Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 5 minor 2 cited by

Localization and wall-crossing of giant graviton expansions in AdS$_5$

T0 review · 1 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 Brane localization reproduces finite-N superconformal indices

desk verdict A solid bulk derivation of the U(N) giant graviton expansion with a convincing wall-crossing explanation; the SO(2k) Pfaffian term rests on an uncomputed rigidity claim and needs referee scrutiny. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.13910 v1 pith:MTVOVSVW submitted 2025-01-23 hep-th

Giorgos Eleftheriou , Sameer Murthy , Martí Rosselló This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-th PACS 11.25.Tq11.30.Pb
keywords giantgravitonexpansionsupersymmetriclocalizationwall-crossingLandauproblemsuperconformalindexAdS/CFTorientifoldPfaffian
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper derives the giant graviton expansions of the 1/2-BPS superconformal indices of N=4 Super Yang-Mills theory with unitary, orthogonal, and symplectic gauge groups directly from the bulk dual. The derivation quantizes the moduli space of 1/2-BPS giant gravitons in AdS5×S5 (and the orientifold AdS5×RP5) by supersymmetric localization, reducing the path integral to one-loop determinants around the maximal giants. The paper shows that the analytic continuation that earlier works had to impose on the giant graviton expansion is actually a wall-crossing phenomenon in the supersymmetric Landau problem that governs the brane fluctuations. The bulk calculation reproduces the exact finite-N indices, including the Pfaffian factor for SO(2k).

What carries the argument

The central object is the supersymmetric Landau problem: the quantum mechanics of a charged particle in a constant magnetic field, which captures the quadratic fluctuations of a maximal giant graviton. Its refined Witten index has two branches (Eq. (2.42)) that are equal as analytic functions, and the paper uses the Q-exact deformation parameter $\alpha$ to interpolate between them, showing that the functional integral is well-defined for generic complex $\alpha$ and thus that the analytic continuation across the wall $B=0$ is a legitimate localization prescription. The wall-crossing is what selects the branch that produces the convergent giant graviton expansion. For the orientifold theories, the same machinery is applied to matrix-valued coordinates with a $\mathbb{Z}_2$ projection that keeps only even R-charge states, plus a rigid $\mathbb{RP}^3$ brane in the twisted sector.

What would settle it

Compute the contribution of a single non-maximal giant (θ0 < π/2) to the localized path integral; the paper predicts it vanishes identically, so any nonzero result would falsify the claim that localization reduces the integral to maximal giants.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the bulk index computed by localizing the moduli space of 1/2-BPS giant gravitons equals the boundary 1/2-BPS index exactly, not just in a large-N or probe limit. Concretely, the localized path integral over the moduli space of m coincident maximal giants yields the factor $(-1)^m q^{m(m+1)/2}/(q)_m$ times $q^{mN}$ for U(N), and summing over m gives $I_{U(N)}(q) = \frac{1}{(q)_\infty}\sum_{m=0}^\infty (-1)^m \frac{q^{m(m+1)/2}}{(q)_m} q^{mN} = \frac{1}{(q)_N}$. For the orientifold theories the same calculation with the projection $q \to q^2$ and the additional $(1+q^k)$ factor from the topologically stable $\mathbb{RP}^3$ brane yields the SO(2k+1), Sp(k), and SO(2k) indices. The key to the exactness is that the two branches of the supersymmetric Landau index, $q^N/(1-q^{-1})$ for $B>0$ and $-q^{N+1}/(1-q)$ for $B<0$, are the same analytic function, so the $B<0$ branch, which is the convergent expansion, is selected by continuing the Q-exact deformation parameter $\alpha$ through the wall $B=0$.

Load-bearing premise

The whole exactness at finite N rests on the premise that the B<0 branch of the supersymmetric Landau index—whose ground states are fermionic and carry R-charges N+1, N+2, ...—is the correct analytic continuation of the physical B>0 branch, and that the Q-exact deformation parameter α can be continued through the wall B=0 without the path integral changing phase.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The bulk localization calculation is exact at finite N: the one-loop determinant around maximal giants captures the full index, with no higher-loop corrections or contributions from non-maximal giants.
  • For the orthogonal and symplectic gauge groups, the replacement $q \to q^2$ in the U(N) expansion is derived from the orientifold projection, which keeps only states with even R-charge.
  • The additional Pfaffian contribution for SO(2k) is explained by a topologically stable D3-brane wrapping $\mathbb{RP}^3$, which is rigid and contributes only its ground state, giving the factor $(1+q^k)$.
  • The analytic continuation of the giant graviton expansion, previously imposed by hand, is shown to be a wall-crossing phenomenon in the supersymmetric Landau index, with the $B<0$ branch giving the convergent expansion.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the wall-crossing mechanism is the correct explanation, similar analytic continuations in other superconformal indices (such as the Schur index) may also be interpretable as wall-crossing in the relevant brane fluctuation problem.
  • The localization argument implies that the GGE is a genuine bulk computation and not merely a boundary combinatorial identity; one could test this by computing subleading corrections around non-maximal giants and checking their cancellation.
  • The method might extend to other brane configurations, such as M2-branes in AdS4×S7, where the analogous Landau problem would predict the sign of the R-charge selection for the convergent expansion.
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

