The spectral gap of the ABJM model: A holographic perspective from uplifted higher-dimensional geometries

Mahdis Ghodrati

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 30 references

The spectral gap of the ABJM model: A holographic perspective from uplifted higher-dimensional geometries

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The 3d ABJM model acquires a gapped, Fermi-liquid-like sector when one of its four chemical potentials is switched off.

desk verdict Useful mode classification and uplift calculations, but the central claim—a spectral gap in ABJM—is never actually demonstrated, only inferred from non-commuting limits. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.06887 v1 pith:XXV57SEG submitted 2026-08-07 hep-th gr-qc

Mahdis Ghodrati This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-thgr-qc

keywords ABJMmodelholographicFermisurfacesspectralgapgaugedsupergravityextremalblackbranesAdS3/BTZthroatDiracequationfermionicresponse

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 studies a four-dimensional $U(1)^4$ charged black brane in gauged supergravity, the holographic dual of a zero-temperature ABJM theory—a 3d Chern–Simons matter theory—at finite density with four chemical potentials. It argues that the dual CFT has a spectral gap precisely when one of the charges, $q'$, is sent to zero, and that this gap encodes the fact that two classical limits do not commute: letting $q'\to 0$ before taking the near-horizon/extremal limit gives a different answer than taking the near-horizon limit first. Inside the gap the theory behaves like a Fermi liquid with long-lived quasiparticles, while outside it is non-Fermi liquid; turning $q'$ on, however slightly, destroys the gap. The same effect appears as a discontinuity in the chemical potential and as an emergent $\mathrm{AdS}_3$ or $\mathrm{BTZ}$ sector in the 5d and 11d uplifts, so the gap is proposed to be the field-theory signature of a decoupled, lower-dimensional regime.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the extremal 3+1-charge black brane, with three equal charges $q$ and one unequal charge $q'$, embedded in N=8 gauged supergravity. The argument's engine is the non-commutativity of two limits—the charge limit $q'\to 0$ and the near-horizon/extremal limit—which yields different values of $qq'/r_H^2$ and different chemical-potential limits depending on the order. The Dirac equation for the 56 fermion modes, with Pauli couplings that shift the effective momentum, provides the connection between the near-horizon geometry and Fermi surfaces, while the uplift to 5d and 11d supplies the geometric interpretation: an $\mathrm{AdS}_3$ or $\mathrm{BTZ}$ throat (a three-dimensional anti-de Sitter space or its rotating black-hole version) emerges as the decoupled sector.

What would settle it

Compute the retarded Green's function for fermions in the $q'=0$ extremal 3-charge background and check whether the spectral function is identically zero over some finite interval in frequency at fixed momentum; if no such interval exists, the predicted gap is absent.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that ordering effects in classical supergravity can be read as a physical gap in the dual ABJM spectrum. For the extremal 3+1-charge black brane, if one first sends $q'\to 0$ and then takes the near-horizon limit, the parameter combination $qq'/r_H^2$ tends to zero, whereas if the near-horizon limit is taken first, that same combination tends to 3. That non-commutativity, together with the associated jump in the chemical potential $\mu_1$, is interpreted as a range of energies with no stable fermionic quasiparticles. The paper backs this by classifying the 56 spin-1/2 modes, writing the Dirac equation with its Pauli couplings for each class, and showing in the near-horizon analysis that the oscillatory momentum $k_{\rm osc}$ exists for the 3-charge case but cannot exist for the 1-charge case. Uplifting to five and eleven dimensions shows that the singular 4d near-horizon geometry becomes a smooth $\mathrm{AdS}_3 \times T^2 \times T^6$ or $\mathrm{BTZ} \times T^2 \times T^6$ when $q'$ is taken to zero first, and an $\mathrm{AdS}_2$ sector when the near-horizon limit is taken with finite $q'$ first; the gap in the CFT is identified with the decoupled $\mathrm{AdS}_3$/BTZ sector.

