Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 79 references

Geometry and symmetries of Hermitian-Einstein and instanton connection moduli spaces

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Holomorphic parallel vector fields on KT manifolds lift to symmetries of their Hermitian-Einstein and instanton moduli spaces.

desk verdict A serious, mostly solid generalization of symmetry lifting on Hermitian-Einstein and instanton moduli spaces, with the QKT principal-bundle claim in Section 6.5 the main soft spot. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.09474 v3 pith:NNO2SIUG submitted 2025-01-16 hep-th math.DG

Georgios Papadopoulos This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-thmath.DG MSC 53C0753C2653C5558D27
keywords Hermitian-EinsteinconnectionsinstantonmodulispacesKählerwithtorsion(KT)manifoldsHKTcovariantlyconstantvectorfieldstoricprincipalbundlesquaternionic-Kähler(QKT)superconformalsigmamodels
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 tries to show that the symmetries of a geometry with torsion are inherited, in a precise sense, by the moduli space of Hermitian-Einstein connections built over it. Its central claim is that every holomorphic and $\hat{\nabla}$-covariantly constant vector field $X$ on a Kähler-with-torsion (KT) manifold $M^{2n}$ induces a vector field $\alpha_X$ on the moduli space $\mathscr{M}^*_{\mathrm{HE}}(M^{2n})$ that is both Killing and holomorphic, preserving the metric, the Hermitian form, and the torsion. Under the extra condition that $X^\flat\wedge\theta$ is a $(1,1)$-form, $\alpha_X$ is covariantly constant for the torsion connection $\hat{D}$ of the moduli space. These induced fields organise the moduli space, when orbits close, as a holomorphic toric principal bundle over a KT base, and they similarly explain the geometry of instanton moduli spaces, including a description of $\mathscr{M}^*_{\mathrm{asd}}(S^3\times S^1)$ as a principal bundle with fibre $S^3\times S^1$ over a quaternionic-Kähler-with-torsion (QKT) manifold. If correct, the results give a systematic way to construct new strong KT, bi-KT, HKT and QKT manifolds from gauge-theoretic moduli spaces and to understand the superconformal symmetries of two-dimensional $\sigma$ models with such targets.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the horizontal lift of an induced vector field: for a holomorphic $\hat{\nabla}$-covariantly constant field $X$, the tangent vector $a^h_X=\iota_X F$ on the space of connections is both tangent to the Hermitian-Einstein submanifold and horizontal for the gauge-fixing connection. The central identity is the curvature contraction $\Theta(a^h,a^h_X)=\iota_X a^h$, where $\Theta$ is the curvature of the principal bundle of connections over the moduli space; it converts Lie derivatives on the moduli space into Lie derivatives of $X$ on the base, which is why $\alpha_X$ inherits the Killing and parallel properties of $X$. This identity in turn rests on invertibility of the gauge-fixing operator $O=D^i_A D^A_i+\theta^i D^A_i$, guaranteed for irreducible connections by a Gauduchon metric on the compact underlying manifold.

What would settle it

One concrete test is to evaluate the curvature identity $\Theta(a^h,a^h_X)=\iota_X a^h$ on an explicit Hermitian-Einstein connection over $S^3\times S^1$ or $S^3\times S^3$; if it fails for any horizontal tangent vector $a^h$, the induced-field construction collapses.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the smooth part of the moduli space of irreducible Hermitian-Einstein connections over a compact KT manifold, the paper establishes that a holomorphic and $\hat{\nabla}$-covariantly constant vector field $X$ on $M^{2n}$ lifts to a vector field $\alpha_X$ whose horizontal representative is $\iota_X F$. The lift is tangent and horizontal because of the Bianchi identity for the curvature and the Hermitian-Einstein equations, and the key identity $\Theta(a^h,a^h_X)=\iota_X a^h$ then implies that $\alpha_X$ is Killing and holomorphic. If $X^\flat\wedge\theta$ is a $(1,1)$-form, the same identity yields $d\alpha_X^\flat=\iota_{\alpha_X} H$, so $\alpha_X$ is parallel with respect to the torsion connection $\hat{D}$. The paper further shows that the existence of one such field forces a second, $Y=-IX$, and when orbits close the moduli space is locally a holomorphic principal $T^2$ fibration over a KT base, with the metric, Hermitian form and torsion decomposing accordingly. For instantons, the same mechanism models $\mathscr{M}^*_{\mathrm{asd}}(S^3\times S^1)$ and its quotients as principal bundles with fibre $S^3\times S^1$ over a QKT base, up to a discrete identification.

