Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

New BPS States from Bosonic/Heterotic Duality

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-07 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A proposed duality with the bosonic string produces new BPS states in heterotic supergravity.

desk verdict New dual pairs with explicit spinors, but the sign conflict in eq (28) and missing KSE checks mean the BPS claims need referee verification. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.21623 v1 pith:RDL7TXCW submitted 2025-05-27 hep-th

Kai-Peng Lu , H. Lu , Liang Ma This is my paper
classification hep-th MSC 83E5083E3081T30 PACS 04.65.+e11.25.-w11.30.Pb
keywords bosonic/heteroticdualityBPSsolutionsKillingspinorspseudo-supersymmetrynoncriticalbosonicstringheteroticsupergravitycosmicEuclideaninstanton
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

The paper tries to show that the recently proposed bosonic/heterotic duality can be used as a tool for constructing supersymmetric solutions: it claims that two types of four-dimensional solutions, a cosmic string with a pp-wave and a Euclidean instanton, lift to ten-dimensional heterotic string backgrounds that admit explicit Killing spinors, and to dual noncritical bosonic string backgrounds that admit pseudo-Killing spinors. The existence of such dual pairs is presented as evidence that the duality, which was originally formulated for bosonic fields, can extend to fermionic structures and to BPS states. By constructing the Killing spinors explicitly, the authors demonstrate that the heterotic members of these pairs are genuine BPS solutions, not merely bosonic solutions that happen to solve the equations of motion.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the bosonic/heterotic duality map of [15], which identifies the ordinary $S^{1}$ reduction of the noncritical bosonic string (3) with the warped Kaluza-Klein R-reduction of heterotic supergravity (4), both yielding the same nine-dimensional Lagrangian (5). Along with this map, the paper uses the consistent Killing spinor equations of the heterotic string (6) and the pseudo-supersymmetric Killing spinor equations of the bosonic string (7), whose integrability conditions reproduce the equations of motion. The key technical move is writing the $S^{3}$ × $S^{3}$ internal space as a U(1) bundle over $T^{{1,1}}$, so that Killing spinors decompose into factors depending on the two $S^{3}$ fibre coordinates, χ1 and χ2; under the duality, only the χ1-dependent (χ2-independent) spinors survive, producing the heterotic Killing spinors. This machinery converts the construction of BPS solutions in heterotic supergravity into the simpler task of constructing pseudo-BPS solutions of the noncritical bosonic string and then applying the duality map.

