Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 40 references

Supersymmetry-breaking compactifications on Riemann-flat manifolds

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Broken supersymmetry leaves a fixed fingerprint on the whole Kaluza–Klein tower.

desk verdict Solid example-level results and a useful Scherk-Schwarz clarification, but the universal supertrace claim goes beyond what is shown and there is a missing factor of 2^8 in the displayed Str M^8. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.02339 v2 pith:SYEZREPT submitted 2025-07-03 hep-th

Gianguido Dall'Agata , Fabio Zwirner This is my paper
classification hep-th PACS 04.65.+e11.30.Pb
keywords supersymmetrybreakingKaluza–KleincompactificationRiemann-flatmanifoldsBieberbachsupertracemassrelationsone-loopeffectivepotentialScherk–SchwarzmechanismEpsteinzetafunction
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 claims that when maximal supergravity is compactified on a Riemann-flat spin manifold that fully breaks supersymmetry, the Kaluza–Klein spectrum still obeys fixed supertrace identities: after regrouping states by shifted Kaluza–Klein numbers, the mass supertraces vanish through $M^6$ at every level, while the $M^8$ supertrace is a nonzero, level-independent number. On this basis the authors derive a finite, analytic one-loop effective potential $V_1$, negative definite in all worked examples and scaling as inverse powers of the internal radii. This matters because it extends earlier circle-based Scherk–Schwarz results to a broad class of higher-dimensional compactifications and gives a purely field-theoretic window onto supersymmetry breaking below the string scale.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the spectral ansatz $M_a^2=\sum_A (n_A+M_a^A)^2\mu_A^2$ for the Kaluza–Klein masses, together with the charge vectors $\vec q_i$ of the eight supercharges under up to seven $U(1)$ factors. Because $\sum_i \vec q_i=0$, the binomial cancellations in the supertrace $\mathrm{Str}\,M^{2p}=\sum_a \epsilon_a (M_a^2)^p$ force the first three powers to vanish and fix the eighth-power trace. The paper constructs the required shifted harmonics on spin Bieberbach manifolds as holonomy-invariant combinations of torus plane waves, uses known multiplicity formulas for the Laplacian and Dirac operators on flat manifolds, and evaluates $V_1$ through the Epstein zeta function and its functional equation.

What would settle it

Take a five- or six-dimensional spin Bieberbach manifold from the known classification, compute its scalar, one-form, and spinor Kaluza–Klein spectra, and check whether the reassembled levels satisfy $\mathrm{Str}\,M^2=\mathrm{Str}\,M^4=\mathrm{Str}\,M^6=0$ with $\mathrm{Str}\,M^8$ independent of the level; a single counterexample with a level-dependent eighth supertrace or a nonvanishing lower supertrace would disprove the claimed universality.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that for maximal supergravity compactified on any spin Riemann-flat Bieberbach manifold with fully broken supersymmetry, the Kaluza–Klein tower reorganizes level by level into multiplets of the broken four-dimensional supersymmetry, and in this reorganization $\mathrm{Str}\,M^{2p}=0$ for $p=1,2,3$ at every level while $\mathrm{Str}\,M^{8}$ is positive and independent of the level. In the single-$U(1)$ case the result is $\mathrm{Str}\,M^{8}=40320\,(\prod_i q_i)\,\mu^8$, and in the Hantzsche–Wendt-type case it is $40320\,(\prod_i q_i)\,(\sum_A \mu_A^2)^4$. The level independence turns the regularized one-loop potential into the finite expression $V_1 = -\frac{\sqrt{\Delta}\,\Gamma((D+d)/2)}{2\pi^{(D+d)/2}}\sum_I \frac{(-1)^{F_I} N_I}{|r(\Gamma_I)|}\,Z_{\Lambda_I}(D+d,0,\vec a_I^*)$, which in all explicit examples is negative definite and falls with inverse powers of the radii. The same machinery shows that a consistent Scherk–Schwarz reduction selects a subset of the full Kaluza–Klein states, and that the Hantzsche–Wendt manifold, which has no trivial spin structure and no fixed directions, cannot be described as a twisted torus yet still satisfies the same supertrace identities and yields a finite, negative $V_1$.

