Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 3 cited by

Universal Observables, SUSY RG-Flows and Holography

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 This paper claims that Wilson loops, flow central charges, and complexity factorize into a UV-CFT part times a flow-dependent part in three infinite families of supergravity backgrounds, and that the complexity puzzle is resolved by the…

desk verdict New background families and a real universal-factorization story, but the class III Wilson loop has a vanishing overall factor that needs a renormalization prescription, and the heaviest checks live in the unpublished companion paper. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.10062 v3 pith:TQV7JKML submitted 2025-06-11 hep-th

Dimitrios Chatzis , Madison Hammond , Georgios Itsios , Carlos Nunez , Dimitrios Zoakos This is my paper
classification hep-th
keywords holographicRGflowstwistedcirclecompactificationsupersymmetricWilsonloopsflowcentralchargecomplexitygaugedsupergravityupliftN=2SCFTsgappedQFTs
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper constructs and analyzes three infinite families of regular supergravity solutions that describe four-dimensional superconformal field theories compactified on a circle with a supersymmetry-preserving twist. The dual theories are three-dimensional gapped QFTs with four supercharges, obtained by deforming each CFT by vacuum expectation values of a dimension-three and a dimension-two operator. Across the three families, the paper computes Wilson loops, a flow central charge, and holographic complexity, and finds that each observable factorizes into a contribution fixed by the UV CFT times a factor that depends only on the flow. This universality is used to resolve an apparent puzzle in the complexity calculation, where the correct normalization turns out to be the warp factor coming from the five-dimensional gauged supergravity seed. A sympathetic reader would care because the result identifies common features of holographic RG flows that hold even for non-Lagrangian conformal theories.

What carries the argument

The machinery is a single five-dimensional gauged supergravity solution, marked [27] in the paper, that is lifted in two different ways: to Type IIB through [46] for class I and to eleven dimensions through [26] for class II, with a further reduction giving the Type IIA class III backgrounds. The twist is encoded in one-forms $A_1,A_2,A_3$ that mix the circle direction with the R-symmetry directions, while the functions $\lambda(r)$, $F(r)$, and $\zeta(r,\theta)$ encode the Coulomb-branch deformation and the gap parameter $\hat{\nu}=\varepsilon \ell^2/r_\star^2$. The factorization of observables is supported by a consistency-truncation result conjectured in [36] and proved in [37], which lets quantities computed in the lifted background split into UV data times a flow factor. For class II, the remaining data is a function $D_0(y,v_1,v_2)$ solving the Toda equation; for class III, it is a function $V(\sigma,\eta)$ solving a Laplace equation with boundary conditions set by the quiver rank function.