Load-bearing premise

The smooth construction assumes that the moduli space of irreducible Hermitian-Einstein connections is a manifold and that the gauge-fixing operator $O=D^i_A D^A_i+\theta^i D^A_i$ has trivial kernel and is onto, which requires a compact underlying manifold with a Gauduchon metric and gauge group $U(r)$, $SU(r)$ or $PU(r)$; if this fails, the induced vector field $\alpha_X$ and its Killing and parallel properties are not defined.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Every holomorphic and $\hat{\nabla}$-covariantly constant vector field on a KT manifold gives a Killing holomorphic vector field on the Hermitian-Einstein moduli space, so the moduli space inherits the torsion-parallel isometries of the base.
  • With closed orbits, the moduli space is locally a holomorphic principal $T^2$ fibration over a KT base; for $S^3\times S^3$ the two curvature components are equal, while for $S^3\times T^3$ one component vanishes and the moduli space is locally $S^1$ times a circle bundle.
  • The instanton moduli spaces $\mathscr{M}^*_{\mathrm{asd}}(S^3\times S^1)$ and $\mathscr{M}^*_{\mathrm{asd}}(RP^3\times S^1)$ are locally $S^1$ times a principal bundle with fibre $S^3$ or $RP^3$ over a QKT base, with the $u(1)$ component of the curvature zero.
  • The sigma model with target $\mathscr{M}^*_{\mathrm{asd}}(S^3\times S^1)$ carries two copies of the large $N=4$ superconformal algebra, with the currents constructed from the induced vector fields and complex structures; this reproduces the known symmetry content required by the AdS$_3\times S^3\times S^1$ duality.
  • The moduli spaces themselves become a source of new strong KT, bi-KT, HKT and QKT manifolds, including low-dimensional QKT bases coming from the $S^3\times S^1$ instanton moduli spaces.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The mechanism suggests a general transfer principle: a suitably parallel Killing field on any geometric structure with torsion should lift to a parallel field on a moduli space of connections, provided the gauge-fixing operator is invertible; this may extend to other gauge-theoretic moduli spaces such as Higgs bundles or $G_2$-instanton moduli.
  • The condition $X^\flat\wedge\theta\in\Lambda^{1,1}$ looks like a moment-map-type compatibility between the vector field and the Lee form; if made precise, the induced $\hat{D}$-parallel fields would be the Hamiltonian generators of a torus action on the moduli space with respect to the Hermitian form $\Omega$.
  • The QKT description of $\mathscr{M}^*_{\mathrm{asd}}(S^3\times S^1)$ gives a concrete construction route for compact QKT manifolds: any Hermitian-Einstein bundle over $S^3\times S^1$ should yield a QKT base, so new examples could be obtained by varying the rank and instanton number and computing the corresponding base metrics.
  • For $S^3\times T^3$, the model predicts that the moduli space decomposes as $S^1$ times a circle bundle only when the vector field $V_3$ is used; the additional fields $V_1,V_2$ are Killing and holomorphic but not $\hat{D}$-parallel, so a testable distinction is whether their associated flows close on the moduli space.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper investigates the geometry that symmetries of the underlying manifold induce on moduli spaces of Hermitian-Einstein connections M*_HE(M^{2n}) over compact KT manifolds and on instanton moduli spaces M*_asd(M^4) over KT, bi-KT, HKT, and bi-HKT four-manifolds. Section 2 reproduces and reorganizes the Lübke-Teleman construction of a strong KT structure on M*_HE, including the gauge-fixing operator O of (2.44), the connection curvature Θ of (2.61), and the torsion H of (2.63). Section 3 proves the central structural results: a holomorphic ∇̂-covariantly constant vector field X on M^{2n} induces a vector field α_X on M*_HE that is Killing and holomorphic (equations (3.34) and (3.35)), and if X^♭∧θ is a (1,1)-form, α_X is D̂-covariantly constant (equations (3.26)-(3.31)); the key technical input is the lemma Θ(a^h, a^h_X) = ι_X a^h of (3.20). Section 4 applies these results to M*_HE(S3×S3) and M*_HE(S3×T3), giving holomorphic T²-fibration models with curvature (F1,F1) and (F1,0), respectively. Section 5 adapts the analysis to instantons over KT and bi-KT four-manifolds, re-deriving Hitchin's argument that the metric and torsion of M*_asd do not depend on the choice of KT structure. Section 6 treats HKT and bi-HKT manifolds, computes the so(4)⊕so(2) symmetry action on M*_asd(S3×S1), and models the moduli space as S1×P with P an SU(2)-bundle over a QKT base (equations (6.51)-(6.55)); Section 6.6 covers S3/Zn × S1 and squashed metrics.

Significance. If the results hold, the paper is a substantial and systematic contribution to the geometry of gauge-theory moduli spaces. Its most solid part is Section 3: the lifting theorem for holomorphic ∇̂-covariantly constant vector fields, the Killing/holomorphic/parallel properties of the lifted fields, and the key lemma (3.20) are derived in detail and are internally coherent, and the paper re-derives the Lübke-Teleman, Hitchin, and Moraru-Verbitsky structures in a uniform notation with many helpful intermediate steps. Explicit credit is given to prior work, and the paper is honest about its limitations, notably footnote 47 on the QKT curvature and the explicitly conditional 'is expected' statement in §3.3.3. The derived structural predictions — the curvature identity F = (F1,F1) for M*_HE(S3×S3), the vanishing dF_{V0}=0 for M*_asd(S3×S1), and the so(4)⊕so(2) action on the bi-HKT structure — are concrete and checkable. The QKT modeling of M*_asd(S3×S1) is an interesting structural conjecture whose value depends on completing the consistency computation behind (6.54).

