Circle compactifications of Minkowski$_D$ solutions, flux vacua and solitonic branes

Niall T. Macpherson; Paul Merrikin; Ricardo Stuardo

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 3 cited by

Circle compactifications of Minkowski$_D$ solutions, flux vacua and solitonic branes

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A primitive 2-form makes circle compactification SUSY-preserving

desk verdict The G-structure core is solid and genuinely new, but the advertised flux vacua and solitonic branes are not yet backed by the flux-quantization and Op-plane source checks needed to call them string backgrounds. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.15102 v1 pith:CB3ZIAWS submitted 2024-12-19 hep-th

Niall T. Macpherson , Paul Merrikin , Ricardo Stuardo This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-th MSC 83E5081T3053C29 PACS 04.65.+e11.25.-w

keywords circlecompactificationsupersymmetrygeneratingtechniqueG-structureprimitivetwo-formMinkowskifluxvacuasolitonicbranesSasaki-EinsteinmanifoldstypeIIsupergravity

topics Quantum Gravity

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

Under a primitivity assumption on the connection 2-form, the paper establishes that circle compactification maps supersymmetry conditions of a Minkowski_{D+1} solution of type II supergravity to those of a Minkowski_D solution, for D=1,...,5. The equations of motion do not automatically follow: the RR and NS Bianchi identities acquire extra F∧F corrections and must be imposed by hand, so the construction is an 'off-shell' or 'supersymmetry generating' technique rather than a full solution generating one. To apply it the paper derives new G-structure conditions for general N=(1,0) Mink_2 solutions and a restricted null class of Mink_1. The machinery yields new compact Minkowski flux vacua bounded between D-branes and orientifold planes, and generalises solitonic-brane solutions to arbitrary Sasaki-Einstein and Kähler-Einstein manifolds, including smeared brane sources at the end of the space.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the 'primitive' 2-form F = dA defined on the internal space of the parent solution, where A is the connection of the circle fibration Dφ = dφ + A. Primitivity means the Clifford action /F kills both internal Killing spinors of the parent; equivalently F satisfies algebraic constraints such as ⋆F = -F ∧ Φ_3 ∧ V in the G_2 case and F ∧ J = F ∧ Ω = 0 for SU(n)-structures, which force F to lie along the directions transverse to the G-structure. This condition makes the bilinear identities factor: it is exactly what is needed for the parent's supersymmetry conditions to imply the lower-dimensional ones. Because a 2-form annihilating a spinor requires the internal manifold to support at least an SU(2)-structure, the construction terminates at Mink_6 (four internal dimensions), and the same obstruction explains the dimension bound in every D.

What would settle it

Take any known supersymmetric Minkowski_5 solution of type IIB with a 5-dimensional internal space supporting only an identity structure, and attempt a circle compactification to Minkowski_4 with a non-vanishing F; the paper's equations (3.47b)-(3.49) predict that the Killing-spinor equations force the internal space to an SU(2)-structure, so finding one supersymmetric example with identity-structure internal space and F ≠ 0 would refute the claimed bound. A concrete check is to solve (3.47b) directly for the general bilinears of (3.45) with a,b,c ≠ 0 and see whether any non-zero F satisfies them.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is a transfer theorem: if a supersymmetric Minkowski_{D+1} solution admits a 2-form F that annihilates the internal Killing spinors (a 'primitive' form, generalising primitive (1,1)-forms of SU(n)-structures), then the background obtained by replacing Minkowski_{D+1} with Minkowski_D × $S^{1}$, with fluxes shifted by Dφ ∧ F ∧ (G-structure bilinears), satisfies the necessary and sufficient conditions for supersymmetry in one dimension lower, provided one also imposes modified magnetic Bianchi identities. The proof runs through the bilinear/G-structure decomposition of the spinor equations and works for D=1,...,5, terminating at Mink_6 because a non-zero primitive 2-form cannot exist on an internal space of dimension below four. The paper further claims that the new N=(1,0) Mink_2 conditions and restricted Mink_1 conditions it derives are necessary and sufficient, and uses them to construct explicit classes: universal Mink_p vacua for p=1,3,5 on SE-cone fibrations bounded by Op planes, Mink_2 vacua with G_2 cones, and generalised solitonic branes on squashed Sasaki-Einstein manifolds with Dp-brane sources.

Load-bearing premise

The entire construction depends on the compactification 2-form F annihilating both internal spinors of the parent solution, because only then do the supersymmetry conditions factor; if F fails this primitivity test the claimed implication from parent to compactified solution breaks down.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Every supersymmetric Minkowski_{D+1} solution whose internal space carries a primitive 2-form yields, after circle compactification and modification of the Bianchi identities, an off-shell Minkowski_D background with the same number of preserved supercharges.
The new G-structure conditions for Mink_2 and restricted Mink_1 solutions fill a gap in the literature and provide the necessary input for compactifying any D1 or D2 brane system in this fashion.
The universal Mink_p vacua for p = 1, 3, 5 exist for any compact Sasaki-Einstein base, with the radial interval bounded by Op planes; the same warp-factor technology adapts to G_2 cones for Mink_2 vacua.
Known solitonic brane solutions in type IIB and the AdS_4 soliton in d = 11 are reproduced within the compactification classes, and the harmonic function can be extended so that smeared Dp/M2 sources sit at one end of the space, adding a meson-vev deformation in the dual field theory.

