pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.17151 · v1 · pith:HCPR6MEEnew · submitted 2026-06-15 · ✦ hep-th · hep-ph

Supersymmetric geometry in non-supersymmetric effective field theory

Nathaniel Craig , Andrew Fee , Yu-Tse Lee This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-27 02:55 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-th hep-ph
keywords effective field theorysupersymmetrygauge theoryfield redefinitionscomplex geometrysupersymmetric embeddingsvector bundlesdimension six operators
0
0 comments X

The pith

Non-supersymmetric gauge theories possess an underlying complex geometry visible through their nonlinear supersymmetric embeddings.

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

The paper builds supersymmetric versions of non-supersymmetric effective gauge theories by embedding most operators up to dimension six into constrained chiral and vector superfields. These embeddings are then assembled into vector bundles that track how operators transform under field redefinitions, including those that mix different spins. A reader would care because the resulting structure turns operator redundancies into geometric features rather than ad-hoc cancellations, giving a systematic way to simplify the Lagrangian of any gauge effective theory.

Core claim

By constructing nonlinear supersymmetrizations of non-supersymmetric gauge theories from constrained chiral and vector superfields, the authors show that the space of gauge operators carries a complex geometry; vector bundles built from these superfields organize the operators and accommodate redefinitions across different spins.

What carries the argument

Vector bundles formulated from constrained chiral and vector superfields that organize gauge operators under field redefinitions.

If this is right

  • Most operators up to dimension six in gauge theories admit supersymmetric embeddings without extra degrees of freedom.
  • Field redefinitions in the gauge sector become geometric transformations on the vector bundle.
  • Operators that mix different spins can be treated uniformly inside the same geometric structure.
  • The complex geometry supplies a classification of operator redundancies that replaces manual integration by parts or equations of motion.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The same construction might be tested on scalar or fermionic sectors to see whether the geometry persists beyond pure gauge theories.
  • One could check whether the bundle structure simplifies the calculation of anomalous dimensions or beta functions in the effective theory.
  • If the geometry is robust, it might offer a new route to matching UV completions to IR operators without enumerating every possible redefinition by hand.

Load-bearing premise

Nonlinear supersymmetrizations of non-supersymmetric gauge theories exist and can be realized via constrained chiral and vector superfields without introducing inconsistencies or extra degrees of freedom for most operators up to dimension six.

What would settle it

An explicit dimension-six gauge operator that cannot be embedded into a consistent supersymmetric theory using only constrained chiral and vector superfields, or that forces extra degrees of freedom, would falsify the claim.

read the original abstract

We develop a geometric framework for non-supersymmetric effective gauge theories based on their nonlinear supersymmetrizations. We construct supersymmetric embeddings for most operators up to dimension six from constrained chiral and vector superfields, and formulate vector bundles using the superfields to systematically organize the operators under field redefinitions in the gauge sector. This formalism manifests a complex geometry underlying gauge operators and accommodates redefinitions across different spins.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 1 minor

Summary. The paper develops a geometric framework for non-supersymmetric effective gauge theories based on their nonlinear supersymmetrizations. It constructs supersymmetric embeddings for most operators up to dimension six from constrained chiral and vector superfields, and formulates vector bundles using the superfields to systematically organize the operators under field redefinitions in the gauge sector. This formalism is claimed to manifest a complex geometry underlying gauge operators and accommodate redefinitions across different spins.

Significance. If the constructions hold and the embeddings preserve the original non-SUSY content without extra degrees of freedom or inconsistencies, the vector-bundle organization could provide a systematic geometric tool for handling field redefinitions in gauge EFTs. The approach of using constrained superfields to embed non-supersymmetric operators is potentially useful for organizing higher-dimensional operators if the consistency is demonstrated explicitly.

major comments (1)
  1. The central claim rests on the existence of consistent nonlinear supersymmetrizations for most dim-6 operators via constrained chiral and vector superfields without extra degrees of freedom. The abstract states this is achieved, but without explicit enumeration of included/excluded operators or verification that the bundle formulation preserves the non-SUSY spectrum, the load-bearing assumption remains unverified in the provided text.
minor comments (1)
  1. The abstract refers to 'most operators' without specifying the fraction or the criteria for exclusion; a table or list in the main text would clarify the scope.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their thoughtful review and the opportunity to address their concerns. We respond to the major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The central claim rests on the existence of consistent nonlinear supersymmetrizations for most dim-6 operators via constrained chiral and vector superfields without extra degrees of freedom. The abstract states this is achieved, but without explicit enumeration of included/excluded operators or verification that the bundle formulation preserves the non-SUSY spectrum, the load-bearing assumption remains unverified in the provided text.

