Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 minor 65 references

Any consistent 6d (1,0) supergravity can be assembled by gluing supergravity blocks built around an H-string and then enhancing gauge algebras.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · grok-4.5

2026-07-11 06:49 UTC pith:XTO4RSV4

load-bearing objection Solid, reproducible classification of non-Higgsable 6d supergravity blocks that organizes the landscape around the H-string; the load-bearing assumption is inherited and standard.

arxiv 2607.05496 v1 pith:XTO4RSV4 submitted 2026-07-06 hep-th

6d Supergravity Blocks

Yuta Hamada , Seongmin Jeon , Hee-Cheol Kim This is my paper
classification hep-th
keywords 6d supergravitysupergravity blocksH-stringlittle string theorynon-Higgsable clusterstensor moduli spaceanomaly cancellationBPS strings
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

Six-dimensional supergravity with eight supercharges is tightly constrained by anomalies and by the non-perturbative requirement that every boundary of tensor moduli space hosts a tensionless BPS string. This paper turns that structure into a constructive recipe: the basic objects are supergravity blocks, each made from one little-string theory that carries a distinguished H-string charge together with external tensors that intersect it positively. Every such block has a Gram matrix with exactly one positive eigenvalue, so it always contains gravitational strings that never become tensionless. The claim is that every consistent theory is obtained by gluing compatible blocks and then enhancing the gauge algebras and matter. As the first concrete step the authors fully classify the non-Higgsable blocks built only from the minimal non-Higgsable clusters, list the admissible little-string sectors that can share an H-string, and enumerate complete tensor bases up to nine tensors.

Core claim

Any consistent 6d (1,0) supergravity theory can be obtained by gluing compatible supergravity blocks—each a single little-string theory sharing the H-string charge plus external tensors that intersect it positively, whose Gram matrix has exactly one positive eigenvalue—and then enhancing the gauge algebras and matter content. The complete set of non-Higgsable such blocks is classified.

What carries the argument

A supergravity block: the minimal collection consisting of one little-string theory that carries the H-string charge together with external generators that intersect it positively; its Gram matrix has exactly one positive eigenvalue, guaranteeing intrinsically gravitational BPS strings that cannot all become tensionless.

Load-bearing premise

Every boundary of the tensor moduli space of a consistent theory hosts a tensionless BPS string whose charge already appears in the known lists of six-dimensional superconformal field theories, little-string theories, or critical strings.

What would settle it

Exhibit a consistent 6d (1,0) supergravity whose tensor base cannot be blown down to a Hirzebruch surface after the H-string decomposition, or whose Gram matrix cannot be assembled from blocks each having exactly one positive eigenvalue, while still satisfying all anomaly and unitarity constraints.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

0 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a constructive framework for 6d N=(1,0) supergravity theories based on “supergravity blocks”: minimal collections consisting of one P-type little-string theory sharing a distinguished H-string charge f together with external generators that intersect f positively. Each block is required to have a Gram matrix with exactly one positive eigenvalue, so that it contains intrinsically gravitational BPS strings that cannot become tensionless anywhere in tensor moduli space. Any consistent theory is claimed to arise by gluing compatible blocks and then enhancing gauge algebras and matter. As a concrete first step the authors completely classify the non-Higgsable subclass (blocks built only from non-Higgsable clusters), enumerate the admissible P-type LST sectors (12 762 of them), attach external generators subject to E-string and H-string central-charge bounds, Gram-signature and blow-down constraints, and produce a public catalog of ~9.6 million blocks. They also give an explicit sketch of all non-Higgsable bases up to T=9 (with new features at T=10) and verify agreement with the geometric F-theory base classification of Taylor–Wang up to T=6.