What would settle it

Run the supersymmetry variations and curvature-invariant checks for the class II and III backgrounds promised in [21]: if the variations fail to close or any invariant diverges for $\hat{\nu}>-1$, the universal factorization results computed on these backgrounds would have no basis. Alternatively, recompute the class I complexity with a different warp factor $A$; if the factorization persists for arbitrary $A$, the proposed resolution would not actually depend on the five-dimensional lift.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that three large families of supergravity backgrounds, one in Type IIB, one in eleven dimensions, and one in Type IIA, describe the same kind of twisted RG flow, and that the observables evaluated on any member of any family obey a universal factorization: each observable equals the UV-CFT value times a factor that depends only on the radial flow, not on which CFT or which supergravity dimension is used. For Wilson loops this means the quark–antiquark separation and energy are governed by the same dynamical functions in all three classes. For the flow central charge it means the same normalized function decreases monotonically from the UV central charge to zero at the end of the space. For complexity it means the volume integral, when normalized by the warp factor inherited from the five-dimensional gauged supergravity lift, is proportional to the UV central charge in every class, resolving the apparent mismatch found when using a naive ten- or eleven-dimensional warp factor. The paper also identifies a parameter window, $\hat{\nu}\to -1^+$, in which higher-curvature invariants become large even though the geometry is smooth, and argues that the Wilson-loop phase transition seen there is an artifact of the failing supergravity approximation.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the new class II and III backgrounds really are regular, supersymmetric solutions of eleven-dimensional and Type IIA supergravity, with the dual field-theory interpretation claimed; that verification is deferred to the companion paper [21] rather than performed here.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For every background in the three classes, the same universal Wilson-loop data describes confinement of external quarks, with only a global normalization changing between classes; the first-order transition in class I appears only in the parameter regime where the supergravity approximation is unreliable.
  • The flow central charge is a monotone function that equals the UV CFT central charge at large radius and vanishes in the IR, matching the expectation for a gapped theory, and its normalized form is identical across all three classes.
  • Holographic complexity, normalized with the five-dimensional gauged supergravity warp factor, is proportional to the UV central charge times the same radial integral in all classes, so universality is restored.
  • The parameter $\hat{\nu}$ controls the separation between the mass gap and the Coulomb-branch light states; for $\hat{\nu}\to -1^+$ the higher-curvature invariants grow and the physical interpretation of Wilson-loop results must be revised.
  • The class II and III constructions give holographic descriptions of deformed Gaiotto-type CFTs and $N=2$ linear quivers with flavours, with Page charges counting colour and flavour branes.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper leaves implicit that the same factorization should hold for other observables that only probe the field-theory directions, such as entanglement entropy or meson masses; this could be tested in the same backgrounds.
  • The resolution of the complexity puzzle suggests a general prescription: for any solution obtained by lifting a lower-dimensional gauged supergravity configuration, the complexity normalization should come from the lower-dimensional warp factor, not from a naive ten- or eleven-dimensional volume.
  • If the companion paper's checks of supersymmetry and regularity for classes II and III pass, the same twisted-compactification mechanism could be applied to other five-dimensional gauged supergravity solutions, producing new gapped three-dimensional QFTs.
  • The universality is expected to break once a probe explores internal directions; for instance, a Wilson loop moving toward a flavour group in class III should show screening rather than pure confinement.
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. This paper presents three infinite families of supergravity backgrounds—Type IIB (class I), eleven-dimensional (class II), and Type IIA (class III)—claimed to be dual to 4d SCFTs compactified on a circle with a supersymmetry-preserving twist, flowing to 3d gapped N=2 QFTs. The backgrounds generalize known constructions by including a deformation parameter that avoids the Coulomb-branch singularity. The authors compute three observables: rectangular Wilson loops, a holographic flow central charge, and complexity under the volume proposal. They argue that all three factorize into a UV-CFT contribution times a universal flow-dependent factor, and they propose a resolution of an apparent non-universality in complexity by choosing the normalization warp factor from the five-dimensional gauged-supergravity lift. Class I is worked out in detail; classes II and III are presented with the statement that their equations of motion were checked, while supersymmetry, boundary expansions, and stability are deferred to the companion paper [21].

Significance. If the claims hold, the paper would provide a broad class of top-down holographic RG flows with regular IR endpoints and a striking universality of Wilson loops, central charges, and complexity across Type IIB, M-theory, and Type IIA. The explicit Wilson-loop integrals and the connection to the Gauntlett–Varela consistent-truncation framework are valuable, and the paper is honest about the regimes where higher-curvature corrections invalidate the supergravity approximation. The authors also state that the equations of motion were checked with Mathematica, which is a useful verification step, although no checks are shown for the supersymmetry of the new families. The significance is nevertheless conditional: the two new background families and the complexity normalization argument rest on deferred or convention-dependent input.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3.2.2, Eq. (3.17)] The class III Wilson-loop calculation is not regulated. In the sigma-to-zero limit used for the probe, Eqs. (3.14)-(3.17) give F^2 and G^2 with a common factor 32 R(eta_star)/M-hat(epsilon), where M-hat(epsilon) ~ log(1/epsilon) diverges as epsilon goes to zero. Since the Nambu-Goto energy in Eq. (3.2) is linear in both F(r0)L_QQ and the two integrals, every term in E_QQ carries the vanishing prefactor M-hat(epsilon)^{-1/2}, while the turning point and L_QQ do not. The resulting quark-antiquark energy therefore tends to zero in the regulated limit, and the confining potential claimed for class III in Section 4 is not established. The 'global factor' remark in the text cannot dispose of this: a field-dependent vanishing prefactor changes the observable, not merely its normalization. A finite, physically motivated renormalization of the class III Wilson loop, or a separate treatment of the prefactor in F and G, is needed before the universality claim for Wilson loops can include class III.
  2. [Sections 2.2-2.4 and 3.1] The construction and physical interpretation of the new class II and III backgrounds are deferred to the unpublished companion [21]. Section 2.4 states that 'the presence of SUSY and other details are discussed in the companion work [21]', and Section 3.1 states that the boundary expansions justifying the dimension-two VEV are provided in [21]. These are load-bearing: without explicit checks of supersymmetry, regularity away from the D6-brane sources, and the boundary asymptotics identifying the dual operators, the claim that these backgrounds are the claimed twisted compactifications of Gaiotto and linear-quiver CFTs is unverified. The equations of motion are said to have been checked, but that alone does not establish the holographic dictionary. The paper should either include these checks or be revised to present the present results as contingent on a forthcoming companion.
  3. [Section 3.4, Eqs. (3.30)-(3.37)] The resolution of the complexity puzzle is a convention rather than an independent prediction. After observing that the naive complexity integrals give integral of r^2 dr for class I and integral of r^2 lambda(r) dr for classes II and III, the paper chooses the normalization factor A to be the warp factor of the five-dimensional gauged-supergravity lift, rewriting the class I metric as in Eq. (3.36) and adding the factor f-tilde to A_III in Eq. (3.32). With this choice the factorization is imposed by definition, and the statement that the complexity is proportional to the UV central charge follows from the chosen normalization. The abstract's claim that a puzzle is 'resolved' therefore overstates what is shown. The manuscript needs a principled argument for why this A is the correct one, for example from the volume-proposal derivation, from consistent truncation, or from an independent complexity proposal, or it should be presented explicitly as a consistency check of the normalization.
minor comments (4)
  1. [References] Reference [21] is listed as 'To appear' with no arXiv number; it should be updated or the dependence on it minimized.
  2. [Section 2.3 and Abstract] The abstract describes the backgrounds as 'regular', but class III has localized singularities at sigma=0 where D6 branes sit; please clarify that regularity means no naked curvature singularities away from the brane sources.
  3. [Section 3.2, 'A word of caution'] The stability of the non-supersymmetric Wilson-loop embeddings is not analyzed here; the paper relies on the energy-based criterion (3.7) from Refs. [51,52], while a fluctuation analysis is postponed to [21]. If the companion is not yet available, this assumption should be flagged more prominently.
  4. [Section 2.1, Eqs. (2.3), (2.8), (2.13)] The units of the parameters should be stated consistently: q1 and q2 are declared to have inverse-length units and Q is redefined as Q = q-hat/ell^2, but Q then appears in Eq. (2.13) alongside L and ell without a clear statement of its dimensions.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

