Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 4 cited by

Any analytic stress-tensor deformation leaves every solution with vanishing energy-momentum tensor untouched, in any dimension.

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 · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-05 05:37 UTC pith:BSRA3ZV5

load-bearing objection The vanishing-T preservation theorem is clean and general, but the 'all γ' claim outruns the convergence assumption. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2509.05081 v1 pith:BSRA3ZV5 submitted 2025-09-05 hep-th math-phmath.MPnlin.SI

Soliton Surfaces and the Geometry of Integrable Deformations of the mathbb{CP}^(N-1) Model

Christian Ferko , Michele Galli , Zejun Huang , Gabriele Tartaglino-Mazzucchelli This is my paper
classification hep-th math-phmath.MPnlin.SI
keywords CP^{N-1} modelsoliton surfacesTTbar deformationstress tensor flowsinstantonsauxiliary field deformationsSmirnov-Zamolodchikov deformationssymmetric space sigma models
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.

The paper proves that if a field configuration solves the equations of motion and its energy-momentum tensor is exactly zero, then it remains a solution under any analytic deformation of the Lagrangian driven by the energy-momentum tensor, in any dimension. This generalizes earlier results for 4d Yang-Mills instantons and applies directly to instantons of the CP^{N-1} model, which serve as a 2d analogue of Yang-Mills. The same preservation is shown in the auxiliary-field formulation for higher-spin Smirnov-Zamolodchikov-type deformations, with a separate argument for the non-analytic root-TTbar case. The paper also constructs soliton surfaces for the deformed models, showing the Gauss curvature of the CP^1 surface is unaffected by the flow, and gives two geometric readings of TTbar-like deformations: coupling to a unit-determinant field-dependent metric, or a moving-frame transformation on the soliton surface.

Core claim

The paper's central claim is the theorem stated in Section 4: for a flow ∂_γ L = f(T_{μν}) with f analytic, f(0)=0, and ∂f(0)/∂T_{ρτ}=0, any solution φ* of the seed theory with T*_{μν}=0 remains a solution of the deformed theory for every γ, with T^{(γ)*}=0 and L(γ)(φ*)=L_0(φ*). The proof iterates the first-order argument, treating each deformed Lagrangian as a new seed; because f is at least quadratic in T and the Hilbert stress tensor is linear in the Lagrangian, the extra terms vanish on the zero-stress solution. In the auxiliary-field formulation, the same preservation becomes the condition ∇E|_{v=-j}=0, and for CP^{N-1} instantons this condition is satisfied. The root-TTbar case, where

What carries the argument

The mechanism is the flow equation ∂_γ L = f(T_{μν}) iterated order by order: each Lagragian L_k is used as the seed for the next, and the Hilbert stress tensor's linearity in the Lagrangian makes the extra contributions vanish when f is at least quadratic in T and T*=0. In the auxiliary-field formulation, the central objects are the interaction function E(ν²) depending only on chiral traces and the matrix R relating deformed currents J to undeformed currents j; R is a Toeplitz SL(2,R) matrix encoding the unit-determinant field-dependent metric. The geometric side is carried by the Sym-Tafel immersion r = Φ^{-1}∂_zΦ defined from the Lax connection, which translates integrability into surface

Load-bearing premise

The proof assumes the deformed Lagrangian can be expanded as a convergent Taylor series in the deformation parameter γ; if the series has zero radius of convergence or the flow is non-analytic, the induction to all orders does not apply.

What would settle it

Find an analytic f with f(0)=f'(0)=0 and a solution with T*=0 for which the Taylor series (4.18) converges but the coefficient of some γ^k in the deformed equations of motion is nonzero; equivalently, integrate the deformed EOM for the CP^1 instanton at a finite γ where the square root remains real and check whether Eq. (3.27) is violated.

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

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

If this is right

  • Instanton and other zero-stress solutions of CP^{N-1} and Yang-Mills-type theories are exact fixed points of analytic stress-tensor flows; their on-shell action and energy-momentum tensor do not change along the flow.
  • Since the unit constraint of CP^{N-1} is not modified by TTbar, the deformed theory can still be described by projective fields; no enhanced constraint is forced by the flow.
  • The Gauss curvature of the CP^1 soliton surface stays constant under higher-spin auxiliary field deformations, so the geometry of the surface captures an undeformed sector of the theory.
  • TTbar-like deformations of symmetric space sigma models admit a metric reinterpretation: they are the same physics on a unit-determinant field-dependent metric, which becomes flat precisely on solutions with vanishing stress tensor.
  • The preservation mechanism extends to higher-spin Smirnov-Zamolodchikov-type deformations through the condition that the gradient of the interaction function vanishes on the undeformed solution.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • This suggests a general fixed-point principle: the subspace of solutions with T=0 is invariant under any flow whose generator is analytic and vanishes at least quadratically in T, which may identify protected subsectors in other integrable or non-integrable theories.
  • For non-analytic flows such as root-TTbar, the auxiliary-field equations are singular on instantons, so the correct notion of 'solution' may need to be relaxed to action minimization; checking the negative branch of the square root could decide whether an actual equation-of-motion solution exists.
  • Because the unit-determinant field-dependent metric reduces to flat on zero-stress solutions, the non-deformation result can be viewed as a geometric obstruction: any deformation that can be geometrized by a unimodular metric automatically leaves the zero-stress sector unchanged, which may inform higher-dimensional analogues.