Load-bearing premise

The universal supertrace relations rest on the assumption that the full Kaluza–Klein spectrum on every spin Bieberbach manifold can be decomposed into shifted sums of squares whose shifts are the supercharge charges, with those charges adding to zero; the paper verifies this decomposition explicitly only for the $T^3/\mathbb{Z}_3$ and Hantzsche–Wendt examples.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • At every redefined Kaluza–Klein level the first three mass supertraces vanish and only the eighth-power trace is nonzero; no ultraviolet-divergent term survives before regularization.
  • The one-loop potential $V_1$ is finite in all maximal-supergravity examples without needing a string cutoff, and it is negative definite with a runaway in the internal radii.
  • Consistent Scherk–Schwarz reductions are matched to specific subsets of the full Kaluza–Klein spectrum of Riemann-flat manifolds, clarifying when a twisted-torus description is valid.
  • The Hantzsche–Wendt manifold demonstrates that the same universal supertrace relations hold even when no ordinary Scherk–Schwarz or twisted-torus interpretation exists.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The claimed universality over all spin Bieberbach manifolds is an extrapolation from $T^3/\mathbb{Z}_3$ and the Hantzsche–Wendt manifold; computing the full spectrum on a four-, five-, or six-dimensional spin Bieberbach manifold with a different holonomy would test whether the charge-vector ansatz holds everywhere.
  • If the negative-definite $V_1$ persists for all such manifolds, these backgrounds are perturbatively runaway in the radii, so radius stabilization would have to come from additional effects; the paper notes the sign may correlate with more bosonic than fermionic zero modes but does not prove it.
  • The explicit classification of Bieberbach manifolds up to dimension six could be used to scan all spin cases and map which holonomy groups admit the level-by-level supertrace structure; the paper leaves such a systematic scan to future work.
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

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies Kaluza-Klein compactifications of higher-dimensional supergravities, in particular maximal (Type IIA) supergravity in seven dimensions, on Riemann-flat spin manifolds (Bieberbach manifolds) that break all supersymmetry at the classical level. For the two main examples, T^3/Z_3 and the Hantzsche-Wendt manifold, the authors construct the explicit KK spectrum, reorganize the states into redefined "levels" so that Str M^2 = Str M^4 = Str M^6 = 0 and Str M^8 is level-independent, and use Epstein zeta functions to obtain a finite, analytic one-loop effective potential V1 that is negative in all presented examples. They further claim that the supertrace relations are universal for all spin Bieberbach manifolds and clarify the relation of these compactifications to Scherk-Schwarz reductions and twisted tori.

Significance. If the universality claim holds, this is a valuable extension of earlier results on Scherk-Schwarz circle compactifications and freely acting orbifolds to a broad class of Ricci-flat internal spaces. The paper includes a concrete algorithm for constructing harmonics and computing KK spectra, and it passes two independent consistency checks: the d=1 limits reproduce [39,40], and the large-L3 limit of the T^3/Z3 potential matches the string computation of [17]. The derivation of the supertrace identities from the explicit harmonic spectrum is not circular; the spectrum is obtained independently of the supertrace relations. The authors also honestly state in the Introduction that no general proof of the negative-definiteness of V1 is yet available. The main weaknesses are the unproven universality of the ansatz (4.35) and a concrete missing power of 2 in the quoted Str M^8 values for T^3/Z3.