Load-bearing premise

The argument rises or falls on the interpretive step that non-commutativity of two classical limits—sending $q'$ to zero before versus after the near-horizon limit—directly implies a real gap in the dual field theory's excitation spectrum, a step not independently verified in this paper by a density-of-states or Green's-function computation.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

For the ABJM theory with $q'=0$, there is a decoupled low-energy sector dual to an $\mathrm{AdS}_3$ or $\mathrm{BTZ}$ throat, in which excitations behave as a Fermi liquid with long-lived quasiparticles.
The gap is fragile: any nonzero $q'$ closes it and drives the system to non-Fermi-liquid behavior, marking $q'=0$ as a critical point in parameter space.
The near-horizon analysis predicts an oscillatory instability $k_{\rm osc}$ for the 3-charge black brane but not for the 1-charge brane, so the two charge types play different physical roles.
The same near-horizon Dirac structure appears in four and five dimensions, so the gap and Fermi-surface features are expected to be universal across holographic constructions.
Different orders of taking limits correspond to different bulk regimes—3-charge, 3+1-charge, and the $\mathrm{AdS}_3$/BTZ excitation regime—which map to different energy scales in the dual field theory.

Reading between the lines

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

If the gap is real, a direct numerical evaluation of the spectral function for the extremal 3-charge background should show a hard zero over a finite frequency window; fixing that window would turn the qualitative claim into a quantitative prediction.
The same two-limit logic could be applied to other extremal black brane constructions with multiple charges, predicting gapped decoupled sectors whenever one charge is varied in different orders.
The paper does not determine whether the gap survives quantum corrections to the Dirac equation or the one-loop effective action; testing that would distinguish a structural feature from a classical artifact.
The chemical-potential jump around $q'=0$ parallels a Lifshitz transition in Fermi-surface topology, so a condensed-matter analogue with tunable chemical potentials could provide an experimental window on the same phenomenon.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Colleague,

Here is my read of Ghodrati's ABJM gap paper. The useful core is real: the categorization of the 56 fermion modes of the U(1)^4 charged black brane, the near-horizon Dirac reduction, the 3-charge versus 1-charge oscillatory stability comparison, and the uplift limits to 5d and 11d. If you work on top-down holographic Fermi surfaces, the mode table and the near-horizon expansions are worth having.

But the paper's advertised central result—that the ABJM dual has a spectral gap—is not established. The Introduction and abstract promise that the gap is checked by studying the poles of the retarded Green's function. Section 5 sets up the machinery (master radial equation, Green's function definition, Fermi-surface condition), and then... stops. No poles of G_R are located, no spectral function is computed, and no density of states is shown to vanish over any interval. The gap is instead inferred from the non-commutativity of the q'→0 and r_H→0 limits and from a discontinuity in the chemical potential. That is a suggestive analogy with DeWolfe-Gubser-Rosen, but in this paper it remains an interpretive leap, not a demonstrated property of the field theory.

There are also presentation problems that matter. The abstract and conclusion say the uplifted near-horizon geometry is BTZ×S^2 or AdS3×R^2, but the actual derivations in Section 6 give AdS3×T^2×T^6 for the L1 limit and AdS2×T^2×T^7 for L2, which the conclusion itself later admits. That mismatch will confuse any careful reader. The stability analysis relies on Pauli couplings p1 and p2, which are introduced as free parameters and never specified or derived; equations (5.34)–(5.35) show that k_osc existence depends on them, so the 3-charge versus 1-charge stability contrast is conditional on choices the paper does not justify.

The limit calculations and the mode classification are honest pieces of work, and the paper is clear about its debts to [1], [2], and [6]. But the main physics claim is currently unsupported.

Who is this for? Someone mining the paper for technical ingredients—mode counting, near-horizon Dirac data, uplift limits—will get something. Someone looking for a credible demonstration of a gap in ABJM will not.

My recommendation: do not accept as is. Ask for a major revision in which the retarded Green's function poles are actually computed, the topology statements in the abstract/conclusion are corrected, and p1, p2 are either derived or explicitly shown not to affect the qualitative conclusions. If the author can deliver that, the paper would be worth publishing. As it stands, it is a useful technical note in need of a central missing calculation.