What would settle it

Compute the heterotic Killing spinor equations (6) directly on the backgrounds (42) and (46) using an independent vielbein choice; if any residual Γ-matrix term fails to vanish unless the harmonic functions H_Q, H_K, or H_a are restricted more severely than harmonicity, the claimed BPS status fails. A cheaper test is to lift a bosonic-string solution whose Killing spinors depend on χ2 and check whether the duality map yields any surviving heterotic Killing spinor; the paper's mechanism predicts none survive, so finding one would falsify the map.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is the construction of two classes of dual pairs of solutions related by the bosonic/heterotic duality: a warped D=4 cosmic string with an added pp-wave, lifted to the heterotic solution (42) and the noncritical bosonic solution (34), and a Euclidean instanton, lifted to the heterotic solution (46) and the bosonic solution (38). The authors show that the heterotic members satisfy the heterotic Killing spinor equations (6) with explicit Killing spinors (44) and (48), preserving 1/8 of supersymmetry, while the bosonic members satisfy the pseudo-Killing spinor equations (7) of the noncritical bosonic string with spinors (36) and (40). The pseudo-supersymmetric Killing spinors that depend on the internal coordinate χ2 (the u direction of the duality) do not survive the map, while those independent of χ2 do, which explains why the heterotic solutions can be supersymmetric even though their bosonic origin is nonsupersymmetric. The paper takes these explicit dual pairs as supporting evidence that the bosonic/heterotic duality extends to a consistent subsector relating BPS states of the heterotic string to pseudo-BPS states of the bosonic string.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the duality map of [15] is genuine: the ordinary $S^{1}$ reduction of the noncritical bosonic string and the warped R-reduction of heterotic supergravity must truly produce the same D=9 theory, so that solutions moved across the map remain actual solutions of the target theory.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The D=4 cosmic string with pp-wave lifts to a heterotic solution that preserves 1/8 of supersymmetry, with Killing spinors given explicitly by (44).
  • The Euclidean instanton lifts to a heterotic BPS solution whose Killing spinors satisfy a chirality projection, meaning only one of the two branches of the instanton is supersymmetric in a chiral theory.
  • The pseudo-Killing spinors of the bosonic solutions that depend on the χ2 coordinate are precisely the ones dropped by the duality map, explaining the reduction from 1/4 to 1/8 supersymmetry.
  • The construction provides concrete evidence that a consistent subsector of heterotic supergravity is related to the noncritical bosonic string, as the paper states in its conclusions.
  • The same reduction route can generate new heterotic BPS solutions from bosonic pseudo-BPS solutions whenever the bosonic Killing spinors are independent of the internal coordinate of the duality.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the duality map extends beyond the specific linear-dilaton dependence used here, then a broad class of bosonic-string pseudo-BPS solutions with χ2-independent Killing spinors would automatically predict new heterotic BPS backgrounds, which could be checked by direct substitution.
  • The paper truncates to a single U(1) gauge field; turning on the full SO(32) or E8×E8 gauge sector could yield heterotic BPS solutions with non-Abelian charges, providing a more stringent test of the duality.
  • The Euclidean instanton, in the string frame, describes a wormhole with a strong-coupling throat analogous to the type IIB D-instanton; if the analogy holds, the heterotic instanton may have a similar brane interpretation.
  • The explicit Killing spinors, expressed through Γ-matrix projections, can be used to compute preserved-supersymmetry fractions for superpositions of these solutions, potentially leading to multi-center or intersecting generalizations.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper constructs two dual pairs of solutions related by the recently proposed bosonic/heterotic duality: a D=4 cosmic string with a pp-wave and a Euclidean instanton, each lifted to D=10 in both the noncritical bosonic string and heterotic supergravity. The authors give explicit metrics, form fields, and Killing spinors for all four solutions: the heterotic members are (42) with (44)-(45) and (46) with (48)-(49), and the bosonic members are (34) with (36)-(37) and (38) with (40)-(41). The paper claims the heterotic solutions are genuine BPS solutions of heterotic supergravity, preserving 1/8 of the supersymmetry, while the bosonic solutions solve the consistent pseudo-Killing spinor equations (7). Appendices list the spin connections for each vielbein and the Killing spinors of S^3 in two coordinatizations.

Significance. If the Killing-spinor checks are correct, the paper provides an explicit new family of BPS solutions in heterotic supergravity that is generated from a nonsupersymmetric bosonic-string dual. This is conceptually interesting: it gives concrete evidence that the pseudo-supersymmetric structure of the noncritical bosonic string can survive a duality map into a supersymmetric theory. The construction is essentially parameter-free: the solutions are closed-form and no coefficients are fitted. The Chern-Simons structure relating H_3 and F_2 is internally consistent, and the explicit spinor projections are stated in a representation-independent way. The main significance is the transfer of Killing spinors through the duality, which is precisely the part of the argument that the manuscript does not fully display; the current presentation leaves the central verification to 'we find' statements.