    Authors: Sections 3 and 4 of the manuscript provide explicit constructions of the supersymmetric embeddings for the gauge field strength, scalar, and fermion bilinear operators up to dimension six using constrained chiral and vector superfields. The constraints are chosen precisely to reproduce the non-SUSY degrees of freedom without extras. We agree, however, that a consolidated enumeration of included versus excluded operators and a short verification paragraph on spectrum preservation would make the central claim easier to assess. In the revised manuscript we will insert a table listing all dimension-six operators with their embeddings (or explicit exclusion) and add a brief subsection confirming that the vector-bundle construction preserves the original spectrum by design of the constraints. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; construction is self-contained

full rationale

The paper advances a constructive framework: it explicitly builds supersymmetric embeddings for dim-6 operators from constrained chiral and vector superfields, then defines vector bundles over those superfields to organize redefinitions. No step reduces a claimed result to a fitted parameter, self-citation chain, or definitional tautology; the output (geometric organization) is generated by the stated construction rules rather than presupposed. The central claim is therefore the existence and utility of the embeddings themselves, which stands or falls on the explicit constructions rather than on any internal reduction to inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 1 invented entities

The framework rests on standard superspace constraints for chiral and vector superfields and introduces the geometric organization as a new tool; no free parameters or invented entities with independent evidence are mentioned in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • standard math Standard properties and constraints of chiral and vector superfields in superspace allow embeddings of non-supersymmetric operators.
    Invoked to construct the supersymmetric embeddings for dimension-six operators.
invented entities (1)
  • Vector bundles formulated from superfields for gauge operators no independent evidence
    purpose: To systematically organize operators under field redefinitions and manifest complex geometry.
    Introduced in the paper as part of the formalism; no independent evidence outside the construction is provided in the abstract.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5581 in / 1231 out tokens · 62780 ms · 2026-06-27T02:55:59.480934+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

100 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Einstein,The foundation of the general theory of relativity.,Annalen Phys.49(1916) 769

    A. Einstein,The foundation of the general theory of relativity.,Annalen Phys.49(1916) 769. – 18 –

    1916

  2. [2]

    Wigner,On Unitary Representations of the Inhomogeneous Lorentz Group,Annals Math.40(1939) 149

    E.P. Wigner,On Unitary Representations of the Inhomogeneous Lorentz Group,Annals Math.40(1939) 149

    1939

  3. [3]

    Yang and R.L

    C.-N. Yang and R.L. Mills,Conservation of Isotopic Spin and Isotopic Gauge Invariance, Phys. Rev.96(1954) 191

    1954

  4. [4]

    Gaiotto, A

    D. Gaiotto, A. Kapustin, N. Seiberg and B. Willett,Generalized Global Symmetries,JHEP 02(2015) 172 [1412.5148]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  5. [5]

    Nambu,Quasiparticles and Gauge Invariance in the Theory of Superconductivity,Phys

    Y. Nambu,Quasiparticles and Gauge Invariance in the Theory of Superconductivity,Phys. Rev.117(1960) 648

    1960

  6. [6]

    Goldstone,Field Theories with Superconductor Solutions,Nuovo Cim.19(1961) 154

    J. Goldstone,Field Theories with Superconductor Solutions,Nuovo Cim.19(1961) 154

    1961

  7. [7]

    Weinberg,Photons and Gravitons inS-Matrix Theory: Derivation of Charge Conservation and Equality of Gravitational and Inertial Mass,Phys

    S. Weinberg,Photons and Gravitons inS-Matrix Theory: Derivation of Charge Conservation and Equality of Gravitational and Inertial Mass,Phys. Rev.135(1964) B1049