Best, [Your name]

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript studies the U(1)^4 charged black brane of four-dimensional gauged supergravity, whose holographic dual is claimed to be a 3d ABJM-type SCFT with four chemical potentials. It categorizes 56 fermion modes, writes a general Dirac equation in this background, analyzes near-horizon limits of the Dirac equation, and uplifts the geometry to five and eleven dimensions to exhibit AdS3 or BTZ sectors. The central claim is that, as in DeWolfe, Gubser and Rosen for N=4 SYM, a spectral gap exists in the dual CFT states, corresponding to the non-commutativity of two classical limits and to a jump in the chemical potential as the fourth charge q' is turned off. The paper also claims to show stability/instability differences between the 3-charge and 1-charge black branes through the near-horizon oscillatory momentum k_osc.

Significance. If the gap claim were established, this would be a useful top-down extension of holographic Fermi-surface analysis from the 5d U(1)^3 case to the 4d U(1)^4/ABJM case, with the added geometric understanding of an AdS3 or BTZ decoupled sector in the uplifted backgrounds. The structural setup, the mode charge tables, and the uplift computations are potentially valuable. However, the central physical claim is not demonstrated in the present manuscript: the promised retarded Green's function pole computation is absent, and the gap assertion rests on limit arithmetic and chemical-potential discontinuities rather than on any computed spectral function or density of states. The paper therefore does not currently deliver what its abstract and introduction promise.

major comments (3)

[Section 5, Eqs. (5.10), (5.15), (5.16); also Sections 1 and 2.1] The central claim that a gap exists in the ABJM dual is never established by the advertised Green's function analysis. The abstract and Section 1 state that the gap is checked 'by studying the poles of the retarded Green's functions,' but the manuscript does not solve Eq. (5.10) with infalling boundary conditions, does not locate any poles of G_R defined in Eq. (5.15), and does not compute the spectral function or density of states in any section. The non-commutativity of limits in Eqs. (2.23)-(2.24) and the discontinuity of μ1 in Eq. (2.30) are statements about bulk parameters and classical limits; they do not by themselves imply a vanishing spectral density over an energy interval in the dual field theory. This missing computation is load-bearing for the abstract's main assertion, so the central claim is currently unsupported.
[Section 3 and Abstract] The abstract claims the paper finds 'the coefficients of the Dirac equations for each mode,' but this is not done. Section 3 provides charge assignments and dual operators for 56 fermion modes, while the Dirac equation is written once in Eq. (5.1) with generic coefficients p1, p2 and charges q1, q2; no per-mode Dirac coefficients, mass eigenvalues, or explicit couplings are derived for the 56 modes. The categorization is therefore a charge table, not the promised set of mode-by-mode Dirac equations.
[Section 5.1, Eqs. (5.34)-(5.35)] The stability conclusions for the 1-charge and 3-charge limits are not established by the displayed expansions. In Eq. (5.35) for k_osc in the q→0 limit, the right-hand side contains positive terms proportional to q^2 and m2^2, so the statement that the expression is 'always negative' requires a parameter-domain analysis that is not provided. Similarly, Eq. (5.34) is presented as an expansion in q' but contains explicit powers of q' in denominators; the asymptotic regime in which this expansion is valid, and the range of m1 and m2 for which the right-hand side can be positive, are not specified. Since these formulas are the basis for the claimed difference between the stable 1-charge case and the unstable 3-charge case, this point needs to be either proved or substantially clarified.

minor comments (5)

[Section 2.1] The sentence 'One should that the new developments...' is grammatically incomplete; also 'this can be interpreted in the dual N=4 SYM theory' appears to confuse the 4d N=4 SYM dual of the 5d solution with the 3d ABJM dual studied here.
[Section 6 and Abstract] The abstract states that the uplifted geometries contain 'BTZ × S^2 or AdS3 × R^2', but Section 6.2.1 obtains AdS3 × T^2 × T^6 while Section 6.2.2 obtains AdS2 × T^2 × T^7 before taking q2→0; the relation between these results and the abstract's S^2/R^2 statement should be clarified.
[Section 2.3, Figures 4-6] The text refers to 'the right panel' of Figure 5, but the figures are not labeled as panels; the captions should identify the left and right panels explicitly.
[Section 4.2] There are several typos and grammatical errors, for example 'inices' for 'indices' in the paragraph after Eq. (4.30), and 'responce' in Section 3; a careful proofread is needed.
[References [22]-[24]] These references on quantum corrections are mentioned once in Section 2 and then not connected to any computation in the paper; either remove them or explain their relevance to the present analysis.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity found; the gap claim is an interpretive step borrowed from external references and is under-supported, but the paper's geometric and Dirac-equation derivations are not defined by the target result.