Reading between the lines

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

Since the primitive condition is precisely the statement that F preserves the G-structure, the technique may be read as a recipe for 'twisting' any supersymmetric Minkowski solution by an R-symmetry or global-symmetry gauge field; we speculate it will combine with integrability results of the type used in [48] to upgrade off-shell backgrounds to full solutions whenever the modified Bianchi identit
The dimension bound D ≤ 5 is about the existence of a primitive 2-form, not about supergravity itself; the same circle-reduction idea should have an M-theory analogue in which the relevant form is the 4-form G_4, and we would expect generalisations of the AdS_4 soliton to AdS_3 or AdS_5 solitons once the appropriate M2/M5 wrappings are considered.
The replacement of the sphere by generic Sasaki-Einstein and Kähler-Einstein bases in the solitonic brane solutions suggests a holographic dictionary between the squashing functions and the VEVs of mesonic operators; we infer the brane-source limits of (4.55) define new confining vacua whose low-energy spectra, as in the p=3 case, should be discrete and gapped.

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

First thing you should know: the formal machinery in this paper is the real contribution, and it holds up better than the applications. The authors derive the general N=(1,0) Mink_2 G-structure conditions, which were absent from the literature, and use a 'primitive 2-form' ansatz to turn circle compactifications of Mink_{D+1} supersymmetry conditions into Mink_D conditions, at the cost of modifying the RR Bianchi identities. That is a clean and useful organizing idea, and they are honest about its limits: it stops at Mink_6 because the internal space must support at least an SU(2)-structure, and the Mink_2 to Mink_1 case needs an extra Einstein equation component imposed by hand. The displayed derivations look internally consistent, and the appendices are thorough. Credit where due: this fills a real gap.

The soft spot is in Section 4. The advertised flux vacua and solitonic branes are not yet established as string backgrounds. In §4.1.1 and §4.1.3 the text says 'we find no issues with flux quantisation' without computing any flux periods. The harmonic functions in (4.11)-(4.13) and (4.31)-(4.34) contain integration constants that must produce integer charges; that is not checked. The vacua are bounded by Op planes at r_min and r_max, but the localized Bianchi identity source terms are never matched to Op-plane charge and tension. The solitonic brane section computes a magnetic charge in (4.57) but does not verify quantization of the resulting ℓ or of other cycles. If those global data come out wrong, the interpretation as string-theory vacua fails even though the supersymmetry conditions are satisfied. These are addressable gaps, not a flaw in the technique, but they are load-bearing for the applications as advertised.

The stress-test note lands on the right spot. The primitivity assumption the reader flags is not a hidden weakness; it is stated explicitly and it explains the scope of the method. The real issue is the unverified global checks.

Who this is for: people working on G-structure classifications and supersymmetric compactifications will get value from Sections 2-3. The explicit solutions in Section 4 need more work before they should be quoted as new vacua. I would send this to a serious referee, with the clear instruction that flux quantization and Op-plane source matching must be completed, or the applications must be explicitly reframed as provisional.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper develops a G-structure-based technique for constructing circle compactifications of supersymmetric Minkowski_{D+1} solutions of type II supergravity down to Minkowski_D, for D = 1,\ldots,5. The key structural claim is that, when the circle connection curvature F is a "primitive" 2-form annihilating the internal spinors, the supersymmetry conditions of the parent Minkowski_{D+1} solution imply those of the compactified Minkowski_D solution, while the Bianchi identities of the RR fluxes must be modified. The paper also derives G-structure conditions for general N=(1,0) Minkowski_2 solutions and a restricted class of Minkowski_1 solutions, and it constructs explicit Minkowski flux vacua bounded by Op planes as well as generalized "solitonic brane" solutions on generic Sasaki-Einstein manifolds, including versions with Dp-brane sources.

Significance. If the advertised constructions are fully valid, the paper provides a genuinely useful organizing principle for generating supersymmetric Minkowski solutions from known ones, and it fills a gap in the literature by giving G-structure conditions for low-dimensional Minkowski vacua. The formal core is a strength: the derivations in Appendices B through E are detailed and explicit, the restrictive assumptions (especially the primitivity of F) are stated rather than hidden, and the mapping from Minkowski_{D+1} to Minkowski_D conditions is demonstrated through several concrete solution classes. However, the physical applications in Section 4 are not yet established as string backgrounds: the claimed flux vacua and solitonic branes lack explicit flux-quantization checks and localized source matching for the Op/Dp planes. These gaps are load-bearing for the headline claims, so the current version is not yet at the standard required for acceptance.

major comments (3)

[§4.1.1, Eqs. (4.11)–(4.13)] The statement "We find no issues with flux quantisation" is not supported by any computation of flux periods. The solutions are presented as compact Minkowski vacua bounded between two Op planes, but the harmonic functions (4.11)–(4.13) only solve the bulk equation (4.3) away from sources. To claim string backgrounds, the authors must compute the integrals of the magnetic fluxes over all non-trivial cycles, show that the resulting charges are consistent with quantized Dp/Op charges, and match the localized δ-function source terms in the Bianchi identities to the Op-plane charges and tensions at r_min and r_max. Without these checks, the bounded-interval solutions are local supergravity solutions rather than established flux vacua.
[§4.1.3, Eqs. (4.31)–(4.34)] The Minkowski_2 vacua with O2 planes and D2 branes suffer from the same gap. The text asserts "We find no issue with flux quantisation in any of these cases" without presenting any flux-period computation. The warp factors (4.32)–(4.34) are derived from the source-free equation (4.23), and the O2/D2 interpretations require matching the singular terms at the ends of the interval to the appropriate localized charges. In particular, the two-O2-plane case (4.34) needs a check that the total RR charge and tension balance, and that the periods of the RR flux are integer-quantized. This is essential to the advertised status of these as viable Minkowski_2 vacua.
[§4.2.2, Eqs. (4.55)–(4.57)] The solitonic-brane construction computes one brane charge, N_Dp in (4.57), but does not verify quantization of the resulting parameter ℓ or of other cycle periods. More importantly, the new solutions with Dp-brane sources are introduced through the log behavior (4.54) and the smeared Dp interpretation, yet no localized source term is added to the Bianchi identity and matched to the Dp-brane charge and tension. The same comment applies to the M2-brane source case in §4.2.3. Thus the "new solitonic brane solutions" with sources remain local solutions of the supergravity equations until global consistency is demonstrated.

