Aspects of AdS$_2$ classification in M-theory: Solutions with mesonic and baryonic charges

Junho Hong; Leopoldo A. Pando Zayas; Niall T. Macpherson

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 57 references

Aspects of AdS$_2$ classification in M-theory: Solutions with mesonic and baryonic charges

T0 review · 3 major / 3 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 derives sufficient (and likely necessary) conditions for N=(1,0) AdS2 solutions of M-theory with SU(4)-structure, then uses them to construct a new AdS2×Σ_g×Q^{1,1,1} near-horizon geometry carrying both baryonic and mesonic…

desk verdict The N=(1,0) SU(4)-structure conditions are a real step forward; the advertised mesonic-charge solution is not demonstrated, and the authors mostly admit it. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.08518 v3 pith:HN6YYT3V submitted 2019-08-22 hep-th gr-qc

Junho Hong , Niall T. Macpherson , Leopoldo A. Pando Zayas This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-thgr-qc

keywords AdS2solutionsM-theorySU(4)-structureQ^{111}baryonicchargesmesonicSasaki-EinsteinmanifoldsKillingspinorgeometry

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

Working in eleven-dimensional supergravity, the paper asks which warped AdS2 backgrounds with internal nine-manifolds supporting an SU(4)-structure can be supersymmetric. It derives a list of differential and algebraic conditions on the structure forms and the fluxes—displayed as (2.29a)–(2.30c)—that are sufficient for N=(1,0) supersymmetry and, the authors argue, very likely necessary. This generalizes an earlier N=(2,0) analysis, which the paper recovers as the special case where the internal space is a U(1) fibration and the structure is Kähler. The payoff is a unification of known AdS2×Σ_g×$Q^{{1,1,1}}$ solutions and the construction of a new family with baryonic and mesonic charges turned on at the same time, the mesonic charge parameter n1 being continuously tunable down to zero in the numerical examples. This matters because such near-horizon geometries are the missing gravitational side of entropy counts for asymptotically AdS4 black holes dual to Chern-Simons quiver theories.

What carries the argument

The central object is an SU(4)-structure on the internal nine-manifold $M_9$: a real one-form $V$, a $(1,1)$-form $J$, and a $(4,0)$-form $\Omega$, with the metric $\mathrm{d}s^2(M_9)=V^2+\mathrm{d}s^2(M_8)$. The paper translates the Killing-spinor bilinears into equations on $(V,J,\Omega)$ and the fluxes $G_2,G_4$; equations (2.29a)–(2.30c) are the load-bearing conditions. The other key machinery is the family of $Q^{{1,1,1}}$ ansätze in section 3.2, where all unknown functions depend only on $x_1$ and the 4-form equation of motion reduces to the fourth-order ODE (3.8) for $U(x_1)$; solving that ODE with appropriate boundary conditions is what produces the new solutions.

What would settle it

Take the external parameters of Example 1, set n1=1, and integrate the fourth-order ODE (3.8) from x_L=0 with U(0)=0, U'(0)=2, and tunable U''(0)=u2; the claimed solution exists only if one finds u2 for which U(x_R)=0 and U'(x_R)=-2 at finite x_R>0, with $e^{{-A(x)}}$ positive throughout, and failure to find such a u2 for any n1 would falsify the new-solution claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's central result is that the whole supersymmetry of an N=(1,0) AdS2 solution of M-theory with an SU(4)-structure is encoded in the five differential conditions (2.29a)–(2.29e) and three algebraic constraints (2.30a)–(2.30c), together with the Bianchi identity and equation of motion for the four-form flux. The derivation starts from the known necessary-and-sufficient Killing-spinor geometry of eleven-dimensional supergravity, so solving the new conditions guarantees supersymmetry; whether every such solution satisfies them is left as a likely-but-unproved converse. Specializing to N=(2,0) forces the one-form V to be dual to a U(1) R-symmetry isometry, making the internal metric a warped Kähler fibration and reproducing the earlier 'transgression' solutions. For $Q^{{1,1,1}}$, the same framework reduces the flux equation of motion to a fourth-order nonlinear ODE for a single function U(x1); the paper exhibits one new polynomial solution, which lies in a branch disconnected from n1=0, and a numerical family that deforms smoothly under n1→0 and has both Betti-multiplet (baryonic) and mesonic charges.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the desired near-horizon geometry is captured by an ansatz in which all warping depends on one coordinate, the circle connection has the restricted form (3.2), and the four-form flux has no self-dual parts beyond the Mij terms; if the true mesonically twisted solution needs a richer fibration or flux, it is missed.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Each supersymmetric AdS2 solution in this class has a symplectic, generically non-Kähler internal geometry; Kähler structure and the U(1) R-symmetry are special to N=(2,0), so magnetic flux prevents the generic enhancement to N=(2,0).
The universal-twist solution and the deformed Betti-multiplet solutions of earlier work are recovered as special cases of the same ansatz, giving a unified classification chart for AdS2×Σ_g×Q^{1,1,1}.
The numerical solutions with n1≠0 are the first candidates within this ansatz for AdS2 near-horizon geometries with both baryonic and mesonic charges; their smooth n1→0 limit distinguishes them from the disconnected polynomial branch.
The Spin(7)-structure and AdS3 exclusions delineate the boundary of this classification: a complete classification of AdS2 solutions in M-theory will require going beyond SU(4)-structure.