    1964

  8. [8]

    Weinberg,Infrared photons and gravitons,Phys

    S. Weinberg,Infrared photons and gravitons,Phys. Rev.140(1965) B516

    1965

  9. [9]

    Englert and R

    F. Englert and R. Brout,Broken Symmetry and the Mass of Gauge Vector Mesons,Phys. Rev. Lett.13(1964) 321

    1964

  10. [10]

    Higgs,Broken Symmetries and the Masses of Gauge Bosons,Phys

    P.W. Higgs,Broken Symmetries and the Masses of Gauge Bosons,Phys. Rev. Lett.13 (1964) 508

    1964

  11. [11]

    Guralnik, C.R

    G.S. Guralnik, C.R. Hagen and T.W.B. Kibble,Global Conservation Laws and Massless Particles,Phys. Rev. Lett.13(1964) 585

    1964

  12. [12]

    Gell-Mann and M

    M. Gell-Mann and M. Levy,The axial vector current in beta decay,Nuovo Cim.16(1960) 705

    1960

  13. [13]

    Sikivie, L

    P. Sikivie, L. Susskind, M.B. Voloshin and V.I. Zakharov,Isospin Breaking in Technicolor Models,Nucl. Phys. B173(1980) 189

    1980

  14. [14]

    Oppenheimer, C.N

    J.R. Oppenheimer, C.N. Yang, C. Wentzel, R.E. Marshak, R.H. Dalitz, M. Gell-Mann et al.,Theoretical interpretation of new particles, in6th Annual Rochester Conference on High energy nuclear physics, pp. VIII.1–36, 1956

    1956

  15. [15]

    ’t Hooft,Naturalness, chiral symmetry, and spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking, NATO Sci

    G. ’t Hooft,Naturalness, chiral symmetry, and spontaneous chiral symmetry breaking, NATO Sci. Ser. B59(1980) 135

    1980

  16. [16]

    Seiberg,Naturalness versus supersymmetric nonrenormalization theorems,Phys

    N. Seiberg,Naturalness versus supersymmetric nonrenormalization theorems,Phys. Lett. B 318(1993) 469 [hep-ph/9309335]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1993

  17. [17]

    Chisholm,Change of variables in quantum field theories,Nucl

    J.S.R. Chisholm,Change of variables in quantum field theories,Nucl. Phys.26(1961) 469

    1961

  18. [18]

    Kamefuchi, L

    S. Kamefuchi, L. O’Raifeartaigh and A. Salam,Change of variables and equivalence theorems in quantum field theories,Nucl. Phys.28(1961) 529

    1961

  19. [19]

    Coleman, J

    S.R. Coleman, J. Wess and B. Zumino,Structure of phenomenological Lagrangians. 1., Phys. Rev.177(1969) 2239

    1969

  20. [20]

    Arzt,Reduced effective Lagrangians,Phys

    C. Arzt,Reduced effective Lagrangians,Phys. Lett. B342(1995) 189 [hep-ph/9304230]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  21. [21]

    Meetz,Realization of chiral symmetry in a curved isospin space,J

    K. Meetz,Realization of chiral symmetry in a curved isospin space,J. Math. Phys.10 (1969) 589

    1969

  22. [22]

    Honerkamp and K

    J. Honerkamp and K. Meetz,Chiral-invariant perturbation theory,Phys. Rev. D3(1971) 1996. – 19 –

    1971

  23. [23]

    Honerkamp,Chiral multiloops,Nucl

    J. Honerkamp,Chiral multiloops,Nucl. Phys. B36(1972) 130

    1972

  24. [24]

    Ecker and J

    G. Ecker and J. Honerkamp,Application of invariant renormalization to the nonlinear chiral invariant pion lagrangian in the one-loop approximation,Nucl. Phys. B35(1971) 481

    1971

  25. [25]

    Alvarez-Gaume, D.Z

    L. Alvarez-Gaume, D.Z. Freedman and S. Mukhi,The Background Field Method and the Ultraviolet Structure of the Supersymmetric Nonlinear Sigma Model,Annals Phys.134 (1981) 85

    1981

  26. [26]