minor comments (5)

[Abstract and Introduction] The phrase "Under a certain assumptions" should be corrected, and the precise assumptions underlying the supersymmetry-generating technique should be stated more prominently in the Introduction rather than left to Eqs. (2.23), (3.12), (3.30), (3.47), and (3.65).
[Introduction, §3.4] The Introduction states that the D5-brane wrapping case is explained in §3.2.1, but that case is actually derived in §3.4; the cross-reference should be corrected.
[§4.1.1] The text refers to a "primate (1,1)-form"; this should be "primitive (1,1)-form".
[§2.4, Eq. (2.27a)] Equation (2.27a) appears to contain a typographical inconsistency: the chain of equalities with a trailing "= 0" suggests that the left-hand side and the middle expression are both being set to zero, which should be clarified or rewritten.
[Throughout] There are several typographical and grammatical issues, including "manor", "ad hock", "of of", "He hope", and "arbitary"; a careful proofreading pass is needed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the compactification theorem is derived by direct substitution under an explicit primitivity assumption, and the self-citations are not load-bearing.

full rationale

The central claim of the paper is a conditional statement: given a Mink_{D+1} solution of type II supergravity and a primitive 2-form F obeying the stated conditions (e.g., (2.23), (3.12), (3.30)), the circle-compactified data satisfy the supersymmetry conditions for Mink_D, with the Bianchi identities modified accordingly. This is established by direct substitution into the bilinear/G-structure equations that are themselves derived in Appendices B and D from the standard framework of [26]. The target conditions are not used to fix any free function or parameter in the ansatz; the components such as f_\mp are determined by F and the spinor bilinears through equations like (3.14), (3.33), (3.51) and (3.69). The explicit solutions in Section 4 solve the Poisson-type equations (4.3), (4.23) and (4.47) with integration constants (c1, c2, b); tuning these constants to produce zeros at r_min and r_max is a boundary-condition choice, not a fit to a predetermined answer. The paper explicitly labels the method an off-shell or supersymmetry-generating technique and states that it falls short of being a solution generating technique, so the by-construction character is the stated intent rather than a hidden circularity. Self-citations to [45], [49], [51] and [63] are used for consistency checks, comparisons, or identifications of known solutions; none is an unverified load-bearing premise of the main theorem. The unperformed flux-quantization checks in Sections 4.1.1 and 4.1.3 are a completeness gap, not a circular step. I therefore find no self-definitional, fitted-input, or citation-forced circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physical entities. The free parameters listed are integration constants and ansatz parameters of the explicit supergravity solutions, not quantities fitted to data. The key ad hoc assumption is the primitivity of the 2-form F, which is the load-bearing condition for the compactification technique.

free parameters (3)

b (connection amplitude in primitive 2-form ansatz) = b (with b^2 = b1^2+b2^2+b3^2 in examples)
Introduced in the ansatz A = b/r^{7-p} Dψ (eq. 4.10) to produce a primitive (1,1)-form F = dA; it appears in the warp factor hp = c1 + c2/r^{7-p} - (7-p)b^2/(2(8-p)r^{2(8-p)}) and in the PDE (4.3). It is a solution parameter, not fitted to external data.
q0, f0, r0, ℓ (solitonic brane parameters) = q0 related to r0 and ℓ by q0^2 = r0^{9-p} ℓ^{7-p} in (4.48)
Parameters in the solitonic brane ansatz (4.44)-(4.49); they are integration or rescaling constants of the ODE, not fit to data.
c1, c2 (integration constants) = c1, c2 (set to zero in the simple solution (4.48))
Integration constants in hp solutions (4.11), (4.50), and (4.53); chosen to specify boundary behaviour, not fit to external data.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption Type II supergravity equations of motion and supersymmetry conditions as given in appendix A.
The paper builds on the standard formulation of type II supergravity, using the general supersymmetry conditions of [26] and the integrability result of [48].
standard math G-structure parameterization of spinor bilinears (SU(n), G2, Spin(7)) as in appendix E.
Used to express the supersymmetry conditions in terms of forms; the conventions follow [64].
ad hoc to paper The compactified field strength F must be a primitive 2-form annihilating the internal spinors.
This is the central technical assumption that makes the supersymmetry conditions of Minkowski_{D+1} imply those of Minkowski_D; it restricts F and the G-structure (eqs. 2.23, 3.12, 3.30, 3.47, 3.65, and appendix E).
ad hoc to paper Spinors are uncharged under the circle isometry ∂φ and the null Killing vector for Minkowski_1 decomposes into time-like and space-like Killing vectors.
Needed for the decomposition of bilinears in the Minkowski_2 to Minkowski_1 case; restricts to a subclass of Minkowski_1 solutions, as stated in footnote 7 and appendix C.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Circle compactifications of Minkowski$_D$ solutions, flux vacua and solitonic branes." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CB3ZIAWS