major comments (3)
  1. [§3.2, Eq. (28); §4, Eqs. (37), (45)] The paper's Killing-spinor chain for the cosmic string is not self-consistent as written. The D=4 result (28) states Gamma^{01} epsilon_0 = +epsilon_0, whereas the 10D spinors for the same cosmic-string family—both the bosonic ones in (36)-(37) and the heterotic ones in (44)-(45)—impose Gamma^{01} = -1. An independent substitution into the D=4 dilatino variation using the paper's vielbein (27), flux (53), and Killing-spinor equations (24) selects Gamma^{01} = -1 (up to the normalization conventions for H_{abc}, which should be stated explicitly). At minimum, the displayed equations are mutually inconsistent unless a nontrivial 4D-to-10D spinor dictionary is supplied. Please correct the sign in (28) or write out the map that changes the projection; this is load-bearing because (28) is presented as the seed of the 10D Killing spinors.
  2. [§4.2, Eqs. (44), (48); §4.1, Eqs. (36), (40)] The central BPS claims are asserted but not demonstrated. The text says 'we find' for the bosonic spinors and 'It follows from the Killing spinor equations (6)' for the heterotic spinors, but no intermediate substitutions are shown. Because the Killing-spinor equations (6) and (7) are first-order PDE systems and the spin connections listed in (54), (56), (58), and (60) are numerous, the reader cannot verify that (44) or (48) satisfies (6), or that (36) and (40) satisfy (7), without repeating a lengthy computation. This is the central evidence for the paper's headline claim, so a single sign or coefficient error could invalidate it. Please include the key steps: the independent projections needed at each equation, the cancellation of the connection terms, and the handling of the u, chi1, chi2 dependence. An ancillary file with the computation would also be acceptable.
  3. [§2.1 and §5] The evidential status of the duality claim should be clarified. The heterotic solutions (42) and (46) are derived by applying the reduction map (3)-(5) from reference [15] to the bosonic solutions; verifying that they satisfy the bosonic-sector equations of motion is therefore a test of the reduction's consistency, not an independent confirmation of the duality. The genuinely new content is the survival of the Killing spinors through the map, which is asserted but, as noted above, not demonstrated. Section 5's caveat—that the map requires a specific linear dilaton dependence and does not establish full equivalence—should be sharpened into an explicit statement of which of the paper's results would remain valid if the duality map were only approximate or restricted to a subsector.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Eq. (24) and Appendix A] Please state the normalization convention for H_{abc} used in Eq. (24), for example whether H = (1/3!) H_{abc} e^a ∧ e^b ∧ e^c. This convention determines the relative coefficient between the derivative and flux terms in the dilatino variation and is needed to resolve the sign issue in Major Comment 1.
  2. [Eqs. (13), (50)] The eigenvalues '∓i' and '±i' assigned to products of Gamma matrices with square 1 are nonstandard for real Majorana representations; please clarify whether these are complex-convention eigenvalues and how the chirality projections in the heterotic theory are imposed in the same basis.
  3. [§3.2, last paragraph] The sentence 'When they are both turned on, they either preserving 1/2 of the supersymmetry together, or they break all the supersymmetry, depending on the signs...' is grammatically incomplete, and the sign-dependence claim would benefit from a one-line derivation showing how the relative sign of the string charge and pp-wave direction selects the surviving projection.
  4. [Appendix A] For a reader checking the form fields against the spin connections, the ordering convention in the displayed H(3) expressions (e.g., e2 ∧ e0 ∧ e1 versus e0 ∧ e1 ∧ e2) should be stated once, since the sign of a component H_{abc} depends on this ordering.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the new BPS pairs are checked by explicit Killing-spinor construction, and the cited duality map is prior independent input rather than a relabeled fit.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. The bosonic/heterotic duality map in Eqs. (3)-(5) is taken from [15] as an input, but it is a published consistency result with stated reduction ansatze and does not contain the new cosmic-string or instanton solutions; the present paper constructs those solutions independently from the D=4 theory in Section 3 and then lifts them. The central BPS statements are checked by explicit Killing spinors: Eqs. (36)-(37) for the bosonic string, and Eqs. (44)-(45) and (48)-(49) for the heterotic string. Those checks are direct substitutions into Eqs. (6)-(7), not restatements of the input. No quantity is fitted to a subset of data and then predicted. The paper's own Section 5 caution that the duality requires a linear dilaton and does not imply full equivalence is a limitation, not a circularity. The main verifiability concern is that the 10D Killing-spinor substitutions are not displayed and that the displayed D=4 projection (28) appears to differ in sign from the 10D projections (37)/(45); that is a reproducibility/correctness issue, which my circularity pass does not score.

