Compactification on Calabi-Yau threefolds: Consistent truncation to pure supergravity

Jieming Lin; K.S. Stelle; Torben Skrzypek

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Compactification on Calabi-Yau threefolds: Consistent truncation to pure supergravity

T0 review · 2 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper proves that compactifying 11d or 10d maximal supergravity on any Calabi-Yau threefold can be consistently truncated to pure 5d or 4d supergravity with eight supercharges, so every lower-dimensional solution lifts exactly to a…

desk verdict A careful explicit construction of CY3 truncations to pure supergravity, with a real gap in the claimed full non-linear proof: Einstein's equation is omitted at fermionic order. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.00186 v2 pith:PPAMJ5VO submitted 2024-11-29 hep-th

Jieming Lin , Torben Skrzypek , K.S. Stelle This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-th

keywords consistenttruncationCalabi-YauthreefoldsupergravityKaluza-KleincompactificationfermioniccorrectionssupersymmetryextremalblackholestypeII

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

Compactifying eleven- or ten-dimensional supergravity on a Calabi-Yau threefold usually leaves a tower of massive and massless modes, and solutions of the truncated lower-dimensional theory need not lift to exact higher-dimensional solutions. This paper constructs explicit truncations that retain only the pure supergravity multiplet with eight supercharges—the metric, the graviphoton, and the gravitini—and proves that these truncations are consistent: every solution of the 5d or 4d equations, including fermionic terms to all orders, solves the original 11d or 10d equations. The consistency argument works for five chains: 11d on CY3 to 5d; 5d on S1 to 4d N=2; 11d on CY3 x S1 to 4d; IIA on CY3 to 4d; and IIB on CY3 to 4d. The construction uses only the universal Calabi-Yau structures (Kähler form, holomorphic three-form, Killing spinors), so it is independent of the chosen Calabi-Yau and its Hodge numbers. If right, any solution of these minimal supergravities—such as the extremal black holes embedded in the paper—is guaranteed to be an exact solution of the higher-dimensional theory.

What carries the argument

The machinery is a set of embedding ansätze organized by supercovariance. For each truncation the higher-dimensional fields are expressed in terms of lower-dimensional fields times the invariant tensors {ω, Ω} and the Killing spinors η± on the Calabi-Yau threefold. The naive bosonic ansatz is corrected by spinor bilinears: a field strength that should be truncated away is not set to zero but to a gravitino bilinear, chosen so that the supercovariant field strength of the higher-dimensional theory reduces exactly to the supercovariant field strength of the lower-dimensional theory (for example, setting F_{μνρσ} = 3 Ψ̄_{[μ} Γ_{νρ} Ψ_{σ]} in the 11d-to-5d case). These supercovariant identities are what let the proof proceed at non-linear fermion order, because they turn the reduction of equations of motion and supersymmetry transformations into algebraic projections onto SU(3) singlets plus the lower-dimensional equations.