Significance. If the framework holds, it supplies a systematic, largely non-geometric organization of the 6d (1,0) supergravity landscape that incorporates the recent non-perturbative H-string constraints of Kim–Vafa–Xu and reduces the construction problem to a finite enumeration of blocks followed by gauge/matter enhancement. The complete classification of non-Higgsable blocks, the public code and data repositories, the quantified cut-off analysis, and the independent geometric cross-check up to T=6 are concrete, reproducible contributions that make the result immediately usable for further landscape studies and for the search for non-geometric models (including those with frozen singularities).

minor comments (5)
  1. §4.2 and Tables 3–5: the practical cut-offs (single-target su2/su3 intersection multiplicity capped at 2; external-sector count at 9; exclusion of certain mixed −2 attachments) are quantified at the T_H=10 benchmark, but a short explicit statement that the T≤9 lists remain complete under these cut-offs would help readers who do not consult the code.
  2. §3.2 and the discussion of infinite duality groups: the claim that quotienting by the duality group renders intersection numbers finite is plausible, yet a concrete bound (or a reference to one) for the remaining free parameters would strengthen the finiteness argument used later in the classification.
  3. Appendix D: the comparison with Taylor–Wang bases is thorough, but a one-sentence summary table listing the number of bases at each T≤6 that match after Weyl reflection would make the agreement more immediately visible.
  4. Notation: the symbols “any C”, “≤g C” and the red colouring of external generators are introduced only in §4.3; a brief forward reference or a short glossary would improve readability of the earlier sections.
  5. Data availability: the Zenodo and GitHub links are given, but the manuscript should state the precise version/DOI that corresponds to the numbers quoted in the text (e.g. N_tot=9 630 606) so that future readers can reproduce the exact catalog.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged

Framework imports H-string/block structure from coauthor prior work [3], but the non-Higgsable classification is an independent enumeration against external SCFT/LST lists and geometric benchmarks.

specific steps
  1. self citation load bearing [§2.1–2.2 and §3.1 (main assumption and refined structure)]
    "Following the main assumption of [3], we will assume that every boundary of the tensor moduli space… corresponds to a point where a BPS string becomes tensionless… Taken together, these results imply the following: Intersection structure of tensor multiplets in any 6d supergravity theory matches that of Kähler surfaces…"

    The existence of the H-string, the decomposition into LST sectors plus external generators, and the Gram-matrix signature that defines a supergravity block are imported wholesale from the coauthor paper [3]. The present work treats that structure as given and builds the entire block framework and classification on top of it; without the self-citation the organizing principle disappears. The citation is therefore load-bearing for the central claim, even though the subsequent enumeration itself is independent.

full rationale

The paper's construction of supergravity blocks and the claim that any consistent 6d (1,0) theory arises by gluing them rest on the refined tensor-moduli structure (existence of the H-string, blow-down to Hirzebruch bases, BPS-cone generators) taken from Kim–Vafa–Xu [3] (overlapping author H.-C. Kim). That citation is load-bearing for the framework, yet it is an explicit assumption, not a uniqueness theorem that forbids alternatives inside the present paper, and the subsequent classification of non-Higgsable blocks is a fresh computational enumeration that uses only previously published SCFT/LST atom/gluing rules, anomaly factorization, and Gram-signature/blow-down tests. No parameters are fitted to data and then re-predicted; no result is obtained by renaming a known pattern; the T≤9 lists match the independent geometric bases of Taylor–Wang up to T=6. The self-citation therefore raises the score only modestly (to 2) and does not render the classification circular by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 4 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard 6d anomaly cancellation, the refined tensor-moduli structure of Kim–Vafa–Xu (including H-string existence), and the completeness of existing SCFT/LST classifications. No free parameters are fitted. The only new entity is the supergravity block itself, introduced as a definitional organizing tool rather than a dynamical postulate.

axioms (4)
  • domain assumption Every boundary of the tensor moduli space hosts a tensionless BPS string belonging to the classified list of 6d SCFTs, LSTs or critical strings.
    Main assumption of Kim–Vafa–Xu (arXiv:2411.19155), invoked in §2.1–2.2 to guarantee the H-string and the block decomposition.
  • domain assumption Green–Schwarz–Sagnotti anomaly factorization and the resulting integral anomaly lattice of signature compatible with (1,T).
    Standard 6d consistency condition used throughout §§2–4 to constrain Gram matrices and matter content.
  • domain assumption Completeness of the atomic classification of 6d SCFTs and P-type LSTs (Heckman et al., Bhardwaj et al.).
    Supplies the exhaustive list of allowed LST sectors and non-Higgsable clusters that enter the block scan (§4.1 and Appendices A–C).
  • domain assumption Unimodularity and Lorentzian signature of the string charge lattice; existence of a blow-down sequence to a Hirzebruch surface (or P2).
    Refined structure of tensor moduli space (§2.2) used to accept or reject candidate gluings.
invented entities (1)
  • supergravity block no independent evidence
    purpose: Minimal gravitational unit consisting of one H-string LST plus external generators whose Gram matrix has exactly one positive eigenvalue; building block for all consistent 6d (1,0) theories.
    Definitional organizing tool introduced in §3.3; no independent dynamical prediction beyond the classification itself.