Complexity 'universality' is imposed by choosing the normalization A to be the gauged-supergravity lift factor; the new class II/III backgrounds are deferred to the authors' own companion paper.

  1. self definitional [Section 3.4, eqs. (3.30)-(3.37), 'Complexity: a puzzle and its solution']
    "Below, we encounter a puzzling result: the complexity of backgrounds in classes II and III is different from that in backgrounds of class I. ... The complexity is defined in such a way that the factor A by which we quotient the determinant of the nine-manifold is the factor arising when we lift this gauged supergravity solution to 10 or 11 dimensions."

    The puzzle is resolved by replacing the normalization A_I = ζ/L^2 (eq. 3.32) with A = Δ^{1/2} (eqs. 3.36-3.37), i.e. the warp factor inherited from the common five-dimensional gauged-supergravity solution. Because all three classes are lifts of that same 5d solution, this choice removes the difference between ∫r^2 dr and ∫r^2 λ(r) dr by construction. The sentence 'defined in such a way' is the tell: CV is set up so that the gauge-supergravity lift factor cancels the flow dependence, making the claimed universal factorization an input rather than a computed prediction. With the original A_I from eq. (3.32), complexity would not factorize.

  2. self citation load bearing [Section 2 (intro) and Section 2.4, 'How are these backgrounds constructed?']
    "The construction of each of these backgrounds, the presence of SUSY and other details are discussed in the companion work [21]. We give a quick summary of the construction in Section 2.4."

    The class II and III backgrounds are presented as new solutions, and all subsequent observables are evaluated on them. Their supersymmetry, regularity, Page-charge interpretation and field-theory dual are the load-bearing premises for the claimed universal behavior, but they are not proved in this paper: the text defers to [21], a companion by the same five authors listed as 'To appear'. The central derivation therefore rests on an unverified self-citation rather than on an independent, checkable argument in the present work.

full rationale

The two genuinely computed observables—the class I/II Wilson-loop dynamics and the flow central charge—are not circular: the paper evaluates the Nambu-Goto integrals (3.5), (3.13), (3.21) and the c-flow formula (3.24) on explicit backgrounds, and the coincidences follow from the shared five-dimensional metric, not from fitting. The circularity is concentrated in the complexity section. Equations (3.32) define A_I, A_II, A_III from the 10d/11d metrics and give different radial integrals; the 'puzzle' is then erased by replacing A_I with the gauged-supergravity lift factor Δ^{1/2} and declaring that complexity is 'defined in such a way' to use that factor. This is self-definitional: the universal CV factorization is the input, not the output. Separately, the new class II/III backgrounds—their SUSY, regularity, and QFT interpretation—are not proven here but relegated to companion [21] by the same authors, making a load-bearing premise depend on an unavailable self-citation. I do not count the class III Wilson-loop regulator M̂(ε)^{-1/2} → 0 as circularity; it is a non-circular calculational problem (both F and G vanish in eq. (3.17), so the regulated energy tends to zero) that affects correctness rather than equivalence-by-construction. Overall: partial circularity, with the central claim still containing independent content in the Wilson-loop and c-flow computations.