What would settle it

A reader could test this by inserting the full ansätze (2.19), (2.21), or (2.23) into the corresponding μν Einstein equation with all fermionic terms kept (A.26), (A.37), or (A.57) and checking whether the result reduces exactly to the pure 4d Einstein equation (A.73) after using the lower-dimensional equations of motion and Fierz identities; Appendix B stops before this check.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper establishes that five specific Kaluza-Klein truncations are consistent: minimal 5d supergravity from 11d on any CY3; pure 4d N=2 supergravity from 5d on S1; 11d on CY3 x S1 to pure 4d N=2; IIA on CY3 to pure 4d N=2; and IIB on CY3 to pure 4d N=2. Consistency means the embedding of lower-dimensional fields into higher-dimensional fields maps every solution of the lower-dimensional equations of motion to a solution of the full higher-dimensional theory. The proof covers the equations of motion and supersymmetry transformations with fermionic terms kept to all orders. The constructions use only the universal CY3 data—the Kähler form, the holomorphic three-form, and the Killing spinors—so the result is independent of the particular Calabi-Yau manifold. The paper also embeds an extremal 4d black hole in each higher-dimensional theory and proposes, without proving consistency, ansätze that include universal matter multiplets.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that matching supersymmetry transformations and checking every equation of motion except Einstein's at full fermionic order is enough to guarantee Einstein's equation too; this is asserted at the start of Appendix B, not proved.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Any solution of minimal 5d supergravity or pure 4d N=2 supergravity can be uplifted to an exact solution of 11d, IIA, or IIB supergravity on a Calabi-Yau threefold; the paper demonstrates this for a charged extremal black hole.
The truncations are universal: they depend only on the Kähler form, the holomorphic three-form, and the Killing spinors, not on the Calabi-Yau's Hodge numbers or on which Calabi-Yau is chosen.
Fermion bilinear corrections to the naive embedding ansatz are necessary; setting the truncated components literally to zero would not produce matching supercovariant quantities at non-linear order.
The circle reduction commutes with the Calabi-Yau truncation, and the IIA and IIB ansätze are compatible with mirror symmetry, with IIA fields wrapping the Kähler form and IIB fields wrapping the holomorphic three-form.
The proposed matter-multiplet ansätze would extend the consistent truncation to the full SU(3)-singlet sector, but their consistency is not yet established.

Reading between the lines

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

An explicit check of the quartic-fermion terms in the μν Einstein equation would either close the proof or reveal that the truncation is consistent only in bosonic backgrounds; the paper's Appendix B deliberately leaves this unchecked.
Because the ansätze use only ω, Ω, and the Killing spinors, the same supercovariant-completion strategy could be tried on other SU(3)-structure manifolds, where dω and dΩ are not both zero; the algebraic identities used here would need to be replaced by torsion identities.
The consistency result makes every 4d extremal black hole an exact higher-dimensional solution, so exploring non-extremal or rotating solutions of pure 4d N=2 supergravity would generate new 11d/10d geometries without a separate uplift calculation.
The paper's proposed matter-multiplet ansätze, if they prove consistent, would complete the SU(3)-singlet sector and give a cleaner statement of mirror symmetry between the IIA and IIB reductions; that check is explicitly left open.

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

Short version: this paper does the explicit, manifold-independent construction people have expected since the generalised-geometry work: consistent truncations of 11d and 10d maximal supergravity on a CY3 down to pure 5d and 4d N=2 supergravity. The bosonic reductions are written out in detail for 11d, IIA, and IIB; the supersymmetry transformation matching is thorough; and the extremal black hole uplifts give a concrete payoff. The appendix of equations of motion is itself a useful compilation. Credit where due: this is real work, and the embedding Ansätze are new.

Now the soft spot. The reader's concern about Appendix B is correct and it is load-bearing. The appendix opens by asserting that because the equations of motion are connected by the supersymmetry transformations that were matched in Section 3, Einstein's equation can be omitted and the proof of consistency still concluded. That is not demonstrated. The standard argument would require showing that the SUSY variation of the gravitino equation yields the Einstein equation up to terms proportional to the other equations of motion, and that this closure relation is preserved by the truncation Ansätze. Merely matching the transformation rules does not guarantee the missing equation is satisfied at bilinear and quartic order in fermions. So the central claim, full non-linear consistency, has a genuine gap as written.

I want to be clear about the scale of the problem. This is not a fatal flaw in the whole enterprise. The bosonic consistency is solid, the fermionic field-strength equations and Bianchi identities are checked in detail, and the gravitino equation is plausibly parallel to the SUSY transformation. The missing step is specific and probably fillable. But it is not a cosmetic omission, because the paper's headline claim is exactly the full non-linear consistency. The authors should either supply the omitted Einstein equation check or adjust the claim to consistency at the level of the equations they did check.

The citation pattern looks honest: they cite the generalised-geometry paper and earlier conjectures and position themselves as making those implicit constructions explicit. No circularity red flags.

Bottom line: send this to a serious referee. The referee should focus on Appendix B and ask for either the omitted Einstein equation at fermionic order or a precise on-shell closure argument. If that gap closes, this is a strong, citable paper. I would accept with major revision, not desk reject.