1 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper claims to derive, from the bulk, the giant graviton expansions of the 1/2-BPS superconformal indices of N=4 SYM with U(N), SO(2k+1), Sp(k), and SO(2k) gauge groups. The derivation is based on supersymmetric localization of the integral over the moduli space of 1/2-BPS D3-branes. The maximal-giant fixed points have fluctuations governed by a supersymmetric Landau problem; Section 2 computes the Hamiltonian index and the Euclidean functional-integral superdeterminant and interprets the two q-expansions as the two sides of a wall in the magnetic-field sign. Sections 4 and 5 extend the calculation to the orientifold backgrounds AdS5 x RP5, where the orientifold projection implements the q -> q^2 replacement, and Section 4.3 introduces a topologically stable D3-brane wrapping RP3 to account for the Pfaffian factor (1+q^k) in the SO(2k) case. The final expressions (5.27) and (5.28) are claimed to reproduce the boundary indices (3.20) and (3.16).

Significance. If completed, this would be a substantial step toward a first-principles bulk derivation of finite-N giant graviton expansions for orthogonal and symplectic gauge groups, including the Pfaffian term for SO(2k). The paper contains several strong technical pieces: the explicit reduction of the maximal-giant fluctuation spectrum to the Landau problem, the Hamiltonian and path-integral computations of the Landau index, and the matrix-model treatment of coincident giants in Section 5. The wall-crossing interpretation of the analytic continuation is a useful conceptual clarification, and the algebraic identities behind the expansions are machine-checkable in the sense of being explicit and internally consistent. The main gap is the RP3 brane contribution, which is asserted rather than computed; this prevents the SO(2k) branch from being considered fully derived.

major comments (1)
  1. [Section 4.3, Eq. (5.28)] The RP3 brane contribution (1+q^k) is the only bulk input that produces the Pfaffian term distinguishing SO(2k) from SO(2k+1)/Sp(k), yet the manuscript does not compute the equivariant index of the D3-brane wrapping RP3. Section 4.3 asserts that the brane is rigid, has no fluctuations, and contributes exactly one ground state of R-charge k, supported only by the Z2 homology H3(RP5,Z)=Z2 and a heuristic normal-direction argument. No worldvolume one-loop determinant, zero-mode count, or kappa-symmetric BPS-charge computation is supplied, in contrast to the maximal giants, for which the full fluctuation spectrum is reduced to the Landau problem and the one-loop determinant is computed in Section 2.4. Since the boundary index (3.15) already forces the factor (1+q^k), the final matching in Section 5.4 cannot by itself validate the brane contribution; if the RP3 brane has even one unpaired fermionic or bosonic zero mode, its index contribution would not be exactly 1 and Eq. (5.28) would fail. A computation of the equivariant index of the D3-brane on RP3, or a precise citation to such a computation, is needed to complete the SO(2k) branch of the central claim.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sections 2.3-2.4] The term 'wall-crossing' is used for a situation in which the grand-canonical index is the same analytic function on both sides of B=0 and only the Hilbert-space interpretation of the contributing states changes. I suggest adding a sentence distinguishing this from the more common usage in which the index itself jumps, to avoid misleading readers.
  2. [Section 4.3] The phrase 'fixed point of the orientifold action x1=x2=0' is potentially confusing, since the antipodal map on S5 has no fixed points; the set x1=x2=0 is the fixed submanifold RP3. Please rephrase to avoid implying that the Z2 action has a fixed point in the usual sense.
  3. [Eqs. (2.67)-(2.68)] The normalization constant N is fixed to e^{-i gamma alpha / 2} in (2.68), and this zero-point shift is essential for the R-charge assignments. Please spell out explicitly how this normalization is determined, since the text leaves it somewhat implicit.
  4. [Notation in Eqs. (1.2), (5.24)] The binomial notation q^{(m+1/2)} is non-standard and could be misread as q^{m+1/2}. Please write q^{binom(m+1,2)} consistently, and analogously for q^{2(m+1/2)} in (5.24).
  5. [Section 4.2, footnote 21] The cancellation of the fractional orientifold flux by a worldvolume anomaly is cited to [77], but the q^{2mk} charge assignments depend on the total flux being k. A brief explanation of how this cancellation works in the probe-brane Lagrangian would improve the exposition.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the bulk fluctuation determinants and the boundary indices are derived independently, and the final matching is a nontrivial q-series identity rather than a fitted input.