Reading between the lines

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

Beyond the paper's claims, if the numerical family passes full regularity and flux-quantization checks, its Bekenstein-Hawking entropy should match the topologically twisted index of the dual Q^{1,1,1} quiver with both baryonic and mesonic chemical potentials—an agreement that would extend the known universal-twist entropy match.
The disconnected polynomial solution, being independent of n1 and singular in the n1→0 limit, is more plausibly a different near-horizon topology than the mesonic twist itself; the numerical family is the stronger candidate for the missing black-hole near-horizon.
The same SU(4)-structure conditions could in principle be scanned over other Sasaki-Einstein seven-manifolds with non-trivial second Betti number to look for analogous baryonic-plus-mesonic AdS2 solutions, provided the relevant Betti multiplets are known.

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

You should know two things about this paper. The genuinely valuable piece is Section 2: the derivation of necessary-and-sufficient conditions (2.29a)-(2.30c) for N=(1,0) AdS2 solutions in M-theory with SU(4)-structure, built cleanly on the Gauntlett-Pakis geometric classification. Appendices A and B rule out Spin(7)-structure and AdS3 foliations within this class, and Appendix C cross-checks the result through a direct Killing-spinor solve. That part is solid, and the N=(2,0) reduction matching Donos-Gauntlett-Kim is a good consistency check. The classification itself deserves to be cited and used.

The soft spot is exactly where the abstract points: the claim of a new solution with baryonic and mesonic charges turned on simultaneously. The analytic solution in 3.4.1 is shown to be n1-independent after coordinate redefinition; footnote 5 quietly says it is probably not the mesonic twist solution. The numerical solutions in 3.4.2 are tuned to satisfy U'(xR)=-2 and to deform smoothly as n1 goes to zero, but the paper never computes a Page charge, flux integral, or entropy whose n1-dependence would establish that n1 is a genuine mesonic charge rather than a coordinate artifact. The authors themselves call n1 a 'would-be mesonic charge.' No numerical data or error estimates are released. So the advertised headline result is not actually established by the evidence presented; it is a plausibly suggestive numerical trajectory.

The authors are transparent about the main limitations, including possible redundancy in their conditions and the restricted metric/flux ansatz. That transparency earns credit, but it does not rescue the abstract's overstatement. The classification theorem is the real result; the Q^{1,1,1} application is a promising but unfinished case study. The citation pattern looks reasonable, with the key prior work properly acknowledged. The math in Section 2 and the appendices reads carefully; the ODE analysis in Section 3 is competent even if the physical interpretation is not nailed down.

Who gets value from this? Anyone working on AdS2 classifications, black hole near-horizon geometries, or M-theory compactifications with flux. It deserves a serious referee. My recommendation: send it out, but the referee should ask for a concrete charge computation for the numerical backgrounds — or a clearly softened abstract. This is a conditional accept, not a desk reject.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. This paper studies supersymmetric AdS2 solutions of 11-dimensional supergravity with an SU(4)-structure on the internal nine-manifold. It proposes differential and algebraic conditions (2.29a)-(2.30c) for N=(1,0) supersymmetry, building on the bi-linear Killing-spinor classification of [23], and then derives a sharper Kähler-structure set (2.44a)-(2.44f) for N=(2,0). The second half specializes to AdS2 x Sigma_g x Q^{1,1,1}, recasts the known universal-twist and Betti-multiplet solutions, and presents two new branches: an analytic polynomial branch (Section 3.4.1) and a numerical branch (Section 3.4.2) intended to turn on a mesonic twist n1 together with baryonic charges. The abstract claims that a new solution with baryonic and mesonic charges turned on simultaneously is found, and that necessary and sufficient conditions are constructed.