Referee Report

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper constructs explicit Kaluza-Klein embedding Ansätze for truncations of 11d supergravity, type IIA supergravity, and type IIB supergravity on a Calabi-Yau threefold to pure supergravity with eight supercharges in five and four dimensions. The claimed truncations are: 11d on CY3 to pure 5d supergravity, further reduction on S1 to pure 4d N=2 supergravity, 11d on CY3×S1 to pure 4d N=2 supergravity, IIA on CY3 to pure 4d N=2 supergravity, and IIB on CY3 to pure 4d N=2 supergravity. The paper checks the bosonic equations of motion, matches the supersymmetry transformations on-shell, and then claims consistency at full non-linear order in fermions by means of Appendix B, where all equations except Einstein's equation are discussed. The Einstein equation is omitted on the stated grounds that supersymmetry transformations connect the equations of motion and that the transformations have already been matched. The paper also embeds a four-dimensional extremal black hole into the higher-dimensional theories and proposes Ansätze for truncations including universal matter multiplets, explicitly leaving the consistency check of those matter Ansätze to future work.

Significance. If the full non-linear consistency proof can be completed, this is a valuable result: it provides explicit, Calabi-Yau-independent truncations of maximal supergravity to pure supergravity with eight supercharges, with no fitted parameters and with explicit checks of bosonic reductions and supersymmetry transformations. The application to embedding extremal black holes is a concrete and useful dividend of the construction, and the extensive appendices collecting equations of motion and supersymmetry transformations are a service to the community. However, the central claim of consistency at full non-linear order in fermions currently rests on an unproved assertion in Appendix B that the omitted Einstein equation is redundant. This is a load-bearing gap: without a derivation of that redundancy, the proof establishes bosonic consistency and on-shell matching of supersymmetry transformations, but not the full non-linear fermionic consistency claimed in the abstract and in Section 6.

major comments (2)

[Appendix B, opening paragraph; Section 3, p. 9] The paper omits Einstein's equation at fermionic order and asserts that this is justified because the equations of motion are connected by supersymmetry transformations that have been matched in Section 3. This assertion is load-bearing for the central claim of consistency at full non-linear order in fermions, but no derivation is provided. The standard argument would require showing, for instance, that a supersymmetry variation of the gravitino equation of motion yields the Einstein equation modulo the other equations of motion, and that this relation survives the truncation Ansatz. Matching supersymmetry transformations alone does not establish this, since the variation only constrains a projection of the Einstein equation through the non-invertible operator appearing in the Noether identity. Please supply the explicit computation or a rigorous general argument that the truncated Einstein equation follows from the checked equations.
[Appendix B.1, after Eq. (B.4); analogous statements in B.2 and B.3] The claim that the gravitino equation of motion reduces 'exactly parallel' to the supersymmetry transformation is not demonstrated. The gravitino equation is a first-order differential operator acting on the gravitino with no supersymmetry parameter, whereas the transformation rule contains the parameter; the shared supercovariant derivative structure does not by itself imply that the truncated gamma-trace combination of the gravitino equation vanishes whenever the corresponding supersymmetry transformation does. An explicit reduction of the gravitino equation of motion, or a precise algebraic map between the two, is needed before the proof can be considered complete.

minor comments (4)

[Section 2.3 and Appendix B.3] In several displayed equations, such as (3.35) and (B.15), the supercovariant field strength is written with the same symbol as the ordinary field strength F±(2); please distinguish F±(2) from F̂±(2) consistently to avoid ambiguity in the fermionic-order discussion.
[Appendix B, Eq. (B.1)] The first equality in (B.1) is presented without the Fierz manipulation that makes the quartic terms vanish; since this is the closure argument for the corrected Bianchi identity, a few intermediate steps or a reference to the relevant Fierz identity should be added.
[References [21] and [22]] References [21] and [22] are incomplete; in particular, reference [22] lacks journal or arXiv publication details and should be completed before publication.
[Section 4, D3-brane discussion] The phrase '3 parallel and 3 orthogonal directions' for a D3-brane wrapped on a three-cycle is somewhat ambiguous; please clarify the counting of worldvolume and transverse directions being compactified or smeared.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the truncation Ansätze are checked against independent higher-dimensional equations of motion, and the Appendix B Einstein-equation omission is a proof gap, not a circular step.

