not shown, so a referee cannot tell which normalization is intended.

The other soft spot: Eq. (4.27) is not an exact rewriting of the energy surface; it drops the (1-κ^2ρ^{2m}) factor multiplying π\barπ. The superintegrability claims for m=1 and -1/2 are independently supported by explicit integrals, so this is a presentation issue, but it should be cleaned up.

Who is this for? Specialists in supersymmetric mechanics and special Kähler geometry. The general construction is interesting enough to warrant a proper referee, and the fix is likely simple. As submitted, though, the central classification is unproven. I would send it to review with a clear request to correct the normalization and either display or cite the closure computation.

— [Your name]

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper constructs an N=8 supersymmetric mechanics with a nonzero potential term on special Kähler manifolds of rigid type, presenting the supercharges (3.6), the Hamiltonian (3.9), and the condition (3.8) on the prepotential U. It then states the general solution U = Σ(m_a ∂_a F + i n_a z_a) in a prepotential coordinate frame. In the second part, the authors specialize to U(1)-invariant one-complex-dimensional special Kähler metrics, solve the potential equation, and obtain the bosonic Hamiltonian (4.23). For m=1 and m=-1/2 they identify superintegrable deformations of the two-dimensional oscillator and Coulomb problems, giving explicit deformed symmetry generators and nonlinear algebras. The paper also discusses T-duality and the relation to N=4 mechanics on curved WDVV manifolds.

Significance. If the construction is correct, the paper provides a new class of N=8 supersymmetric mechanics with potentials and makes contact with known superintegrable systems, which is a useful contribution to the subject. The explicit form of the bosonic Hamiltonians and the proposed symmetry generators is a concrete strength. However, the central derivation currently contains a normalization inconsistency that affects the claimed general solution, and the closure of the superalgebra is asserted without a displayed computation. These issues are localized and appear fixable, but they must be resolved before the main claims can be accepted. The explicit constants of motion in Section IV are valuable and can be checked independently, but the heuristic energy-surface identification contains an error that should be corrected.

major comments (4)

[III, Eqs. (3.10)-(3.12)] The displayed conventions are internally inconsistent. With g_{a\bar b}=Re ∂_a∂_b F and f_{abc}=∂_a∂_b∂_c F as stated in (3.10), the curvature identity (1.3) fails by a factor of four in one dimension: for F(z)=c z^3/6+κ z^2/2 with real c,κ one has g=κ+c x, Γ^1_{11}=c/(2g), and R_{1\bar 1 1\bar 1}=-c^2/(4g), whereas the right-hand side of (1.3) equals -f g^{-1}\bar f=-c^2/g. Correspondingly, substituting U=mF'+i n z into (3.11) gives LHS = mF''' - (U'+\bar U')g^{-1}F''' = -mF''' ≠ 0. Hence Eq. (3.12) is not a solution of the displayed equation. The missing factor of 1/2 in the relation between f_{abc} and ∂_a∂_b∂_c F, or equivalently in (3.11), must be introduced and the derivation repeated; as it stands, the classification of admissible potentials is not proven.
[III, Eqs. (3.6)-(3.9)] The paper states that taking Poisson brackets of the supercharges (3.6) closes to the N=8 superalgebra precisely when Eq. (3.8) holds, but no part of the Poisson-bracket computation is displayed. In particular, it is not demonstrated that the fermionic ansatz (3.6) is sufficient: additional terms could be forced by the potential, which would change the Hamiltonian (3.9). Since the existence of the N=8 extension with nonzero potential is the central claim, the computation should be given, at least in outline, or an explicit reference to a full derivation should be supplied.
[IV, Eq. (4.27)] Equation (4.27) is not an exact rewriting of the energy surface H=E. Starting from (4.23), multiplying by 1-κ^2|z|^{2m} yields π\barπ + κ^2(|a|^2+E)|z|^{2m}+κ a^2 z^m+κ\bar a^2 \bar z^m = E-|a|^2 + κ^2|z|^m π\barπ. The last term is omitted in (4.27), so the identification of m=1 and m=-1/2 with oscillator and Coulomb energy surfaces is not justified as written. The explicit constants of motion (4.29)-(4.30) and (4.35)-(4.36) may still be correct, but the derivation leading to them should be corrected or replaced by a direct verification.
[III, Eq. (3.10) vs IV, Eq. (4.18)] The prepotential frame (3.10) appears incompatible with the U(1)-invariant metrics used in Section IV. If g_{a\bar b}=Re ∂_a∂_b F, then g is the real part of a holomorphic function and hence harmonic, i.e. ∂_z∂_{\bar z}g=0. The metric in (4.18), g=1-κ^2(z\bar z)^m, is not harmonic for the values of m considered. Consequently no holomorphic F satisfying (3.10) exists for these examples. Either (3.10) is not the general coordinate frame for solutions of (1.3), or the Section IV metrics are not special Kähler manifolds of rigid type in the sense of (3.10). The relation between the general framework and the explicit one-dimensional solutions needs to be clarified.