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

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper studies the classical CP^{N-1} model, its integrable deformations (TT-bar, root-TT-bar, higher-spin Smirnov-Zamolodchikov-type deformations), and the geometry of the associated soliton surfaces. It constructs Sym-Tafel immersions and shows how the Lagrangian and stress tensor appear in the induced metric. The main new result is a theorem (Section 4) stating that any solution of a field theory with vanishing energy-momentum tensor remains a solution under analytic stress-tensor deformations, with the on-shell Lagrangian and stress tensor unchanged; this is applied to CP^{N-1} instantons. The paper also analyzes the unit constraint under TT-bar, develops an auxiliary-field formulation, discusses the non-analytic root-TT-bar case, and gives two geometric interpretations of stress-tensor deformations: a field-dependent unit-determinant metric and a moving-frame transformation on the soliton surface.

Significance. If the central theorem holds as stated, it is a useful and fairly general statement: it extends earlier results for 4d Yang-Mills to arbitrary dimensions and to a broad class of stress-tensor-like flows. The geometric dictionary established for CP^{N-1} soliton surfaces is explicit and well connected to the integrable structure, and the auxiliary-field reformulation provides a clean framework for higher-spin deformations. The paper is also honest about the limitations of the root-TT-bar case, where only action minimization is claimed. The main gap affecting significance is the convergence issue in the theorem, which currently limits the proof to a formal power-series statement unless additional analyticity/continuation is supplied.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 4, Eqs. (4.18), (4.38); cf. Section 3.3, Eq. (3.33)] The theorem is stated for all γ, but the proof only shows, by induction, that every Taylor coefficient of EOM[L(γ), φ*] vanishes under the convergence assumption (4.18). No radius of convergence is established. For the TT-bar-deformed CP^{N-1} Lagrangian (3.14), the Taylor expansion around γ=0 has finite radius: on topological chiral solutions the radicand becomes (1-γY)^2, producing a branch point at γ=1/Y. The paper restricts 0≤γ≤1/Y in Eq. (3.33), but the general theorem in Eq. (4.38) does not carry this restriction. As written, the claim that the solution persists for all γ is unsupported beyond the domain of convergence of (4.18). The theorem should either be stated only for γ in that domain, or a separate analytic-continuation argument should be provided for the relevant flows.
  2. [Section 3.2, Eqs. (3.18)-(3.22)] The paper claims that TT-bar preserves holonomic constraints, and the introduction/conclusion state this as a general result. However, the explicit check is only performed to second order in the Picard iteration. The discussion of the 'remaining factor' in Eq. (3.21) and the rejection of Eq. (3.22) do not constitute an all-order proof: a coefficient multiplying the Lagrange-multiplier term K does not by itself create a new constraint, and higher-order terms in K are not shown to vanish. Either an induction to all orders should be given, or the claim should be softened to 'verified to second order'.
  3. [Section 6.1, Lemma 6.2, Eq. (6.26)] The proof of Lemma 6.2 rejects Eq. (6.26) because E' depends only on ν² and not on tr(v_+ v_-). But Eq. (6.26) is a condition on a particular field configuration, not an identity: it could hold for specific values of tr(v_+ v_-) and ν². The conclusion that tr(v_± v_±)=0 and hence h=η therefore does not follow as written. The lemma is not needed for the main theorem of Section 4, but if it is to be stated, the proof must either show that no solution of the auxiliary-field equations satisfies (6.26), or the lemma must be qualified.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 4, Eq. (4.33) and surrounding notation] The notation L_i (Taylor coefficients) and L^k (truncated Lagrangian) is confusing in Eq. (4.33): the text writes L_{k+1}(φ*)=L_0(φ*) and also L_1(φ*)=L_2(φ*)=0. Since the lower-index objects are coefficients and vanish on-shell for k≥1, the equalities likely refer to the approximate Lagrangians L^{k+1}. The notation should be disambiguated.
  2. [Eqs. (2.77) and (5.48)] The Gaussian curvature is given as K=-(1-z²)²/2 in Eq. (2.77) and as K=-(z²-1)²/2 in Eq. (5.48). These agree up to a sign convention for (z²-1)²=(1-z²)², but the intermediate expression '= - (1-z²)²/2' in Eq. (2.77) and the line above it would benefit from a short comment on conventions to avoid apparent inconsistency.
  3. [Section 5.3.1] For the root-TT-bar case the paper correctly says instantons minimize the action rather than solve the equations of motion, but this distinction could be made even more prominent, since the abstract and introduction mention root-TT-bar among the cases covered, and a reader could otherwise over-read the claim.
  4. [Section 3.3, Eq. (3.33)] The restriction 0≤γ≤1/Y is introduced for the topological chiral solutions, but its relation to the general theorem in Section 4 is not stated. Connecting this bound to the convergence assumption (4.18) would resolve much of the confusion discussed in the major comment.
  5. [General] There are a few typos, e.g. 'particulary' in Section 4 and 'beecause' in Section 5.3.1. They do not affect the content.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the central theorem is an inductive proof from explicit assumptions, and the auxiliary-field/geometric reinterpretations are based on cited prior work rather than self-referential reductions.