pith-pipeline@v1.1.0-grok45 · 66981 in / 2729 out tokens · 26546 ms · 2026-07-11T06:49:15.175421+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We propose a systematic framework for constructing six-dimensional supergravity theories with eight supercharges that respect all known consistency constraints, including anomaly cancellation and the non-perturbative ${\it H}$-string constraints recently discovered by Kim, Vafa, and Xu. The basic objects in this framework are ${\it supergravity\,blocks}$, which are minimal collections of tensor multiplets consisting of a single little string theory sharing the ${\it H}$-string charge together with additional tensors whose string charges intersect it positively. A characteristic feature of each supergravity block is that its Gram matrix has exactly one positive eigenvalue, and therefore it necessarily contains gravitational BPS strings that cannot become tensionless anywhere in tensor moduli space. Any consistent 6d $(1,0)$ supergravity theory can then be obtained by gluing compatible blocks and subsequently enhancing the gauge algebras and matter content. As a first step toward establishing this framework concretely, we provide a complete classification of the ${\it non\text{-}Higgsable\,supergravity\,blocks}$, (or ${\it non\text{-}Higgsable\,gravity\,blocks}$ for short) namely those built from tensor multiplets that support only non-Higgsable gauge algebras.

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

65 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Vafa,The string landscape and the swampland,arXiv preprint hep-th/0509212(2005)

    C. Vafa,The string landscape and the swampland,arXiv preprint hep-th/0509212(2005) . 1, 2

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  2. [2]

    S.-J. Lee, W. Lerche and T. Weigand,Emergent strings from infinite distance limits,JHEP02 (2022) 190 [1910.01135]. 2

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  3. [3]

    H.-C. Kim, C. Vafa and K. Xu,Finite Landscape of 6d N=(1,0) Supergravity,SciPost Phys. 20(2026) 016 [2411.19155]. 2, 5, 6, 8, 10, 12, 42

    arXiv 2026

  4. [4]

    Heckman, D.R

    J.J. Heckman, D.R. Morrison and C. Vafa,On the Classification of 6D SCFTs and Generalized ADE Orbifolds,JHEP05(2014) 028 [1312.5746]. 2

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  5. [5]

    Heckman, D.R

    J.J. Heckman, D.R. Morrison, T. Rudelius and C. Vafa,Atomic Classification of 6D SCFTs, Fortsch. Phys.63(2015) 468 [1502.05405]. 6, 7, 12, 25, 44, 45, 48

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  6. [6]

    Bhardwaj,Classification of 6dN= (1,0)gauge theories,JHEP11(2015) 002 [1502.06594]

    L. Bhardwaj,Classification of 6dN= (1,0)gauge theories,JHEP11(2015) 002 [1502.06594]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  7. [7]

    Bhardwaj, M

    L. Bhardwaj, M. Del Zotto, J.J. Heckman, D.R. Morrison, T. Rudelius and C. Vafa,F-theory and the Classification of Little Strings,Phys. Rev. D93(2016) 086002 [1511.05565]. 10, 11, 25, 42, 45, 46, 48

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  8. [8]

    Bhardwaj,Revisiting the classifications of 6d SCFTs and LSTs,JHEP03(2020) 171 [1903.10503]

    L. Bhardwaj,Revisiting the classifications of 6d SCFTs and LSTs,JHEP03(2020) 171 [1903.10503]. 2, 6, 7, 11, 12, 20, 40, 42, 44

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  9. [9]

    Douglas,Talk given in Strings 2005, Toronto

    M. Douglas,Talk given in Strings 2005, Toronto. 2

    2005

  10. [10]

    Acharya and M.R

    B.S. Acharya and M.R. Douglas,A finite landscape?,arXiv preprint hep-th/0606212(2006) . – 51 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  11. [11]