full rationale

Score 0. I find no step in which a prediction or first-principles result reduces to its own input by construction. The non-commutativity of the limits q'→0 and r_H→0 in Section 2 is computed from the black-brane equations (2.16), (2.18), and (2.30); equations (2.23)-(2.24) and (2.27)-(2.29) are arithmetic consequences of the solution and are not fitted to any target. The chemical-potential discontinuity in Section 2.3 is likewise read off from the boundary gauge fields, not imposed. The identification of this non-commutativity with a spectral gap is an interpretive step inherited from the external reference [1] (DeWolfe, Gubser, Rosen), not from the author's own prior work. That may be an under-supported physical claim, especially because the promised pole analysis of the retarded Green's function (5.15)-(5.16) is never actually exhibited for the 4d case, but an unsupported or borrowed interpretation is not circularity. The near-horizon Dirac analysis in Section 5 is self-contained: the master equation (5.10), the Green's function definition (5.15), and the Fermi-surface condition (5.16) are standard relations, and the k_osc formulas (5.33)-(5.35) follow from (5.24) with the horizon data (5.17). The paper explicitly notes that the parameters in (5.17) are chosen for comparison with [6] but that the definitions differ, so this is analogy rather than an ansatz smuggled in as an unexamined input. The only citation of the author's own work is [10], a passing example of bottom-up instabilities, and it is not load-bearing. No circular step can therefore be exhibited under the required standard.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard holographic assumptions, the specific black brane solution, the mode decomposition table, and an interpretive leap from limit non-commutativity to a spectral gap. The only genuinely free parameters are the Pauli couplings p1 and p2, which are not fixed by the paper and which control the stability conclusions. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (2)

p1
Pauli coupling coefficient in the Dirac equation (5.1) and (5.9). No value or derivation from the supergravity embedding is given, yet it affects the shifted momentum (5.25) and the oscillatory region (5.33).
p2
Pauli coupling coefficient for the second gauge field, introduced in (5.1) and (5.9). It enters the near-horizon stability analysis and k_osc, but its value is never specified or derived.

assumptions (5)

domain assumption The U(1)^4 charged black brane of [11] is a valid holographic dual of the 3d N=2 ABJM SCFT.
Invoked in the Introduction and Section 2; no derivation of the duality is given in this paper.
domain assumption The non-commutativity of the near-horizon and q'->0 limits implies a spectral gap in the dual CFT, following the mechanism of [1].
Sections 2.1-2.3 use this interpretive leap; no spectral function or Green's function poles are computed to verify the gap in this 4d background.
domain assumption The 56 fermion modes decompose under the U(1)^4 Cartan subgroup exactly as tabulated in Section 3.
The table is asserted without a group-theoretic derivation; the subsequent fermionic analysis relies entirely on this assignment.
ad hoc to paper The Dirac operator (5.1) with Pauli couplings p1, p2 is the correct fermionic truncation of N=8 supergravity for this background.
p1 and p2 are introduced without values, and the form is chosen by analogy to [6], not derived from the full N=8 Lagrangian shown in Section 4.
domain assumption The near-horizon singularity of the 4d black brane is a 'good' singularity resolved in the uplifted 5d/11d geometries, following [2].
Used in Sections 6-7 to claim decoupling; cited from [2] but not re-derived here.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The spectral gap of the ABJM model: A holographic perspective from uplifted higher-dimensional geometries." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XXV57SEG