@misc{pith2026241215102,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Circle compactifications of Minkowski$_D$ solutions, flux vacua and solitonic branes},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CB3ZIAWS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.15102}
}

abstract

G-structure techniques are used to construct broad classes of circle compactifications of Mink$_{D+1}$ solutions to Mink$_{D}$ embedded into type II supergravity for $D=1,...5$. Under a certain assumptions we show that the conditions that imply supersymmetry for Mink$_{D+1}$ imply those of the Mink$_{D}$ solution, but that Bianchi identities of the fluxes must be modified. This realises an off shell solution generating technique for supersymmetric solutions or a "supersymmetry generating" technique. Along the way it is necessary for us to derive G structure conditions for general ${\cal N}=(1,0)$ supersymmetric Mink$_2$ solutions and a restricted class of Mink$_1$ solutions. We apply our results to construct some simple Minkowski flux vacua before turning our attention to "solitonic branes" which are generalisations of the AdS soliton. We are able to generalise known examples in two ways: 1) to embed them in terms of generic Sasaki Einstein manifolds. 2) To modify the harmonic factor to include D$p$ brane sources at one end of the space.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

Twisted-Circle Compactifications of SQCD-like Theories and Holography
hep-th 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

New regular type IIB supergravity backgrounds are constructed for twisted-circle compactifications of SQCD-like theories, and their regularity forces the anomaly-free condition N_f = 2N_c.
Universal Observables, SUSY RG-Flows and Holography
hep-th 2025-06 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

New Type IIB, 11d, and Type IIA supergravity flows dual to twisted-compactified 4d SCFTs yield a universal factorization of Wilson loops, flow central charges, and complexity.
Supersymmetric Moduli Space and Vacua with Vector Fields in $D=4$ Gauged $\mathcal{N}=8$ Supergravity
hep-th 2026-07 accept novelty 5.0 of 10

Four-charge supersymmetric AdS solitons in the dilatonic STU model have a compact moduli space fixed by |ψ₁|+|ψ₂|+|ψ₃|+|ψ₄|=√2 L, with scalar VEVs determined by the Wilson lines.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

64 extracted references · 25 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

[1]

Consistent Kaluza-Klein reductio ns for general supersym- metric AdS solutions,

J. P. Gauntlett and O. Varela, “Consistent Kaluza-Klein reductio ns for general supersym- metric AdS solutions,” Phys. Rev. D 76 (2007), 126007 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.76.126007 [arXiv:0707.2315 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2007
[2]

Universal consistent tru ncation for 6d/7d gauge/gravity duals,

A. Passias, A. Rota and A. Tomasiello, “Universal consistent tru ncation for 6d/7d gauge/gravity duals,” JHEP 10 (2015), 187 doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2015)187 [arXiv:1506.05462 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2015
[3]

Minimal D = 4 N = 2 supergravity from D = 11: An M-theory free lunch,

G. Larios and O. Varela, “Minimal D = 4 N = 2 supergravity from D = 11: An M-theory free lunch,” JHEP 10 (2019), 251 doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2019)251 [arXiv:1907.11027 [hep- th]]

arXiv 2019
[4]

A plethora of Ty pe IIA embeddings for d = 5 minimal supergravity,

C. Couzens, N. T. Macpherson and A. Passias, “A plethora of Ty pe IIA embeddings for d = 5 minimal supergravity,” JHEP 01 (2023), 047 doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2023)047 [arXiv:2209.15540 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2023
[5]

The Consistency of the S**7 Truncation in D=11 Supergravity,

B. de Wit and H. Nicolai, “The Consistency of the S**7 Truncation in D=11 Supergravity,” Nucl. Phys. B 281 (1987), 211-240 doi:10.1016/0550-3213(87)90253-7

doi:10.1016/0550-3213(87)90253-7 1987
[6]

Consistent no nlinear K K reduction of 11-d supergravity on AdS(7) x S(4) and selfduality in odd dimensions ,

H. Nastase, D. Vaman and P. van Nieuwenhuizen, “Consistent no nlinear K K reduction of 11-d supergravity on AdS(7) x S(4) and selfduality in odd dimensions ,” Phys. Lett. B 469 (1999), 96-102 doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(99)01266-6 [arXiv:hep- th/9905075 [hep-th]]

work page arXiv 1999
[7]

Consistency o f the AdS(7) x S(4) re- duction and the origin of selfduality in odd dimensions,

H. Nastase, D. Vaman and P. van Nieuwenhuizen, “Consistency o f the AdS(7) x S(4) re- duction and the origin of selfduality in odd dimensions,” Nucl. Phys. B 581 (2000), 179-239 doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(00)00193-0 [arXiv:hep-th/9911238 [hep -th]]

arXiv 2000
[8]

Con sistent SO(6) reduction of type IIB supergravity on S**5,

M. Cvetic, H. Lu, C. N. Pope, A. Sadrzadeh and T. A. Tran, “Con sistent SO(6) reduction of type IIB supergravity on S**5,” Nucl. Phys. B 586 (2000), 275-286 doi:10.1016/S0550- 3213(00)00372-2 [arXiv:hep-th/0003103 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2000

Show all 64 references

[9]

Consistent N = 8 truncation of massive IIA on S 6,

A. Guarino and O. Varela, “Consistent N = 8 truncation of massive IIA on S 6,” JHEP 12 (2015), 020 doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2015)020 [arXiv:1509.02526 [hep- th]]