major comments (2)
  1. [Section 4.3, eqs. (4.35)-(4.40)] The universal supertrace relations (4.38)-(4.40) are claimed for all spin Riemann-flat Bieberbach manifolds, but the derivation explicitly rests on two assumptions: the existence of U(1)^n charges with sum zero (4.34) and the representation of the KK spectrum as M_a^2 = sum_A (n_A+M_a^A)^2 mu_A^2 (4.35). These are verified only for T^3/Z3 and HW, both d=3 with abelian holonomy (Z3 and Z2xZ2). The general harmonic construction of Section 3, in particular the multiplicity formula (3.15), involves holonomy traces and fixed-point sums that do not obviously reduce to the simple diagonal, translated form (4.35) for manifolds with non-abelian holonomy or non-orthogonal lattices. The sentence at the end of Section 4.2.2 stating that 'we can actually obtain the same supertrace properties for all Bieberbach manifolds' is therefore not supported by the evidence presented. Please either prove the ansatz for the general case (e.g., using the classification up to d=6 and the explicit harmonic construction) or explicitly restrict the supertrace claim to the worked examples and present (4.35) as a conjecture.
  2. [Eqs. (4.25) and (4.27)] With the mass convention M = 2 pi ||k*|| stated before eq. (4.3), the supertrace for the T^3/Z3 short series is Str M^8 = sum (-1)^F N (2 pi m/L3)^8 = (2 pi)^8/L3^8 * sum (-1)^F N m^8. Since the Table 2 multiplicities give sum (-1)^F N m^8 = 40320, the correct result is Str M^8 = 40320 (2 pi)^8/L3^8, not 40320 pi^8/L3^8. The same issue affects eq. (4.27) for the twisted spin structure. This does not change the level-independence or the finiteness argument, but the displayed numerical values are off by a factor 256 and should be corrected; the V1 expressions in (4.26)-(4.29) should also be re-checked for consistency with the same mass convention.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 1, paragraph after eq. (4.9)] The statement that 'the regularized sum over all KK levels always gives a finite D=4 1-loop effective potential' for any number N>0 of supersymmetries is broad and would benefit from a brief justification or a pointer to the relevant property of the Epstein zeta function beyond the single-tower example.
  2. [Section 4.3, eqs. (4.39)-(4.40)] The notation product_i q_i is ambiguous when the supercharges carry vector charges q_i^A. Please define explicitly whether the product runs over the eight supercharges of a scalar charge in the single-U(1) case and how it is contracted with the index A in the multi-U(1) formula (4.40).
  3. [Tables 2, 3, 4] The notation with brackets, for example |3[n3]| and the multiplicative factors such as '2 x' in the mass-level columns, is hard to parse. A short explanation of the table conventions (how the degrees of freedom are distributed among the listed shifts) would greatly improve readability.
  4. [Eqs. (4.26), (4.29), (4.32)] The intermediate steps leading to the numerical coefficients (e.g., -3936/35, -197/105, and the factor 384 in (4.32)) are not shown. Since these analytic values are central quantitative results, a few lines of derivation or an appendix entry would make the computations easier to verify.
  5. [Abstract] The abstract says 'dimension d (d <= 7)' but the intended range appears to be 3 <= d <= 7; please correct the typo.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: supertrace identities follow from stated assumptions, with examples computed from explicit harmonic spectra.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The universal supertrace identities (4.38)-(4.40) are derived algebraically from two explicitly stated assumptions in Section 4.3: the charge constraint sum_i q_i = 0 (4.34) and the mass-ansatz (4.35)-(4.36). The paper does not fit any parameter to the supertrace results; for the worked examples, the mass formula and level shifts are read off from the explicit harmonic spectra (Tables 2-4) and then the identities are checked. The T3/Z3 and HW computations are anchored by comparison with the string-theory results of [17], and the d=1 checks match [39,40]. Self-citations [13,14] supply method and context, e.g. the earlier statement that the one-loop potential is finite, but finiteness here is also obtained from the Epstein zeta property Z[-2n]=0, so the argument does not reduce to a self-citation. The only weakness is the extrapolation from two examples to all spin Bieberbach manifolds; the paper itself marks the input as an assumption ('Assume...', 'Our second assumption is...') and notes 'we have no general proof yet' for the sign of V1. That is a limitation on scope, not a circular reduction. No step exhibits a quantity that is defined in terms of the target, nor a fitted input relabeled as a prediction.

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

The paper introduces no new particles or forces; the U(1) factors in Section 4.3 are standard isometry gauge symmetries. The main loading is the unproven generality of the charge-vector mass ansatz (4.35).

assumptions (3)
  • standard math The Epstein zeta function satisfies the functional equation and vanishes at negative even integers (Appendix A).
    Used in deriving (4.8)-(4.9) and in the finiteness argument for V1.
  • domain assumption The linearized Type IIA fluctuations on the flat manifold are governed by the Laplace-Beltrami operators (3.1)-(3.6) with the gauge choices (4.16)-(4.17).
    This determines the KK mass spectrum; standard for supergravity compactifications but not derived in this paper.
  • domain assumption For any spin Bieberbach manifold, the KK spectrum of maximal supergravity can be written as in (4.35) with U(1)^n charge vectors q_i satisfying Σ q_i = 0.
    Stated in Section 4.3; verified explicitly only for T^3/Z3 and HW. This is the load-bearing premise for the claimed universal supertrace relations.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Supersymmetry-breaking compactifications on Riemann-flat manifolds." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/SYEZREPT