    Hamada, M

    Y. Hamada, M. Montero, C. Vafa and I. Valenzuela,Finiteness and the swampland,J. Phys. A 55(2022) 224005 [2111.00015]. 2

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  12. [12]

    Avramis and A

    S.D. Avramis and A. Kehagias,A Systematic search for anomaly-free supergravities in six dimensions,JHEP10(2005) 052 [hep-th/0508172]. 2

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  13. [13]

    Kumar and W

    V. Kumar and W. Taylor,A Bound on 6D N=1 supergravities,JHEP12(2009) 050 [0910.1586]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  14. [14]

    Kumar, D.R

    V. Kumar, D.R. Morrison and W. Taylor,Mapping 6D N = 1 supergravities to F-theory, JHEP02(2010) 099 [0911.3393]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  15. [15]

    Kumar, D.R

    V. Kumar, D.R. Morrison and W. Taylor,Global aspects of the space of 6D N = 1 supergravities,JHEP11(2010) 118 [1008.1062]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  16. [16]

    Bedroya, Y

    A. Bedroya, Y. Hamada, M. Montero and C. Vafa,Compactness of brane moduli and the String Lamppost Principle in d>6,JHEP02(2022) 082 [2110.10157]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  17. [17]

    H.-C. Kim, G. Shiu and C. Vafa,Branes and the Swampland,Phys. Rev. D100(2019) 066006 [1905.08261]. 7, 8, 13

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  18. [18]

    Lee and T

    S.-J. Lee and T. Weigand,Swampland Bounds on the Abelian Gauge Sector,Phys. Rev. D100 (2019) 026015 [1905.13213]. 8

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  19. [19]

    Tarazi and C

    H.-C. Tarazi and C. Vafa,On The Finiteness of 6d Supergravity Landscape,JHEP05(2026) 007 [2106.10839]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  20. [20]

    Cvetic, L

    M. Cvetic, L. Lin and A.P. Turner,Flavor symmetries and automatic enhancement in the 6D supergravity swampland,Phys. Rev. D105(2022) 046005 [2110.00008]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  21. [21]

    Lee and P.-K

    S.-J. Lee and P.-K. Oehlmann,Geometric bounds on the 1-form gauge sector,Phys. Rev. D 108(2023) 086021 [2212.11915]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  22. [22]

    Hayashi, H.-C

    H. Hayashi, H.-C. Kim and M. Kim,Spectra of BPS strings in 6d supergravity and the Swampland,JHEP03(2025) 123 [2310.12219]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  23. [23]

    Hamada and G.J

    Y. Hamada and G.J. Loges,Towards a complete classification of 6D supergravities,JHEP02 (2024) 095 [2311.00868]. 5

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  24. [24]

    Kim and C

    H.-C. Kim and C. Vafa,Exploring new constraints on K¨ ahler moduli space of 6dN= 1 supergravity,JHEP10(2024) 217 [2406.06704]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  25. [25]

    Hamada and G.J

    Y. Hamada and G.J. Loges,A finite 6d supergravity landscape from anomalies, 2507.20949. 13

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  26. [26]

    Lockhart and L

    G. Lockhart and L. Novelli,The hyperplane string, RCFTs, and the swampland,JHEP11 (2025) 065 [2506.05173]

    arXiv 2025

  27. [27]

    Baykara, M

    Z.K. Baykara, M. Dierigl, H.-C. Kim, C. Vafa and K. Xu,Bounds on Discrete Gauge Symmetries in Supergravity,JHEP03(2026) 171 [2511.09613]. 8

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  28. [28]

    Lockhart and Y

    G. Lockhart and Y. Proto,Rational points in the 6d supergravity landscape and simple current extensions,2603.17713

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  29. [29]

    Lockhart, L

    G. Lockhart, L. Novelli and Y. Proto,String probes, simple currents, and the no global symmetries conjecture,2605.12594. 2

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  30. [30]

    Birkar and S.-J

    C. Birkar and S.-J. Lee,Explicit Bounds on the Spectrum of 6d N=(1,0) Supergravity,Phys. Rev. D113(2026) 026006 [2507.06295]. 2