full rationale

The derivation is not circular. The lower-dimensional target theories (pure 5d and pure 4d N=2 supergravity) are taken from the supergravity literature as external data, not generated by the truncation Ansatz itself. The Ansätze are then substituted into the independent 11d/10d equations of motion and Bianchi identities (Sections 3.1–3.3), and the reductions are explicitly checked rather than assumed. The fermion-bilinear corrections to the Ansätze are fixed by requiring supercovariant quantities to match, e.g. Eqs. (1.2)–(1.3) and (2.13), and Appendix B then verifies that the corrected field strengths close and satisfy the reduced field-strength equations; these are non-trivial checks that could fail. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' prior work. The citation to [19] is not to the present authors, and the citation to [23] is to a conjecture that this paper explicitly confirms with an independent argument; neither is load-bearing for the consistency proof. The only caveat is Appendix B's assertion that matched supersymmetry transformations make the omitted fermionic Einstein equation redundant ("Given that the various equations of motion are connected by supersymmetry transformations which we have matched consistently in Section 3, we choose to omit Einstein's equation from this appendix but instead discuss all other equations of motion. This concludes the proof of consistency."). This is an unproven completeness gap, but it is not an input-output equivalence and does not make the derivation circular.

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

No fitted parameters or new physical entities are introduced in the central construction. The proof relies on standard Calabi-Yau geometry, literature supergravity equations, and one unproven supersymmetry-based inference about the omitted Einstein equation.

assumptions (5)

domain assumption A CY3 has SU(3) structure with Kahler form omega and holomorphic 3-form Omega satisfying d omega = d Omega = omega and Omega = 0, and admits a covariantly constant Killing spinor eta+ with charge conjugate eta-.
Section 2, Eqs. (2.1)-(2.3); this structure underlies all Ansatze.
domain assumption The SU(3)-singlet decomposition (2.7) is complete and no SU(3)-singlet vector exists on a generic irreducible CY3, i.e. eta-dagger Sigma_m eta = 0 in Eq. (2.6).
Used throughout Section 3 to show that mixed components of transformations and equations vanish.
domain assumption The 11d, IIA, and IIB supergravity equations of motion and supersymmetry transformations quoted in Appendix A from Refs. [41], [43], and [33] are correct.
The consistency proof reduces these equations, so any error in the quoted background material propagates into the result.
standard math Fierz identities and Clifford algebra identities, e.g. Eqs. (3.7), (3.8), and (3.39), are valid in the relevant dimensions and signatures.
Used to evaluate spinor bilinear projections in Section 3 and Appendix B.
ad hoc to paper Supersymmetry transformations relate the equations of motion so that verification of a subset, together with on-shell matching of transformations, implies reduction of the omitted Einstein equation.
Appendix B opening paragraph; this inference is load-bearing and is not demonstrated.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Compactification on Calabi-Yau threefolds: Consistent truncation to pure supergravity." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/PPAMJ5VO

@misc{pith2026241200186,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Compactification on Calabi-Yau threefolds: Consistent truncation to pure supergravity},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/PPAMJ5VO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.00186}
}

read the original abstract

We study compactifications of eleven- and ten-dimensional maximal supergravity on Calabi-Yau threefolds. We explicitly construct truncations to pure supergravity with eight supercharges in five and four dimensions and show that they are consistent, i.e. that every solution of the lower-dimensional equations of motion fully solves the higher-dimensional ones. We furthermore match the supersymmetry transformations and demonstrate the consistency to full non-linear order in fermions. Our construction is independent of the choice of Calabi-Yau threefold and only involves the universal structures such as the K\"ahler form and the holomorphic three-form, in agreement with implicit constructions in the generalised geometry literature. As an immediate application, we embed four-dimensional extremal black holes in the higher-dimensional supergravities. We furthermore propose Ans\"atze for consistent truncations on all universal structures, leading to supergravities with additional matter multiples. An extensive list of equations of motion and supersymmetry transformations for various supergravity theories is provided in the appendix.