@misc{pith2026260806887,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The spectral gap of the ABJM model: A holographic perspective from uplifted higher-dimensional geometries},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XXV57SEG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.06887}
}

abstract

We study the $U(1)^4$ charged black brane solution of four-dimensional gauged supergravity and analyze the fermionic response in this geometry, which is holographically dual to $3d$ $\mathcal{N}=2$ SCFT ABJM models. Similar to \cite{DeWolfe:2013fha}, we show that a gap exists in the states of the conformal field theory, which corresponds to the different limiting behaviors of the two unequal chemical potentials of the four-charge geometry. We study the behavior of this gap and also the stability of the near-horizon geometry by changing the parameters of the theory in various orders. We then categorize the $56$ fermion modes of the geometry, find the coefficients of the Dirac equations for each mode, and comment on the behavior of the solution of the Dirac equation in different near-horizon limits. We then uplift the geometry to five-dimensional and then to eleven-dimensional geometries and, similar to \cite{Fareghbal:2008dy}, we show that in both cases, a piece of $\mathrm{BTZ} \times \mathrm{S}^2$ or $\mathrm{AdS}^3 \times \mathbb{R}^2$ emerges, and as a result, a decoupling sector in the field theory exists. We study the singularity of the near-horizon $4d$ geometry and the mentioned gap in these uplifted geometries.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.06887 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** The ratio of the dilaton fields X X′ = q ′+r q+r for r = 1. When q q ′ → ∞, X X′ → 0. Also, for fixed q and q ′ , as r → ∞, X X′ → 1. Thus, the dilaton fields are equal at the boundary. Based on [12], the near-horizon of these charged black holes can ”decouple” from the rest of the spacetime. This decoupled sector is described by a 2D CFT on the gravity side, which is dual to a specific, large R-charge sector of the… view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Plot of A′ as a function of r for different q. As q → 0, the curves approach the x-axis. At q = 0, A′ vanishes identically (with rH = 2, L = 1). This extreme sensitivity suggests the gap is a critical phenomenon, a phase transition point that exists only at a specific, fine-tuned value of a parameter (q ′ = 0). It is a sharp boundary in the theory’s parameter space. The singular near-horizon geometry of the 4d blac… view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** µc µ′ c as a function of q q ′ for rH = 3, L = 1, q ′ = −2. In the right panel, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_5.png] view at source ↗

Figures from the paper (2 more)

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: The ratio of the chemical potentials µc µ′ c as a function of Q Q′ , with rH = L = 1 and Q = 3. to lower values, and free energy is released. From these Figures, 4, 5 and 6, when q q ′ increases—for example, if the number of charge 1 relative to charge 2 is increasing—…

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: Three limits around the black hole in the bulk, which can be seen by taking different orders of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p034_7.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

30 extracted references · 9 canonical work pages

[1]

DeWolfe, S

O. DeWolfe, S. S. Gubser, and C. Rosen,Minding the gap in N=4 Super Yang Mills,Phys. Rev. D91(2015), no. 8 086005, [arXiv:1312.7347]

arXiv 2015
[2]

Fareghbal, C

R. Fareghbal, C. N. Gowdigere, A. E. Mosaffa, and M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari,Nearing 11d Extremal Intersecting Giants and New Decoupled Sectors in D=3,6 SCFTs,JHEP08(2008) 063, [arXiv:0805.0203]

arXiv 2008
[6]

DeWolfe, S

O. DeWolfe, S. S. Gubser, and C. Rosen,Fermi surfaces in N=4 Super-Yang-Mills theory, Phys. Rev. D86(2012) 106002, [arXiv:1207.3352]

arXiv 2012
[3]

S. A. Hartnoll, C. P. Herzog, and G. T. Horowitz,Building a Holographic Superconductor, Phys. Rev. Lett.101(2008) 031601, [arXiv:0803.3295]

arXiv 2008
[4]

Holographic non-relativistic fermionic fixed point and bulk dipole coupling

W.-J. Li and H. Zhang,Holographic non-relativistic fermionic fixed point and bulk dipole coupling,Phys. Rev. D84(2011) 126014, [arXiv:1110.4559]

work page Pith review arXiv 2011
[5]

J. M. Maldacena,The Large N limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity,Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.2(1998) 231–252, [hep-th/9711200]

arXiv 1998
[7]