full rationale

The paper's central derivation is self-contained against independent inputs. In Section 2.4, the one-loop super-determinant SDet(δαV)^-1 = 1/(1-q^-1) is computed directly from the stated Euclidean Lagrangian (2.47) via the mode expansions (2.49)-(2.67), not imported from the final GGE formula. The Landau index (2.42) in both branches follows from the explicit spectrum (2.37)-(2.38); the B<0 branch is not obtained by imposing the target expansion, but by computing the trace over LLL states with n_F=1 and then identifying the convergent series in |q|<1. The wall-crossing argument is an analytic-continuation statement about a well-defined α-deformed path integral, not a renaming of the answer. Section 3 derives the boundary indices ISO(2k+1), ISp(k), and ISO(2k) by independent free-field enumeration based on Procesi's theorem (ref. [74]), with no input from the bulk localization. The bulk expansion (5.28) is then shown to equal the boundary expression (3.16) through the q-binomial identity, so the equality is not built in by construction. The only potentially load-bearing imported item is the rigid RP3 brane contribution (1+q^k) in Section 4.3, taken from refs. [36,44]; this is an external physical input rather than a self-derived prediction, and its status is a correctness/rigor concern (no explicit worldvolume determinant is computed), not a circular reduction. Self-citations to the authors' previous work [30] are present, but the paper explicitly recalculates and corrects the one-loop determinant and the R-charge assignment, so they are not load-bearing in the final argument. Accordingly, no circular step meeting the evidentiary standard of this review was found.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The bulk derivation imports the D3-brane fluctuation spectrum [21], the orientifold bulk dual and discrete-torsion selection [36], the anomaly cancellation of fractional flux [77], and the analyticity of refined indices [33,34]. Computed in-paper: the one-loop super-determinant (2.67), the reduction of the full brane index to the Landau index (Table 1 and Section 2.4), the wall-crossing branch structure (2.42), and the orientifold charge assignments (5.21)-(5.24). Two constants are fixed by hand (N = e^{-i gamma alpha / 2}; C = 1/2) and the B<0 branch is a convergence choice; none of these is fitted to data. No genuinely new entity is postulated: the RP3-brane is inherited from prior work and carries independent evidence via the boundary Pfaffian.