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

Compactifying the Sen Action: Six Dimensions
hep-th 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 7.0 of 10

Compactification of the two-metric Sen action requires zero modes from both KK towers but preserves correct on-shell degrees of freedom without doubling.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

58 extracted references · 25 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

[1]

Grana, Flux compactiﬁcations in string theory: A Comprehensive re view, Phys

M. Grana, Flux compactiﬁcations in string theory: A Comprehensive re view, Phys. Rept. 423 (2006) 91 [hep-th/0509003]

arXiv 2006
[2]

Becker, M

K. Becker, M. Becker and J.H. Schwarz, String theory and M-theory: A modern introduction, Cambridge University Press (12, 2006), 10.1017/CBO9780511816086

doi:10.1017/cbo9780511816086 2006
[3]

Tomasiello, Geometry of String Theory Compactiﬁcations , Cambridge University Press (1, 2022), 10.1017/9781108635745

A. Tomasiello, Geometry of String Theory Compactiﬁcations , Cambridge University Press (1, 2022), 10.1017/9781108635745

doi:10.1017/9781108635745 2022
[4]

M.J. Duﬀ, S. Ferrara, C.N. Pope and K.S. Stelle, Massive Kaluza-Klein Modes and Eﬀective Theories of Superstring Moduli , Nucl. Phys. B 333 (1990) 783

work page 1990
[5]

Duﬀ, B.E.W

M.J. Duﬀ, B.E.W. Nilsson, C.N. Pope and N.P. Warner, On the Consistency of the Kaluza-Klein Ansatz , Phys. Lett. B 149 (1984) 90

work page 1984
[6]

Nastase, D

H. Nastase, D. Vaman and P. van Nieuwenhuizen, Consistency of the AdS(7) x S(4) reduction and the origin of selfduality in odd dimensions , Nucl. Phys. B 581 (2000) 179 [hep-th/9911238]

arXiv 2000
[7]

Gauntlett and O

J.P. Gauntlett and O. Varela, Consistent Kaluza-Klein reductions for general supersymmetric AdS solutions , Phys. Rev. D 76 (2007) 126007 [0707.2315]. 41

arXiv 2007
[8]

Gauntlett and O

J.P. Gauntlett and O. Varela, D=5 SU(2) x U(1) Gauged Supergravity from D=11 Supergravity, JHEP 02 (2008) 083 [0712.3560]

arXiv 2008

Show all 58 references

[9]

Gauntlett, S

J.P. Gauntlett, S. Kim, O. Varela and D. Waldram, Consistent supersymmetric Kaluza-Klein truncations with massive modes , JHEP 04 (2009) 102 [0901.0676]

2009 arXiv
[10]

Gauntlett and O

J.P. Gauntlett and O. Varela, Universal Kaluza-Klein reductions of type IIB to N=4 supergravity in ﬁve dimensions , JHEP 06 (2010) 081 [1003.5642]

2010 arXiv
[11]

Donos, J.P

A. Donos, J.P. Gauntlett, N. Kim and O. Varela, Wrapped M5-branes, consistent truncations and AdS/CMT , JHEP 12 (2010) 003 [1009.3805]

2010 arXiv
[12]

Baguet, O

A. Baguet, O. Hohm and H. Samtleben, Consistent Type IIB Reductions to Maximal 5D Supergravity, Phys. Rev. D 92 (2015) 065004 [1506.01385]

2015 arXiv
[13]

Varela, Complete D = 11 embedding of SO(8) supergravity , Phys

O. Varela, Complete D = 11 embedding of SO(8) supergravity , Phys. Rev. D 97 (2018) 045010 [1512.04943]

2018 arXiv
[14]