Significance. If the classification statement is fully established, the paper would extend the N=(2,0) results of [21] to N=(1,0) and provide a framework for near-horizon geometries relevant to I-extremization and AdS4 black-hole microstate counting. The paper has several concrete strengths: the derivation is grounded in the known Killing-spinor geometry of [23]; the N=(2,0) reduction reproduces known results; the recasting of the universal-twist and Betti-multiplet solutions is careful; and the independent Killing-spinor calculation in Appendix C yields the same master ODE, providing a useful cross-check. However, the advertised new mesonic-charge solution is not supported by a charge computation: no charge integral is evaluated for the numerical backgrounds, and the paper itself calls n1 a 'would-be mesonic charge'. The lasting value of the manuscript therefore lies mainly in the classification and unification part, with the new-solution claim requiring substantial additional evidence or a significant softening.

major comments (3)

[§2.3.2, Eqs. (2.29a)-(2.30c)] The abstract and Section 2 state that necessary and sufficient conditions for N=(1,0) supersymmetry are constructed, but the text immediately after (2.30c) only says "It seem likely that these are necessary and sufficient conditions for supersymmetry" and concedes that "we have not totally ruled out the possibility of some redundancy." Sufficiency follows from (2.12)-(2.14), but no proof is given that every N=(1,0) AdS2 solution with SU(4)-structure satisfies all of (2.29a)-(2.30c). Since the classification claim is a central advertised result, the authors should either complete the necessity argument or state the result as sufficient conditions and adjust the abstract and conclusions accordingly.
[§3.4.2, Eqs. (3.18)-(3.21), Figures 1-3] The numerical solutions with n1 != 0 are not shown to carry mesonic or baryonic charge. The electric and magnetic charges defined in (3.18)-(3.21) are evaluated only for the analytic branch (3.19), (3.21), (3.28), (3.29), and that branch is explicitly said in footnote 5 not to be the mesonic-twist solution. For the numerical backgrounds, no Page charge, flux integral, or entropy is computed as a function of n1, so the abstract's claim of "a new solution with baryonic and mesonic charges turned on simultaneously" is not established; n1 could still be a coordinate artifact. Please compute at least one physical charge for the numerical solution and show that it is nonzero and properly quantized, or revise the claim.
[§3.4.2, ODE (3.8) and shooting method] The numerical construction is presented with tuned values of u2 and x_R (for example, u2 = -16.12833 and x_R = 0.2651715 for n1 = 1) but without any stated numerical accuracy. The paper does not report the residual of (3.8) over the interval [x_L, x_R], the tolerance in the shooting condition U'(x_R) = -2, or the sensitivity of the solution to the truncation order Jmax in (3.42). Since this numerical solution is the only evidence for the new mesonic-charge branch, please provide residual and convergence checks or explicitly characterize the results as preliminary numerical evidence.

minor comments (3)