2015 arXiv
[10]

Complete D = 11 embedding of SO(8) supergravity,

O. Varela, “Complete D = 11 embedding of SO(8) supergravity,” Phys. Rev. D 97 (2018) no.4, 045010 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.97.045010 [arXiv:1512.04943 [hep -th]]

2018 arXiv
[11]

Supersymmetric AdS 7 and AdS 6 vacua and their minimal consistent truncations from exceptional ﬁeld theory ,

E. Malek, H. Samtleben and V. Vall Camell, “Supersymmetric AdS 7 and AdS 6 vacua and their minimal consistent truncations from exceptional ﬁeld theory ,” Phys. Lett. B 786 (2018), 171-179 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2018.09.037 [arXiv:1808.05597 [hep-t h]]. 58

2018 arXiv
[12]

Supersymmetric AdS 7 and AdS 6 vacua and their consistent truncations with vector multiplets,

E. Malek, H. Samtleben and V. Vall Camell, “Supersymmetric AdS 7 and AdS 6 vacua and their consistent truncations with vector multiplets,” JHE P 04 (2019), 088 doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2019)088 [arXiv:1901.11039 [hep-th]]

2019 arXiv
[13]

Consistent truncations around half -maximal AdS 5 vacua of 11-dimensional supergravity,

E. Malek and V. Vall Camell, “Consistent truncations around half -maximal AdS 5 vacua of 11-dimensional supergravity,” Class. Quant. Grav. 39 (2022) no.7, 075026 doi:10.1088/1361- 6382/ac566a [arXiv:2012.15601 [hep-th]]

2022 arXiv
[14]

The higher-dime nsional ori- gin of ﬁve-dimensional N = 2 gauged supergravities,

G. Josse, E. Malek, M. Petrini and D. Waldram, “The higher-dime nsional ori- gin of ﬁve-dimensional N = 2 gauged supergravities,” JHEP 06 (2022), 003 doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2022)003 [arXiv:2112.03931 [hep-th]]

2022 arXiv
[15]

Consistent truncations to 3-dimensional supergravity,

M. Galli and E. Malek, “Consistent truncations to 3-dimensional supergravity,” JHEP 09 (2022), 014 doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2022)014 [arXiv:2206.03507 [hep- th]]

2022 arXiv
[16]

Consistent tru ncations and G 2-invariant AdS4 solutions of D = 11 supergravity,

B. Duboeuf, M. Galli, E. Malek and H. Samtleben, “Consistent tru ncations and G 2-invariant AdS4 solutions of D = 11 supergravity,” [arXiv:2412.13300 [hep-th]]

arXiv
[17]

Supersymm etric back- grounds from generalized Calabi-Yau manifolds,

M. Grana, R. Minasian, M. Petrini and A. Tomasiello, “Supersymm etric back- grounds from generalized Calabi-Yau manifolds,” JHEP 08 (2004), 046 doi:10.1088/1126- 6708/2004/08/046 [arXiv:hep-th/0406137 [hep-th]]

2004 arXiv
[18]

Supers ymmetric AdS(5) solutions of M theory,

J. P. Gauntlett, D. Martelli, J. Sparks and D. Waldram, “Supers ymmetric AdS(5) solutions of M theory,” Class. Quant. Grav. 21 (2004), 4335-4366 doi:10.1088/0264-9381/21/18/005 [arXiv:hep-th/0402153 [hep-th]]

2004 arXiv
[19]

Generalized structures of N=1 vacua,

M. Grana, R. Minasian, M. Petrini and A. Tomasiello, “Generalized structures of N=1 vacua,” JHEP 11 (2005), 020 doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2005/11/020 [arXiv:hep-th/ 0505212 [hep-th]]

2005 doi
[20]

N = 2 supersymmetric AdS 4 solutions of M-theory,

M. Gabella, D. Martelli, A. Passias and J. Sparks, “ N = 2 supersymmetric AdS 4 solutions of M-theory,” Commun. Math. Phys. 325 (2014), 487-525 doi:10.1007/s00220-013-1865-0 [arXiv:1207.3082 [hep-th]]

2014 arXiv
[21]

All AdS 7 solutions of type II supergravity,

F. Apruzzi, M. Fazzi, D. Rosa and A. Tomasiello, “All AdS 7 solutions of type II supergravity,” JHEP 04 (2014), 064 doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2014)064 [arXiv:1309.2949 [hep-t h]]

2014 arXiv
[22]

AdS 3 So- lutions with Exceptional Supersymmetry,

G. Dibitetto, G. Lo Monaco, A. Passias, N. Petri and A. Tomasie llo, “AdS 3 So- lutions with Exceptional Supersymmetry,” Fortsch. Phys. 66 (2018) no.10, 1800060 doi:10.1002/prop.201800060 [arXiv:1807.06602 [hep-th]]. 59

2018 arXiv
[23]

G-structu res for black hole near-horizon geometries,

A. Legramandi, N. T. Macpherson and A. Passias, “G-structu res for black hole near-horizon geometries,” JHEP 06 (2024), 056 doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2024)056 [arXiv:2309.01714 [hep- th]]

2024 arXiv
[24]

The Geometry of D = 11 killing spinor s,

J. P. Gauntlett and S. Pakis, “The Geometry of D = 11 killing spinor s,” JHEP 04 (2003), 039 doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2003/04/039 [arXiv:hep-th/0212008 [hep-th]]

2003 arXiv
[25]