Matthew Cheung, J.P

K.C. Matthew Cheung, J.P. Gauntlett and C. Rosen, Consistent KK truncations for M5-branes wrapped on Riemann surfaces , Class. Quant. Grav. 36 (2019) 225003 [1906.08900]

2019 arXiv
[15]

Josse, E

G. Josse, E. Malek, M. Petrini and D. Waldram, The higher-dimensional origin of ﬁve-dimensional N = 2 gauged supergravities , JHEP 06 (2022) 003 [2112.03931]

2022 arXiv
[16]

Cheung, J.H.T

K.C.M. Cheung, J.H.T. Fry, J.P. Gauntlett and J. Sparks, M5-branes wrapped on four-dimensional orbifolds , JHEP 08 (2022) 082 [2204.02990]

2022 arXiv
[17]

Couzens, H

C. Couzens, H. Kim, N. Kim, Y. Lee and M. Suh, D4-branes wrapped on four-dimensional orbifolds through consistent truncation , JHEP 02 (2023) 025 [2210.15695]

2023 arXiv
[18]

Faedo, A

F. Faedo, A. Fontanarossa and D. Martelli, Branes wrapped on orbifolds and their gravitational blocks, Lett. Math. Phys. 113 (2023) 51 [2210.16128]

2023 arXiv
[19]

Cassani, G

D. Cassani, G. Josse, M. Petrini and D. Waldram, Systematics of consistent truncations from generalised geometry , JHEP 11 (2019) 017 [1907.06730]

2019 arXiv
[20]

DeWitt, Dynamical theory of groups and ﬁelds , Gordon and Breach (1965)

B.S. DeWitt, Dynamical theory of groups and ﬁelds , Gordon and Breach (1965)

1965
[21]

Terrisse and D

R. Terrisse and D. Tsimpis, Consistent truncation and de sitter space from gravitation al instantons, Journal of High Energy Physics 2019 (2019)

2019
[22]

Tsimpis, Consistent truncation on calabi-yau and nearly-k¨ ahler manifolds, 2020

D. Tsimpis, Consistent truncation on calabi-yau and nearly-k¨ ahler manifolds, 2020

2020
[23]

Leung and K.S

R. Leung and K.S. Stelle, Supergravities on branes , JHEP 09 (2022) 099 [2205.13551]

2022 arXiv
[24]

Chamseddine and H

A.H. Chamseddine and H. Nicolai, Coupling the SO(2) Supergravity Through Dimensional Reduction, Phys. Lett. B 96 (1980) 89 [1808.08955]

1980 arXiv
[25]

Gibbons and C.M

G.W. Gibbons and C.M. Hull, A Bogomolny Bound for General Relativity and Solitons in N=2 Supergravity , Phys. Lett. B 109 (1982) 190

1982
[26]

Strominger and C

A. Strominger and C. Vafa, Microscopic origin of the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy , Phys. Lett. B 379 (1996) 99 [hep-th/9601029]

1996 arXiv
[27]

H. Lu, C.N. Pope and K.S. Stelle, Vertical versus diagonal dimensional reduction for p-branes, Nucl. Phys. B 481 (1996) 313 [hep-th/9605082]

1996 arXiv
[28]

Hulsey, S

G. Hulsey, S. Kachru, S. Yang and M. Zimet, Distributions of extremal black holes in Calabi-Yau compactiﬁcations, JHEP 10 (2020) 042 [1901.10614]. 42

2020 arXiv
[29]

Candelas and X

P. Candelas and X. de la Ossa, Moduli Space of Calabi-Yau Manifolds , Nucl. Phys. B 355 (1991) 455

1991
[30]

Andrianopoli, M

L. Andrianopoli, M. Bertolini, A. Ceresole, R. D’Auria, S. Ferrara and P. Fre’, General matter coupled N=2 supergravity , Nucl. Phys. B 476 (1996) 397 [hep-th/9603004]

1996 arXiv
[31]