major comments (3)
  1. [§6.5.1, eq. (6.54), footnote 47] The modeling of M*_asd(S3×S1) as a principal SU(2)×U(1)-bundle over a QKT base uses (6.54) — the identification (G^r_sp(1))_ab = ½δ^{rs}ω^s_ab of the sp(1) component of the curvature of λ — as an essential input in (6.55). Footnote 47 concedes that G has not been obtained from a first-principles computation on the moduli space and is instead fixed by 'the restrictions imposed on G by the HKT structure.' The argument that determines the coefficient — comparing (6.50) with the second line of (6.16), decomposing G^r = G^r_sp(k−1) ⊕ G^r_sp(1), and solving the ansatz (6.53) for A^{rs} — is summarized in three sentences. The reader is not shown the quaternionic linear algebra that fixes A^{rs} = ½δ^{rs}, nor the verification that the sp(k−1) component indeed drops out of (6.16). Since (6.54) is the load-bearing step for the claim that the base is QKT (rather than some more general almost-quaternionic structure), the derivation should either be written out or the statement explicitly marked as conditional on (6.54).
  2. [§3.3.3 and footnote 30] The freeness of the k-action on M*_HE, on which the principal-bundle models of Sections 4 and 6 depend, is not proved. The contradiction argument ends with 'It is expected that A*_HE contains non-invariant connections under the action of k', which is an unproven assertion; footnote 30 sketches a rescue for ASD instantons (ι_X F = 0 plus anti-self-duality implies F = 0) but does not justify the claim, and does not cover the general Hermitian-Einstein cases of Section 4. In addition, the inference 'the action... has no fixed points. Therefore, it is free' conflates local freeness with freeness: even if every non-zero infinitesimal generator is nowhere vanishing, finite stabilizers are not excluded, and a finite stabilizer would prevent M*_HE → M*_HE/K from being a genuine principal bundle. Section 6.5.2 itself concedes that the full so(4) action has fixed points, so the principal-bundle model rests precisely on the individual left and right su(2)⊕u(1) actions being free; that is what the incomplete argument must establish. For the instanton case with non-trivial instanton number the missing non-vanishing argument can be completed (for an ASD connection, ι_X F = 0 with X nowhere vanishing forces F = 0, since a non-zero ASD 2-form on a 4-manifold is non-degenerate), so this gap is repairable, but as written the argument is incomplete at a load-bearing point.
  3. [§6.3.2, eq. (6.38)] Equation (6.38) is inconsistent with the formula (6.24) it is said to follow from, and with equation (6.39). From (6.24), L_{α_X}Ω̂s(α1,α2) = −∫ L_Xω̂s ∧ ⟨a1^h∧a2^h⟩, using (6.26), (6.27), and (6.31), a direct computation gives L_{L1}ω̂2 = −ω̂3 (via Cartan's formula with dL1 = L2∧L3, dL2 = L3∧L1, dL3 = L1∧L2), hence L_{α_{L1}}Ω̂2 = +Ω̂3, whereas (6.38) states −Ω̂3. Moreover (6.38) and (6.39) cannot both hold under the paper's convention ω(X,Y) = g(X,IY) of §2.1.1: L_{α_{L1}}Ω̂2 = −Ω̂3 would imply L_{α_{L1}}Î2 = −Î3, contradicting (6.39). The downstream equations (6.39), (6.43), (6.50), and (6.54) appear consistent with the corrected sign, so the error is localized; nevertheless (6.38) as displayed is wrong, and the stated agreement with Witten [12] should be re-verified with the corrected sign.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§4.1.1] The sentence 'Viewing S3×S3 as the group manifold SU(3)×SU(3)' should read SU(2)×SU(2); the same typo appears in the surrounding discussion of the left-invariant vector fields.
  2. [§6.5.1] In the summary sentence 'for K = SU(2)×U(1) or S(3)×SO(2)', the symbol S(3) is a typo for SO(3).
  3. [eq. (3.32) and (3.26)-(3.30)] The characterization of 'X^♭∧θ is (1,1)' via X^♭∧θ = ι_IX^♭∧ι_Iθ is stated without comment; a one-sentence explanation that this is the (1,1)-condition would help, as the mixed vector/1-form notation (X∧θ^♭)_{ij} in (3.26)-(3.30) is otherwise hard to track.
  4. [§6.1.2 and §6.4] The symbol Ω is used both for the Hermitian form of the moduli space and for the frame connection of ∇̂ in (6.10)-(6.16); although the paper notes the clash, a distinct symbol for the frame connection would improve readability.
  5. [Title line] The title line in the full text ('instant on connection moduli spaces') contains a spacing typo that should be corrected in the final version.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the moduli-space vector-field theorems are derived from standard definitions and independent prior results; the QKT curvature gap in §6.5 is a derivation gap, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The paper's central claims are derived self-containedly rather than assumed. The induced vector field is defined by its horizontal lift a^h_X = ι_X F, and the results that α_X is Killing, holomorphic, and (under X^♭ ∧ θ being (1,1)) D-hat-covariantly constant are proven by explicit computations (3.26)–(3.35), with the key curvature identity (3.20) following from the invertibility of O and the same equation (2.61) that defines Θ. The strong KT structure on M*_HE is reproduced and attributed to Lübke-Teleman [19], an independent external source; Hitchin [23] and Moraru-Verbitsky [25] supply independent geometric inputs that are not the paper's target conclusions. The author's own prior works are used mainly as background definitions and tools, e.g. QKT geometry from [28] and HKT conventions from [13]; those citations are not used to prove the paper's principal results, so they are not load-bearing circularity. No parameter is fitted and no prediction is renamed from a fit: the condition that X^♭ ∧ θ be a (1,1)-form is an explicit hypothesis, and the curvature assignment (G^r_sp(1))_{ab} = 1/2 δ^{rs} ω^s_{ab} is enforced by matching the previously derived Lie-derivative relations (6.50) with the integrability conditions (6.16), not by fitting to the desired QKT conclusion. The manuscript itself flags genuine gaps: footnote 47 states that G has not been computed from first principles on the moduli space, and §3.3.3 says A*_HE 'is expected' to contain non-invariant connections rather than proving it, while §6.5.2 notes that so(4) is expected to have fixed points. These are unresolved derivation or completeness issues and correctness risks, not circular reductions: no displayed equation is equivalent to the conclusion by construction. Overall the derivation chain is self-contained apart from standard external analytic results, so the circularity score is 1.