Assumptions & free parameters 6 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on the holographic dictionary, on established uplift theorems, on the five-dimensional solution of [27], and on the assumed validity of the complexity prescription. The main unverified inputs are the contents of the companion paper [21] (which is cited for the construction and SUSY checks of the new classes) and the normalization choice for complexity. No new entities are introduced.

free parameters (6)
  • ℓ
    Length-scale parameter entering the background functions ζ, λ and F in eq. (2.3); it sets the scale of the dimension-two Coulomb-branch deformation and is not fitted to data.
  • Q (q1 = q2)
    Charge parameter controlling the R-symmetry twist and the VEV of the dimension-three operator; the paper sets q1 = q2 = Q to preserve four supercharges (Section 2.1). It is a parameter of the family, not a fitted constant.
  • L
    AdS radius fixing the overall scale; often set to unity in plots and not fitted to data.
  • ε
    Sign ε = ±1 selecting the two non-diffeomorphic branches of the solution from eq. (2.3); its choice is part of the construction.
  • ν̂ = εℓ²/r⋆²
    Dimensionless combination derived from ℓ, ε, Q and L via the largest root r⋆ of F (eqs. (2.12), (2.13)). It controls the gap and the size of higher-curvature invariants, and all observable plots are labeled by it; it is not fitted to data.
  • Rank function R(η) for class III
    The piecewise-linear rank function in eq. (2.35) encodes the gauge and flavour data of the linear quiver; it sets the boundary condition for the Laplace equation (2.37) and determines the class III solution. It is chosen by the quiver, not fitted.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption AdS/CFT correspondence and the validity of the supergravity approximation for the constructed backgrounds.
    The entire holographic dictionary used in Sections 3.2 to 3.4 presumes this correspondence and that the backgrounds are reliable gravitational duals; the paper identifies regimes where higher-curvature corrections become relevant, limiting this validity (Section 2.1.1).
  • standard math Consistent truncation and uplift theorems from Gauntlett-Varela [36], proven in [37], and from Cvetic et al. [46] and Gauntlett-Varela [26].
    Section 2.4 uses these results to lift a five-dimensional gauged supergravity solution to Type IIB and 11d/IIA backgrounds, asserting that the lifts are solutions of the full higher-dimensional equations.
  • domain assumption The five-dimensional gauged supergravity solution of Anabalón-Nastase-Oyarzo [27] is a valid supersymmetric solution.
    Class I is taken from [27] and classes II and III are constructed as lifts of the same five-dimensional solution (Section 2.4).
  • domain assumption Identification of the dual QFT deformations: a dimension-two operator VEV and a dimension-three current VEV, per [35] and [49].
    Section 3.1 states these identifications, but the required boundary expansions are deferred to the companion paper [21], so the identification is assumed on the basis of earlier literature and holographic renormalisation.
  • domain assumption The complexity-as-volume prescription of Fatemiabhari and Nunez [30] is the correct holographic definition of complexity.
    Section 3.4 adopts this conjectural prescription, and the resolution of the complexity puzzle depends on choosing the normalization factor A according to the gauged-supergravity lift; no independent derivation is provided.
  • domain assumption The universal Wilson loop embeddings solve the equations of motion and their stability is not required for the qualitative results.
    The paper states the embeddings were checked to satisfy the equations of motion (Section 3.2.1) but explicitly postpones the stability analysis to [21]; the interpretation of the 'swallow-tail' as spurious relies on this stability assumption.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Universal Observables, SUSY RG-Flows and Holography." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/TQV7JKML

@misc{pith2026250610062,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Universal Observables, SUSY RG-Flows and Holography},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/TQV7JKML}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.10062}
}
read the original abstract

We construct and analyse infinite classes of regular supergravity backgrounds dual to four-dimensional superconformal field theories (SCFTs) compactified on a circle with a supersymmetry-preserving twist. These flows lead to three-dimensional gapped QFTs preserving four supercharges. The solutions arise in Type IIB, Type IIA, and eleven-dimensional supergravity, and generalise known constructions by incorporating deformations that avoid typical singularities associated with the holographic description of the Coulomb branch of the CFT. We examine several observables: Wilson loops, holographic central charges, and complexity. We show they exhibit a universal factorisation, with each observable decomposing into a UV-CFT contribution times a flow-dependent factor. We also explore the parameter regimes where higher-curvature corrections become relevant, affecting the physical interpretation of certain observables. Our findings provide new insights into universal features of holographic RG flows and resolve a puzzle related to complexity in these systems.

Discussion (0). Sign in 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

  1. Krylov Complexity, Confinement and Universality

    hep-th 2026-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Holographic calculations show the proper-momentum proxy for Krylov complexity oscillates in every confining geometry with a smooth infrared cap, with frequency set by the confinement scale.