[§2.3.2 and Conclusions] There are several typos and grammatical issues: "It seem likely" should be "It seems likely", "parametrixed" should be "parametrized", and "susyersymmetry" should be "supersymmetry".
[Figures 1-3] The figure captions are terse parameter lists; captions should be self-contained and should state, for example, what is plotted, the fixed external parameters, and the consequence of the chosen u2 values.
[§3.3.2, Eqs. (3.18), (3.20)] The charge definitions use a potential A with dA = F and iota_V A = 0, but the global existence and closure of the Page charge integrand on the internal manifold are not discussed; a brief comment on why these integrals are well defined would be helpful.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the SU(4)-structure conditions are derived from the independent Gauntlett–Pakis Killing-spinor theorem, and the numerical solutions are verified against the Bianchi identity and 4-form equation of motion.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained and not circular. The necessary and sufficient Killing-spinor geometry (2.12)-(2.14) is taken from the independent external result of Gauntlett and Pakis [23]; the paper then substitutes the AdS2/SU(4)-structure bilinears (2.28a)-(2.28c) into those conditions to obtain (2.29a)-(2.30c). No step equates a predicted quantity to a fitted input by construction. For the Q^{1,1,1} application, the N=(2,0) specialization is derived in section 2.4 and only afterwards cross-checked against [21], so the agreement is a consistency check, not a load-bearing self-citation. The numerical solutions in section 3.4.2 are obtained by solving the 4-form equation of motion (3.8), with u2 tuned to satisfy the boundary regularity condition U'(x_R) = -2; this is a boundary-value condition, not a fit to a target observable. The only flagged weakness is interpretive: the advertised mesonic charge is never computed, and the paper itself calls n1 the 'would-be mesonic charge' and concedes in footnote 5 that the polynomial solution 'is not the solution with a mesonic twist.' That gap affects whether the numerical solution has the claimed physical interpretation, but it is not circularity, because n1 is an input ansatz parameter rather than an output obtained by fitting a charge. Self-citations ([3], [7], [45]) appear only as contextual references and do not support any central claim. The paper even states that sufficiency of (2.29a)-(2.30c) follows from [23] while noting possible redundancy, which is an honest limitation rather than a circular move. Overall, the central derivation is independent and the analysis is not circular.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central derivation rests on the standard G-structure machinery of [23] plus a specific ansatz for Q^{1,1,1} solutions. The numerical solutions require tuning u2 as a boundary-value parameter, but no new particles, forces, or fields are introduced. The free parameters are constants of the ansatz and integration constants from the Bianchi identity, not fits to external data.

free parameters (4)

u2 = -10.81250, -16.12833, -25.06519, -48.39740 (for n1=0,1,2,3 in Example 1)
Second derivative of U at the left boundary; tuned in the numerical shooting method to satisfy U'(x_R) = -2, which removes conical singularities. It is a hand-chosen parameter, not fixed by the equations.
external warp and flux constants f0,f1,f2,f3,c1,c2 = examples: (2,1,1,2,4,1) and (3/2,2,3,1,3,0)
Free constants in the metric and flux ansatz (3.1)-(3.4). They are not determined by the equations of motion and are fixed by hand in the examples; the regularity conditions constrain but do not fix them.
mesonic twist n1 = 0,1,2,3 in the numerical examples
Parameter in the fibration ρ that is intended to correspond to a mesonic charge. It is a free parameter of the ansatz; the new numerical solutions are explored for several discrete values.
Riemann surface curvature k = k=1 for the new regular and numerical solutions
Curvature of Σ_g; the universal twist requires k=-1 for positive-definite metric, while the new polynomial and numerical branches require k=1. It is an input choice, not an output.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption The 11-dimensional supergravity equations of motion and the Killing spinor equation (2.4) are the governing physical equations.
The paper builds all solutions on this physical framework; it is not derived in the paper.
standard math The geometric classification of a single Killing spinor presented in [23,24] is necessary and sufficient for supersymmetry, giving (2.12)-(2.14).
The paper relies on this theorem from the literature to convert spinor equations into differential conditions on the bi-linears.
domain assumption The internal 9-manifold M9 admits an SU(4)-structure with a unit 1-form V orthogonal to the structure forms, as in (2.18)-(2.20), and the spinor ansatz (2.5) holds.
This defines the class of solutions considered; it excludes Spin(7)-structure and other G-structures, though appendix A proves Spin(7) gives no solutions.
domain assumption For N=(2,0) enhancement, the internal spinors are charged under an SO(2) R-symmetry and the solution is invariant under the dual U(1), equations (2.36)-(2.42).
This is the enhancement assumption that leads to the Kähler-structure conditions (2.44).
domain assumption The Q^{1,1,1} metric and flux ansatz (3.1)-(3.4) is sufficiently general to capture the desired mesonic and baryonic solutions.
The paper asserts this ansatz following the general conditions, but does not prove exhaustiveness; it later notes the general ODE (3.8) remains unsolved.
domain assumption There are no localized sources, so the Bianchi identity is dG4=0 as in (2.31a).
The paper states this explicitly and notes that with sources additional calibration conditions would be needed.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Aspects of AdS$_2$ classification in M-theory: Solutions with mesonic and baryonic charges." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HN6YYT3V