free parameters (3)
  • Path-integral normalization constant N = N = e^{-i gamma alpha / 2}
    Eqs. (2.67)-(2.68): the overall normalization of the one-loop super-determinant is fixed at the end by the zero-point angular momentum so that the maximal-giant ground state has R-charge N. It is a chosen constant, not derived from the path-integral measure.
  • Angular-momentum rescaling C for orientifold sector = C = 1/2
    Eq. (5.13): the bL operator for orthogonal and symplectic projections is halved relative to the unitary case to account for the Z2 identification of antipodal giant pairs. This rescaling feeds into the spectra (5.21)-(5.24).
  • Magnetic-field sign on the GGE branch = B < 0
    Section 2.3: the B<0 branch is chosen because it is the only one giving a convergent expansion for |q|<1, the regime of the boundary index. The paper argues via analytic continuation that both branches are the same function, so this is a regime choice rather than a fit, but it is the load-bearing wall-crossing premise.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption The one-loop spectrum of Euclidean D3-brane fluctuations on S3 x S1 is exactly the one summarized in Table 1, as computed by Gautason and van Muiden [21].
    Invoked in Section 2.4 to reduce the full fluctuation index to the super-Landau problem: all KK modes except the k=0, r=-1 boson cancel in the determinant. A missing mode or wrong R-charge assignment in this spectrum would change the central one-loop result (2.67).
  • domain assumption A maximal giant carries R-charge N, and m coincident maximal giants contribute a solenoid/flux-line factor q^{mN} with R = mN - bL.
    Eqs. (2.12)-(2.13), (5.18): the shift by N units from the Chern-Simons term in the DBI+CS action (reviewed from [30,31]) fixes every q-power in the final expansion. If the shift were not exactly N, the exponents mN and m(m+1)/2 would not reproduce the known index.
  • standard math The refined (equivariant) supersymmetric index is an analytic function of its fugacity across the wall B=0, even though individual Fourier coefficients jump.
    Sections 2.3-2.4: this wall-crossing premise, imported from Witten [33] and Stone [34], is the mechanism claimed to explain the GGE analytic continuation. It is verified explicitly in the Landau model, since both branches of (2.42) are the same function, but assumed to survive in the full system.
  • domain assumption Type IIB string theory on AdS5 x RP5 with k units of 5-form flux is the holographic dual of N=4 SYM with SO or Sp gauge group, with discrete torsion selecting the group and allowing the RP3-brane only for SO(2k).
    Section 4.1 (following Witten [36]): the orientifold duality, the Z2 homology of RP5, and the discrete-torsion selection rule are imported. The entire SO/Sp derivation rests on them.
  • domain assumption The fractional +/-1/4 orientifold flux is cancelled by an anomaly in the worldvolume fermionic theory, so the probe-brane Lagrangian effectively carries half-integer flux.
    Footnote 21: the cancellation is taken from Tachikawa and Yonekura [77] and interpreted by the authors as a classical half-integer flux. The factor 1/2 in the orientifold flux N' = N/2 and the charge assignments (5.21)-(5.24) depend on this step.
  • standard math The q-binomial resummation identities used to convert the sum over m into 1/(q)_N, 1/(q^2)_k, and (1+q^k)/(q^2)_k are valid.
    Eqs. (1.2), (3.13), (3.16): the final GGE forms follow from standard q-series identities attributed to Appendix A of [30]. No approximation is involved.
  • standard math The ring of 1/2-BPS gauge-invariant operators is freely generated by the trace and Pfaffian generators listed in Section 3, per Cayley-Hamilton and Procesi's theorem [74].
    Section 3.2: the boundary indices 1/(q)_N, 1/(q^2)_k, and (1+q^k)/(q^2)_k are derived from these classical results. These indices are the external benchmarks the bulk derivation must match.
invented entities (1)
  • Topologically stable D3-brane wrapping RP3 inside RP5 (twisted sector brane) independent evidence
    purpose: Accounts for the (1+q^k) factor in the SO(2k) giant graviton expansion (Eqs. (4.9) and (5.28)).
    Not a new postulate of this paper: the brane was introduced by Witten [36] and studied in [44]. Its existence follows from H3(RP5,Z)=Z2, and its predicted contribution q^k matches the independently computable boundary Pfaffian operator of degree k, giving a falsifiable handle outside the bulk construction.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Localization and wall-crossing of giant graviton expansions in AdS$_5$." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MTVOVSVW

@misc{pith2026250113910,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Localization and wall-crossing of giant graviton expansions in AdS$_5$},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MTVOVSVW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.13910}
}
abstract

The $\frac12$-BPS indices of $\mathcal{N}=4$ Super Yang-Mills theory with unitary, orthogonal, and symplectic groups all admit $q$-expansions suggesting an interpretation in terms of D-branes in the dual bulk AdS$_5$ string theories. We present a derivation of these expansions in the corresponding bulk duals by quantizing the moduli space of $\frac12$-BPS giant gravitons using supersymmetric localization, extending and clarifying our study in arxiv:2312.14921. We perform a detailed analysis of the one-loop fluctuations around the maximal giants (the fixed points), and show how the Hamiltonian analysis is recovered from the functional integral for the equivariant index. We show that the analytic continuation for these giant graviton expansions observed in the literature maps precisely to a wall-crossing phenomenon for the index. In the case of orthogonal and symplectic gauge groups, the $\mathbb{Z}_2$ quotient in the bulk leads to a corresponding projection in the $q$-expansion. Additional terms in the expansion related to the Pfaffian operator arise from topologically stable branes in the bulk dual on AdS$_5 \times \mathbb{RP}^5$.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. The giant graviton expansion in AdS$_5\times$SE$_5$

    hep-th 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Giant-graviton fluctuations on AdS5 imes SE5 are governed by a conical Fock-Darwin system whose lowest Landau level yields the protected finite-N index of the dual N=1 SCFT for T1,1.

  2. Quiver superconformal index and giant gravitons: asymptotics and expansions

    hep-th 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    For toric quiver theories, coefficients of the large-N superconformal index grow like exp(constant*sqrt(n)) times n^((m-5)/4) for the A-hat_m family, with polynomial growth for dP3 and Y^{p,0}.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

82 extracted references · 37 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [21]

    F. F. Gautason and J. van Muiden,One-loop quantization of Euclidean D3-branes in holographic backgrounds, JHEP 06 (2024) 073, [2402.16779]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2024

  2. [77]

    Tachikawa and K

    Y. Tachikawa and K. Yonekura,Why are fractional charges of orientifolds compatible with Dirac quantization?, SciPost Phys. 7 (2019) 058, [1805.02772]

    arXiv 2019

  3. [1]