  2. Light dilaton from top-down holographic confinement with magnetic fluxes

    hep-th 2026-02 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    In a two-flux family of top-down holographic confining theories, the lightest scalar is an approximate dilaton with mass about one tenth of the lightest spin-2 confinement scale, over a wide, untuned region of paramet...

  3. 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

66 extracted references · 7 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [21]

    To appear,

    D. Chatzis, M. Hammond, G. Itsios, C. Nunez, and D. Zoakos, “To appear,”

    work page

  2. [1]

    The Large N limit of superconformal field theories and supergravity,

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

    arXiv 1998

  3. [2]

    Gauge theory correlators from noncritical string theory,

    S. S. Gubser, I. R. Klebanov, and A. M. Polyakov, “Gauge theory correlators from noncritical string theory,” Phys. Lett. B 428 (1998) 105–114, arXiv:hep-th/9802109

    arXiv 1998

  4. [3]

    Anti-de Sitter space and holography,

    E. Witten, “Anti-de Sitter space and holography,” Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2 (1998) 253–291, arXiv:hep-th/9802150

    arXiv 1998

  5. [4]

    Anti-de Sitter space, thermal phase transition, and confinement in gauge theories,

    E. Witten, “Anti-de Sitter space, thermal phase transition, and confinement in gauge theories,” Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2 (1998) 505–532, arXiv:hep-th/9803131

    arXiv 1998

  6. [5]

    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, arXiv:hep-th/0008001

    arXiv 2001

  7. [6]

    An M theory flop as a large N duality,

    M. Atiyah, J. M. Maldacena, and C. Vafa, “An M theory flop as a large N duality,” J. Math. Phys. 42 (2001) 3209–3220, arXiv:hep-th/0011256

    arXiv 2001

  8. [7]

    D6-branes and M theory geometrical transitions from gauged supergravity,

    J. D. Edelstein and C. Nunez, “D6-branes and M theory geometrical transitions from gauged supergravity,” JHEP 04 (2001) 028, arXiv:hep-th/0103167

    arXiv 2001

Show all 66 references
  1. [8]

    Superconformal field theory on three-branes at a Calabi-Yau singularity,

    I. R. Klebanov and E. Witten, “Superconformal field theory on three-branes at a Calabi-Yau singularity,” Nucl. Phys. B 536 (1998) 199–218, arXiv:hep-th/9807080

    1998 arXiv

  2. [9]

    Gravity duals of supersymmetric SU(N) x SU(N+M) gauge theories,

    I. R. Klebanov and A. A. Tseytlin, “Gravity duals of supersymmetric SU(N) x SU(N+M) gauge theories,” Nucl. Phys. B 578 (2000) 123–138, arXiv:hep-th/0002159

    2000 arXiv

  3. [10]

    Supergravity and a confining gauge theory: Duality cascades and chi SB resolution of naked singularities,

    I. R. Klebanov and M. J. Strassler, “Supergravity and a confining gauge theory: Duality cascades and chi SB resolution of naked singularities,” JHEP 08 (2000) 052, arXiv:hep-th/0007191

    2000 arXiv

  4. [11]

    Symmetry breaking and axionic strings in the warped deformed conifold,

    S. S. Gubser, C. P. Herzog, and I. R. Klebanov, “Symmetry breaking and axionic strings in the warped deformed conifold,” JHEP 09 (2004) 036, arXiv:hep-th/0405282

    2004 arXiv

  5. [12]

    The Unwarped, resolved, deformed conifold: Fivebranes and the baryonic branch of the Klebanov-Strassler theory,

    J. Maldacena and D. Martelli, “The Unwarped, resolved, deformed conifold: Fivebranes and the baryonic branch of the Klebanov-Strassler theory,” JHEP 01 (2010) 104, arXiv:0906.0591 [hep-th]

    2010 arXiv

  6. [13]

    The warped, resolved, deformed conifold gets flavoured,

    J. Gaillard, D. Martelli, C. Nunez, and I. Papadimitriou, “The warped, resolved, deformed conifold gets flavoured,” Nucl. Phys. B 843 (2011) 1–45, arXiv:1004.4638 [hep-th]

    2011 arXiv

  7. [14]

    Heating up the Baryonic Branch with U-duality: A Unified picture of conifold black holes,

    E. Caceres, C. Nunez, and L. A. Pando-Zayas, “Heating up the Baryonic Branch with U-duality: A Unified picture of conifold black holes,” JHEP 03 (2011) 054, arXiv:1101.4123 [hep-th]

    2011 arXiv

  8. [15]

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

    R. Casero, C. N´ u˜ nez, and A. Paredes, “Towards the string dual of N=1 SQCD-like theories,” Phys. Rev. D 73 (2006) 086005, arXiv:hep-th/0602027. – 32 –