The Geometry o f D = 11 null Killing spinors,

J. P. Gauntlett, J. B. Gutowski and S. Pakis, “The Geometry o f D = 11 null Killing spinors,” JHEP 12 (2003), 049 doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2003/12/049 [arXiv:hep-th/ 0311112 [hep-th]]

2003 doi
[26]

Generalized structures of ten-dimensional sup ersymmetric solutions,

A. Tomasiello, “Generalized structures of ten-dimensional sup ersymmetric solutions,” JHEP 03 (2012), 073 doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2012)073 [arXiv:1109.2603 [hep-t h]]

2012 arXiv
[27]

Timelike structu res of ten-dimensional su- persymmetry,

A. Legramandi, L. Martucci and A. Tomasiello, “Timelike structu res of ten-dimensional su- persymmetry,” JHEP 04 (2019), 109 doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2019)109 [arXiv:1810.08625 [hep- th]]

2019 arXiv
[28]

Breaking supersymmetry wit h pure spinors,

A. Legramandi and A. Tomasiello, “Breaking supersymmetry wit h pure spinors,” JHEP 11 (2020), 098 doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2020)098 [arXiv:1912.00001 [hep- th]]

2020 arXiv
[29]

New non-supersymmetric ﬂux vacua from generalis ed calibrations,

V. Menet, “New non-supersymmetric ﬂux vacua from generalis ed calibrations,” JHEP 05 (2024), 100 doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2024)100 [arXiv:2311.12115 [hep- th]]

2024 arXiv
[30]

Deforming ﬁeld theories with U(1) x U(1) global sym- metry and their gravity duals,

O. Lunin and J. M. Maldacena, “Deforming ﬁeld theories with U(1) x U(1) global sym- metry and their gravity duals,” JHEP 05 (2005), 033 doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2005/05/033 [arXiv:hep-th/0502086 [hep-th]]

2005 arXiv
[31]

The Unwarped, resolved, deform ed conifold: Five- branes and the baryonic branch of the Klebanov-Strassler theor y,

J. Maldacena and D. Martelli, “The Unwarped, resolved, deform ed conifold: Five- branes and the baryonic branch of the Klebanov-Strassler theor y,” JHEP 01 (2010), 104 doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2010)104 [arXiv:0906.0591 [hep-th]]

2010 arXiv
[32]

Towards the string dua l of N=1 SQCD-like theories,

R. Casero, C. Nunez and A. Paredes, “Towards the string dua l of N=1 SQCD-like theories,” Phys. Rev. D 73 (2006), 086005 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.73.086005 [arXiv:hep-th/06 02027 [hep-th]]

2006 doi
[33]

Towards the large N limit of pure N =1 superYang-Mills,

J. M. Maldacena and C. Nunez, “Towards the large N limit of pure N =1 superYang-Mills,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 86 (2001), 588-591 doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.86.588 [arXiv:hep-th/0 008001 [hep-th]]

2001 doi
[34]

Th e Baryonic branch of Klebanov-Strassler solution: A supersymmetric family of SU(3) str ucture backgrounds,

A. Butti, M. Grana, R. Minasian, M. Petrini and A. Zaﬀaroni, “Th e Baryonic branch of Klebanov-Strassler solution: A supersymmetric family of SU(3) str ucture backgrounds,” JHEP 03 (2005), 069 doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2005/03/069 [arXiv:hep-th/ 0412187 [hep-th]]. 60

2005 doi
[35]

Duality symmetries from nonAb elian isometries in string theory,

X. C. de la Ossa and F. Quevedo, “Duality symmetries from nonAb elian isometries in string theory,” Nucl. Phys. B 403 (1993), 377-394 doi:10.1016/0550-3213(93)90041-M [arXiv:hep- th/9210021 [hep-th]]

1993
[36]

NonAbelian duality and canonical transformations ,

Y. Lozano, “NonAbelian duality and canonical transformations ,” Phys. Lett. B 355 (1995), 165-170 doi:10.1016/0370-2693(95)00777-I [arXiv:hep-th/9503 045 [hep-th]]

1995 doi
[37]

On non-abelian T-dual geome tries with Ramond ﬂuxes,

K. Sfetsos and D. C. Thompson, “On non-abelian T-dual geome tries with Ramond ﬂuxes,” Nucl. Phys. B 846 (2011), 21-42 doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2010.12.013 [arXiv:1012.1320 [hep- th]]

2011 arXiv
[38]

Supersymmetry and non- Abelian T-duality in type II supergravity,

¨O. Kelekci, Y. Lozano, N. T. Macpherson and E. ´O. Colg´ ain, “Supersymmetry and non- Abelian T-duality in type II supergravity,” Class. Quant. Grav. 32 (2015) no.3, 035014 doi:10.1088/0264-9381/32/3/035014 [arXiv:1409.7406 [hep-th]]

2015 arXiv
[39]

Poisson-Lie T duality,

C. Klimcik, “Poisson-Lie T duality,” Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl. 46 (1996), 116-121 doi:10.1016/0920-5632(96)00013-8 [arXiv:hep-th/9509095 [hep- th]]

1996 arXiv
[40]

An algebraic classiﬁcat ion of solution gener- ating techniques,

R. Borsato, S. Driezen and F. Hassler, “An algebraic classiﬁcat ion of solution gener- ating techniques,” Phys. Lett. B 823 (2021), 136771 doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2021.136771 [arXiv:2109.06185 [hep-th]]

2021
[41]