    Arai and Y

    R. Arai and Y. Imamura,Finite N Corrections to the Superconformal Index of S-fold Theories, PTEP 2019 (2019) 083B04, [1904.09776]

    arXiv 2019

  4. [2]

    Imamura,Finite-N superconformal index via the AdS/CFT correspondence, PTEP 2021 (2021) 123B05, [2108.12090]

    Y. Imamura,Finite-N superconformal index via the AdS/CFT correspondence, PTEP 2021 (2021) 123B05, [2108.12090]

    arXiv 2021

  5. [3]

    Gaiotto and J

    D. Gaiotto and J. H. Lee,The Giant Graviton Expansion, 2109.02545

    arXiv

  6. [4]

    Murthy,Unitary matrix models, free fermions, and the giant graviton expansion, Pure Appl

    S. Murthy,Unitary matrix models, free fermions, and the giant graviton expansion, Pure Appl. Math. Quart.19 (2023) 299–340, [2202.06897]

    arXiv 2023

  7. [5]

    J. T. Liu and N. J. Rajappa,Finite N indices and the giant graviton expansion, JHEP 04 (2023) 078, [2212.05408]

    arXiv 2023

  8. [6]

    D. S. Eniceicu,Comments on the Giant-Graviton Expansion of the Superconformal Index, 2302.04887

    work page Pith review arXiv

Show all 82 references
  1. [7]

    D. S. Eniceicu, R. Mahajan and C. Murdia,Complex eigenvalue instantons and the Fredholm determinant expansion in the Gross-Witten-Wadia model, 2308.06320

    arXiv

  2. [8]

    Ezroura, J

    N. Ezroura, J. T. Liu and N. J. Rajappa,Analytic continuation and the giant graviton expansion, 2408.02759

    arXiv

  3. [9]

    Y. Chen, R. Mahajan and H. Tang,Giant graviton expansion from eigenvalue instantons, 2407.08155

    arXiv

  4. [10]

    Borodin and A

    A. Borodin and A. Okounkov,A fredholm determinant formula for toeplitz determinants., Integral equations operator theory37 (2000) 457–486

    2000

  5. [11]

    R. Arai, S. Fujiwara and Y. Imamura,BPS Partition Functions for S-folds, JHEP 03 (2019) 172, [1901.00023]

    2019 arXiv

  6. [12]

    R. Arai, S. Fujiwara, Y. Imamura and T. Mori,Schur index of theN = 4 U (N ) supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory via the AdS/CFT correspondence, Phys. Rev. D101 (2020) 086017, [2001.11667]

    2020 arXiv

  7. [13]

    R. Arai, S. Fujiwara, Y. Imamura, T. Mori and D. Yokoyama,Finite-N corrections to the M-brane indices, JHEP 11 (2020) 093, [2007.05213]. – 39 –

    2020 arXiv

  8. [14]

    Fujiwara, Y

    S. Fujiwara, Y. Imamura and T. Mori,Flavor symmetries of six-dimensionalN = (1, 0) theories from AdS/CFT correspondence, JHEP 05 (2021) 221, [2103.16094]

    2021 arXiv

  9. [15]

    Imamura,Analytic continuation for giant gravitons, PTEP 2022 (2022) 103B02, [2205.14615]

    Y. Imamura,Analytic continuation for giant gravitons, PTEP 2022 (2022) 103B02, [2205.14615]

    2022 arXiv

  10. [16]

    Fujiwara,Schur-like index of the Klebanov-Witten theory via the AdS/CFT correspondence, 2302.04697

    S. Fujiwara,Schur-like index of the Klebanov-Witten theory via the AdS/CFT correspondence, 2302.04697

    arXiv

  11. [17]

    Beccaria and A

    M. Beccaria and A. A. Tseytlin,Large N expansion of superconformal index of k=1 ABJM theory and semiclassical M5 brane partition function, 2312.01917

    arXiv

  12. [18]

    Beccaria, S

    M. Beccaria, S. Giombi and A. A. Tseytlin,(2,0) theory on S5×S1 and quantum M2 branes, Nucl. Phys. B 998 (2024) 116400, [2309.10786]

    2024 arXiv

  13. [19]

    J. H. Lee,Trace relations and open string vacua, 2312.00242

    arXiv

  14. [20]

    Beccaria and A

    M. Beccaria and A. Cabo-Bizet,Large N Schur index ofN = 4 SYM from semiclassical D3 brane, JHEP 04 (2024) 110, [2402.12172]

    2024 arXiv

  15. [22]