Fermi surfaces in maximal gauged supergravity

O. DeWolfe, S. S. Gubser, and C. Rosen,Fermi surfaces in maximal gauged supergravity, Phys. Rev. Lett.108(2012) 251601, [arXiv:1112.3036]. 34

work page Pith review arXiv 2012
[8]

DeWolfe, O

O. DeWolfe, O. Henriksson, and C. Rosen,Fermi surface behavior in the ABJM M2-brane theory,Phys. Rev. D91(2015) 126013, [arXiv:1410.6986]

arXiv 2015

Show all 30 references

[9]

Weidner,Gauged supergravities in various spacetime dimensions,Fortsch

M. Weidner,Gauged supergravities in various spacetime dimensions,Fortsch. Phys.55 (2007) 843–945, [hep-th/0702084]

2007 arXiv
[10]

Ghodrati,Hyperscaling Violating Solution in Coupled Dilaton-Squared Curvature Gravity,Phys

M. Ghodrati,Hyperscaling Violating Solution in Coupled Dilaton-Squared Curvature Gravity,Phys. Rev. D90(2014) 044055, [arXiv:1404.5399]

2014 arXiv
[11]

Cvetic, M

M. Cvetic, M. J. Duff, P. Hoxha, J. T. Liu, H. Lu, R. Martinez-Acosta, C. N. Pope, H. Sati, and T. A. Tran,Embedding AdS black holes in ten and eleven dimensions,Nucl. Phys. B 558(1999) 96–126, [hep-th/9903214]

1999 arXiv
[12]

Fareghbal, C

R. Fareghbal, C. N. Gowdigere, A. E. Mosaffa, and M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari,Nearing Extremal Intersecting Giants and New Decoupled Sectors in N=4 SYM,JHEP08(2008) 062, [arXiv:0801.4457]

2008 arXiv
[13]

Ahn and K

C. Ahn and K. Woo,Domain wall and membrane flow from other gauged d=4, N=8 supergravity. 1.,Nucl. Phys. B634(2002) 141–157, [hep-th/0109010]

2002 arXiv
[14]

De Wit and H

B. De Wit and H. Nicolai,N=8 Supergravity,Nucl. Phys. B208(1982) 323

1982
[15]

Aharony, O

O. Aharony, O. Bergman, D. L. Jafferis, and J. M. Maldacena,N=6 superconformal Chern-Simons-matter theories, M2-branes and their gravity duals,JHEP10(2008) 091, [arXiv:0806.1218]

2008 arXiv
[16]

M. J. Duff and J. T. Liu,Anti-de Sitter black holes in gauged N=8 supergravity,Nucl. Phys. B554(1999) 237–253, [hep-th/9901149]

1999 arXiv
[17]

Seiberg and E

N. Seiberg and E. Witten,Gauge dynamics and compactification to three-dimensions,Adv. Ser. Math. Phys.24(1997) 333–366, [hep-th/9607163]

1997 arXiv
[18]

M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari and H. Yavartanoo,EVH Black Holes, AdS3 Throats and EVH/CFT Proposal,JHEP10(2011) 013, [arXiv:1107.5705]

2011 arXiv
[19]

de Boer, M

J. de Boer, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, and J. Simon,Near Horizon Limits of Massless BTZ and Their CFT Duals,JHEP01(2011) 035, [arXiv:1011.1897]

2011 arXiv
[20]

de Boer, M

J. de Boer, M. Johnstone, M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari, and J. Simon,Emergent IR dual 2d CFTs in charged AdS5 black holes,Phys. Rev. D85(2012) 084039, [arXiv:1112.4664]

2012 arXiv
[21]

Leblond, R

F. Leblond, R. C. Myers, and D. N. Page,Superstars and giant gravitons in M-theory,JHEP 01(2002) 026, [hep-th/0111178]. 35

2002 arXiv
[22]

Chen and J

Y.-J. Chen and J. Nian,Quantum corrections to Randall-Sundrum model from JT gravity, Phys. Rev. D113(2026), no. 4 046011, [arXiv:2512.06686]

2026 arXiv
[23]

J. Nian, L. A. Pando Zayas, and C.-Y. Yue,Quantum Corrections in the Low-Temperature Fluid/Gravity Correspondence,arXiv:2510.15411
[24]