minor comments (4)

[IV, Eq. (4.21)] The notation in Eq. (4.21) is confusing: since \bar U depends only on \bar z, the left-hand side d\bar U/dz is identically zero, and the intended statement is that the holomorphic derivative with respect to z of the bracket vanishes; this should be written as ∂_z[ ... ]=0.
[IV, Eqs. (4.25), (4.38)] There are typographical errors: in Eq. (4.25) 'arg a' appears as 'arga', and in Eq. (4.38) the bracket in '|~κ~a]~z~m' is malformed.
[References] Reference [7] and [8] are missing the author initial 'A.' (Ballesteros), and reference [12] contains an obvious typo in the year '20112'.
[II, Eq. (2.4)] Equation (2.4) contains a stray comma in 'H,,'; it should read {Q_α,Q_β}=-i/2 δ_αβ H.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the N=8 potential extension is independently derived; self-citations provide only the starting framework.

full rationale

The paper's new claim is the N=8 mechanics with a potential term on rigid special Kähler manifolds, with admissible prepotentials obeying Eq. (3.8). That condition is obtained by taking Poisson brackets of the supercharge ansatz (3.6); it is not fitted to the Hamiltonian (3.9), and the Hamiltonian is then written so that closure reduces to exactly (3.8). The special-case potential U'(z)=κ a z^m + ar a is derived from (4.20), not inserted, and the later identification with superintegrable oscillator/Coulomb perturbations uses the external references [7,8]. The citations to the authors' earlier papers [2,5] supply the known structure of N=8 mechanics without potential and the curved-WDVV N=4 analogue, but they do not by themselves force the new potential condition or its solution. A normalization mismatch has been alleged between Eq. (3.10) and Eq. (1.3), but even if real that is a mathematical consistency/correctness concern about Eq. (3.12), not a circularity in which the prediction equals its input by construction. No parameter is fitted to a target result and no 'prediction' is a renamed input.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central derivation introduces a family of metrics and potentials parameterized by kappa, m, and a, and an ansatz matrix T(alpha0,beta0). These are model parameters, not fitted constants. The main unproved input is the supercharge ansatz (3.6), whose closure is asserted rather than displayed.

free parameters (4)

kappa = arbitrary real (positive)
Introduced in Eq. (4.18) as the scale in the metric ds^2=(1-kappa^2|z|^{2m})dz d\bar z; it controls curvature and is not fixed by any principle.
m = arbitrary real exponent
Parameter in (4.18); special values m=-2, 1, -1/2 are selected to get integrable or superintegrable bosonic systems.
a = arbitrary complex constant
Amplitude in U'(z)=kappa a z^m + \bar a (Eq. 4.22); it sets the potential and the oscillator or Coulomb couplings.
alpha0, beta0 = arbitrary angles
Parameters in the T matrix (3.7) controlling the breaking of one SU(2) symmetry; introduced in the supercharge ansatz.