    2006 arXiv

  9. [16]

    Unquenched Flavor in the Gauge/Gravity Correspondence,

    C. N´ u˜ nez, A. Paredes, and A. V. Ramallo, “Unquenched Flavor in the Gauge/Gravity Correspondence,” Adv. High Energy Phys. 2010 (2010) 196714, arXiv:1002.1088 [hep-th]

    2010 arXiv

  10. [17]

    Unquenched flavors in the Klebanov-Witten model,

    F. Benini, F. Canoura, S. Cremonesi, C. N´ u˜ nez, and A. V. Ramallo, “Unquenched flavors in the Klebanov-Witten model,” JHEP 02 (2007) 090, arXiv:hep-th/0612118

    2007 arXiv

  11. [18]

    Backreacting flavors in the Klebanov-Strassler background,

    F. Benini, F. Canoura, S. Cremonesi, C. Nunez, and A. V. Ramallo, “Backreacting flavors in the Klebanov-Strassler background,” JHEP 09 (2007) 109, arXiv:0706.1238 [hep-th]

    2007 arXiv

  12. [19]

    The Klebanov-Strassler model with massive dynamical flavors,

    F. Bigazzi, A. L. Cotrone, A. Paredes, and A. V. Ramallo, “The Klebanov-Strassler model with massive dynamical flavors,” JHEP 03 (2009) 153, arXiv:0812.3399 [hep-th]

    2009 arXiv

  13. [20]

    Holographic QCD with Dynamical Flavors,

    F. Bigazzi and A. L. Cotrone, “Holographic QCD with Dynamical Flavors,” JHEP 01 (2015) 104, arXiv:1410.2443 [hep-th]

    2015 arXiv

  14. [22]

    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, arXiv:2405.03739 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  15. [23]

    EFT and the SUSY Index on the 2nd Sheet,

    D. Cassani and Z. Komargodski, “EFT and the SUSY Index on the 2nd Sheet,” SciPost Phys. 11 (2021) 004, arXiv:2104.01464 [hep-th]

    2021 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Supersymmetric solitons and a degeneracy of solutions in AdS/CFT,

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

    2021 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Supersymmetric solitons in gauged N = 8 supergravity,

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

    2023 arXiv

  18. [26]

    D=5 SU(2) x U(1) Gauged Supergravity from D=11 Supergravity,

    J. P. Gauntlett and O. Varela, “D=5 SU(2) x U(1) Gauged Supergravity from D=11 Supergravity,” JHEP 02 (2008) 083, arXiv:0712.3560 [hep-th]

    2008 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Supersymmetric AdS solitons and the interconnection of different vacua of N = 4 Super Yang-Mills,

    A. Anabal´ on, H. Nastase, and M. Oyarzo, “Supersymmetric AdS solitons and the interconnection of different vacua of N = 4 Super Yang-Mills,” JHEP 05 (2024) 217, arXiv:2402.18482 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Confinement in (1 + 1) dimensions: a holographic perspective from I-branes,

    C. Nunez, M. Oyarzo, and R. Stuardo, “Confinement in (1 + 1) dimensions: a holographic perspective from I-branes,” JHEP 09 (2023) 201, arXiv:2307.04783 [hep-th]

    2023 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Supersymmetric smooth distributions of M2-branes as AdS solitons,

    A. Anabal´ on, D. Astefanesei, A. Gallerati, and J. Oliva, “Supersymmetric smooth distributions of M2-branes as AdS solitons,” JHEP 05 (2024) 077, arXiv:2402.00880 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  22. [30]

    From conformal to confining field theories using holography,

    A. Fatemiabhari and C. Nunez, “From conformal to confining field theories using holography,” JHEP 03 (2024) 160, arXiv:2401.04158 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Confinement and D5-branes,

    C. Nunez, M. Oyarzo, and R. Stuardo, “Confinement and D5-branes,” JHEP 03 (2024) 080, arXiv:2311.17998 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Universal IR holography, scalar fluctuations, and glueball spectra,

    A. Anabal´ on and H. Nastase, “Universal IR holography, scalar fluctuations, and glueball spectra,” Phys. Rev. D 109 no. 6, (2024) 066011, arXiv:2310.07823 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Circle compactifications of Minkowski D solutions, flux vacua and solitonic branes,

    N. T. Macpherson, P. Merrikin, and R. Stuardo, “Circle compactifications of Minkowski D solutions, flux vacua and solitonic branes,” arXiv:2412.15102 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  26. [34]