Andrianopoli, M

L. Andrianopoli, M. Bertolini, A. Ceresole, R. D’Auria, S. Ferrara , P. Fre et al., N=2 supergravity and N=2 superYang-Mills theory on general sca lar manifolds: Symplectic covariance, gaugings and the momentum map , J. Geom. Phys. 23 (1997) 111 [hep-th/9605032]

1997 arXiv
[32]

Wess and B

J. Wess and B. Zumino, Superspace Formulation of Supergravity, Phys. Lett. B 66 (1977) 361

1977
[33]

Howe and P.C

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

1984
[34]

Coimbra, C

A. Coimbra, C. Strickland-Constable and D. Waldram, Supergravity as Generalised Geometry I: Type II Theories , JHEP 11 (2011) 091 [1107.1733]

2011 arXiv
[35]

Kupka, C

J. Kupka, C. Strickland-Constable and F. Valach, Direct derivation of gauged N = 1 supergravity in ten dimensions to all orders in fermions , 2410.16046

arXiv
[36]

Conlon, Moduli Stabilisation and Applications in IIB String Theory , Fortsch

J.P. Conlon, Moduli Stabilisation and Applications in IIB String Theory , Fortsch. Phys. 55 (2007) 287 [hep-th/0611039]

2007 arXiv
[37]

McAllister and F

L. McAllister and F. Quevedo, Moduli Stabilization in String Theory , 2310.20559

arXiv
[38]

Sohnius, Introducing supersymmetry, Physics Reports 128 (1985) 39

M.F. Sohnius, Introducing supersymmetry, Physics Reports 128 (1985) 39

1985
[39]

Coimbra, C

A. Coimbra, C. Strickland-Constable and D. Waldram, Supergravity as Generalised Geometry II: Ed(d) × R+ and M theory , JHEP 03 (2014) 019 [1212.1586]

2014 arXiv
[40]

Freedman and A

D.Z. Freedman and A. Van Proeyen, Supergravity, Cambridge University Press (2012), 10.1017/CBO9781139026833

2012 doi
[41]

Cremmer, B

E. Cremmer, B. Julia and J. Scherk, Supergravity Theory in 11 Dimensions , Phys. Lett. B 76 (1978) 409

1978
[42]

Cremmer and S

E. Cremmer and S. Ferrara, Formulation of Eleven-Dimensional Supergravity in Superspace, Phys. Lett. B 91 (1980) 61

1980
[43]

Campbell and P.C

I.C.G. Campbell and P.C. West, N=2 D=10 Nonchiral Supergravity and Its Spontaneous Compactiﬁcation, Nucl. Phys. B 243 (1984) 112

1984
[44]

West, Introduction to Strings and Branes , Cambridge University Press (2012)

P. West, Introduction to Strings and Branes , Cambridge University Press (2012)

2012
[45]

Schwarz and P.C

J.H. Schwarz and P.C. West, Symmetries and Transformations of Chiral N=2 D=10 Supergravity, Phys. Lett. B 126 (1983) 301

1983
[46]

Schwarz, Covariant Field Equations of Chiral N=2 D=10 Supergravity , Nucl

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

1983
[47]

Dall’Agata, K

G. Dall’Agata, K. Lechner and M. Tonin, D = 10, N = IIB supergravity: Lorentz invariant actions and duality , JHEP 07 (1998) 017 [hep-th/9806140]

1998 arXiv
[48]

Bergshoeﬀ, C.M

E. Bergshoeﬀ, C.M. Hull and T. Ortin, Duality in the type II superstring eﬀective action , Nucl. Phys. B 451 (1995) 547 [hep-th/9504081]

1995 arXiv
[49]

Bergshoeﬀ, H.J

E. Bergshoeﬀ, H.J. Boonstra and T. Ortin, S duality and dyonic p-brane solutions in type II string theory , Phys. Rev. D 53 (1996) 7206 [hep-th/9508091]. 43

1996 arXiv
[50]

Polchinski, String theory

J. Polchinski, String theory. Vol. 2: Superstring theory and beyond , Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics, Cambridge University Press (12, 2007), 10.1017/CBO9780511618123

2007 doi
[51]