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

The central derivation uses standard differential-geometric axioms and imported analytic regularity results. No free parameters are fitted to data, and no new particles, forces, or dimensions are introduced. The main extra assumptions are the non-emptiness and smoothness of moduli spaces, the Gauduchon condition, closed orbits for the fibration models, and the inferred curvature in the QKT section.

assumptions (6)
  • standard math Every Hermitian metric admits a Gauduchon representative in its conformal class with D_i θ^i = 0.
    Used in Section 2.3, equations (2.45)-(2.46), to make the operator O self-adjoint with trivial kernel and to ensure the horizontal splitting is well defined.
  • domain assumption M*_HE is a smooth manifold and the gauge-fixing operator O is invertible for irreducible connections with gauge group U(r), SU(r), or PU(r).
    Invoked from Lübke-Teleman [19]; all later identities for horizontal lifts and vector fields assume this regularity and invertibility.
  • domain assumption The moduli spaces under consideration are assumed non-empty.
    Stated in footnote 2 on page 3; all constructions require the existence of Hermitian-Einstein or instanton connections.
  • domain assumption The orbits of the induced commuting vector fields, or a linear combination of them, are closed.
    Used to model the geometry as a holomorphic T^2 principal fibration over a KT base, for example in Sections 3.1 and 4.
  • domain assumption In four dimensions, the two KT or HKT structures induce the same orientation and satisfy θ˘ = -θ_hat.
    Needed to identify horizontal subspaces and to prove independence of the induced metric and torsion in Sections 5.3.2 and 6.2.1.
  • ad hoc to paper The principal bundle curvature λ in the QKT model decomposes into sp(k-1) ⊕ sp(1) with the sp(1) component fixed by equation (6.54), inferred from representation theory and HKT integrability rather than computed from first principles.
    Section 6.5.1 explicitly states the curvature has not been computed from a first-principles moduli-space calculation; the QKT modeling claim depends on this consistency argument.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Geometry and symmetries of Hermitian-Einstein and instanton connection moduli spaces." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/NNO2SIUG

@misc{pith2026250109474,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Geometry and symmetries of Hermitian-Einstein and instanton connection moduli spaces},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/NNO2SIUG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.09474}
}
abstract

We investigate the geometry of the moduli spaces $\mathscr{M}_{\HE}^*(M^{2n})$ of Hermitian-Einstein irreducible connections on a vector bundle $E$ over a K\"ahler with torsion (KT) manifold $M^{2n}$ that admits holomorphic and $\h\nabla$-covariantly constant vector fields, where $\h\nabla$ is the connection with skew-symmetric torsion $H$. We demonstrate that such vector fields induce an action on $\mathscr{M}_{\HE}^*(M^{2n})$ that leaves both the metric and complex structure invariant. Moreover, if an additional condition is satisfied, the induced vector fields are covariantly constant with respect to the connection with skew-symmetric torsion $\h{\mathcal{ D}}$ on $\mathscr{M}_{\HE}^*(M^{2n})$. We demonstrate that in the presence of such vector fields, the geometry of $\mathscr{M}_{\HE}^*(M^{2n})$ can be modelled on that of holomorphic toric principal bundles with base space KT manifolds and give some examples. We also extend our analysis to the moduli spaces $\mathscr{M}_{\asd}^*(M^{4})$ of instanton connections on vector bundles over KT, bi-KT (generalised K\"ahler) and hyper-K\"ahler with torsion (HKT) manifolds $M^4$. We find that the geometry of $\mathscr{M}_{\asd}^*(S^3\times S^1)$ can be modelled on that of principal bundles with fibre $S^3\times S^1$ over Quaternionic K\"ahler manifolds with torsion (QKT). In addition motivated by applications to AdS/CFT, we explore the (superconformal) symmetry algebras of two-dimensional sigma models with target spaces such moduli spaces.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

79 extracted references · 59 canonical work pages

  1. [12]

    Instantons and the Large N=4 Algebra,

    E. Witten, “Instantons and the Large N=4 Algebra,” [arX iv:2407.20964 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  2. [1]

    The Large N limit of superconformal fiel d theories and supergravity,

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

    arXiv 1998

  3. [2]

    Brane inter sections, anti-de Sitter space- times and dual superconformal theories,