assumptions (3)

domain assumption The special Kähler rigidity condition (1.3) defines the allowed configuration spaces.
Section I and III: the N=8 construction requires the third-rank holomorphic tensor f_{abc} to satisfy (1.3), the established rigid special Kähler condition taken from [2,3].
domain assumption The supersymplectic structure (3.2) and Poisson brackets (3.4) are the correct phase-space formulation for N=8 mechanics.
Section III, Eqs. (3.2)-(3.4): this is standard within the Hamiltonian superfield approach, but it is not re-derived in the paper.
ad hoc to paper The supercharge ansatz (3.6) is sufficient to close the N=8 superalgebra.
Section III, Eq. (3.6): this is a chosen ansatz; the paper states closure follows if (3.8) holds but does not display the full computation.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Geometry and integrability in $\mathcal{N}=8$ supersymmetric mechanics." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MH2FQF4G

@misc{pith2026190806490,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Geometry and integrability in $\mathcalN=8$ supersymmetric mechanics},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MH2FQF4G}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.06490}
}

abstract

We construct the $\mathcal{N}=8$ supersymmetric mechanics with potential term whose configuration space is the special K\"ahler manifold of rigid type and show that it can be viewed as the K\"ahler counterpart of $\mathcal{N}=4$ mechanics related to "curved WDVV equations". Then, we consider the special case of the supersymmetric mechanics with the non-zero potential term defined on the family of $U(1)$-invariant one-(complex)dimensional special K\"ahler metrics. The bosonic parts of these systems include superintegrable deformations of perturbed two-dimensional oscillator and Coulomb systems.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

20 extracted references · 18 canonical work pages

[1]

prepotential

In the particular case of sphere and two-sheet hyperboloid (pse udosphere), when g = (1 + ǫr2)−2 (with ǫ = 1 corresponding to the sphere and ǫ = − 1 to the pseudosphere), it coincides with the potential of the superintegrable (pseudo)spherical generalization of harmonic os cillator known as Higgs oscillator [13]. Thus, with the speciﬁc choice of initial p...

work page
[2]

Curved Witten-Dijkgraaf-Verlinde-Verlinde equation and ${\cal N}{=}\,4$ mechanics

N. Kozyrev, S. Krivonos, O. Lechtenfeld, A. Nersessian a nd A. Sutulin, Curved Witten-Dijkgraaf-Verlinde-Verlinde equa- tion and N = 4 mechanics, Phys. Rev. D 96 (2017) no.10, 101702(R) [arXiv:1710.00884 [hep-th]]

work page Pith review arXiv 2017
[3]

N=8 supersymmetric mechanics on special K\"ahler manifolds

S. Bellucci, S. Krivonos and A. Nersessian, N=8 supersymmetric mechanics on special Kahler manifolds, Phys. Lett. B 605 (2005) 181 [hep-th/0410029]

work page Pith review arXiv 2005
[4]

Lectures on Special Kahler Geometry and Electric--Magnetic Duality Rotations

P. Fre, Lectures on special Kahler geometry and electric - magnetic duality rotations , Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 45BC (1996) 59 [hep-th/9512043]

work page Pith review arXiv 1996
[5]

Seiberg and E

N. Seiberg and E. Witten, Electric - magnetic duality, monopole condensation, and co nﬁnement in N=2 supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory, Nucl. Phys. B 426 (1994) 19 Erratum: [Nucl. Phys. B 430 (1994) 485] [hep-th/9407087]. 10

arXiv 1994
[6]

${\cal N}{=}\,4$ supersymmetric mechanics on curved spaces

N. Kozyrev, S. Krivonos, O. Lechtenfeld, A. Nersessian a nd A. Sutulin, N = 4 supersymmetric mechanics on curved spaces Phys. Rev. D 97 (2018) no.8, 085015 [arXiv:1711.08734 [hep-th]]

work page Pith review arXiv 2018
[7]