full rationale

The paper's central claim (Sec. 4, Eq. (4.38)) is that a solution with T*_mu nu = 0 is preserved under analytic stress-tensor flows with f(0)=0 and f'(0)=0. This is an induction on Taylor coefficients of the deformed Lagrangian, and the conclusion follows from the stated assumptions: the flow is defined by dL/dgamma = f(T), so f(0)=0 makes the on-shell Lagrangian unchanged, while f'(0)=0 makes the first variation of the EOM vanish. The argument is direct but not circular: it does not define the deformed solution in terms of the undeformed one, and it would fail for a non-analytic flow such as root-TT, which the paper explicitly treats separately in Sec. 5.3.1. The proof does assume convergence of the Taylor series (Eq. (4.18)) and takes the k->infty limit 'while assuming convergence'; this is a flagged rigor/limitation issue, not a circularity. The auxiliary-field results (Sec. 5) rest on the formalism of [33,34,36], which includes overlapping authors, but those papers contain separate constructions of the Lax pair and integrability; the instanton-preservation statement is re-derived here directly from the v-field equations of motion (Eqs. (5.50)-(5.55)), not merely imported. Section 6 candidly describes its results as 'essentially restatements of previous observations in different language' and uses them as geometric interpretation rather than as a new prediction. The root-TT action-minimization argument is explicitly distinguished from the analytic EOM argument. Overall, I find no step where a conclusion is identified with an input by definition, no fitted parameter renamed as a prediction, and no load-bearing argument that reduces to an unverified self-citation.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 6 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims depend on the standard integrability background of the CP^{N-1} model and on the auxiliary field formalism, which is largely self-cited. No new particles or fields are introduced. The only deliberately introduced 'free' datum is the deformation parameter γ, which is a coupling constant, not a fit parameter. The convergence assumption (item 4) is the most fragile input.

axioms (6)
  • domain assumption The classical CP^{N-1} model admits a Lax pair (2.51) whose flatness is equivalent to the equations of motion.
    This is the basis of the soliton surface construction; it is a known result cited to [15,51,52] and is not proven in this paper.
  • standard math The Sym-Tafel formula r = Φ^{-1}∂_z Φ defines a surface whose metric is ⟨∂_z L, ∂_z L⟩ (Eq. (2.60)).
    This is a standard construction in soliton surface theory, reviewed in Section 2.2.
  • domain assumption The auxiliary field deformed symmetric space sigma model (AF-SSSM) with interaction function E depending only on chiral traces preserves classical integrability.
    This is a result from refs. [33,34,36] by the same group; the paper relies on it to construct Lax connections and conserved currents. It is not independently proven here.
  • ad hoc to paper The deformed Lagrangian L(γ) has a convergent Taylor series expansion in γ (Eq. (4.18)).
    This is assumed without proof in Section 4 to allow an induction to all orders. It is a critical premise for the general theorem.
  • domain assumption The flow function f(T) is analytic in T and satisfies f(0)=0 and ∂f(0)=0 (Eq. (4.3)).
    This defines the class of 'analytic stress tensor deformations' and ensures f is at least quadratic in T, which is used to show metric variations vanish on-shell.
  • standard math For the CP^{N-1} model, the auxiliary field interaction function can be restricted to E=E(ν²) with ν²=tr(v_+²)tr(v_-²).
    This follows from trace identities (5.34) in the coset decomposition, so it is not an additional assumption but a consequence.

pith-pipeline@v1.4.0-alltime-deepseek-medium · 39670 in / 18145 out tokens · 181925 ms · 2026-08-05T05:37:03.316031+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Soliton Surfaces and the Geometry of Integrable Deformations of the $\mathbb{CP}^{N-1}$ Model." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/BSRA3ZV5

@misc{pith2026250905081,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Soliton Surfaces and the Geometry of Integrable Deformations of the $\mathbbCP^N-1$ Model},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/BSRA3ZV5}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.05081}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