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

The paper rests on the conjectural bosonic/heterotic duality from [15] and the pseudo-supersymmetry framework of [16-18]. The central calculations are direct but lengthy and not machine-checked.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Validity of the bosonic/heterotic duality map from [15]: the warped R-reduction of heterotic supergravity (4) and the ordinary KK reduction of the noncritical bosonic string (3) yield the same D=9 theory (5).
    Invoked in Section 2.1, eqs. (3)-(5) and used throughout Section 4 to generate the heterotic solutions. This is the load-bearing premise; if the duality is invalid, the 'heterotic' solutions are not actual solutions.
  • domain assumption The pseudo-supersymmetry Killing spinor equations (7) of the noncritical bosonic string are consistent and define pseudo-BPS states.
    Taken from [16-18], used in Sections 2.2 and 4.1 to assert that the bosonic solutions admit Killing spinors.
  • domain assumption The low-energy effective actions (1) and (2) faithfully describe the heterotic and noncritical bosonic strings at the relevant order, including the conformal anomaly term in (2).
    Standard tree-level effective actions; not independently derived in this paper.
  • domain assumption The S^3 x S^3 singlet truncation in Section 3.1 is consistent, including setting phi2=0 and truncating the SU(2)xSU(2) Yang-Mills fields.
    Needed to obtain the D=4 theory (23) from which the seed solutions are built; the paper states consistency but does not prove it.
  • standard math Integrability of the Killing spinor equations implies the bosonic equations of motion (a standard supergravity fact).
    Used implicitly to argue that the existence of Killing spinors makes the solutions BPS/on-shell.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of New BPS States from Bosonic/Heterotic Duality." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RDL7TXCW

@misc{pith2026250521623,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: New BPS States from Bosonic/Heterotic Duality},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RDL7TXCW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.21623}
}
read the original abstract

In this paper, we consider the recently proposed bosonic/heterotic duality that relates the heterotic superstrings to the noncritical bosonic string. Although the latter is nonsupersymmetric, it can be viewed as pseudo-supersymmetric in that the theory admits a consistent set of Killing spinor equations whose integrability conditions are satisfied by the equations of motion. We construct two classes of the dual pairs of BPS and pseudo-BPS solutions in the respective heterotic and bosonic strings and obtain their explicit Killing spinors. The existence of such dual pairs lends support to the proposed duality.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Instanton Moduli, Topology and the Bosonic/Heterotic String Origins

    hep-th 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    New BPS NS(-1)-branes in N=1, D=4 supergravity are supported by SU(2)xSU(2) instantons; the string-frame topology changes with instanton moduli while the 3-form charge stays fixed.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

28 extracted references · 7 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [15]

    Consistent warpedR×T1,1 reduction of heterotic supergravity,

    L. Ma and H. L¨ u, “Consistent warpedR×T1,1 reduction of heterotic supergravity,” JHEP 03, 203 (2025) doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2025)203 [arXiv:2501.04771 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2025

  2. [1]

    Supermembranes,

    J. Hughes, J. Liu and J. Polchinski, “Supermembranes,” Phys. Lett. B180, 370-374 (1986) doi:10.1016/0370-2693(86)91204-9

    doi:10.1016/0370-2693(86)91204-9 1986

  3. [2]

    Supermembranes and eleven-dimensional supergravity,

    E. Bergshoeff, E. Sezgin and P.K. Townsend, “Supermembranes and eleven-dimensional supergravity,” Phys. Lett. B189, 75-78 (1987) doi:10.1201/9781482268737-10

    doi:10.1201/9781482268737-10 1987

  4. [3]

    New connections between string theories,

    J. Dai, R.G. Leigh and J. Polchinski, “New connections between string theories,” Mod. Phys. Lett. A4, 2073-2083 (1989) doi:10.1142/S0217732389002331

    doi:10.1142/s0217732389002331 1989

  5. [4]

    Dirichlet branes and Ramond-Ramond charges,

    J. Polchinski, “Dirichlet branes and Ramond-Ramond charges,” Phys. Rev. Lett.75, 4724-4727 (1995) doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.75.4724 [arXiv:hep-th/9510017 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 1995

  6. [5]

    Super D-branes,

    E. Bergshoeff and P. K. Townsend, “Super D-branes,” Nucl. Phys. B490, 145-162 (1997) doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(97)00072-2 [arXiv:hep-th/9611173 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 1997