The curved WDVV equations and superfields

N. Kozyrev, The curved WDVV equations and superﬁelds , J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 1194 (2019) no.1, 012061 [arXiv:1812.01406 [hep-th]]

work page Pith review arXiv 2019
[8]

Quantum mechanics on spaces of nonconstant curvature: the oscillator problem and superintegrability

Ballesteros, A. Enciso, F. J. Herranz, O. Ragnisco and D . Riglioni, Quantum mechanics on spaces of nonconstant curvature: the oscillator problem and superintegrability , Annals Phys. 326 (2011) 2053 [arXiv:1102.5494 [quant-ph]]

work page Pith review arXiv 2011

Show all 20 references

[9]

Enciso, F

Ballesteros, A. Enciso, F. J. Herranz, O. Ragnisco and D . Riglioni, An exactly solvable deformation of the Coulomb problem associated with the TaubNUT metric , Annals Phys. 351 (2014) 540 [arXiv:1407.1401 [math-ph]]

2014 arXiv
[10]

Witten, On the Structure of the Topological Phase of Two-dimensiona l Gravity , Nucl

E. Witten, On the Structure of the Topological Phase of Two-dimensiona l Gravity , Nucl. Phys. B 340(1990) 281; R. Dijkgraaf, H. Verlinde, E. Verlinde, Topological strings in d < 1, Nucl. Phys. B 352(1991) 59

1990
[11]

Donets, A

E. Donets, A. Pashnev, J. Juan Rosales, M. Tsulaia, N = 4 Supersymmetric Multidimensional Quantum Mechanics, Partial SUSY Breaking and Superconformal Quantum Mechanic s , Phys.Rev. D61 (2000) 043512, [hep-th/9907224]

2000 arXiv
[12]

E. A. Ivanov, S. O. Krivonos and V. M. Leviant, Geometric Superﬁeld Approach To Superconformal Mechanics , J. Phys. A 22 (1989) 4201. E. A. Ivanov, S. O. Krivonos and A. I. Pashnev, Partial supersymmetry breaking in N=4 supersymmetric quan tum mechanics, Class. Quant. Grav. 8 ...

1989
[13]

Galajinsky, O

A. Galajinsky, O. Lechtenfeld, K. Polovnikov, N=4 mechanics, WDVV equations and roots , JHEP 0903 (2009 113, [arXiv:0802.4386[hep-th]]; S. Krivonos, O. Lechtenfeld, K. Polovnikov, N=4 superconformal n-particle mechanics via superspace , Nucl.Phys. B817 (2009) 265, [arXiv:0812....

2009 arXiv
[14]

P. W. Higgs, Dynamical symmetries in a spherical geometry. I , J. Phys. A 12(1979) 309; H. I. Leemon, Dynamical symmetries in a spherical geometry. II , J. Phys. A 12(1979) 489

1979
[15]

Wyllard, (Super)conformal many-body quantum mechanics with extend ed supersymmetry , J

N. Wyllard, (Super)conformal many-body quantum mechanics with extend ed supersymmetry , J. Math. Phys. 41 (2000) 2826, [hep-th/9910160]

2000 arXiv
[16]

Hakobyan, O

T. Hakobyan, O. Lechtenfeld and A. Nersessian, Superintegrability of generalized Calogero models with os cillator or Coulomb potential, Phys. Rev. D 90 (2014) 101701(R), [arXiv:1409.8288[hep-th]]; F. Correa, T. Hakobyan, O. Lechtenfeld and A. Nersessian, Spherical Calogero mod...

2014 arXiv
[17]

Grosche, G

C. Grosche, G. S. Pogosyan and A. N. Sissakian, Path Integral Discussion for Smorodinsky-Winternitz Pote ntials: I. Two- and Three Dimensional Euclidean Sphere , Fortschritte der Physik 43(1995) 523-563 ; J. Harnad and O. Yermolayeva, Superintegrability, Lax matrices and separ...