The $\mathbb{CP}^{N-1}$ model is an analytically tractable $2d$ quantum field theory which shares several properties with $4d$ Yang-Mills theory. By virtue of its classical integrability, this model also admits a family of integrable higher-spin auxiliary field deformations, including the $T \overline{T}$ deformation as a special case. We study the $\mathbb{CP}^{N-1}$ model and its deformations from a geometrical perspective, constructing their soliton surfaces and recasting physical properties of these theories as statements about surface geometry. We examine how the $T \overline{T}$ flow affects the unit constraint in the $\mathbb{CP}^{N-1}$ model and prove that any solution of this theory with vanishing energy-momentum tensor remains a solution under analytic stress tensor deformations -- an argument that extends to generic dimensions and instanton-like solutions in stress tensor flows including the non-analytic, $2d$, root-$T \overline{T}$ case and classes of higher-spin, Smirnov-Zamolodchikov-type, deformations. Finally, we give two geometric interpretations for general $T \overline{T}$-like deformations of symmetric space sigma models, showing that such flows can be viewed as coupling the undeformed theory to a unit-determinant field-dependent metric, or using a particular choice of moving frame on the soliton surface.

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. The auxiliary-deformed Breitenlohner-Maison model: duality frames and higher-dimensional origin

    hep-th 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Extends auxiliary deformations of the 2D BM model to the μ-frame and uplifts both frames to a 4D higher-derivative theory without manifest diffeomorphism invariance.

  2. The auxiliary-deformed Breitenlohner-Maison model: duality frames and higher-dimensional origin

    hep-th 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Derives μ-frame auxiliary deformation of 2D BM model and uplifts both ν- and μ-frames to 4D higher-derivative theory lacking manifest diffeomorphism invariance.

  3. The classical Yangian symmetry of Auxiliary Field Sigma Models

    hep-th 2026-05 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Generalizes the BIZZ recursive procedure and provides sufficient conditions under which auxiliary field deformations of integrable sigma models retain classical Yangian symmetry and Maillet bracket structure.

  4. Courant-Hilbert deformations of Yang-Baxter sigma models

    hep-th 2026-02 conditional novelty 6.0

    Yang-Baxter and Courant-Hilbert deformations combine inside 4D Chern-Simons theory: the corrected action equals the master Lagrangian plus half the trace of the energy-momentum tensor.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

84 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers · 5 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Classical integrability of root-T Tflows,

    R. Borsato, C. Ferko, and A. Sfondrini, “Classical integrability of root-T Tflows,” Phys. Rev. D107(2023), no. 8, 086011,2209.14274

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  2. [2]

    Conservation laws in some two-dimensional models,

    Y. Goldschmidt and E. Witten, “Conservation laws in some two-dimensional models,”Physics Letters B91(1980), no. 3, 392–396

    1980

  3. [3]

    Anomaly in the nonlocal quantum charge of theCP n−1 model,

    E. Abdalla, M. C. B. Abdalla, and M. Gomes, “Anomaly in the nonlocal quantum charge of theCP n−1 model,”Phys. Rev.D23(1981) 1800. 57

    1981

  4. [4]

    Anomaly cancellations in the supersymmetricCP n−1 model,

    E. Abdalla, M. C. B. Abdalla, and M. Gomes, “Anomaly cancellations in the supersymmetricCP n−1 model,”Phys. Rev.D25(1982) 452

    1982

  5. [5]

    On the nonlocal charge of theCP n−1 model and its supersymmetric extension to all orders,

    M. Gomes, E. Abdalla, and M. C. B. Abdalla, “On the nonlocal charge of theCP n−1 model and its supersymmetric extension to all orders,”Phys. Rev.D27(1983) 825

    1983

  6. [6]

    An Index for Quantum Integrability

    S. Komatsu, R. Mahajan, and S.-H. Shao, “An Index for Quantum Integrability,” SciPost Phys.7(2019), no. 5, 065,1907.07186

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  7. [7]

    SOLITON SURF ACES,

    A. Sym, “SOLITON SURF ACES,”Lett. Nuovo Cim.33(1982) 394

    work page 1982

  8. [8]

    SOLITON SURF ACES. II. GEOMETRIC UNIFICATION OF SOL V ABLE NONLINEARITIES,

    A. Sym, “SOLITON SURF ACES. II. GEOMETRIC UNIFICATION OF SOL V ABLE NONLINEARITIES,”Lett. Nuovo Cim.36(1983) 307–312

    work page 1983

  9. [9]

    Soliton surfaces and their applications (soliton geometry from spectral problems),

    A. Sym, “Soliton surfaces and their applications (soliton geometry from spectral problems),” inGeometric Aspects of the Einstein Equations and Integrable Systems, R. Martini, ed., pp. 154–231. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1985

    work page 1985

  10. [10]

    A. I. Bobenko,Surfaces in terms of 2 by 2 matrices. Old and new integrable cases, pp. 83–127. Vieweg+Teubner Verlag, Wiesbaden, 1994

    work page 1994

  11. [11]