    H. J. Boonstra, B. Peeters and K. Skenderis, “Brane inter sections, anti-de Sitter space- times and dual superconformal theories,” Nucl. Phys. B 533 (1998), 127-162 [arXiv:hep- th/9803231 [hep-th]]

    work page arXiv 1998

  4. [3]

    Strin g theory on AdS 3 ×S3 ×S3 ×S1,

    S. Elitzur, O. Feinerman, A. Giveon and D. Tsabar, “Strin g theory on AdS 3 ×S3 ×S3 ×S1,” Phys. Lett. B 449 (1999), 180-186 [arXiv:hep-th/9811245 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 1999

  5. [4]

    AdS / CFT dua lities involving large 2-D N=4 superconformal symmetry,

    J. de Boer, A. Pasquinucci and K. Skenderis, “AdS / CFT dua lities involving large 2-D N=4 superconformal symmetry,” Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 3 (1999), 577-614 [arXiv:hep- th/9904073 [hep-th]]. 60

    work page arXiv 1999

  6. [5]

    The Search for a holographic dual to AdS 3 ×S3 ×S3 ×S1,

    S. Gukov, E. Martinec, G. W. Moore and A. Strominger, “The Search for a holographic dual to AdS 3 ×S3 ×S3 ×S1,” Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 9 (2005), 435-525 [arXiv:hep-th/0403090 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2005

  7. [6]

    The holographic dual of AdS3 × S3 × S3 × S1,

    D. Tong, “The holographic dual of AdS3 × S3 × S3 × S1,” JHEP 04 (2014), 193 [arXiv:1402.5135 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2014

  8. [7]

    BP S spectrum on AdS3×S3×S3×S1,

    L. Eberhardt, M. R. Gaberdiel, R. Gopakumar and W. Li, “BP S spectrum on AdS3×S3×S3×S1,” JHEP 03 (2017), 124 [arXiv:1701.03552 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2017

Show all 79 references
  1. [8]

    A holographic du al for string theory on AdS3×S3×S3×S1,

    L. Eberhardt, M. R. Gaberdiel and W. Li, “A holographic du al for string theory on AdS3×S3×S3×S1,” JHEP 08 (2017), 111 [arXiv:1707.02705 [hep-th]]

    2017 arXiv

  2. [9]

    Strings on AdS 3 × S3 × S3 × S1,

    L. Eberhardt and M. R. Gaberdiel, “Strings on AdS 3 × S3 × S3 × S1,” JHEP 06 (2019), 035 [arXiv:1904.01585 [hep-th]]

    2019 arXiv

  3. [10]

    Superconforma l Algebras in Two-Dimensions with N=4,

    A. Sevrin, W. Troost and A. Van Proeyen, “Superconforma l Algebras in Two-Dimensions with N=4,” Phys. Lett. B 208 (1988), 447-450

    1988

  4. [11]

    O(n) Extended Superconformal Field The ory in Superspace,

    K. Schoutens, “O(n) Extended Superconformal Field The ory in Superspace,” Nucl. Phys. B 295 (1988), 634-652

    1988

  5. [13]

    Scale and Conformal Inv ariance in 2d Sigma Models, with an Application to N=4 Supersymmetry,

    G. Papadopoulos and E. Witten, “Scale and Conformal Inv ariance in 2d Sigma Models, with an Application to N=4 Supersymmetry,” [arXiv:2404.19 526 [hep-th]]

  6. [14]

    First Chern class and holomorphic tenso r fields,

    S. Kobayashi, “First Chern class and holomorphic tenso r fields,” Nagoya Math. J. 77 (1980) 5-11

    1980

  7. [15]

    Anti-self-dual Yang-Mills connecti ons on complex algebraic surfaces and stable vector bundles,

    S. K. Donaldson, “Anti-self-dual Yang-Mills connecti ons on complex algebraic surfaces and stable vector bundles,” Proc. London Math. Soc. 3 (1985), 1–26

    1985

  8. [16]

    On the existence of hermi tian Yang-Mills connections on stable bundles over compact K¨ ahler manifolds,

    K. K. Uhlenbeck and S.-T. Yau, “On the existence of hermi tian Yang-Mills connections on stable bundles over compact K¨ ahler manifolds,” Commun. Pu re Applied Math. 39 (1986), 257–93

    1986

  9. [17]

    Hermitian-Yang-Mills connection on non-K¨ ahler manifolds,

    J. Li and S.-T. Yau, “Hermitian-Yang-Mills connection on non-K¨ ahler manifolds,” Mathe- matical Aspects of String Theory, World Scientic, (1987), 5 60-573

    1987

  10. [18]

    Hermitian-Yang-Mills connections and beyond,

    J. Li, “Hermitian-Yang-Mills connections and beyond, ” Surveys in Differential Geometry XIX (2015) International Press

    2015

  11. [19]

    L¨ ubke and A

    M. L¨ ubke and A. Teleman, ” The Kobayashi-Hitchin corre spondence,” World Scientific (1995)

    1995

  12. [20]

    A Metric for He terotic Moduli,

    P. Candelas, X. de la Ossa and J. McOrist, “A Metric for He terotic Moduli,” Commun. Math. Phys. 356 (2017) no.2, 567-612 doi:10.1007/s00220-017-2978-7 [arX iv:1605.05256 [hep-th]]