@misc{pith2026250702339,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Supersymmetry-breaking compactifications on Riemann-flat manifolds},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/SYEZREPT}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.02339}
}
abstract

We consider compactifications of higher-dimensional supergravities on Riemann-flat manifolds of dimension d ($3 \le d \le 7$) that fully break supersymmetry at the classical level on a resulting D-dimensional Minkowski space. We systematically discuss consistency conditions, the Kaluza-Klein (KK) spectrum and harmonics, and the resulting one-loop effective potential $V_1$, focusing for illustration on maximal supergravity and d=3, in particular on the $T^3/Z_3$ and on the Hantzsche-Wendt manifolds. We show how the KK spectrum is organized in multiplets of the broken supersymmetry, derive new universal supertrace mass relations valid at each KK level and obtain an analytic finite expression for $V_1$ after resumming the contributions of all KK levels. In all examples $V_1$ is negative definite and scales with inverse powers of some internal radii. We extensively comment, when applicable, on the relation with the Scherk-Schwarz mechanism and with supersymmetry-breaking string compactifications on freely acting symmetric orbifolds. We also finally clarify the assumptions and constraints for Scherk-Schwarz reductions to correspond to twisted tori compactifications.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

40 extracted references · 19 canonical work pages

  1. [17]

    B. S. Acharya, G. Aldazabal, E. Andr´ es, A. Font, K. Narain and I. G. Zadeh,Stringy Tachyonic Instabilities of Non-Supersymmetric Ricci Flat Backgrounds ,’JHEP 04 (2021), 026 doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2021)026 [arXiv:2010.02933 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2021

  2. [2]

    Scherk and J

    J. Scherk and J. H. Schwarz, How to Get Masses from Extra Dimensions , Nucl. Phys. B 153 (1979), 61-88 doi:10.1016/0550-3213(79)90592-3

    doi:10.1016/0550-3213(79)90592-3 1979

  3. [3]

    Cremmer, J

    E. Cremmer, J. Scherk and J. H. Schwarz, Spontaneously Broken N=8 Supergravity, Phys. Lett. B 84 (1979), 83-86 doi:10.1016/0370-2693(79)90654-3

    work page doi:10.1016/0370-2693(79)90654-3 1979

  4. [4]

    No-scale supergravity

    F. Zwirner, No-scale supergravity, [arXiv:2504.06190 [hep-th]]

    work page Pith review arXiv

  5. [5]

    Dall’Agata and N

    G. Dall’Agata and N. Prezas, Scherk–Schwarz reduction of M-theory on G2- manifolds with fluxes , JHEP 10 (2005), 103 doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2005/10/103 [arXiv:hep-th/0509052 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2005

  6. [6]

    The quantization problem in Scherk-Schwarz compactifications

    M. Gra˜ na, R. Minasian, H. Triendl and T. Van Riet, Quantization problem in Scherk–Schwarz compactifications ,’ Phys. Rev. D 88 (2013) no.8, 085018 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.88.085018 [arXiv:1305.0785 [hep-th]]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2013

  7. [7]

    L. J. Dixon and J. A. Harvey, String Theories in Ten-Dimensions Without Space-Time Supersymmetry, Nucl. Phys. B 274 (1986), 93-105 doi:10.1016/0550- 3213(86)90619-X

    doi:10.1016/0550- 1986

  8. [8]

    Alvarez-Gaume, P

    L. Alvarez-Gaume, P. H. Ginsparg, G. W. Moore and C. Vafa, An O(16) × O(16) Heterotic String , Phys. Lett. B 171 (1986), 155-162 doi:10.1016/0370- 2693(86)91524-8

    doi:10.1016/0370- 1986

Show all 40 references
  1. [9]

    Rohm, Spontaneous Supersymmetry Breaking in Supersymmetric String Theo- ries, Nucl

    R. Rohm, Spontaneous Supersymmetry Breaking in Supersymmetric String Theo- ries, Nucl. Phys. B 237 (1984) 553 doi:10.1016/0550-3213(84)90007-5