    Hatsuda, H

    Y. Hatsuda, H. Lin and T. Okazaki,Giant graviton expansions and ETW brane, 2405.14564

    arXiv

  16. [23]

    J. H. Lee and D. Stanford,Bulk thimbles dual to trace relations, 2412.20769

    arXiv

  17. [24]

    Deddo, J

    E. Deddo, J. T. Liu, L. A. Pando Zayas and R. J. Saskowski,Giant Graviton Expansion from Bubbling Geometry: Discreteness from Quantized Geometry, Phys. Rev. Lett.132 (2024) 261501, [2402.19452]

    2024 arXiv

  18. [25]

    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

  19. [26]

    Gopakumar and E

    R. Gopakumar and E. A. Mazenc,Deriving the Simplest Gauge-String Duality – I: Open-Closed-Open Triality, 2212.05999

    arXiv

  20. [27]

    Mikhailov,Giant gravitons from holomorphic surfaces, JHEP 11 (2000) 027, [hep-th/0010206]

    A. Mikhailov,Giant gravitons from holomorphic surfaces, JHEP 11 (2000) 027, [hep-th/0010206]

    2000 arXiv

  21. [28]

    C. E. Beasley,BPS branes from baryons, JHEP 11 (2002) 015, [hep-th/0207125]

    2002 arXiv

  22. [29]

    Biswas, D

    I. Biswas, D. Gaiotto, S. Lahiri and S. Minwalla,Supersymmetric states of N=4 Yang-Mills from giant gravitons, JHEP 12 (2007) 006, [hep-th/0606087]

    2007 arXiv

  23. [30]

    Eleftheriou, S

    G. Eleftheriou, S. Murthy and M. Rosselló,The giant graviton expansion in AdS5 × S5, 2312.14921

    arXiv

  24. [31]

    M. T. Grisaru, R. C. Myers and O. Tafjord,SUSY and goliath, JHEP 08 (2000) 040, [hep-th/0008015]

    2000 arXiv

  25. [32]

    S. R. Das, A. Jevicki and S. D. Mathur,Giant gravitons, BPS bounds and noncommutativity, Phys. Rev. D63 (2001) 044001, [hep-th/0008088]

    2001 arXiv

  26. [33]

    Witten,Fermion quantum numbers in Kaluza-Klein theory, Conf

    E. Witten,Fermion quantum numbers in Kaluza-Klein theory, Conf. Proc. C8306011 (1983) 227

    1983

  27. [34]

    Stone,Supersymmetry and the Quantum Mechanics of Spin, Nucl

    M. Stone,Supersymmetry and the Quantum Mechanics of Spin, Nucl. Phys. B 314 (1989) 557–586. – 40 –

    1989

  28. [35]

    Montonen and D

    C. Montonen and D. Olive,Magnetic monopoles as gauge particles?, Physics Letters B72 (1977) 117–120

    1977

  29. [36]

    Witten,Baryons and branes in anti-de Sitter space, JHEP 07 (1998) 006, [hep-th/9805112]

    E. Witten,Baryons and branes in anti-de Sitter space, JHEP 07 (1998) 006, [hep-th/9805112]

    1998 arXiv

  30. [37]

    Kakushadze,Gauge theories from orientifolds and large N limit, Nucl

    Z. Kakushadze,Gauge theories from orientifolds and large N limit, Nucl. Phys. B529 (1998) 157–179, [hep-th/9803214]

    1998 arXiv

  31. [38]

    Fayyazuddin and M

    A. Fayyazuddin and M. Spalinski,Large N superconformal gauge theories and supergravity orientifolds, Nucl. Phys. B 535 (1998) 219–232, [hep-th/9805096]

    1998 arXiv

  32. [39]

    Aharony, Y

    O. Aharony, Y. Oz and Z. Yin,M theory on AdS(p) x S(11-p) and superconformal field theories, Phys. Lett. B430 (1998) 87–93, [hep-th/9803051]

    1998 arXiv

  33. [40]

    Fujiwara, Y

    S. Fujiwara, Y. Imamura, T. Mori, S. Murayama and D. Yokoyama,Simple-Sum Giant Graviton Expansions for Orbifolds and Orientifolds, PTEP 2024 (2024) 023B02, [2310.03332]

    2024 arXiv

  34. [41]

    Hatsuda, H

    Y. Hatsuda, H. Lin and T. Okazaki,Orbifold ETW brane and half-indices, 2409.16841

    arXiv

  35. [42]

    Mukhi and M

    S. Mukhi and M. Smedback,Bubbling orientifolds, JHEP 08 (2005) 005, [hep-th/0506059]

    2005 arXiv

  36. [43]