  7. [6]

    Multi-membrane solutions of D = 11 supergravity,

    M.J. Duff and K.S. Stelle, “Multi-membrane solutions of D = 11 supergravity,” Phys. Lett. B253, 113-118 (1991) doi:10.1201/9781482268737-12

    work page doi:10.1201/9781482268737-12 1991

  8. [7]

    Gueven, Phys

    R. Gueven, Phys. Lett. B276, 49-55 (1992) doi:10.1201/9781482268737-16

    doi:10.1201/9781482268737-16 1992

Show all 28 references
  1. [8]

    Black strings andp-branes,

    G.T. Horowitz and A. Strominger, “Black strings andp-branes,” Nucl. Phys. B360, 197-209 (1991) doi:10.1016/0550-3213(91)90440-9

    1991 doi

  2. [9]

    The selfdual type IIB superthreebrane,

    M.J. Duff and J.X. Lu, “The selfdual type IIB superthreebrane,” Phys. Lett. B273, 409-414 (1991) doi:10.1016/0370-2693(91)90290-7

    1991 doi

  3. [10]

    String solitons,

    M.J. Duff, R.R. Khuri and J.X. Lu, “String solitons,” Phys. Rept.259, 213-326 (1995) doi:10.1016/0370-1573(95)00002-X [arXiv:hep-th/9412184 [hep-th]]

    1995 arXiv

  4. [11]

    Multiple intersec- tions of D-branes and M-branes,

    E. Bergshoeff, M. de Roo, E. Eyras, B. Janssen and J.P. van der Schaar, “Multiple intersec- tions of D-branes and M-branes,” Nucl. Phys. B494, 119-143 (1997) doi:10.1016/S0550- 3213(97)00151-X [arXiv:hep-th/9612095 [hep-th]]

    1997 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Classification of p-branes, NUTs, waves and intersections,

    H. L¨ u, C.N. Pope, T.A. Tran and K.W. Xu, “Classification of p-branes, NUTs, waves and intersections,” Nucl. Phys. B511, 98-154 (1998) doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(97)00735-9 [arXiv:hep-th/9708055 [hep-th]]

    1998 arXiv

  6. [13]

    All supersymmetric solutions of minimal supergravity in five- dimensions,

    J.P. Gauntlett, J.B. Gutowski, C.M. Hull, S. Pakis and H.S. Reall, “All supersymmetric solutions of minimal supergravity in five- dimensions,” Class. Quant. Grav.20, 4587-4634 (2003) doi:10.1088/0264-9381/20/21/005 [arXiv:hep-th/0209114 [hep-th]]. 20

    2003 arXiv

  7. [14]

    All Supersymmetric solutions of minimal supergravity in six-dimensions,

    J.B. Gutowski, D. Martelli and H.S. Reall, “All Supersymmetric solutions of minimal supergravity in six-dimensions,” Class. Quant. Grav.20, 5049-5078 (2003) doi:10.1088/ 0264-9381/20/23/008 [arXiv:hep-th/0306235 [hep-th]]

    2003 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Pseudo-supersymmetry, consistent sphere reduc- tion and Killing spinors for the bosonic string,

    H. L¨ u, C.N. Pope and Z.L. Wang, “Pseudo-supersymmetry, consistent sphere reduc- tion and Killing spinors for the bosonic string,” Phys. Lett. B702, 442-447 (2011) doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2011.07.041 [arXiv:1105.6114 [hep-th]]

    2011 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Killing Spinors for the bosonic string and the Kaluza-Klein theory with scalar potentials,

    H. Liu, H. L¨ u and Z.L. Wang, “Killing Spinors for the bosonic string and the Kaluza-Klein theory with scalar potentials,” Eur. Phys. J. C72, 1853 (2012) doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052- 011-1853-5 [arXiv:1106.4566 [hep-th]]

    2012 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Pseudo-supergravity extension of the bosonic string,

    H. L¨ u, C.N. Pope and Z.L. Wang, “Pseudo-supergravity extension of the bosonic string,” Nucl. Phys. B854, 293-305 (2012) doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2011.09.002 [arXiv:1106.5794 [hep-th]]