    1984 doi

  2. [10]

    Ferrara, C

    S. Ferrara, C. Kounnas and M. Porrati, Superstring Solutions With Spontaneously Broken Four-dimensional Supersymmetry , Nucl. Phys. B 304 (1988), 500-512 doi:10.1016/0550-3213(88)90639-6

    1988 doi

  3. [11]

    Kounnas and M

    C. Kounnas and M. Porrati, Spontaneous Supersymmetry Breaking in String The- ory, Nucl. Phys. B 310 (1988), 355-370 doi:10.1016/0550-3213(88)90153-8

    1988 doi

  4. [12]

    Ferrara, C

    S. Ferrara, C. Kounnas, M. Porrati and F. Zwirner, Superstrings with Spontaneously Broken Supersymmetry and their Effective Theories , Nucl. Phys. B 318 (1989), 75- 105 doi:10.1016/0550-3213(89)90048-5 32

    1989 doi

  5. [13]

    Dall’Agata and F

    G. Dall’Agata and F. Zwirner, One-Loop Effective Potential in Scherk–Schwarz Compactifications of Pure d = 5 Supergravities, Fortsch. Phys. 72 (2024) no.7-8, 2400087 doi:10.1002/prop.202400087 [arXiv:2401.02480 [hep-th]]

    2024 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Dall’Agata and F

    G. Dall’Agata and F. Zwirner, Quantum corrections to broken N = 8 supergravity , JHEP 09 (2012), 078 doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2012)078 [arXiv:1205.4711 [hep-th]]

    2012 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Andriot and D

    D. Andriot and D. Tsimpis, Laplacian spectrum on a nilmanifold, trunca- tions and effective theories , JHEP 09 (2018), 096 doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2018)096 [arXiv:1806.05156 [hep-th]]

    2018 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Gkountoumis, C

    G. Gkountoumis, C. Hull, K. Stemerdink and S. Vandoren, Freely acting orbifolds of type IIB string theory on T 5, JHEP 08 (2023), 089 doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2023)089 [arXiv:2302.09112 [hep-th]]

    2023 arXiv

  9. [18]

    J. M. Borwein, M. L. Glasser, R. C. McPhedran, J. G. Wan and I. J. Zucker, Lattice sums then and now , Encyclopaedia of Mathematics and its Applications series, CUP (2013). https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9781139626804

    2013 doi

  10. [19]

    B. V. Bento and M. Montero, An M-theory dS maximum from Casimir energies on Riemann-flat manifolds, [arXiv:2507.02037 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  11. [20]

    Charlap, Bieberbach Groups and Flat Manifolds, Universitext, Springer-Verlag New York Inc

    L.S. Charlap, Bieberbach Groups and Flat Manifolds, Universitext, Springer-Verlag New York Inc. 1986. doi:10.1007/978-1-4613-8687-2

    1986 doi

  12. [21]

    R. C. Kirby, The topology of 4-manifolds , Lecture Notes in Mathematics 1374, Springer-Verlag (1989)

    1989

  13. [22]

    Friedrich, Dirac Operators in Riemannian Geometry , Graduate Studies in Mathematics No

    Th. Friedrich, Dirac Operators in Riemannian Geometry , Graduate Studies in Mathematics No. 25, AMS 2000

    2000

  14. [23]

    C. Cid, T. Schulz, Computation of Five- and Six-Dimensional Bieberbach Groups , Experiment. Math. 10(1): 109-115 (2001)

    2001

  15. [24]

    Lutowski, B

    R. Lutowski, B. Putrycz, Spin structures on flat manifolds , Journal of Algebra 436 (2015) 277-291 [arXiv:1411.7799] doi:10.1016/j.jalgebra.2015.03.037

    2015 arXiv

  16. [25]

    Hantzsche, H

    W. Hantzsche, H. Wendt, Dreidimensionale euklidische Raumformen, Mathematis- che Annalen 110 (1935), 593–611. 33

    1935

  17. [26]

    Riazuelo, J

    A. Riazuelo, J. Weeks, J. P. Uzan, R. Lehoucq and J. P. Luminet,Cosmic microwave background anisotropies in multi-connected flat spaces , Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004), 103518 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.69.103518 [arXiv:astro-ph/0311314 [astro-ph]]