Sen, Self-dual forms: action, hamiltonian and compactiﬁcation , Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 53 (2020) 084002

A. Sen, Self-dual forms: action, hamiltonian and compactiﬁcation , Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 53 (2020) 084002

2020
[52]

Mkrtchyan and F

K. Mkrtchyan and F. Valach, Democratic actions for type II supergravities , Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023) 066027 [2207.00626]

2023 arXiv
[53]

Hull, Covariant action for self-dual p-form gauge ﬁelds in genera l spacetimes, JHEP 04 (2024) 011 [2307.04748]

C.M. Hull, Covariant action for self-dual p-form gauge ﬁelds in genera l spacetimes, JHEP 04 (2024) 011 [2307.04748]

2024 arXiv
[54]

Gunaydin, G

M. Gunaydin, G. Sierra and P.K. Townsend, The Geometry of N=2 Maxwell-Einstein Supergravity and Jordan Algebras , Nucl. Phys. B 242 (1984) 244

1984
[55]

Gunaydin, G

M. Gunaydin, G. Sierra and P.K. Townsend, Gauging the d = 5 Maxwell-Einstein Supergravity Theories: More on Jordan Algebras , Nucl. Phys. B 253 (1985) 573

1985
[56]

Ceresole and G

A. Ceresole and G. Dall’Agata, General matter coupled N=2, D = 5 gauged supergravity , Nucl. Phys. B 585 (2000) 143 [hep-th/0004111]

2000 arXiv
[57]

Lauria and A.V

E. Lauria and A.V. Proeyen, N=2 supergravity in d = 4, 5, 6 dimensions, 2020

2020
[58]

Ferrara and P

S. Ferrara and P. van Nieuwenhuizen, Consistent Supergravity with Complex Spin 3/2 Gauge Fields , Phys. Rev. Lett. 37 (1976) 1669 . 44

1976

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Grana, Flux compactiﬁcations in string theory: A Comprehensive re view, Phys

M. Grana, Flux compactiﬁcations in string theory: A Comprehensive re view, Phys. Rept. 423 (2006) 91 [hep-th/0509003]

arXiv 2006

[2] [2]

Becker, M

K. Becker, M. Becker and J.H. Schwarz, String theory and M-theory: A modern introduction, Cambridge University Press (12, 2006), 10.1017/CBO9780511816086

doi:10.1017/cbo9780511816086 2006

[3] [3]

Tomasiello, Geometry of String Theory Compactiﬁcations , Cambridge University Press (1, 2022), 10.1017/9781108635745

A. Tomasiello, Geometry of String Theory Compactiﬁcations , Cambridge University Press (1, 2022), 10.1017/9781108635745

doi:10.1017/9781108635745 2022

[4] [4]

M.J. Duﬀ, S. Ferrara, C.N. Pope and K.S. Stelle, Massive Kaluza-Klein Modes and Eﬀective Theories of Superstring Moduli , Nucl. Phys. B 333 (1990) 783

work page 1990

[5] [5]

Duﬀ, B.E.W

M.J. Duﬀ, B.E.W. Nilsson, C.N. Pope and N.P. Warner, On the Consistency of the Kaluza-Klein Ansatz , Phys. Lett. B 149 (1984) 90

work page 1984

[6] [6]

Nastase, D

H. Nastase, D. Vaman and P. van Nieuwenhuizen, Consistency of the AdS(7) x S(4) reduction and the origin of selfduality in odd dimensions , Nucl. Phys. B 581 (2000) 179 [hep-th/9911238]

arXiv 2000

[7] [7]

Gauntlett and O

J.P. Gauntlett and O. Varela, Consistent Kaluza-Klein reductions for general supersymmetric AdS solutions , Phys. Rev. D 76 (2007) 126007 [0707.2315]. 41

arXiv 2007

[8] [8]

Gauntlett and O

J.P. Gauntlett and O. Varela, D=5 SU(2) x U(1) Gauged Supergravity from D=11 Supergravity, JHEP 02 (2008) 083 [0712.3560]

arXiv 2008