    Renormalization group flows from holography supersymmetry and a c theorem,

    D. Z. Freedman, S. S. Gubser, K. Pilch, and N. P. Warner, “Renormalization group flows from holography supersymmetry and a c theorem,” Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 3 (1999) 363–417, arXiv:hep-th/9904017. – 33 –

    1999 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Continuous distributions of D3-branes and gauged supergravity,

    D. Z. Freedman, S. S. Gubser, K. Pilch, and N. P. Warner, “Continuous distributions of D3-branes and gauged supergravity,” JHEP 07 (2000) 038, arXiv:hep-th/9906194

    2000 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Consistent Kaluza-Klein reductions for general supersymmetric AdS solutions,

    J. P. Gauntlett and O. Varela, “Consistent Kaluza-Klein reductions for general supersymmetric AdS solutions,” Phys. Rev. D 76 (2007) 126007, arXiv:0707.2315 [hep-th]

    2007 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Systematics of consistent truncations from generalised geometry,

    D. Cassani, G. Josse, M. Petrini, and D. Waldram, “Systematics of consistent truncations from generalised geometry,” JHEP 11 (2019) 017, arXiv:1907.06730 [hep-th]

    2019 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Wilson loops from multicenter and rotating branes, mass gaps and phase structure in gauge theories,

    A. Brandhuber and K. Sfetsos, “Wilson loops from multicenter and rotating branes, mass gaps and phase structure in gauge theories,” Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 3 (1999) 851–887, arXiv:hep-th/9906201

    1999 arXiv

  31. [39]

    The Gravity duals of N=2 superconformal field theories,

    D. Gaiotto and J. Maldacena, “The Gravity duals of N=2 superconformal field theories,” JHEP 10 (2012) 189, arXiv:0904.4466 [hep-th]

    2012 arXiv

  32. [40]

    N=2 dualities,

    D. Gaiotto, “N=2 dualities,” JHEP 08 (2012) 034, arXiv:0904.2715 [hep-th]

    2012 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Marginally deformed AdS 5/CFT4 and spindle-like orbifolds,

    N. T. Macpherson, P. Merrikin, and C. Nunez, “Marginally deformed AdS 5/CFT4 and spindle-like orbifolds,” JHEP 07 (2024) 042, arXiv:2403.02380 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Field theory aspects of non-Abelian T-duality andN = 2 linear quivers,

    Y. Lozano and C. N´ u˜ nez, “Field theory aspects of non-Abelian T-duality andN = 2 linear quivers,” JHEP 05 (2016) 107, arXiv:1603.04440 [hep-th]

    2016 arXiv

  35. [43]

    4d N=2 superconformal linear quivers with type IIA duals,

    O. Aharony, L. Berdichevsky, and M. Berkooz, “4d N=2 superconformal linear quivers with type IIA duals,” JHEP 08 (2012) 131, arXiv:1206.5916 [hep-th]

    2012 arXiv

  36. [44]

    On Type IIA geometries dual to N = 2 SCFTs,

    R. A. Reid-Edwards and B. Stefanski, jr., “On Type IIA geometries dual to N = 2 SCFTs,” Nucl. Phys. B 849 (2011) 549–572, arXiv:1011.0216 [hep-th]

    2011 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Holographic aspects of four dimensional N = 2 SCFTs and their marginal deformations,

    C. N´ u˜ nez, D. Roychowdhury, S. Speziali, and S. Zacar ´ ıas, “Holographic aspects of four dimensional N = 2 SCFTs and their marginal deformations,” Nucl. Phys. B 943 (2019) 114617, arXiv:1901.02888 [hep-th]

    2019 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Embedding AdS black holes in ten-dimensions and eleven-dimensions,

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

    1999 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Conformal to confining SQFTs from holography,

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

    2024 arXiv

  40. [48]

    SCFT deformations via uplifted solitons,

    D. Chatzis, A. Fatemiabhari, C. Nunez, and P. Weck, “SCFT deformations via uplifted solitons,” Nucl. Phys. B 1006 (2024) 116659, arXiv:2406.01685 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Holography for confined and deformed theories: TsT-generated solutions in type IIB supergravity,

    F. Castellani and C. Nunez, “Holography for confined and deformed theories: TsT-generated solutions in type IIB supergravity,” JHEP 12 (2024) 155, arXiv:2410.00094 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Confinement and screening via holographic Wilson loops,

    M. Giliberti, A. Fatemiabhari, and C. Nunez, “Confinement and screening via holographic Wilson loops,” JHEP 11 (2024) 068, arXiv:2409.04539 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Stability of strings dual to flux tubes between static quarks in N = 4 SYM,

    S. D. Avramis, K. Sfetsos, and K. Siampos, “Stability of strings dual to flux tubes between static quarks in N = 4 SYM,” Nucl. Phys. B 769 (2007) 44–78, arXiv:hep-th/0612139