@misc{pith2026190808518,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Aspects of AdS$_2$ classification in M-theory: Solutions with mesonic and baryonic charges},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HN6YYT3V}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.08518}
}

abstract

We construct necessary and sufficient geometric conditions for a class of AdS$_2$ solutions of M-theory with, at least, minimal supersymmetry to exist. We generalize previous results in the literature for ${\cal N}=(2,0)$ supersymmetry in AdS$_2$ to ${\cal N}=(1,0)$. When the solution can be locally described as AdS$_2\times \Sigma_g \times \,$SE$_7$ with $\Sigma_g$ a Riemann surface of genus $g$ and SE$_7$ a seven-dimensional Sasaki-Einstein manifold, we clarify and unify various solutions present in the literature. In the case of SE$_7=Q^{1,1,1}$ we find a new solution with baryonic and mesonic charges turned on simultaneously.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.08518 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** (f0, f1, f2, f3, c1, c2, k) = (2, 1, 1, 2, 4, 1, 1) and u1 = 2 studied in section 3.4.1. Example 2 We find another numerical solution with different external parameters (f0, f1, f2, f3, c1, c2, k) = ( 3 2 , 2, 3, 1, 3, 0, 1), u1 = 2, and n1 = 2. The tunable parameter is chosen as u2 = −21.32431 for U 0 (xR) = −2 as in Example 1 and the corresponding numerical solution is plotted in the left hand side of [PITH_FULL_… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** (f0, f1, f2, f3, c1, c2, k) = (2, 1, 1, 2, 4, 1, 1) and u1 = 2: Note that, in the upper-left panel for n1 = 0, the numerical plot (blue) matches the constant value of e A(x1) from the exact quadratic polynomial solution U(x1) = − 173 32 x1(x1 − xR) (red, dashed). 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08 0.10 x1 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05 U (x1 ) n1=2 xR =0.1084641 -0.35 -0.30 -0.25 -0.20 -0.15 -0.10x1 -0.01 0.01 0.02 0.03 U (x1 ) n1=2 [P… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** (f0, f1, f2, f3, c1, c2, k) = ( 3 2 , 2, 3, 1, 3, 0, 1) and u2 = −21.32431: the numerical solution(LHS) is distinguished from the polynomial solution(RHS). differential and algebraic conditions that the background needs to satisfy are given in (2.29a)-(2.30c). Let us briefly summarize the situation. Since an SU(4)-structure is canonically eight-dimensional, we find that the relevant data consists of a real 1-form V … view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

57 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages

[23]

J. P. Gauntlett and S. Pakis, The Geometry of D = 11 killing spinors , JHEP 04 (2003) 039, [ hep-th/0212008]. 38

arXiv 2003
[21]

Donos, J

A. Donos, J. P. Gauntlett and N. Kim, AdS Solutions Through Transgression, JHEP 09 (2008) 021, [ 0807.4375]

arXiv 2008
[1]

Benini, K

F. Benini, K. Hristov and A. Zaﬀaroni, Black hole microstates in AdS 4 from supersymmetric localization, JHEP 05 (2016) 054, [ 1511.04085]

arXiv 2016
[2]

Benini, K

F. Benini, K. Hristov and A. Zaﬀaroni, Exact microstate counting for dyonic black holes in AdS4 , 1608.07294

arXiv
[3]

Microstate Counting of $AdS_4$ Hyperbolic Black Hole Entropy via the Topologically Twisted Index

A. Cabo-Bizet, V. I. Giraldo-Rivera and L. A. Pando Zayas, Microstate counting of AdS4 hyperbolic black hole entropy via the topologically twisted index , JHEP 08 (2017) 023, [ 1701.07893]

work page Pith review arXiv 2017
[4]

Benini, H

F. Benini, H. Khachatryan and P. Milan, Black hole entropy in massive Type IIA, Class. Quant. Grav. 35 (2018) 035004, [ 1707.06886]

arXiv 2018
[5]

S. M. Hosseini, K. Hristov and A. Passias, Holographic microstate counting for AdS4 black holes in massive IIA supergravity , JHEP 10 (2017) 190, [1707.06884]

arXiv 2017
[6]

Azzurli, N

F. Azzurli, N. Bobev, P. M. Crichigno, V. S. Min and A. Zaﬀaroni, A universal counting of black hole microstates in AdS 4, JHEP 02 (2018) 054, [ 1707.04257]

arXiv 2018

Show all 57 references

[7]