1995 arXiv
[18]

Bellucci and A

S. Bellucci and A. Nersessian, A Note on N=4 supersymmetric mechanics on Kahler manifolds, Phys. Rev. D 64 (2001) 021702 [hep-th/0101065]

2001 arXiv
[19]

Bellucci, S

S. Bellucci, S. Krivonos and A. Shcherbakov, Two-dimensional N=8 supersymmetric mechanics in superspa ce, Phys. Lett. B 612 (2005) 283 [hep-th/0502245]

2005 arXiv
[20]

V. I. Arnold, Huygens and Barrow, Newton and Hooke , Birkhauser Verlag Basel, 1990 A. Nersessian, V. Ter-Antonian and M. M. Tsulaia, A Note on quantum Bohlin transformation, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 11 (1996) 1605 [hep-th/9604197]

1996 arXiv

Pith tools

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

[1] [1]

prepotential

In the particular case of sphere and two-sheet hyperboloid (pse udosphere), when g = (1 + ǫr2)−2 (with ǫ = 1 corresponding to the sphere and ǫ = − 1 to the pseudosphere), it coincides with the potential of the superintegrable (pseudo)spherical generalization of harmonic os cillator known as Higgs oscillator [13]. Thus, with the speciﬁc choice of initial p...

work page

[2] [2]

Curved Witten-Dijkgraaf-Verlinde-Verlinde equation and ${\cal N}{=}\,4$ mechanics

N. Kozyrev, S. Krivonos, O. Lechtenfeld, A. Nersessian a nd A. Sutulin, Curved Witten-Dijkgraaf-Verlinde-Verlinde equa- tion and N = 4 mechanics, Phys. Rev. D 96 (2017) no.10, 101702(R) [arXiv:1710.00884 [hep-th]]

work page Pith review arXiv 2017

[3] [3]

N=8 supersymmetric mechanics on special K\"ahler manifolds

S. Bellucci, S. Krivonos and A. Nersessian, N=8 supersymmetric mechanics on special Kahler manifolds, Phys. Lett. B 605 (2005) 181 [hep-th/0410029]

work page Pith review arXiv 2005

[4] [4]

Lectures on Special Kahler Geometry and Electric--Magnetic Duality Rotations

P. Fre, Lectures on special Kahler geometry and electric - magnetic duality rotations , Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 45BC (1996) 59 [hep-th/9512043]

work page Pith review arXiv 1996

[5] [5]

Seiberg and E

N. Seiberg and E. Witten, Electric - magnetic duality, monopole condensation, and co nﬁnement in N=2 supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory, Nucl. Phys. B 426 (1994) 19 Erratum: [Nucl. Phys. B 430 (1994) 485] [hep-th/9407087]. 10

arXiv 1994

[6] [6]

${\cal N}{=}\,4$ supersymmetric mechanics on curved spaces

N. Kozyrev, S. Krivonos, O. Lechtenfeld, A. Nersessian a nd A. Sutulin, N = 4 supersymmetric mechanics on curved spaces Phys. Rev. D 97 (2018) no.8, 085015 [arXiv:1711.08734 [hep-th]]

work page Pith review arXiv 2018

[7] [7]

The curved WDVV equations and superfields

N. Kozyrev, The curved WDVV equations and superﬁelds , J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 1194 (2019) no.1, 012061 [arXiv:1812.01406 [hep-th]]

work page Pith review arXiv 2019

[8] [8]

Quantum mechanics on spaces of nonconstant curvature: the oscillator problem and superintegrability

Ballesteros, A. Enciso, F. J. Herranz, O. Ragnisco and D . Riglioni, Quantum mechanics on spaces of nonconstant curvature: the oscillator problem and superintegrability , Annals Phys. 326 (2011) 2053 [arXiv:1102.5494 [quant-ph]]

work page Pith review arXiv 2011