    2004 arXiv

  18. [27]

    Z. P. Peng, L. Lindblom and F. Zhang, Scalar, Vector and Tensor Harmonics on the Flat Compact Orientable Three-Manifolds, JCAP 12 (2019), 042 doi:10.1088/1475- 7516/2019/12/042 [arXiv:1909.06721 [gr-qc]]

    2019 arXiv

  19. [28]

    Kehagias and K

    A. Kehagias and K. Tamvakis, Box compactification and supersymmetry breaking,’Phys. Lett. B 603 (2004), 249-256 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2004.10.019 [arXiv:hep-th/0403029 [hep-th]]

    2004 arXiv

  20. [29]

    Pf¨ affle, The Dirac spectrum of Bieberbach manifolds , J

    F. Pf¨ affle, The Dirac spectrum of Bieberbach manifolds , J. Geom. Phys. 35 (367–385), 2000

    2000

  21. [30]

    R. J. Miatello and J. P. Rossetti, Flat manifolds isospectral on p-forms, Jour. Geom. Anal. 11 (647–665), 2001. [arXiv:math/0303276] doi:10.1007/BF02930761

    2001 arXiv

  22. [31]

    Miatello and R.A

    R.J. Miatello and R.A. Podest´ a,The spectrum of twisted Dirac operators on compact flat manifolds, Transactions of the American Mathematical Society 358, 4569-4603 (2003) [arXiv:math/0312004] doi:10.1090/S0002-9947-06-03873-6

    2003 arXiv

  23. [32]

    Ponton and E

    E. Ponton and E. Poppitz, Casimir energy and radius stabilization in five- dimensional orbifolds and six-dimensional orbifolds , JHEP 06 (2001), 019 doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2001/06/019 [arXiv:hep-ph/0105021 [hep-ph]]

    2001 arXiv

  24. [33]

    K. R. Dienes, M. Moshe and R. C. Myers, String theory, misaligned supersym- metry, and the supertrace constraints , Phys. Rev. Lett. 74 (1995), 4767-4770 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.74.4767 [arXiv:hep-th/9503055 [hep-th]]

    1995 arXiv

  25. [34]

    S. Abel, K. R. Dienes and E. Mavroudi, Towards a nonsupersym- metric string phenomenology , Phys. Rev. D 91 (2015) no.12, 126014 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.91.126014 [arXiv:1502.03087 [hep-th]]

    2015 arXiv

  26. [35]

    S. Abel, K. R. Dienes and L. A. Nutricati, New nonrenormalization theorem from UV/IR mixing , Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024) no.12, 126021 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.126021 [arXiv:2407.11160 [hep-th]]

    2024 arXiv

  27. [36]

    Classification of Bieberbach manifolds up to dimension 6: https://mat.ug.edu.pl/ rlutowsk/bieblib/

  28. [37]

    M. J. Duff, B. E. W. Nilsson and C. N. Pope, Kaluza–Klein Supergravity, Phys. Rept. 130 (1986), 1-142. doi:10.1016/0370-1573(86)90163-8. 34

    1986 doi

  29. [38]

    D’Auria and P

    R. D’Auria and P. Fre, On the Fermion Mass Spectrum of Kaluza–Klein Supergrav- ity,’Annals Phys. 157 (1984), 1

    1984

  30. [39]

    Casimir effect between world branes in heterotic M theory,

    M. Fabinger and P. Horava, “Casimir effect between world branes in heterotic M theory,” Nucl. Phys. B 580 (2000), 243-263 doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(00)00255-8 [arXiv:hep-th/0002073 [hep-th]]

    2000 arXiv

  31. [40]

    Brane induced supersymmetry breaking,

    J. Bagger, F. Feruglio and F. Zwirner, “Brane induced supersymmetry breaking,” JHEP 02 (2002), 010 doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2002/02/010 [arXiv:hep-th/0108010 [hep-th]]

    2002 arXiv

  32. [41]

    A. A. Buchheit, J. K. Busse, R. Gutendorf, Computation and properties of the Epstein zeta function with high-performance implementation in EpsteinLib , arXiv:2412.16317 [math.NA] doi:10.48550/arXiv.2412.16317. 35

    doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.