D. Gang, N. Kim and L. A. Pando Zayas, Precision Microstate Counting for the Entropy of Wrapped M5-branes, 1905.01559

1905 arXiv
[8]

S. M. Hosseini, Black hole microstates and supersymmetric localization . PhD thesis, Milan Bicocca U., 2018-02. 1803.01863. 37

2018 arXiv
[9]

Zaﬀaroni, Lectures on AdS Black Holes, Holography and Localization , 2019

A. Zaﬀaroni, Lectures on AdS Black Holes, Holography and Localization , 2019. 1902.07176

2019 arXiv
[10]

S. Choi, C. Hwang and S. Kim, Quantum vortices, M2-branes and black holes , 1908.02470

1908 arXiv
[11]

Nian and L

J. Nian and L. A. Pando Zayas, Microscopic Entropy of Rotating Electrically Charged AdS4 Black Holes from Field Theory Localization , 1909.07943

1909 arXiv
[12]

S. M. Hosseini and A. Zaﬀaroni, LargeN matrix models for 3d N = 2 theories: twisted index, free energy and black holes , JHEP 08 (2016) 064, [ 1604.03122]

2016 arXiv
[13]

S. M. Hosseini and N. Mekareeya, LargeN topologically twisted index: necklace quivers, dualities, and Sasaki-Einstein spaces , JHEP 08 (2016) 089, [1604.03397]

2016 arXiv
[14]

S. L. Cacciatori and D. Klemm, Supersymmetric AdS(4) black holes and attractors, JHEP 01 (2010) 085, [ 0911.4926]

2010 arXiv
[15]

Cvetic, M

M. Cvetic, M. J. Duﬀ, P. Hoxha, J. T. Liu, H. Lu, J. X. Lu et al., Embedding AdS black holes in ten-dimensions and eleven-dimensions , Nucl. Phys. B558 (1999) 96–126, [ hep-th/9903214]

1999 arXiv
[16]

Cassani, P

D. Cassani, P. Koerber and O. Varela, All homogeneous N=2 M-theory truncations with supersymmetric AdS4 vacua , JHEP 11 (2012) 173, [1208.1262]

2012 arXiv
[17]

Halmagyi, M

N. Halmagyi, M. Petrini and A. Zaﬀaroni, BPS black holes in AdS4 from M-theory, JHEP 08 (2013) 124, [ 1305.0730]

2013 arXiv
[18]

Halmagyi, Static BPS black holes in AdS 4 with general dyonic charges , JHEP 03 (2015) 032, [ 1408.2831]

N. Halmagyi, Static BPS black holes in AdS 4 with general dyonic charges , JHEP 03 (2015) 032, [ 1408.2831]

2015 arXiv
[19]

Kim and J.-D

N. Kim and J.-D. Park, Comments on AdS(2) solutions of D=11 supergravity , JHEP 09 (2006) 041, [ hep-th/0607093]

2006 arXiv
[20]

J. P. Gauntlett, N. Kim and D. Waldram, Supersymmetric AdS(3), AdS(2) and Bubble Solutions, JHEP 04 (2007) 005, [ hep-th/0612253]

2007 arXiv
[22]

Donos and J

A. Donos and J. P. Gauntlett, Supersymmetric quantum criticality supported by baryonic charges, JHEP 10 (2012) 120, [ 1208.1494]

2012 arXiv
[24]

J. P. Gauntlett, J. B. Gutowski and S. Pakis, The Geometry of D = 11 null Killing spinors , JHEP 12 (2003) 049, [ hep-th/0311112]

2003 arXiv
[25]

O. A. P. Mac Conamhna and E. O Colgain, Supersymmetric wrapped membranes, AdS(2) spaces, and bubbling geometries, JHEP 03 (2007) 115, [hep-th/0612196]

2007 arXiv
[26]

Katmadas and A

S. Katmadas and A. Tomasiello, AdS4 black holes from M-theory , JHEP 12 (2015) 111, [ 1509.00474]

2015 arXiv
[27]

Prins, On ﬂux vacua, SU (n)-structures and generalised complex geometry

D. Prins, On ﬂux vacua, SU (n)-structures and generalised complex geometry . PhD thesis, Lyon, IPN, 2015. 1602.05415

2015 arXiv
[28]