    2017 arXiv

  13. [21]

    The U niversal Geometry of Heterotic Vacua,

    P. Candelas, X. De La Ossa, J. McOrist and R. Sisca, “The U niversal Geometry of Heterotic Vacua,” JHEP 02 (2019), 038 doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2019)038 [arXiv:1810.00 879 [hep-th]]

    2019 doi

  14. [22]

    The moduli of the universal geometry of heterotic moduli,

    J. McOrist, M. Sticka and E. E. Svanes, “The moduli of the universal geometry of heterotic moduli,” [arXiv:2411.05350 [hep-th]]. 61

    arXiv

  15. [23]

    Instantons, Poisson structures and gener alized Kahler geometry,

    N. Hitchin, “Instantons, Poisson structures and gener alized Kahler geometry,” Commun. Math. Phys. 265 (2006), 131-164 [arXiv:math/0503432 [math.DG]]

    2006 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Generalized Kahler geometry,

    M. Gualtieri, “Generalized Kahler geometry,” [arXiv: 1007.3485 [math.DG]]

    arXiv

  17. [25]

    Moraru and M

    R. Moraru and M. Verbitsky, ”Stable bundles on hyper-co mplex surfaces,” [arXiv:math/0611714]

    arXiv

  18. [26]

    The Spinoria l geometry of supersymmetric heterotic string backgrounds,

    U. Gran, P. Lohrmann and G. Papadopoulos, “The Spinoria l geometry of supersymmetric heterotic string backgrounds,” JHEP 02 (2006), 063 [arXiv:hep-th/0510176 [hep-th]]

    2006 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Generalized Ricc i Flow,

    M. Garcia-Fernandez and J. Streets, “Generalized Ricc i Flow,” arXiv:2008.07004 [math.DG]

    2008 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Twistor s paces for QKT manifolds,

    P. S. Howe, A. Opfermann and G. Papadopoulos, “Twistor s paces for QKT manifolds,” Commun. Math. Phys. 197 (1998), 713-727 [arXiv:hep-th/9710072 [hep-th]]

    1998 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Ivanov, ”Geometry of quaternionic K¨ ahler connecti ons with torsion,” J

    S. Ivanov, ”Geometry of quaternionic K¨ ahler connecti ons with torsion,” J. Geom. Phys. 41 (2002), no. 3, 235–257

    2002

  22. [30]

    F. M. Cabrera and A. Swann, The intrinsic torsion of almo st quaternion-Hermitian manifolds, Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble) 58 (2008), 1455–1 497; arXiv:math/0707.0939 [math.DG]

    2008 arXiv

  23. [31]

    The c lassification of non-K¨ ahler Calabi-Yau geometries on threefolds,

    V. Apostolov, G. Barbaro, K. H. Lee and J. Streets, “The c lassification of non-K¨ ahler Calabi-Yau geometries on threefolds,” [arXiv:2408.09648 [math.DG]]

  24. [32]

    The Riemannian curvature id entities on almost Calabi-Yau with torsion 6-manifold and generalized Ricci solitons,

    S. Ivanov and N. Stanchev, “The Riemannian curvature id entities on almost Calabi-Yau with torsion 6-manifold and generalized Ricci solitons,” [ arXiv:2307.05001 [math.DG]]

    arXiv

  25. [33]

    A note on Hyperhermitian Four-Manifolds,

    C. P. Boyer, “A note on Hyperhermitian Four-Manifolds, ” Proc. Am. Math. Soc 102 (1988) 157-164

    1988

  26. [34]

    Generalized Calabi-Yau Manifolds,

    N. Hitchin, “Generalized Calabi-Yau Manifolds,” Q. J. Math. ]bf 54 (2003) 281-308, arXiv:math/0209099

    2003 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Twistor spaces for HKT m anifolds,

    P. S. Howe and G. Papadopoulos, “Twistor spaces for HKT m anifolds,” Phys. Lett. B 379, 80-86 (1996)

    1996

  28. [36]

    Scale and Conformal Invariance in He terotic σ-Models,

    G. Papadopoulos, “Scale and Conformal Invariance in He terotic σ-Models,” [arXiv:2409.01818 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  29. [37]

    Elliptic monopoles and (4,0) Supers ymmetric Sigma-models With Tor- sion,

    G. Papadopoulos, “Elliptic monopoles and (4,0) Supers ymmetric Sigma-models With Tor- sion,” Phys. Lett. B356 (1995), 249-255 [arXiv:hep-th/9505119

    1995 arXiv

  30. [38]

    (4,0) and (4,4) sigma- models with a triholomorphic Killing vector,

    T. Chave, G. Valent and K. P. Tod, “(4,0) and (4,4) sigma- models with a triholomorphic Killing vector,” Phys. Lett. B 383 (1996), 262-270

    1996

  31. [39]

    Selfduali ty in Four-Dimensional Riemannian Geometry,

    M. F. Atiyah, N. J. Hitchin, and I. M. Singer, “Selfduali ty in Four-Dimensional Riemannian Geometry,” Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A362 (1978) 425–461

    1978

  32. [40]