David, A

M. David, A. Lezcano Gonz´ alez, J. Nian, and L. A. Pando Zayas,Logarithmic corrections to the entropy of rotating black holes and black strings in AdS 5,JHEP04(2022) 160, [arXiv:2106.09730]

2022 arXiv
[25]

Ceresole, S

A. Ceresole, S. Ferrara, A. Gnecchi, and A. Marrani,More on N=8 Attractors,Phys. Rev. D 80(2009) 045020, [arXiv:0904.4506]

2009 arXiv
[26]

Fischbacher,Fourteen new stationary points in the scalar potential of SO(8)-gauged N=8, D=4 supergravity,JHEP09(2010) 068, [arXiv:0912.1636]

T. Fischbacher,Fourteen new stationary points in the scalar potential of SO(8)-gauged N=8, D=4 supergravity,JHEP09(2010) 068, [arXiv:0912.1636]

2010 arXiv
[27]

Batrachenko, J

A. Batrachenko, J. T. Liu, R. McNees, W. A. Sabra, and W. Y. Wen,Black hole mass and Hamilton-Jacobi counterterms,JHEP05(2005) 034, [hep-th/0408205]

2005 arXiv
[28]

Faulkner, H

T. Faulkner, H. Liu, J. McGreevy, and D. Vegh,Emergent quantum criticality, Fermi surfaces, and AdS2,Phys. Rev. D83(2011) 125002, [arXiv:0907.2694]

2011 arXiv
[29]

Belliard, S

R. Belliard, S. S. Gubser, and A. Yarom,Absence of a Fermi surface in classical minimal four-dimensional gauged supergravity,JHEP10(2011) 055, [arXiv:1106.6030]

2011 arXiv
[30]

D. D. K. Chow and G. Comp` ere,Dyonic AdS black holes in maximal gauged supergravity, Phys. Rev. D89(2014) 065003, [arXiv:1311.1204]. 36

2014 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

DeWolfe, S

O. DeWolfe, S. S. Gubser, and C. Rosen,Minding the gap in N=4 Super Yang Mills,Phys. Rev. D91(2015), no. 8 086005, [arXiv:1312.7347]

arXiv 2015

[2] [2]

Fareghbal, C

R. Fareghbal, C. N. Gowdigere, A. E. Mosaffa, and M. M. Sheikh-Jabbari,Nearing 11d Extremal Intersecting Giants and New Decoupled Sectors in D=3,6 SCFTs,JHEP08(2008) 063, [arXiv:0805.0203]

arXiv 2008

[3] [6]

DeWolfe, S

O. DeWolfe, S. S. Gubser, and C. Rosen,Fermi surfaces in N=4 Super-Yang-Mills theory, Phys. Rev. D86(2012) 106002, [arXiv:1207.3352]

arXiv 2012

[4] [3]

S. A. Hartnoll, C. P. Herzog, and G. T. Horowitz,Building a Holographic Superconductor, Phys. Rev. Lett.101(2008) 031601, [arXiv:0803.3295]

arXiv 2008

[5] [4]

Holographic non-relativistic fermionic fixed point and bulk dipole coupling

W.-J. Li and H. Zhang,Holographic non-relativistic fermionic fixed point and bulk dipole coupling,Phys. Rev. D84(2011) 126014, [arXiv:1110.4559]

work page Pith review arXiv 2011

[6] [5]

J. M. Maldacena,The Large N limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity,Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.2(1998) 231–252, [hep-th/9711200]

arXiv 1998

[7] [7]

Fermi surfaces in maximal gauged supergravity

O. DeWolfe, S. S. Gubser, and C. Rosen,Fermi surfaces in maximal gauged supergravity, Phys. Rev. Lett.108(2012) 251601, [arXiv:1112.3036]. 34

work page Pith review arXiv 2012

[8] [8]

DeWolfe, O

O. DeWolfe, O. Henriksson, and C. Rosen,Fermi surface behavior in the ABJM M2-brane theory,Phys. Rev. D91(2015) 126013, [arXiv:1410.6986]

arXiv 2015