Nontrivial R R two form ﬁeld strength and SU(3) structure,

P. Kaste, R. Minasian, M. Petrini and A. Tomasiello, “Nontrivial R R two form ﬁeld strength and SU(3) structure,” Fortsch. Phys. 51 (2003), 764-768 doi:10.1002/prop.200310095 [arXiv:hep-th/0301063 [hep-th]]

2003 arXiv
[42]

Kaluza-Klein bundles and mani- folds of exceptional holonomy,

P. Kaste, R. Minasian, M. Petrini and A. Tomasiello, “Kaluza-Klein bundles and mani- folds of exceptional holonomy,” JHEP 09 (2002), 033 doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2002/09/033 [arXiv:hep-th/0206213 [hep-th]]

2002 arXiv
[43]

Domain walls f rom ten dimensions,

M. Haack, D. Lust, L. Martucci and A. Tomasiello, “Domain walls f rom ten dimensions,” JHEP 10 (2009), 089 doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2009/10/089 [arXiv:0905.158 2 [hep-th]]

2009 doi
[44]

Generalized geometry of two-dimensional vacua,

D. Rosa, “Generalized geometry of two-dimensional vacua,” JH EP 07 (2014), 111 doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2014)111 [arXiv:1310.6357 [hep-th]]

2014 arXiv
[45]

Twisted circle compactiﬁcation of N = 4 SYM and its holographic dual,

S. P. Kumar and R. Stuardo, “Twisted circle compactiﬁcation of N = 4 SYM and its holographic dual,” JHEP 08 (2024), 089 doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2024)089 [arXiv:2405.03739 [hep-th]]. 61

2024 arXiv
[46]

The Gauge/gravity theory of blown up four cycles,

S. Benvenuti, M. Mahato, L. A. Pando Zayas and Y. Tachikawa, “The Gauge/gravity theory of blown up four cycles,” [arXiv:hep-th/0512061 [hep-th]]

arXiv
[47]

Supersymmetric solitons and a deg eneracy of solutions in AdS/CFT,

A. Anabalon and S. F. Ross, “Supersymmetric solitons and a deg eneracy of solutions in AdS/CFT,” JHEP 07 (2021), 015 doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2021)015 [arXiv:2104.14572 [hep- th]]

2021 arXiv
[48]

6D microstat e geometries from 10D structures,

S. Giusto, L. Martucci, M. Petrini and R. Russo, “6D microstat e geometries from 10D structures,” Nucl. Phys. B 876 (2013), 509-555 doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2013.08.018 [arXiv:1306.1745 [hep-th]]

2013 arXiv
[49]

AdS 3 solutions in Massive IIA with small N = (4, 0) supersymmetry,

Y. Lozano, N. T. Macpherson, C. Nunez and A. Ramirez, “AdS 3 solutions in Massive IIA with small N = (4, 0) supersymmetry,” JHEP 01 (2020), 129 doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2020)129 [arXiv:1908.09851 [hep-th]]

2020 arXiv
[50]

N=(0,4) b lack string chains,

C. Couzens, Y. Lozano, N. Petri and S. Vandoren, “N=(0,4) b lack string chains,” Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022) no.8, 086015 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.105.086015 [arXiv:2109.1 0413 [hep-th]]

2022 doi
[51]

On ge neralised D1-D5 near horizons and their spectra,

M. Lima, N. T. Macpherson, D. Melnikov and L. Ypanaque, “On ge neralised D1-D5 near horizons and their spectra,” JHEP 04 (2023), 060 doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2023)060 [arXiv:2211.02702 [hep-th]]

2023 arXiv
[52]

All N = (8, 0) AdS 3 solutions in 10 and 11 dimensions,

A. Legramandi, G. Lo Monaco and N. T. Macpherson, “All N = (8, 0) AdS 3 solutions in 10 and 11 dimensions,” JHEP 05 (2021), 263 doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2021)263 [arXiv:2012.10507 [hep-th]]

2021 arXiv
[53]

The AdS / CFT correspondenc e and a new positive energy conjecture for general relativity,

G. T. Horowitz and R. C. Myers, “The AdS / CFT correspondenc e and a new positive energy conjecture for general relativity,” Phys. Rev. D 59 (1998), 026005 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.59.026005 [arXiv:hep-th/9808079 [hep-th]]

1998 arXiv
[54]

Euclidean black saddles an d AdS 4 black holes,

N. Bobev, A. M. Charles and V. S. Min, “Euclidean black saddles an d AdS 4 black holes,” JHEP 10 (2020), 073 doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2020)073 [arXiv:2006.01148 [hep- th]]

2020 arXiv
[55]

Supersym metric solitons in gauged N = 8 supergravity,

A. Anabal´ on, A. Gallerati, S. Ross and M. Trigiante, “Supersym metric solitons in gauged N = 8 supergravity,” JHEP 02 (2023), 055 doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2023)055 [arXiv:2210.06319 [hep-th]]

2023 arXiv
[56]

Conﬁnement in (1 + 1) dim ensions: a holo- graphic perspective from I-branes,

C. Nunez, M. Oyarzo and R. Stuardo, “Conﬁnement in (1 + 1) dim ensions: a holo- graphic perspective from I-branes,” JHEP 09 (2023), 201 doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2023)201 [arXiv:2307.04783 [hep-th]]. 62

2023 arXiv
[57]

Conﬁnement and D5-br anes,

C. Nunez, M. Oyarzo and R. Stuardo, “Conﬁnement and D5-br anes,” JHEP 03 (2024), 080 doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2024)080 [arXiv:2311.17998 [hep-th]]

2024 arXiv
[58]