    Self-Dual Connections on 4-Manifolds wi th Indefinite Intersection Matrix,

    C. H. Taubes, “Self-Dual Connections on 4-Manifolds wi th Indefinite Intersection Matrix,” J. Diff. Geom. 19 (1984) 517-560 62

    1984

  33. [41]

    The Stable Topology Of Self-Dual Moduli S paces,

    C. H. Taubes, “The Stable Topology Of Self-Dual Moduli S paces,” J. Diff. Geom. 29 (1989) 163-230

    1989

  34. [42]

    Topological Quantum Field Theory,

    E. Witten, “Topological Quantum Field Theory,” Commun . Math. Phys. 117 (1998) 353- 86

    1998

  35. [43]

    Apostolov, P

    V. Apostolov, P. Gauduchon and G. Grantcharov, ‘Biherm itian structures on complex surfaces,” Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 79 (1999), 414–428. Corrigendum 92 (2006), no. 1, 200–202

    1999

  36. [44]

    Ext ended Supersymmetric sigma- models on Group Manifolds. 1. The Complex Structures,

    P. Spindel, A. Sevrin, W. Troost and A. Van Proeyen, “Ext ended Supersymmetric sigma- models on Group Manifolds. 1. The Complex Structures,” Nucl . Phys. B 308, 662-698 (1988)

    1988

  37. [45]

    Homogeneous HKT and Q KT manifolds,

    A. Opferman and G. Papadopoulos, “Homogeneous HKT and Q KT manifolds,” arXiv:math- ph/9807026

  38. [46]

    Hyper-K¨ ahler Manifolds With Torsion O btained from Hyperholomorphic Bundles,

    M. Verbitsky, “Hyper-K¨ ahler Manifolds With Torsion O btained from Hyperholomorphic Bundles,” Math. Research Lett. 10 (2003) 501-13, arXiv:math/0303129

    2003 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Salamon, ”Quaternionic K¨ ahler manifolds,” Invent Math 67, 143–171 (1982)

    S. Salamon, ”Quaternionic K¨ ahler manifolds,” Invent Math 67, 143–171 (1982)

    1982

  40. [48]

    M. C. Thornton, ‘Total spaces of circle bundles over len s spaces,” Portogalian Mathematica 33 171-176 (1974)

    1974

  41. [49]

    Verbitsky, ”Rational curves and special metrics on t wistor spaces,” Geometry and Topology 18 (2014), 897–909

    M. Verbitsky, ”Rational curves and special metrics on t wistor spaces,” Geometry and Topology 18 (2014), 897–909

    2014

  42. [50]

    A. Fino, M. Parton and S. Salamon, ”Families of strong KT structures in six dimensions,” arXiv:math.DG/0209259

  43. [51]

    Ugarte, ‘Hermitian structures on six dimensional ni lmanifolds,” Transf

    L. Ugarte, ‘Hermitian structures on six dimensional ni lmanifolds,” Transf. Groups 12 (2007), 175–202

    2007

  44. [52]

    Grantcharov, G

    D. Grantcharov, G. Grantcharov, Y. S. Poon, ”Calabi-Ya u connections with torsion on toric bundles,” J. Differential Geom. 78 (2008), no. 1, 13–32

    2008

  45. [53]

    Fino and A

    A. Fino and A. Tomassini, ”Blow-ups and resolutions of s trong K¨ ahler with torsion metrics,” arXiv:math.DG/0804.0397

    arXiv

  46. [54]

    Tamed Symplectic for ms and Strong K¨ ahler with torsion metrics,

    N. Enrietti, A. Fino, L. Vezzoni, “Tamed Symplectic for ms and Strong K¨ ahler with torsion metrics,” J. Symplectic Geom. 10 (2012), 203–223

    2012

  47. [55]

    Swann, ”Twisting Hermitian and hyper-complex geome tries,” Duke Math

    A. Swann, ”Twisting Hermitian and hyper-complex geome tries,” Duke Math. J. 155, (2010), 403–431

    2010

  48. [56]

    Apostolov and M

    V. Apostolov and M. Gualtieri, ”Generalized K¨ ahler Ma nifolds, Commuting Complex Structures, and Split Tangent Bundles,” Commun. Math. Phys . 271, (2007), 561–575

    2007

  49. [57]

    A. Fino, G. Grantcharov, Properties of manifolds with s kew-symmetric torsion and special ho- lonomy, Adv. Math. 189 (2004), 439–450

    2004

  50. [58]

    Barberis, I

    M.L. Barberis, I. Dotti, M. Verbitsky, Canonical bundl es of complex nilmanifolds, with applica- tions to hyper-complex geometry, Math. Res. Lett. 16 (2009), 331–347 63

    2009

  51. [59]

    I. G. Dotti, Isabel G and A. Fino, ”HyperK¨ ahler torsion structures invariant by nilpotent Lie groups,” Classical and Quantum Gravity, 19 3 (2002) 551–562; arXiv:math/0112166 [math.DG]

    2002 arXiv

  52. [60]

    M. L. Barberis and A. Fino, ”New HKT manifolds arising fr om quaternionic representa- tions,” arXiv:0805.2335 [math.DG]

    arXiv

  53. [61]

    Nonlinear σ Models With Extended Supersymmetry in Four-dimensions,

    T. L. Curtright and D. Z. Freedman, “Nonlinear σ Models With Extended Supersymmetry in Four-dimensions,” Phys. Lett. B 90, 71 (1980) [erratum: Phys. Lett. B 91, 487 (1980)]