    B. Fiol, B. Garolera and G. Torrents,Exact probes of orientifolds, JHEP 09 (2014) 169, [1406.5129]

    2014 arXiv

  37. [44]

    Aharony, Y

    O. Aharony, Y. E. Antebi, M. Berkooz and R. Fishman,’Holey sheets’: Pfaffians and subdeterminants as D-brane operators in large N gauge theories, JHEP 12 (2002) 069, [hep-th/0211152]

    2002 arXiv

  38. [45]

    Witten,Constraints on Supersymmetry Breaking, Nucl

    E. Witten,Constraints on Supersymmetry Breaking, Nucl. Phys. B 202 (1982) 253

    1982

  39. [46]

    Hashimoto, S

    A. Hashimoto, S. Hirano and N. Itzhaki,Large branes in AdS and their field theory dual, JHEP 08 (2000) 051, [hep-th/0008016]

    2000 arXiv

  40. [47]

    Yoshioka,The Quantum Hall Effect

    D. Yoshioka,The Quantum Hall Effect. Physics and astronomy online library. Springer, 2002

    2002

  41. [48]

    S. J. van Enk,Angular momentum in the fractional quantum hall effect, American Journal of Physics 88 (04, 2020) 286–291, [1906.00342]

    2020 arXiv

  42. [49]

    Gaiotto and X

    D. Gaiotto and X. Yin,Notes on superconformal Chern-Simons-Matter theories, JHEP 08 (2007) 056, [0704.3740]

    2007 arXiv

  43. [50]

    Ben Geloun, J

    J. Ben Geloun, J. Govaerts and F. G. Scholtz,The N=1 Supersymmetric Landau Problem and its Supersymmetric Landau Level Projections: The N=1 Supersymmetric Moyal-Voros Superplane, J. Phys. A42 (2009) 495203, [0908.3300]

    2009 arXiv

  44. [51]

    Correa, H

    F. Correa, H. Falomir, V. Jakubsky and M. S. Plyushchay,Supersymmetries of the spin-1/2 particle in the field of magnetic vortex, and anyons, Annals Phys. 325 (2010) 2653–2667, [1003.1434]

    2010 arXiv

  45. [52]

    Ivanov,Supersymmetrizing Landau models, Theor

    E. Ivanov,Supersymmetrizing Landau models, Theor. Math. Phys.154 (2008) 349–361, [0705.2249]

    2008 arXiv

  46. [53]

    Kim and C.-k

    S. Kim and C.-k. Lee,Supersymmetry based approach to quantum particle dynamics on a curved surface with nonzero magneitc field, Annals Phys. 296 (2002) 390–405, [hep-th/0112120]

    2002 arXiv

  47. [54]

    Index and supersymmetry, Lectures at the Pyeong-Chang Summer School

    P. Yi, “Index and supersymmetry, Lectures at the Pyeong-Chang Summer School.” http://psi.kias.re.kr/2013/sub02/sub02_01.php, 2013. – 41 –

    2013

  48. [55]

    M. F. Atiyah and R. Bott,The Moment map and equivariant cohomology, Topology 23 (1984) 1–28

    1984

  49. [56]

    Cremonesi,An Introduction to Localisation and Supersymmetry in Curved Space, PoS Modave2013 (2013) 002

    S. Cremonesi,An Introduction to Localisation and Supersymmetry in Curved Space, PoS Modave2013 (2013) 002

    2013

  50. [57]

    Pestun,Review of localization in geometry, J

    V. Pestun,Review of localization in geometry, J. Phys. A50 (2017) 443002, [1608.02954]

    2017 arXiv

  51. [58]

    M. W. Goodman,Proof of Character Valued Index Theorems, Commun. Math. Phys.107 (1986) 391

    1986

  52. [59]

    C. N. Pope,Axial Vector Anomalies and the Index Theorem in Charged Schwarzschild and Taub - Nut Spaces, Nucl. Phys. B 141 (1978) 432–444

    1978

  53. [60]

    J. P. Gauntlett, N. Kim, J. Park and P. Yi,Monopole dynamics and BPS dyons N=2 superYang-Mills theories, Phys. Rev. D61 (2000) 125012, [hep-th/9912082]

    2000 arXiv

  54. [61]

    Dabholkar, D

    A. Dabholkar, D. Gaiotto and S. Nampuri,Comments on the spectrum of CHL dyons, JHEP 01 (2008) 023, [hep-th/0702150]

    2008 arXiv

  55. [62]

    Dabholkar, S

    A. Dabholkar, S. Murthy and D. Zagier,Quantum Black Holes, Wall Crossing, and Mock Modular Forms, 1208.4074

    arXiv

  56. [63]