    Induced Surfaces and Their Integrable Dynamics,

    B. G. Konopelchenko, “Induced Surfaces and Their Integrable Dynamics,”Studies in Applied Mathematics96(1996), no. 1, 9–51

    work page 1996

  12. [12]

    The Darboux-Bianchi transformation for isothermic surfaces. Classical results versus the soliton approach,

    J. Cie´ sli´ nski, “The Darboux-Bianchi transformation for isothermic surfaces. Classical results versus the soliton approach,”Differential Geometry and its Applications7 (1997), no. 1, 1–28

    work page 1997

  13. [13]

    Bobenko and U

    A. Bobenko and U. Eitner,Painleve Equations in the Differential Geometry of Surfaces. No. no. 1753 in Lecture Notes in Mathematics. Springer, 2000

    work page 2000

  14. [14]

    H´ elein,Constant Mean Curvature Surfaces, Harmonic Maps and Integrable Systems

    F. H´ elein,Constant Mean Curvature Surfaces, Harmonic Maps and Integrable Systems. Lectures in Mathematics. ETH Z¨ urich. Springer Basel AG, 2001

    work page 2001

  15. [15]

    Soliton surfaces associated withCP N−1 sigma models,

    A. Grundland and S. Post, “Soliton surfaces associated withCP N−1 sigma models,” inJournal of Physics: Conference Series, vol. 380, p. 012023, IOP Publishing. 2012

    work page 2012

  16. [16]

    On immersion formulas for soliton surfaces,

    A. M. Grundland, D. Levi, and L. Martina, “On immersion formulas for soliton surfaces,” 2016. 58

    work page 2016

  17. [17]

    Soliton surfaces in the generalized symmetry approach,

    A. M. Grundland, “Soliton surfaces in the generalized symmetry approach,” Theoretical and Mathematical Physics188(Sep, 2016) 1322–1333

    work page 2016

  18. [18]

    Soliton surfaces associated with generalized symmetries of integrable equations,

    A. M. Grundland and S. Post, “Soliton surfaces associated with generalized symmetries of integrable equations,”Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical44(mar, 2011) 165203

    work page 2011

  19. [19]

    Soliton surfaces induced by the Fokas-Lenells equation,

    K. Yesmakhanova, M. Zhassybayeva, and R. Myrzakulov, “Soliton surfaces induced by the Fokas-Lenells equation,”Journal of Physics: Conference Series1416(dec,

    work page

  20. [20]

    The T T perturbation and its geometric interpretation,

    R. Conti, S. Negro, and R. Tateo, “The T T perturbation and its geometric interpretation,”Journal of High Energy Physics2019(Feb., 2019)

    2019

  21. [21]

    New results on the Canham–Helfrich membrane model via the generalized Weierstrass representation,

    G. Landolfi, “New results on the Canham–Helfrich membrane model via the generalized Weierstrass representation,”Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and General36(nov, 2003) 11937

    work page 2003

  22. [22]

    Classification of integrable Weingarten surfaces possessing ansl(2)-valued zero curvature representation,

    H. Baran and M. Marvan, “Classification of integrable Weingarten surfaces possessing ansl(2)-valued zero curvature representation,”Nonlinearity23(aug, 2010) 2577

    work page 2010

  23. [23]

    Fokas-Lenells Derivative nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation its associated soliton surfaces and Gaussian curvature,

    S. Talukdar, R. Dutta, G. K. Saharia, and S. Nandy, “Fokas-Lenells Derivative nonlinear Schr¨ odinger equation its associated soliton surfaces and Gaussian curvature,” 2024

    work page 2024

  24. [24]

    Supersymmetric versions of the Fokas–Gel’fand formula for immersion,

    S. Bertrand and A. M. Grundland, “Supersymmetric versions of the Fokas–Gel’fand formula for immersion,”Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical49 (June, 2016) 305201

    work page 2016

  25. [25]

    On geometric aspects of the supersymmetric Fokas–Gel’fand immersion formula,

    S. Bertrand, “On geometric aspects of the supersymmetric Fokas–Gel’fand immersion formula,”Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical50(aug, 2017) 375206

    work page 2017

  26. [26]

    Description of surfaces associated with CPN- 1 sigma models on Minkowski space,

    A. Grundland and L. ˇSnobl, “Description of surfaces associated with CPN- 1 sigma models on Minkowski space,”Journal of Geometry and Physics56(2006), no. 3, 512–531

    work page 2006

  27. [27]

    Conformally parametrized surfaces associated with sigma models,

    A. Grundland, W. Hereman, and I. Yurdusen, “Conformally parametrized surfaces associated with sigma models,”Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical 41(2008), no. 6, 065204. 59

    work page 2008

  28. [28]

    Surfaces Obtained fromCP N−1 Sigma Models,

    A. Grundland and I. Yurdusen, “Surfaces Obtained fromCP N−1 Sigma Models,” International Journal of Modern Physics A23(2008), no. 32, 5137–5157

    work page 2008

  29. [29]