    1980

  54. [62]

    Geometrical Stru cture and Ultraviolet Finiteness in the Supersymmetric sigma-model,

    L. Alvarez-Gaume and D. Z. Freedman, “Geometrical Stru cture and Ultraviolet Finiteness in the Supersymmetric sigma-model,” Commun. Math. Phys. 80, 443 (1981). Alvarez-Gaume

    1981

  55. [63]

    Geometry, Topology an d Supersymmetry in Nonlinear Models,

    T. L. Curtright and C. K. Zachos, “Geometry, Topology an d Supersymmetry in Nonlinear Models,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 53, 1799 (1984)

    1984

  56. [64]

    Two-dimensional supersymmet ric nonlinear sigma-models with torsion,

    P. S. Howe and G. Sierra, “Two-dimensional supersymmet ric nonlinear sigma-models with torsion,” Phys. Lett. B 148, 451-455 (1984)

    1984

  57. [65]

    Twisted Multi plets and New Supersymmetric Nonlinear sigma-models,

    S. J. Gates, Jr., C. M. Hull and M. Roˇ cek, “Twisted Multi plets and New Supersymmetric Nonlinear sigma-models,” Nucl. Phys. B 248, 157-186 (1984)

    1984

  58. [66]

    Supersymmetric Sigma-Models and the Heterotic String,

    C. M. Hull and E. Witten, “Supersymmetric Sigma-Models and the Heterotic String,” Phys. Lett. B 160, 398-402 (1985)

    1985

  59. [67]

    Quantum Corrections and Extended Supe rsymmetry in New σ Models,

    T. H. B¨ uscher, “Quantum Corrections and Extended Supe rsymmetry in New σ Models,” Phys. Lett. B159 (1985) 127-130

    1985

  60. [68]

    Torsion an d Geometrostasis in Nonlinear sigma-models,

    E. Braaten, T. L. Curtright and C. K. Zachos, “Torsion an d Geometrostasis in Nonlinear sigma-models,” Nucl. Phys. B 260, 630 (1985) [erratum: Nucl. Phys. B 266, 748-748 (1986)]

    1985

  61. [69]

    Lectures on Nonlinear Sigma-Models and Str ings,

    C. M. Hull, “Lectures on Nonlinear Sigma-Models and Str ings,” in H.-C. Lee et. al., eds, Superfield Theories , NATO Sci .Ser. B160 (1987), pp. 77-168

    1987

  62. [70]

    Ultraviolet Behavior o f Two-dimensional Supersymmet- ric Nonlinear σ Models,

    P. S. Howe and G. Papadopoulos, “Ultraviolet Behavior o f Two-dimensional Supersymmet- ric Nonlinear σ Models,” Nucl. Phys. B289, 264-276 (1987)

    1987

  63. [71]

    Supersymmetry and K¨ ahler Manifolds,

    B. Zumino, “Supersymmetry and K¨ ahler Manifolds,” Phy s. Lett. B 87, 203 (1979)

    1979

  64. [72]

    Ultraviolet Finiteness of Supersymmetric Nonlinear Sigma Models,

    C. M. Hull, “Ultraviolet Finiteness of Supersymmetric Nonlinear Sigma Models,” Nucl. Phys. B 260 (1985), 182-202

    1985

  65. [73]

    Harmonic Supergraphs. Feynman Rules and Examples,

    A. Galperin, E. Ivanov, V. Ogievetsky and E. Sokatchev, “Harmonic Supergraphs. Feynman Rules and Examples,” Class. Quant. Grav. 2 (1985), 617

    1985

  66. [74]

    Further Remarks on the G eometry of Two-dimensional Nonlinear σ Models,

    P. S. Howe and G. Papadopoulos, “Further Remarks on the G eometry of Two-dimensional Nonlinear σ Models,” Class. Quant. Grav. 5 (1988), 1647-1661

    1988

  67. [75]

    Finiteness of (4,0) Supe rsymmetricσ Models,

    E. Sokatchev and K. S. Stelle, “Finiteness of (4,0) Supe rsymmetricσ Models,” Class. Quant. Grav. 4 (1987), 501 64

    1987

  68. [76]

    Superconformal invariance of the N=(4,0) supersymmetric sigma models,

    C. Becchi and O. Piguet, “Superconformal invariance of the N=(4,0) supersymmetric sigma models,” Nucl. Phys. B 347 (1990), 596-624

    1990

  69. [77]

    Scale and Conformal Invariance in Quan tum Field Theory,

    J. Polchinski, “Scale and Conformal Invariance in Quan tum Field Theory,” Nucl. Phys. B303 (1988) 226-236

    1988

  70. [78]

    The Entropy Formula For The Ricci Flow and Its Applications,

    G. Perelman, “The Entropy Formula For The Ricci Flow and Its Applications,” math.DG/0211159

  71. [79]

    Finiteness and Conformal Invariance in Nonlinear σ Models,

    C. M. Hull and P. K. Townsend, “Finiteness and Conformal Invariance in Nonlinear σ Models,” Nucl. Phys. B274 (1986) 349-362. 65

    1986

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.