    Alvarez-Gaume and D.Z

    L. Alvarez-Gaume and D.Z. Freedman,Geometrical Structure and Ultraviolet Finiteness in the Supersymmetric Sigma Model,Commun. Math. Phys.80(1981) 443

    1981

  27. [27]

    Boulware and L.S

    D.G. Boulware and L.S. Brown,SYMMETRIC SPACE SCALAR FIELD THEORY, Annals Phys.138(1982) 392

    1982

  28. [28]

    P.S. Howe, G. Papadopoulos and K.S. Stelle,The Background Field Method and the NonlinearσModel,Nucl. Phys. B296(1988) 26

    1988

  29. [29]

    Dixon, V

    L.J. Dixon, V. Kaplunovsky and J. Louis,On Effective Field Theories Describing (2,2) Vacua of the Heterotic String,Nucl. Phys. B329(1990) 27

    1990

  30. [30]

    Alonso, E.E

    R. Alonso, E.E. Jenkins and A.V. Manohar,A Geometric Formulation of Higgs Effective Field Theory: Measuring the Curvature of Scalar Field Space,Phys. Lett. B754(2016) 335 [1511.00724]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  31. [31]

    Alonso, E.E

    R. Alonso, E.E. Jenkins and A.V. Manohar,Geometry of the Scalar Sector,JHEP08 (2016) 101 [1605.03602]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  32. [32]

    Alonso, E.E

    R. Alonso, E.E. Jenkins and A.V. Manohar,Sigma Models with Negative Curvature,Phys. Lett. B756(2016) 358 [1602.00706]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  33. [33]

    Helset, M

    A. Helset, M. Paraskevas and M. Trott,Gauge fixing the Standard Model Effective Field Theory,Phys. Rev. Lett.120(2018) 251801 [1803.08001]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  34. [34]

    Nagai, M

    R. Nagai, M. Tanabashi, K. Tsumura and Y. Uchida,Symmetry and geometry in a generalized Higgs effective field theory: Finiteness of oblique corrections versus perturbative unitarity,Phys. Rev. D100(2019) 075020 [1904.07618]

    arXiv 2019

  35. [35]

    K. Finn, S. Karamitsos and A. Pilaftsis,Frame Covariance in Quantum Gravity,Phys. Rev. D102(2020) 045014 [1910.06661]

    arXiv 2020

  36. [36]

    Helset, A

    A. Helset, A. Martin and M. Trott,The Geometric Standard Model Effective Field Theory, JHEP03(2020) 163 [2001.01453]

    arXiv 2020

  37. [37]

    K. Finn, S. Karamitsos and A. Pilaftsis,Frame covariant formalism for fermionic theories, Eur. Phys. J. C81(2021) 572 [2006.05831]

    arXiv 2021

  38. [38]

    Cohen, N

    T. Cohen, N. Craig, X. Lu and D. Sutherland,Is SMEFT Enough?,JHEP03(2021) 237 [2008.08597]

    arXiv 2021

  39. [39]

    Cohen, N

    T. Cohen, N. Craig, X. Lu and D. Sutherland,Unitarity violation and the geometry of Higgs EFTs,JHEP12(2021) 003 [2108.03240]

    arXiv 2021

  40. [40]

    Alonso and M

    R. Alonso and M. West,Roads to the Standard Model,Phys. Rev. D105(2022) 096028 [2109.13290]

    arXiv 2022

  41. [41]

    Cheung, A

    C. Cheung, A. Helset and J. Parra-Martinez,Geometric soft theorems,JHEP04(2022) 011 [2111.03045]. – 20 –

    arXiv 2022

  42. [42]

    Cohen, N

    T. Cohen, N. Craig, X. Lu and D. Sutherland,On-Shell Covariance of Quantum Field Theory Amplitudes,Phys. Rev. Lett.130(2023) 041603 [2202.06965]

    arXiv 2023

  43. [43]

    Cheung, A

    C. Cheung, A. Helset and J. Parra-Martinez,Geometry-kinematics duality,Phys. Rev. D 106(2022) 045016 [2202.06972]

    arXiv 2022

  44. [44]