    Expectation value of composite field T anti-T in two-dimensional quantum field theory,

    A. B. Zamolodchikov, “Expectation value of composite field T anti-T in two-dimensional quantum field theory,”hep-th/0401146

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  30. [30]

    On space of integrable quantum field theories,

    F. A. Smirnov and A. B. Zamolodchikov, “On space of integrable quantum field theories,”Nucl. Phys.B915(2017) 363–383,1608.05499

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  31. [31]

    T¯T-deformed 2D Quantum Field Theories,

    A. Cavagli` a, S. Negro, I. M. Sz´ ecs´ enyi, and R. Tateo, “T¯T-deformed 2D Quantum Field Theories,”JHEP10(2016) 112,1608.05534

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  32. [32]

    Root-T ¯T Deformations in Two-Dimensional Quantum Field Theories,

    C. Ferko, A. Sfondrini, L. Smith, and G. Tartaglino-Mazzucchelli, “Root-T ¯T Deformations in Two-Dimensional Quantum Field Theories,”Phys. Rev. Lett.129 (2022), no. 20, 201604,2206.10515

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  33. [33]

    Infinite Family of Integrable Sigma Models Using Auxiliary Fields,

    C. Ferko and L. Smith, “Infinite Family of Integrable Sigma Models Using Auxiliary Fields,”Phys. Rev. Lett.133(2024), no. 13, 131602,2405.05899

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  34. [34]

    Integrable higher-spin deformations of sigma models from auxiliary fields,

    D. Bielli, C. Ferko, L. Smith, and G. Tartaglino-Mazzucchelli, “Integrable higher-spin deformations of sigma models from auxiliary fields,”Phys. Rev. D111(2025), no. 6, 066010,2407.16338

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  35. [35]

    Higher-Spin Currents and Flows in Auxiliary Field Sigma Models,

    D. Bielli, C. Ferko, M. Galli, and G. Tartaglino-Mazzucchelli, “Higher-Spin Currents and Flows in Auxiliary Field Sigma Models,”2504.17294

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  36. [36]

    Auxiliary field deformations of (semi-)symmetric space sigma models,

    D. Bielli, C. Ferko, L. Smith, and G. Tartaglino-Mazzucchelli, “Auxiliary field deformations of (semi-)symmetric space sigma models,”JHEP01(2025) 096, 2409.05704

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  37. [37]

    Auxiliary Field Sigma Models and Yang-Baxter Deformations,

    D. Bielli, C. Ferko, L. Smith, and G. Tartaglino-Mazzucchelli, “Auxiliary Field Sigma Models and Yang-Baxter Deformations,”2408.09714

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  38. [38]

    T Duality and TT¯-like Deformations of Sigma Models,

    D. Bielli, C. Ferko, L. Smith, and G. Tartaglino-Mazzucchelli, “T Duality and TT¯-like Deformations of Sigma Models,”Phys. Rev. Lett.134(2025), no. 10, 101601,2407.11636

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  39. [39]

    4D Chern-Simons theory with auxiliary fields,

    O. Fukushima and K. Yoshida, “4D Chern-Simons theory with auxiliary fields,” 2407.02204. 60

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  40. [40]

    Integrable auxiliary field deformations of coset models,

    M. Ces` aro, A. Kleinschmidt, and D. Osten, “Integrable auxiliary field deformations of coset models,”JHEP11(2024) 028,2409.04523

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  41. [41]

    T T-like Flows of Yang-Mills Theories,

    C. Ferko, J. Hou, T. Morone, G. Tartaglino-Mazzucchelli, and R. Tateo, “T T-like Flows of Yang-Mills Theories,”2409.18740

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  42. [42]

    An effective lagrangian with no U(1) problem in CP n−1 models and QCD,

    P. Di Vecchia, “An effective lagrangian with no U(1) problem in CP n−1 models and QCD,”Physics Letters B85(Aug., 1979) 357–360

    work page 1979

  43. [43]

    Instantons, the Quark Model, and the 1/nExpansion,

    E. Witten, “Instantons, the Quark Model, and the 1/nExpansion,”Nucl. Phys. B149(1979) 285

    work page 1979

  44. [44]

    CLASSICAL SOLUTIONS OF YANG-MILLS ANDCP n−1 MODELS WITH SCALAR FIELDS,

    A. Actor, “CLASSICAL SOLUTIONS OF YANG-MILLS ANDCP n−1 MODELS WITH SCALAR FIELDS,”Z. Phys. C6(1980) 223–234

    work page 1980

  45. [45]

    Renormalization Group Functions of CPN-1 Non-Linearσ-Model and N-Component Scalar QED Model,

    S. Hikami, “Renormalization Group Functions of CPN-1 Non-Linearσ-Model and N-Component Scalar QED Model,”Progress of Theoretical Physics62(07, 1979) 226–233, https://academic.oup.com/ptp/article-pdf/62/1/226/5461799/62-1-226.pdf

    work page 1979

  46. [46]