    Bourdier, N

    J. Bourdier, N. Drukker and J. Felix,The exact Schur index ofN = 4 SYM, JHEP 11 (2015) 210, [1507.08659]

    2015 arXiv

  57. [64]

    Caputa, R

    P. Caputa, R. de Mello Koch and P. Diaz,A basis for large operators in N=4 SYM with orthogonal gauge group, JHEP 03 (2013) 041, [1301.1560]

    2013 arXiv

  58. [65]

    Caputa, R

    P. Caputa, R. de Mello Koch and P. Diaz,Operators, Correlators and Free Fermions for SO(N) and Sp(N), JHEP 06 (2013) 018, [1303.7252]

    2013 arXiv

  59. [66]

    Lewis-Brown and S

    C. Lewis-Brown and S. Ramgoolam,BPS operators inN = 4 SO(N ) super Yang-Mills theory: plethysms, dominoes and words, JHEP 11 (2018) 035, [1804.11090]

    2018 arXiv

  60. [67]

    Evans, C

    N. Evans, C. V. Johnson and A. D. Shapere,Orientifolds, branes, and duality of 4d gauge theories, Nuclear Physics B505 (Nov., 1997) 251–271

    1997

  61. [68]

    Dabholkar,Lectures on orientifolds and duality, inICTP Summer School in High-Energy Physics and Cosmology, pp

    A. Dabholkar,Lectures on orientifolds and duality, inICTP Summer School in High-Energy Physics and Cosmology, pp. 128–191, 6, 1997.hep-th/9804208

    1997 arXiv

  62. [69]

    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

  63. [70]

    J. Dai, R. G. Leigh and J. Polchinski,New Connections Between String Theories, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 4 (1989) 2073–2083

    1989

  64. [71]

    E. G. Gimon and J. Polchinski,Consistency conditions for orientifolds and D-manifolds, Phys. Rev. D54 (1996) 1667–1676, [hep-th/9601038]

    1996 arXiv

  65. [72]

    Polchinski, S

    J. Polchinski, S. Chaudhuri and C. V. Johnson,Notes on D-branes, hep-th/9602052

    arXiv

  66. [73]

    Polchinski,Tasi lectures on D-branes, inTheoretical Advanced Study Institute in Elementary Particle Physics (TASI 96): Fields, Strings, and Duality, pp

    J. Polchinski,Tasi lectures on D-branes, inTheoretical Advanced Study Institute in Elementary Particle Physics (TASI 96): Fields, Strings, and Duality, pp. 293–356, 11, 1996. hep-th/9611050

    1996 arXiv

  67. [74]

    Procesi,The invariant theory of n× n matrices, Advances in Mathematics19 (1976) 306–381

    C. Procesi,The invariant theory of n× n matrices, Advances in Mathematics19 (1976) 306–381. – 42 –

    1976

  68. [75]

    Bergman, E

    O. Bergman, E. G. Gimon and S. Sugimoto,Orientifolds, RR torsion, and K theory, JHEP 05 (2001) 047, [hep-th/0103183]

    2001 arXiv

  69. [76]

    Giombi and B

    S. Giombi and B. Offertaler,Wilson loops inN = 4 SO(N) SYM and D-branes in AdS5 × RP5, JHEP 10 (2021) 016, [2006.10852]

    2021 arXiv

  70. [78]

    H. J. Kim, L. J. Romans and P. van Nieuwenhuizen,The Mass Spectrum of Chiral N=2 D=10 Supergravity on S**5, Phys. Rev. D32 (1985) 389

    1985

  71. [79]

    Gunaydin and N

    M. Gunaydin and N. Marcus,The Spectrum of the s**5 Compactification of the Chiral N=2, D=10 Supergravity and the Unitary Supermultiplets of U(2, 2/4), Class. Quant. Grav.2 (1985) L11

    1985

  72. [80]

    Witten,Anti-de Sitter space and holography, Adv

    E. Witten,Anti-de Sitter space and holography, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.2 (1998) 253–291, [hep-th/9802150]

    1998 arXiv

  73. [81]

    Aharony, S

    O. Aharony, S. S. Gubser, J. M. Maldacena, H. Ooguri and Y. Oz,Large N field theories, string theory and gravity, Phys. Rept. 323 (2000) 183–386, [hep-th/9905111]

    2000 arXiv

  74. [82]

    Ciceri, I

    A. Ciceri, I. Jeon and S. Murthy,Localization on AdS3× S2. Part I. The 4d/5d connection in off-shell Euclidean supergravity, JHEP 07 (2023) 218, [2301.08084]. – 43 –

    2023 arXiv

Pith tools

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