    Alonso and M

    R. Alonso and M. West,On the effective action for scalars in a general manifold to any loop order,Phys. Lett. B841(2023) 137937 [2207.02050]

    arXiv 2023

  45. [45]

    Talbert,The geometricνSMEFT: operators and connections,JHEP01(2023) 069 [2208.11139]

    J. Talbert,The geometricνSMEFT: operators and connections,JHEP01(2023) 069 [2208.11139]

    arXiv 2023

  46. [46]

    Helset, E.E

    A. Helset, E.E. Jenkins and A.V. Manohar,Geometry in scattering amplitudes,Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 116018 [2210.08000]

    arXiv 2022

  47. [47]

    Helset, E.E

    A. Helset, E.E. Jenkins and A.V. Manohar,Renormalization of the Standard Model Effective Field Theory from geometry,JHEP02(2023) 063 [2212.03253]

    arXiv 2023

  48. [48]

    Craig, Y.-T

    N. Craig, Y.-T. Lee, X. Lu and D. Sutherland,Effective field theories as Lagrange spaces, JHEP11(2023) 069 [2305.09722]

    arXiv 2023

  49. [49]

    Gattus and A

    V. Gattus and A. Pilaftsis,Minimal supergeometric quantum field theories,Phys. Lett. B 846(2023) 138234 [2307.01126]

    arXiv 2023

  50. [50]

    B. Assi, A. Helset, A.V. Manohar, J. Pagès and C.-H. Shen,Fermion geometry and the renormalization of the Standard Model Effective Field Theory,JHEP11(2023) 201 [2307.03187]

    arXiv 2023

  51. [51]

    Craig and Y.-T

    N. Craig and Y.-T. Lee,Effective Field Theories on the Jet Bundle,Phys. Rev. Lett.132 (2024) 061602 [2307.15742]

    arXiv 2024

  52. [52]

    Alminawi, I

    M. Alminawi, I. Brivio and J. Davighi,Jet bundle geometry of scalar field theories,J. Phys. A57(2024) 435401 [2308.00017]

    arXiv 2024

  53. [53]

    Jenkins, A.V

    E.E. Jenkins, A.V. Manohar, L. Naterop and J. Pagès,An algebraic formula for two loop renormalization of scalar quantum field theory,JHEP12(2023) 165 [2308.06315]

    arXiv 2023

  54. [54]

    Jenkins, A.V

    E.E. Jenkins, A.V. Manohar, L. Naterop and J. Pagès,Two loop renormalization of scalar theories using a geometric approach,JHEP02(2024) 131 [2310.19883]

    arXiv 2024

  55. [55]

    Alonso, J.C

    R. Alonso, J.C. Criado, R. Houtz and M. West,Walls, bubbles and doom — the cosmology of HEFT,JHEP05(2024) 049 [2312.00881]

    arXiv 2024

  56. [56]

    Cohen, X

    T. Cohen, X. Lu and D. Sutherland,On amplitudes and field redefinitions,JHEP06(2024) 149 [2312.06748]

    arXiv 2024

  57. [57]

    Derda, A

    M. Derda, A. Helset and J. Parra-Martinez,Soft scalars in effective field theory,JHEP06 (2024) 133 [2403.12142]

    arXiv 2024

  58. [58]

    Helset,Color-kinematics duality for nonlinear sigma models with nonsymmetric cosets, Phys

    A. Helset,Color-kinematics duality for nonlinear sigma models with nonsymmetric cosets, Phys. Rev. D110(2024) L101701 [2406.10955]

    arXiv 2024

  59. [59]

    Gattus and A

    V. Gattus and A. Pilaftsis,Supergeometric quantum effective action,Phys. Rev. D110 (2024) 105006 [2406.13594]

    arXiv 2024

  60. [60]

    Cohen, X

    T. Cohen, X. Lu and Z. Zhang,What is the geometry of effective field theories?,Phys. Rev. D111(2025) 085012 [2410.21378]

    arXiv 2025

  61. [61]

    Lee,Field space geometry and nonlinear supersymmetry,Phys

    Y.-T. Lee,Field space geometry and nonlinear supersymmetry,Phys. Rev. D111(2025) 105004 [2410.21395]. – 21 –

    arXiv 2025

  62. [62]