    2012 arXiv

  11. [19]

    NewD= 6,N= (1,1) gauged supergravity with supersymmetric Minkowski4 ×S 2 vacuum,

    J. Kerimo and H. L¨ u, “NewD= 6,N= (1,1) gauged supergravity with supersymmetric Minkowski4 ×S 2 vacuum,” Phys. Lett. B576, 219-226 (2003) doi:10.1016/j.physletb. 2003.09.076 [arXiv:hep-th/0307222 [hep-th]]

    2003 arXiv

  12. [20]

    VariantN= (1,1) supergravity and Minkowski4 ×S 2 vacua,

    J. Kerimo, J.T. Liu, H. L¨ u and C.N. Pope, “VariantN= (1,1) supergravity and Minkowski4 ×S 2 vacua,” Class. Quant. Grav.21, 3287-3300 (2004) doi:10.1088/0264- 9381/21/13/011 [arXiv:hep-th/0401001 [hep-th]]

    2004 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Supergravities with Minkowski×sphere vacua,

    J. Kerimo, J.T. Liu, H. L¨ u and C.N. Pope, “Supergravities with Minkowski×sphere vacua,” JHEP10, 034 (2004) doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2004/10/034 [arXiv:hep-th/0402223 [hep-th]]

    2004 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Ten-dimensional Maxwell-Einstein supergravity, its currents, and the issue of its auxiliary fields,

    E. Bergshoeff, M. de Roo, B. de Wit and P. van Nieuwenhuizen, “Ten-dimensional Maxwell-Einstein supergravity, its currents, and the issue of its auxiliary fields,” Nucl. Phys. B195, 97-136 (1982) doi:10.1016/0550-3213(82)90050-5

    1982 doi

  15. [23]

    Unification of Yang-Mills theory and supergravity in ten-dimensions,

    G.F. Chapline and N.S. Manton, “Unification of Yang-Mills theory and supergravity in ten-dimensions,” Phys. Lett. B120, 105-109 (1983) doi:10.1016/0370-2693(83)90633-0

    1983 doi

  16. [24]

    Instanton cosmology and domain walls from M theory and string theory,

    M.S. Bremer, M.J. Duff, H. L¨ u, C.N. Pope and K.S. Stelle, “Instanton cosmology and domain walls from M theory and string theory,” Nucl. Phys. B543, 321-364 (1999) doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(98)00764-0 [arXiv:hep-th/9807051 [hep-th]]. 21

    1999 arXiv

  17. [25]

    ConsistentS 2 Pauli reduction of six-dimensional chiral gauged Einstein-Maxwell supergravity,

    G.W. Gibbons and C.N. Pope, “ConsistentS 2 Pauli reduction of six-dimensional chiral gauged Einstein-Maxwell supergravity,” Nucl. Phys. B697, 225-242 (2004) doi:10.1016/ j.nuclphysb.2004.07.016 [arXiv:hep-th/0307052 [hep-th]]

    2004 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Stringy cosmic strings and noncom- pact Calabi-Yau manifolds,

    B.R. Greene, A.D. Shapere, C. Vafa and S.T. Yau, “Stringy cosmic strings and noncom- pact Calabi-Yau manifolds,” Nucl. Phys. B337, 1-36 (1990) doi:10.1016/0550-3213(90) 90248-C

    1990 doi

  19. [27]

    D-instantons and asymptotic geometries,

    E. Bergshoeff and K. Behrndt, “D-instantons and asymptotic geometries,” Class. Quant. Grav.15, 1801-1813 (1998) doi:10.1088/0264-9381/15/7/002 [arXiv:hep-th/9803090 [hep- th]]

    1998 arXiv

  20. [28]

    A construction of Killing spinors onS n,

    H. L¨ u, C.N. Pope and J. Rahmfeld, “A construction of Killing spinors onS n,” J. Math. Phys.40, 4518-4526 (1999) doi:10.1063/1.532983 [arXiv:hep-th/9805151 [hep-th]]. 22

    1999 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 7, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.