    Higgs and Coulomb/confining phases in “twisted-mass

    A. Gorsky, M. Shifman, and A. Yung, “Higgs and Coulomb/confining phases in “twisted-mass” deformedCP(N−1) model,”Phys. Rev. D73(Mar, 2006) 065011

    work page 2006

  47. [47]

    Topological properties of $CP^{N-1}$ models in the large-$N$ limit

    C. Bonanno, C. Bonati, and M. D’Elia, “Topological properties ofCP N−1 models in the large-Nlimit,”JHEP01(2019) 003,1807.11357

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  48. [48]

    Gauge theory

    D. Tong, “Gauge theory.” https://www.damtp.cam.ac.uk/user/tong/gaugetheory.html, 2018. Lecture notes

    work page 2018

  49. [49]

    From 4d Yang-Mills to 2dCP N−1 model: IR problem and confinement at weak coupling,

    M. Yamazaki and K. Yonekura, “From 4d Yang-Mills to 2dCP N−1 model: IR problem and confinement at weak coupling,”JHEP07(2017) 088,1704.05852

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  50. [50]

    Fradkin,Quantum field theory: An integrated approach

    E. Fradkin,Quantum field theory: An integrated approach. Princeton University Press, Mar., 2021. Publisher Copyright:©2021 by Princeton University Press. All rights reserved

    work page 2021

  51. [51]

    Relativistically invariant two-dimensional models of field theory which are integrable by means of the inverse scattering problem method,

    V. E. Zakharov and A. V. Mikhailov, “Relativistically invariant two-dimensional models of field theory which are integrable by means of the inverse scattering problem method,”Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics47(1978) 1017. 61

    work page 1978

  52. [52]

    Darboux transformation and exact multisolitons of CPN nonlinear sigma model,

    U. Saleem and M. Hassan, “Darboux transformation and exact multisolitons of CPN nonlinear sigma model,”Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications447 (2017), no. 2, 1080–1101

    work page 2017

  53. [53]

    Description of surfaces associated with Grassmannian sigma models on Minkowski space,

    A. Grundland and L. ˇSnobl, “Description of surfaces associated with Grassmannian sigma models on Minkowski space,”Journal of mathematical physics46(2005), no. 8,

    work page 2005

  54. [54]

    Geometry of surfaces associated to Grassmannian sigma models,

    L. Delisle, V. Hussin, and W. J. Zakrzewski, “Geometry of surfaces associated to Grassmannian sigma models,” inJournal of Physics: Conference Series, vol. 597, p. 012029, IOP Publishing. 2015

    work page 2015

  55. [55]

    On analytic descriptions of two-dimensional surfaces associated with theCP N−1 sigma model,

    A. Grundland and I. Yurdusen, “On analytic descriptions of two-dimensional surfaces associated with theCP N−1 sigma model,”Journal of Physics A: Mathematical and Theoretical42(2009), no. 17, 172001

    work page 2009

  56. [56]

    A pedagogical review on solvable irrelevant deformations of 2D quantum field theory,

    Y. Jiang, “A pedagogical review on solvable irrelevant deformations of 2D quantum field theory,”Commun. Theor. Phys.73(2021), no. 5, 057201,1904.13376

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  57. [57]

    T Tdeformation: Introduction and some recent advances,

    S. He, Y. Li, H. Ouyang, and Y. Sun, “T Tdeformation: Introduction and some recent advances,”Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron.68(2025), no. 10, 101001, 2503.09997

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  58. [58]

    Duality-invariant nonlinear electrodynamics and stress tensor flows,

    C. Ferko, S. M. Kuzenko, L. Smith, and G. Tartaglino-Mazzucchelli, “Duality-invariant nonlinear electrodynamics and stress tensor flows,”Phys. Rev. D 108(2023), no. 10, 106021,2309.04253

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  59. [59]

    Integrable deformations of dimensionally reduced gravity,

    M. Ces` aro and D. Osten, “Integrable deformations of dimensionally reduced gravity,” JHEP06(2025) 064,2502.01750

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  60. [60]

    Integrability in Sigma-Models,

    K. Zarembo, “Integrability in Sigma-Models,”1712.07725

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  61. [61]

    F. K. Seibold,Integrable deformations of sigma models and superstrings. PhD thesis, Zurich, ETH, 2020

    work page 2020

  62. [62]

    Yoshida,Yang–Baxter Deformation of 2D Non-Linear Sigma Models: Towards Applications to AdS/CFT

    K. Yoshida,Yang–Baxter Deformation of 2D Non-Linear Sigma Models: Towards Applications to AdS/CFT. SpringerBriefs in Mathematical Physics. Springer Nature Singapore, 2021. 62

    work page 2021

  63. [63]

    Metric approach to a T T-like deformation in arbitrary dimensions,

    R. Conti, J. Romano, and R. Tateo, “Metric approach to a T T-like deformation in arbitrary dimensions,”JHEP09(2022) 085,2206.03415