Legramandi, L

A. Legramandi, L. Martucci and A. Tomasiello, Timelike structures of ten-dimensional supersymmetry, JHEP 04 (2019) 109, [ 1810.08625]

2019 arXiv
[29]

J. P. Gauntlett, D. Martelli and D. Waldram, Superstrings with intrinsic torsion , Phys. Rev. D69 (2004) 086002, [ hep-th/0302158]

2004 arXiv
[30]

Aharony, O

O. Aharony, O. Bergman, D. L. Jaﬀeris and J. Maldacena, N=6 superconformal Chern-Simons-matter theories, M2-branes and their gravity duals , JHEP 10 (2008) 091, [ 0806.1218]

2008 arXiv
[31]

Martelli and J

D. Martelli and J. Sparks, Moduli spaces of Chern-Simons quiver gauge theories and AdS(4)/CFT(3), Phys. Rev. D78 (2008) 126005, [ 0808.0912]

2008 arXiv
[32]

Hanany and A

A. Hanany and A. Zaﬀaroni, Tilings, Chern-Simons Theories and M2 Branes , JHEP 10 (2008) 111, [ 0808.1244]

2008 arXiv
[33]

Franco, I

S. Franco, I. R. Klebanov and D. Rodriguez-Gomez, M2-branes on Orbifolds of the Cone over Q**1,1,1 , JHEP 08 (2009) 033, [ 0903.3231]

2009 arXiv
[34]

Benini, C

F. Benini, C. Closset and S. Cremonesi, Chiral ﬂavors and M2-branes at toric CY4 singularities, JHEP 02 (2010) 036, [ 0911.4127]

2010 arXiv
[35]

Cheon, H

S. Cheon, H. Kim and N. Kim, Calculating the partition function of N=2 Gauge theories on S3 and AdS/CFT correspondence, JHEP 05 (2011) 134, [1102.5565]

2011 arXiv
[36]

Martelli and J

D. Martelli and J. Sparks, AdS(40 / CFT(3) duals from M2-branes at hypersurface singularities and their deformations , JHEP 12 (2009) 017, [0909.2036]

2009 arXiv
[37]

C. P. Herzog, I. R. Klebanov, S. S. Pufu and T. Tesileanu, Multi-Matrix Models and Tri-Sasaki Einstein Spaces, Phys. Rev. D83 (2011) 046001, [ 1011.5487]

2011 arXiv
[38]

Amariti, M

A. Amariti, M. Fazzi, N. Mekareeya and A. Nedelin, New 3dN = 2 SCFT’s with N 3/2 scaling, 1903.02586. 39

1903 arXiv
[39]

Jain and A

D. Jain and A. Ray, 3dN = 2 ˆADE Chern-Simons quivers, Phys. Rev. D100 (2019) 046007, [ 1902.10498]

2019 arXiv
[40]

Jain, Twisted Indices of more 3d Quivers , 1908.03035

D. Jain, Twisted Indices of more 3d Quivers , 1908.03035

1908 arXiv
[41]

J. P. Gauntlett, D. Martelli and J. Sparks, Toric geometry and the dual of I-extremization, JHEP 06 (2019) 140, [ 1904.04282]

2019 arXiv
[42]

S. M. Hosseini and A. Zaﬀaroni, Geometry ofI-extremization and black holes microstates, 1904.04269

1904 arXiv
[43]

Kim and N

H. Kim and N. Kim, Black holes with baryonic charge and I-extremization, 1904.05344

1904 arXiv
[44]

C. P. Herzog and I. R. Klebanov, Gravity duals of fractional branes in various dimensions, Phys. Rev. D63 (2001) 126005, [ hep-th/0101020]

2001 arXiv
[45]

Cabo-Bizet, U

A. Cabo-Bizet, U. Kol, L. A. Pando Zayas, I. Papadimitriou and V. Rathee, Entropy functional and the holographic attractor mechanism , JHEP 05 (2018) 155, [1712.01849]

2018 arXiv
[46]

Halmagyi and S

N. Halmagyi and S. Lal, On the on-shell: the action of AdS 4 black holes, JHEP 03 (2018) 146, [ 1710.09580]

2018 arXiv
[47]

Benetti Genolini, J

P. Benetti Genolini, J. M. P´ erez Ipi˜ na and J. Sparks,Localization of the action in AdS/CFT, 1906.11249

1906 arXiv
[48]