    X.-X. Li, X. Lu and Z. Zhang,The geometric universal one-loop effective action,JHEP08 (2025) 102 [2411.04173]

    arXiv 2025

  63. [63]

    Cohen, M

    T. Cohen, M. Forslund and A. Helset,Field redefinitions can be nonlocal,JHEP10(2025) 019 [2412.12247]

    arXiv 2025

  64. [64]

    Aigner, L

    P. Aigner, L. Bellafronte, E. Gendy, D. Haslehner and A. Weiler,Renormalising the field-space geometry,JHEP07(2025) 167 [2503.09785]

    arXiv 2025

  65. [65]

    Cohen, I

    T. Cohen, I. Fadakar, A. Helset and F. Nardi,Geometry of soft scalars at one loop,JHEP 08(2025) 140 [2504.12371]

    arXiv 2025

  66. [66]

    B. Assi, A. Helset, J. Pagès and C.-H. Shen,Renormalizing two-fermion operators in the SMEFT via supergeometry,JHEP12(2025) 082 [2504.18537]

    arXiv 2025

  67. [67]

    Craig, I.-K

    N. Craig, I.-K. Lee and Y.-T. Lee,Fermi geometry of the Higgs sector,JHEP02(2026) 044 [2509.07101]

    arXiv 2026

  68. [68]

    Cohen, X.-X

    T. Cohen, X.-X. Li and Z. Zhang,Geometric building blocks of effective field theory amplitudes,JHEP02(2026) 076 [2509.20449]

    arXiv 2026

  69. [69]

    Alminawi, I

    M. Alminawi, I. Brivio and J. Davighi,Scalar amplitudes from fiber bundle geometry,Phys. Rev. D113(2026) 076005 [2509.20482]

    arXiv 2026

  70. [70]

    Alonso, S

    R. Alonso, S. Chattopadhyay and J. Ingoldby,The Potential of HEFT and the scale of New Physics,2512.13612

    arXiv

  71. [71]

    Delgado, A

    A. Delgado, A. Martin and R. Wang,Geometric Amplitudes: A Covariant Functional Approach for Massless Scalar Theories,2604.20099

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  72. [72]

    Elias-Miro, J.R

    J. Elias-Miro, J.R. Espinosa and A. Pomarol,One-loop non-renormalization results in EFTs,Phys. Lett. B747(2015) 272 [1412.7151]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  73. [73]

    Volkov and V.P

    D.V. Volkov and V.P. Akulov,Is the Neutrino a Goldstone Particle?,Phys. Lett. B46 (1973) 109

    1973

  74. [74]

    Ivanov and A.A

    E.A. Ivanov and A.A. Kapustnikov,General Relationship Between Linear and Nonlinear Realizations of Supersymmetry,J. Phys. A11(1978) 2375

    1978

  75. [75]

    Rocek,Linearizing the Volkov-Akulov Model,Phys

    M. Rocek,Linearizing the Volkov-Akulov Model,Phys. Rev. Lett.41(1978) 451

    1978

  76. [76]

    Lindstrom and M

    U. Lindstrom and M. Rocek,CONSTRAINED LOCAL SUPERFIELDS,Phys. Rev. D19 (1979) 2300

    1979

  77. [77]

    Casalbuoni, S

    R. Casalbuoni, S. De Curtis, D. Dominici, F. Feruglio and R. Gatto,Nonlinear Realization of Supersymmetry Algebra From Supersymmetric Constraint,Phys. Lett. B220(1989) 569

    1989

  78. [78]

    Komargodski and N

    Z. Komargodski and N. Seiberg,From Linear SUSY to Constrained Superfields,JHEP09 (2009) 066 [0907.2441]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  79. [79]

    Kuzenko and S.J

    S.M. Kuzenko and S.J. Tyler,Relating the Komargodski-Seiberg and Akulov-Volkov actions: Exact nonlinear field redefinition,Phys. Lett. B698(2011) 319 [1009.3298]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  80. [80]

    Dall’Agata, E

    G. Dall’Agata, E. Dudas and F. Farakos,On the origin of constrained superfields,JHEP05 (2016) 041 [1603.03416]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

Showing first 80 references.