From conformal to conﬁning ﬁ eld theories using hologra- phy,

A. Fatemiabhari and C. Nunez, “From conformal to conﬁning ﬁ eld theories using hologra- phy,” JHEP 03 (2024), 160 doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2024)160 [arXiv:2401.04158 [hep- th]]

2024 arXiv
[59]

Supersymmetric Ad S solitons and the in- terconnection of diﬀerent vacua of N = 4 Super Yang-Mills,

A. Anabal´ on, H. Nastase and M. Oyarzo, “Supersymmetric Ad S solitons and the in- terconnection of diﬀerent vacua of N = 4 Super Yang-Mills,” JHEP 05 (2024), 217 doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2024)217 [arXiv:2402.18482 [hep-th]]

2024 arXiv
[60]

SCFT defo rmations via up- lifted solitons,

D. Chatzis, A. Fatemiabhari, C. Nunez and P. Weck, “SCFT defo rmations via up- lifted solitons,” Nucl. Phys. B 1006 (2024), 116659 doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2024.116659 [arXiv:2406.01685 [hep-th]]

2024
[61]

Conforma l to conﬁning SQFTs from holography,

D. Chatzis, A. Fatemiabhari, C. Nunez and P. Weck, “Conforma l to conﬁning SQFTs from holography,” JHEP 08 (2024), 041 doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2024)041 [arXiv:2405.05563 [hep- th]]

2024 arXiv
[62]

Supergravity and the large N limit of theories with sixteen supercharges,

N. Itzhaki, J. M. Maldacena, J. Sonnenschein and S. Yankielowic z, “Supergravity and the large N limit of theories with sixteen supercharges,” Phys. Rev. D 58 (1998), 046004 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.58.046004 [arXiv:hep-th/9802042 [hep-th]]

1998 arXiv
[63]

N = (1, 1) supersymmetric AdS 3 in 10 dimensions,

N. T. Macpherson and A. Tomasiello, “ N = (1, 1) supersymmetric AdS 3 in 10 dimensions,” JHEP 03 (2022), 112 doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2022)112 [arXiv:2110.01627 [hep- th]]

2022 arXiv
[64]

Superstrings with intrinsic torsion,

J. P. Gauntlett, D. Martelli and D. Waldram, “Superstrings with intrinsic torsion,” Phys. Rev. D 69 (2004), 086002 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.69.086002 [arXiv:hep-th/03 02158 [hep-th]]. 63

2004 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Consistent Kaluza-Klein reductio ns for general supersym- metric AdS solutions,

J. P. Gauntlett and O. Varela, “Consistent Kaluza-Klein reductio ns for general supersym- metric AdS solutions,” Phys. Rev. D 76 (2007), 126007 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.76.126007 [arXiv:0707.2315 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2007

[2] [2]

Universal consistent tru ncation for 6d/7d gauge/gravity duals,

A. Passias, A. Rota and A. Tomasiello, “Universal consistent tru ncation for 6d/7d gauge/gravity duals,” JHEP 10 (2015), 187 doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2015)187 [arXiv:1506.05462 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2015

[3] [3]

Minimal D = 4 N = 2 supergravity from D = 11: An M-theory free lunch,

G. Larios and O. Varela, “Minimal D = 4 N = 2 supergravity from D = 11: An M-theory free lunch,” JHEP 10 (2019), 251 doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2019)251 [arXiv:1907.11027 [hep- th]]

arXiv 2019

[4] [4]

A plethora of Ty pe IIA embeddings for d = 5 minimal supergravity,

C. Couzens, N. T. Macpherson and A. Passias, “A plethora of Ty pe IIA embeddings for d = 5 minimal supergravity,” JHEP 01 (2023), 047 doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2023)047 [arXiv:2209.15540 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2023

[5] [5]

The Consistency of the S**7 Truncation in D=11 Supergravity,

B. de Wit and H. Nicolai, “The Consistency of the S**7 Truncation in D=11 Supergravity,” Nucl. Phys. B 281 (1987), 211-240 doi:10.1016/0550-3213(87)90253-7

doi:10.1016/0550-3213(87)90253-7 1987

[6] [6]

Consistent no nlinear K K reduction of 11-d supergravity on AdS(7) x S(4) and selfduality in odd dimensions ,

H. Nastase, D. Vaman and P. van Nieuwenhuizen, “Consistent no nlinear K K reduction of 11-d supergravity on AdS(7) x S(4) and selfduality in odd dimensions ,” Phys. Lett. B 469 (1999), 96-102 doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(99)01266-6 [arXiv:hep- th/9905075 [hep-th]]

work page arXiv 1999

[7] [7]

Consistency o f the AdS(7) x S(4) re- duction and the origin of selfduality in odd dimensions,

H. Nastase, D. Vaman and P. van Nieuwenhuizen, “Consistency o f the AdS(7) x S(4) re- duction and the origin of selfduality in odd dimensions,” Nucl. Phys. B 581 (2000), 179-239 doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(00)00193-0 [arXiv:hep-th/9911238 [hep -th]]

arXiv 2000

[8] [8]

Con sistent SO(6) reduction of type IIB supergravity on S**5,

M. Cvetic, H. Lu, C. N. Pope, A. Sadrzadeh and T. A. Tran, “Con sistent SO(6) reduction of type IIB supergravity on S**5,” Nucl. Phys. B 586 (2000), 275-286 doi:10.1016/S0550- 3213(00)00372-2 [arXiv:hep-th/0003103 [hep-th]]

arXiv 2000