D. Gang, N. Kim and S. Lee, Holography of 3d-3d correspondence at Large N , JHEP 04 (2015) 091, [ 1409.6206]

2015 arXiv
[49]

Gang and N

D. Gang and N. Kim, LargeN twisted partition functions in 3d-3d correspondence and Holography, Phys. Rev. D99 (2019) 021901, [ 1808.02797]

2019 arXiv
[50]

I. Bah, M. Gabella and N. Halmagyi, BPS M5-branes as Defects for the 3d-3d Correspondence, JHEP 11 (2014) 112, [ 1407.0403]

2014 arXiv
[51]

H. Lin, O. Lunin and J. M. Maldacena, Bubbling AdS space and 1/2 BPS geometries, JHEP 10 (2004) 025, [ hep-th/0409174]

2004 arXiv
[52]

Lunin, 1/2-BPS states in M theory and defects in the dual CFTs , JHEP 10 (2007) 014, [ 0704.3442]

O. Lunin, 1/2-BPS states in M theory and defects in the dual CFTs , JHEP 10 (2007) 014, [ 0704.3442]

2007 arXiv
[53]

D’Hoker, J

E. D’Hoker, J. Estes, M. Gutperle and D. Krym, Exact Half-BPS Flux Solutions in M-theory. I: Local Solutions , JHEP 08 (2008) 028, [ 0806.0605]. 40

2008 arXiv
[54]

Martelli and J

D. Martelli and J. Sparks, G structures, ﬂuxes and calibrations in M theory , Phys. Rev. D68 (2003) 085014, [ hep-th/0306225]

2003 arXiv
[55]

J. P. Gauntlett, D. Martelli, J. Sparks and D. Waldram, Supersymmetric AdS(5) solutions of M theory , Class. Quant. Grav. 21 (2004) 4335–4366, [hep-th/0402153]

2004 arXiv
[56]

I. Bena, P. Heidmann and D. Turton, AdS2 holography: mind the cap , JHEP 12 (2018) 028, [ 1806.02834]

2018 arXiv
[57]

Li, S.-L

Y.-Z. Li, S.-L. Li and H. Lu, Exact Embeddings of JT Gravity in Strings and M-theory, Eur. Phys. J. C78 (2018) 791, [ 1804.09742]. 41

2018 arXiv

Pith tools

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

[1] [23]

J. P. Gauntlett and S. Pakis, The Geometry of D = 11 killing spinors , JHEP 04 (2003) 039, [ hep-th/0212008]. 38

arXiv 2003

[2] [21]

Donos, J

A. Donos, J. P. Gauntlett and N. Kim, AdS Solutions Through Transgression, JHEP 09 (2008) 021, [ 0807.4375]

arXiv 2008

[3] [1]

Benini, K

F. Benini, K. Hristov and A. Zaﬀaroni, Black hole microstates in AdS 4 from supersymmetric localization, JHEP 05 (2016) 054, [ 1511.04085]

arXiv 2016

[4] [2]

Benini, K

F. Benini, K. Hristov and A. Zaﬀaroni, Exact microstate counting for dyonic black holes in AdS4 , 1608.07294

arXiv

[5] [3]

Microstate Counting of $AdS_4$ Hyperbolic Black Hole Entropy via the Topologically Twisted Index

A. Cabo-Bizet, V. I. Giraldo-Rivera and L. A. Pando Zayas, Microstate counting of AdS4 hyperbolic black hole entropy via the topologically twisted index , JHEP 08 (2017) 023, [ 1701.07893]

work page Pith review arXiv 2017

[6] [4]

Benini, H

F. Benini, H. Khachatryan and P. Milan, Black hole entropy in massive Type IIA, Class. Quant. Grav. 35 (2018) 035004, [ 1707.06886]

arXiv 2018

[7] [5]

S. M. Hosseini, K. Hristov and A. Passias, Holographic microstate counting for AdS4 black holes in massive IIA supergravity , JHEP 10 (2017) 190, [1707.06884]

arXiv 2017

[8] [6]

Azzurli, N

F. Azzurli, N. Bobev, P. M. Crichigno, V. S. Min and A. Zaﬀaroni, A universal counting of black hole microstates in AdS 4, JHEP 02 (2018) 054, [ 1707.04257]

arXiv 2018