    2007 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Stability of Wilson loops and other observables in various type IIB backgrounds,

    D. Chatzis, “Stability of Wilson loops and other observables in various type IIB backgrounds,” Nucl. Phys. B 1004 (2024) 116560, arXiv:2401.13637 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  45. [53]

    What does the string / gauge correspondence teach us about Wilson loops?,

    J. Sonnenschein, “What does the string / gauge correspondence teach us about Wilson loops?,” in – 34 – Advanced School on Supersymmetry in the Theories of Fields, Strings and Branes, pp. 219–269. 7, 1999. arXiv:hep-th/0003032

    1999 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Wilson Loops in string duals of Walking and Flavored Systems,

    C. Nunez, M. Piai, and A. Rago, “Wilson Loops in string duals of Walking and Flavored Systems,” Phys. Rev. D 81 (2010) 086001, arXiv:0909.0748 [hep-th]

    2010 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Confinement, Phase Transitions and non-Locality in the Entanglement Entropy,

    U. Kol, C. N´ u˜ nez, D. Schofield, J. Sonnenschein, and M. Warschawski, “Confinement, Phase Transitions and non-Locality in the Entanglement Entropy,” JHEP 06 (2014) 005, arXiv:1403.2721 [hep-th]

    2014 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Type IIB supergravity solutions with AdS 5 from Abelian and non-Abelian T dualities,

    N. T. Macpherson, C. N´ u˜ nez, L. A. Pando Zayas, V. G. J. Rodgers, and C. A. Whiting, “Type IIB supergravity solutions with AdS 5 from Abelian and non-Abelian T dualities,” JHEP 02 (2015) 040, arXiv:1410.2650 [hep-th]

    2015 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Compactifications of the Klebanov-Witten CFT and new AdS 3 backgrounds,

    Y. Bea, J. D. Edelstein, G. Itsios, K. S. Kooner, C. Nunez, D. Schofield, and J. A. Sierra-Garcia, “Compactifications of the Klebanov-Witten CFT and new AdS 3 backgrounds,” JHEP 05 (2015) 062, arXiv:1503.07527 [hep-th]

    2015 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Compactification of 6d N=(1,0) quivers, 4d SCFTs and their holographic dual Massive IIA backgrounds,

    P. Merrikin, C. N´ u˜ nez, and R. Stuardo, “Compactification of 6d N=(1,0) quivers, 4d SCFTs and their holographic dual Massive IIA backgrounds,” Nucl. Phys. B 996 (2023) 116356, arXiv:2210.02458 [hep-th]

    2023 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Linear Quivers at Large-N,

    C. Nunez, L. Santilli, and K. Zarembo, “Linear Quivers at Large-N,” Commun. Math. Phys. 406 no. 1, (2025) 6, arXiv:2311.00024 [hep-th]

    2025 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Bubbling AdS space and 1/2 BPS geometries,

    H. Lin, O. Lunin, and J. M. Maldacena, “Bubbling AdS space and 1/2 BPS geometries,” JHEP 10 (2004) 025, arXiv:hep-th/0409174

    2004 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Light dilaton near critical points in top-down holography,

    D. Elander, A. F. Faedo, M. Piai, R. Rodgers, and J. G. Subils, “Light dilaton near critical points in top-down holography,” arXiv:2502.19226 [hep-th]

  54. [62]

    On the stability of holographic confinement with magnetic fluxes,

    A. Fatemiabhari, C. Nunez, M. Piai, and J. Rucinski, “On the stability of holographic confinement with magnetic fluxes,” arXiv:2411.16854 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  55. [63]

    On entanglement c-functions in confining gauge field theories,

    N. Jokela, J. Kastikainen, C. Nunez, J. M. Pen ´ ın, H. Ruotsalainen, and J. G. Subils, “On entanglement c-functions in confining gauge field theories,” arXiv:2505.14397 [hep-th]

  56. [64]

    Timelike entanglement entropy and phase transitions in non-conformal theories,

    M. Afrasiar, J. K. Basak, and D. Giataganas, “Timelike entanglement entropy and phase transitions in non-conformal theories,” JHEP 07 (2024) 243, arXiv:2404.01393 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Time-like Entanglement Entropy: a top-down approach,

    C. Nunez and D. Roychowdhury, “Time-like Entanglement Entropy: a top-down approach,” arXiv:2505.20388 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  58. [66]

    Hagedorn temperature in holography: world-sheet and effective approaches,

    F. Bigazzi, T. Canneti, F. Castellani, A. L. Cotrone, and W. M¨ uck, “Hagedorn temperature in holography: world-sheet and effective approaches,” JHEP 09 (2024) 193, arXiv:2407.00375 [hep-th]. – 35 –

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

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