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  64. [64]

    Gravity and TT flows in higher dimensions,

    T. Morone, S. Negro, and R. Tateo, “Gravity and TT flows in higher dimensions,” Nucl. Phys. B1005(2024) 116605,2401.16400

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  65. [65]

    Geometric realization via irrelevant deformations induced by the stress-energy tensor,

    X.-Y. Ran, F. Hao, and M. Yamada, “Geometric realization via irrelevant deformations induced by the stress-energy tensor,”Phys. Rev. D111(2025), no. 8, 085033,2410.02537

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  66. [66]

    Holography for stress-energy tensor flows,

    X.-Y. Ran, F. Hao, and H. Ouyang, “Holography for stress-energy tensor flows,” 2508.12275

    arXiv

  67. [67]

    Conserved currents and T ¯Ts irrelevant deformations of 2D integrable field theories,

    R. Conti, S. Negro, and R. Tateo, “Conserved currents and T ¯Ts irrelevant deformations of 2D integrable field theories,”JHEP11(2019) 120,1904.09141

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  68. [68]

    Massive gravity generalization ofT Tdeformations,

    E. Tsolakidis, “Massive gravity generalization ofT Tdeformations,”JHEP09(2024) 167,2405.07967

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  69. [69]

    Geometric Formulation of Generalized Root-TT¯Deformations,

    H. Babaei-Aghbolagh, S. He, T. Morone, H. Ouyang, and R. Tateo, “Geometric Formulation of Generalized Root-TT¯Deformations,”Phys. Rev. Lett.133(2024), no. 11, 111602,2405.03465

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  70. [70]

    Root-T Tdeformed CFT partition functions at large central charge,

    M. He, “Root-T Tdeformed CFT partition functions at large central charge,” 2505.12093

    arXiv

  71. [71]

    GeometrizingT T,

    P. Caputa, S. Datta, Y. Jiang, and P. Kraus, “GeometrizingT T,”JHEP03(2021) 140,2011.04664. [Erratum: JHEP 09, 110 (2022)]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  72. [72]

    Stress-energy tensor deformations, Ricci flows and black holes,

    N. Brizio, T. Morone, and R. Tateo, “Stress-energy tensor deformations, Ricci flows and black holes,”2408.06031

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  73. [73]

    Solutions to the Ricci Flow via Einstein Field Equations,

    T. Morone and R. Tateo, “Solutions to the Ricci Flow via Einstein Field Equations,” 2411.10265

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  74. [74]

    Field-Dependent Metrics and Higher-Form Symmetries in Duality-Invariant Theories of Non-Linear Electrodynamics

    C. Ferko and C. Luke Martin, “Field-Dependent Metrics and Higher-Form Symmetries in Duality-Invariant Theories of Non-Linear Electrodynamics,” 6, 2024. 2406.17194. 63

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  75. [75]

    New representation for Lagrangians of selfdual nonlinear electrodynamics,

    E. A. Ivanov and B. M. Zupnik, “New representation for Lagrangians of selfdual nonlinear electrodynamics,” inSupersymmetries and Quantum Symmetries. Proceedings, 16th Max Born Symposium, SQS’01: Karpacz, Poland, September 21-25, 2001, pp. 235–250. 2002.hep-th/0202203

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  76. [76]

    New approach to nonlinear electrodynamics: Dualities as symmetries of interaction,

    E. A. Ivanov and B. M. Zupnik, “New approach to nonlinear electrodynamics: Dualities as symmetries of interaction,”Phys. Atom. Nucl.67(2004) 2188–2199, hep-th/0303192

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  77. [77]

    Interacting chiral form field theories andT T-like flows in six and higher dimensions,

    C. Ferko, S. M. Kuzenko, K. Lechner, D. P. Sorokin, and G. Tartaglino-Mazzucchelli, “Interacting chiral form field theories andT T-like flows in six and higher dimensions,”JHEP05(2024) 320,2402.06947

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  78. [78]

    GeneralizedT ¯T-like flows for scalar theories in two dimensions,

    H. Babaei-Aghbolagh, S. He, and H. Ouyang, “GeneralizedT ¯T-like flows for scalar theories in two dimensions,”2501.14583

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  79. [79]

    Root-T T deformations on causal self-dual electrodynamic theories,

    H. Babaei-Aghbolagh, K. Babaei Velni, S. He, and Z. Pezhman, “Root-T T deformations on causal self-dual electrodynamic theories,”JHEP07(2025) 227, 2504.10361

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  80. [80]

    Root-T ¯TFlows Unify 4D Duality-Invariant Electrodynamics and 2D Integrable Sigma Models,

    H. Babaei-Aghbolagh, B. Chen, and S. He, “Root-T ¯TFlows Unify 4D Duality-Invariant Electrodynamics and 2D Integrable Sigma Models,”2507.22808

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

Showing first 80 references.