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  31. [31]

    Birkar and S.-J

    C. Birkar and S.-J. Lee,A Picard rank bound for base surfaces of elliptic Calabi-Yau 3-folds, 2507.06317. 2 – 52 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  32. [32]

    Vafa,Evidence for F-Theory,Nucl

    C. Vafa,Evidence for F-Theory,Nucl. Phys. B469(1996) 403 [hep-th/9602022]. 2

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  33. [33]

    Morrison and C

    D.R. Morrison and C. Vafa,Compactifications of F-Theory on Calabi-Yau Threefolds. I,Nucl. Phys. B473(1996) 74 [hep-th/9602114]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  34. [34]

    Morrison and C

    D.R. Morrison and C. Vafa,Compactifications of F-Theory on Calabi-Yau Threefolds. II,Nucl. Phys. B476(1996) 437 [hep-th/9603161]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  35. [35]

    Bershadsky, K.A

    M. Bershadsky, K.A. Intriligator, S. Kachru, D.R. Morrison, V. Sadov and C. Vafa,Geometric singularities and enhanced gauge symmetries,Nucl. Phys. B481(1996) 215 [hep-th/9605200]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  36. [36]

    Morrison and W

    D.R. Morrison and W. Taylor,Classifying bases for 6D F-theory models,Central Eur. J. Phys. 10(2012) 1072 [1201.1943]. 3, 20

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  37. [37]

    Morrison and W

    D.R. Morrison and W. Taylor,Toric bases for 6D F-theory models,Fortsch. Phys.60(2012) 1187 [1204.0283]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  38. [38]

    Taylor and Y.-N

    W. Taylor and Y.-N. Wang,Non-toric bases for elliptic Calabi–Yau threefolds and 6D F-theory vacua,Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.21(2017) 1063 [1504.07689]. 2, 34, 49, 50, 51

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  39. [39]

    Park and W

    D.S. Park and W. Taylor,Constraints on 6D Supergravity Theories with Abelian Gauge Symmetry,JHEP01(2012) 141 [1110.5916]. 3, 43

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  40. [40]

    Taylor and A.P

    W. Taylor and A.P. Turner,An infinite swampland of u(1) charge spectra in 6d supergravity theories,Journal of High Energy Physics2018(2018) 10 [1803.04447]. 3

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  41. [41]

    Green and J.H

    M.B. Green and J.H. Schwarz,Anomaly Cancellation in Supersymmetric D=10 Gauge Theory and Superstring Theory,Phys. Lett. B149(1984) 117. 4

    1984

  42. [42]

    Green, J.H

    M.B. Green, J.H. Schwarz and P.C. West,Anomaly Free Chiral Theories in Six-Dimensions, Nucl. Phys. B254(1985) 327

    1985

  43. [43]

    Sagnotti,A Note on the Green-Schwarz mechanism in open string theories,Phys

    A. Sagnotti,A Note on the Green-Schwarz mechanism in open string theories,Phys. Lett. B 294(1992) 196 [hep-th/9210127]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1992

  44. [44]

    Erler,Anomaly cancellation in six-dimensions,J

    J. Erler,Anomaly cancellation in six-dimensions,J. Math. Phys.35(1994) 1819 [hep-th/9304104]. 4

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  45. [45]

    Seiberg and W

    N. Seiberg and W. Taylor,Charge Lattices and Consistency of 6D Supergravity,JHEP06 (2011) 001 [1103.0019]. 5

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  46. [46]

    Monnier, G.W

    S. Monnier, G.W. Moore and D.S. Park,Quantization of anomaly coefficients in 6d n=(1,0) supergravity,Journal of High Energy Physics2018(2018) 20 [1711.04777]. 5

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  47. [47]

    Hamada and G.J

    Y. Hamada and G.J. Loges,Enumerating 6D supergravities with T ≤ 1,JHEP12(2024) 167 [2404.08845]. 5, 10

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  48. [48]

    McNamara and C

    J. McNamara and C. Vafa,Cobordism Classes and the Swampland,1909.10355. 5

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1909

  49. [49]

    Cheung and G.N

    C. Cheung and G.N. Remmen,Positivity of Curvature-Squared Corrections in Gravity,Phys. Rev. Lett.118(2017) 051601 [1608.02942]. 6

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  50. [50]

    Hamada, T

    Y. Hamada, T. Noumi and G. Shiu,Weak Gravity Conjecture from Unitarity and Causality, Phys. Rev. Lett.123(2019) 051601 [1810.03637]. 6

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  51. [51]

    Bhardwaj, D.R

    L. Bhardwaj, D.R. Morrison, Y. Tachikawa and A. Tomasiello,The frozen phase of F-theory, JHEP08(2018) 138 [1805.09070]. 6, 7, 12, 41, 42

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  52. [52]

    Di Francesco, P

    P. Di Francesco, P. Mathieu and D. Senechal,Conformal Field Theory, Graduate Texts in Contemporary Physics, Springer-Verlag, New York (1997), 10.1007/978-1-4612-2256-9. 7 – 53 –

    doi:10.1007/978-1-4612-2256-9 1997

  53. [53]

    Haghighat, A

    B. Haghighat, A. Iqbal, C. Koz¸ caz, G. Lockhart and C. Vafa,M-Strings,Commun. Math. Phys.334(2015) 779 [1305.6322]. 8

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  54. [54]

    Kumar, D.S

    V. Kumar, D.S. Park and W. Taylor,6D supergravity without tensor multiplets,JHEP04 (2011) 080 [1011.0726]. 10

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  55. [55]

    Dai and D.S

    X.-z. Dai and D.S. Freed,eta invariants and determinant lines,J. Math. Phys.35(1994) 5155 [hep-th/9405012]. 13

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  56. [56]

    Basile and G

    I. Basile and G. Leone,Anomaly constraints for heterotic strings and supergravity in six dimensions,JHEP04(2024) 067 [2310.20480]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  57. [57]

    Dierigl and M

    M. Dierigl and M. Tartaglia,(Quadratically) Refined discrete anomaly cancellation,JHEP08 (2025) 145 [2504.02934]. 13

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  58. [58]

    Dolgachev,Weyl groups and Cremona transformations, inSingularities, Part 1, vol

    I.V. Dolgachev,Weyl groups and Cremona transformations, inSingularities, Part 1, vol. 40 of Proc. Sympos. Pure Math., (Providence, RI), pp. 283–294, Amer. Math. Soc. (1983), DOI. 16

    1983

  59. [59]

    Sakai,Rational surfaces associated with affine root systems and geometry of the Painleve equations,Commun

    H. Sakai,Rational surfaces associated with affine root systems and geometry of the Painleve equations,Commun. Math. Phys.220(2001) 165. 16

    2001

  60. [60]

    Hayashi, P

    H. Hayashi, P. Jefferson, H.-C. Kim, K. Ohmori and C. Vafa,SCFTs, holography, and topological strings,Surveys Diff. Geom.23(2018) 105 [1905.00116]. 19

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  61. [61]

    Cossec and I.V

    F.R. Cossec and I.V. Dolgachev,Enriques Surfaces I, vol. 76 ofProgress in Mathematics, Birkhauser, Boston (1989). 24 [62]github.com/SungminJeon/SCFT-LST-SUGRA-bases/tree/main/LST, 2026. 26 [63]github.com/SungminJeon/SCFT-LST-SUGRA-bases/.../sugra pipeline share, 2026. 28, 29

    1989

  62. [62]

    Hamada, S

    Y. Hamada, S. Jeon and H.-C. Kim. Zenodo,10.5281/zenodo.20979750, 2026. 28, 34, 40 [65]github.com/SungminJeon/SCFT-LST-SUGRA-bases/.../sugra toolkit, 2026. 34

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.20979750 2026

  63. [63]

    Morrison and B

    D.R. Morrison and B. Sung,On the frozen F-theory landscape,JHEP05(2024) 126 [2310.11432]. 41

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  64. [64]

    Del Zotto, J.J

    M. Del Zotto, J.J. Heckman, A. Tomasiello and C. Vafa,6d Conformal Matter,JHEP02 (2015) 054 [1407.6359]. 44, 45

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  65. [65]

    Taylor.ctp.lns.mit.edu/wati/data.html

    W. Taylor.ctp.lns.mit.edu/wati/data.html. 49 – 54 –