Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 95 references

($0,6$) AdS$_3$/CFT$_2$ and surface defects

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper proposes a brane-box quiver as the dual field theory for new N=(0,6) AdS3 solutions in massive IIA supergravity.

desk verdict A proceedings that honestly reviews the authors' own supergravity backgrounds and adds a genuinely new but unproven field-theory proposal: the brane-box quiver claimed to be the N=(0,6) dual rests on an assumed IR enhancement and unchecked q_l terms. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.20864 v1 pith:UC63PID2 submitted 2025-04-29 hep-th

Yolanda Lozano , Anayeli Ramirez This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-th
keywords AdS3/CFT2N=(06)supersymmetrymassivetypeIIAsupergravityosp(6|2)superconformalalgebrabraneboxmodelstwo-dimensionalquivergaugetheorysurfacedefectsABJM
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 proposes a concrete two-dimensional field theory dual to a new class of $\mathrm{AdS}_3$ solutions of massive type IIA supergravity that preserve $\mathcal{N}=(0,6)$ supersymmetry and realize the $\mathfrak{osp}(6|2)$ superconformal algebra. The solutions are specified by a single cubic function $h(r)$ that controls warping, fluxes, and the SO(6)-symmetric $\mathbb{CP}^3$ internal space. The authors construct a type IIB brane box with D3-, NS5-, $(1,k)5'$-, D7- and fractional D5-branes, read off a two-dimensional quiver, and match its anomaly structure and central charge to the holographic data. At the brane-intersection level the quiver has only $\mathcal{N}=(0,3)$ supersymmetry, and the paper argues it is expected to enhance to $\mathcal{N}=(0,6)$ in the infrared. The configuration is interpreted as backreacted half-BPS surface defects inside the ABJ(M) theory, offering a concrete setting for $\mathcal{N}=(0,6)$ holography beyond the ABJM vacuum.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the single cubic function $h(r)$, with $h'''=-2\pi F_0$ in regular regions, from which the metric, dilaton, $B$-field and all RR fluxes are obtained through equations (14)-(15); its coefficients integrate to Page charges $Q_2,Q_4,Q_6,Q_8$ via the corrected dictionary (37). On the field-theory side, the central mechanism is the type IIB brane box: D3-branes stretched along $(r,\psi)$ between NS5- and NS5$'$-branes, rotated $(1,k)5'$ bound states, D7 flavour branes and fractional D5-branes. The brane-creation rules (38)-(42) determine the quiver of Figure 5, the anomaly condition (36), the Seiberg-like duality shifts (43), and the holographic central-charge formula (45).

What would settle it

Run c-extremization on the quiver of Figure 5 including all massive $(0,3)$ modes: if the resulting right-moving central charge disagrees with the holographic formula (45), or if no operator content drives the enhancement to $(0,6)$, the proposed duality is refuted. A sharper diagnostic is the anomaly equation: condition (36) closes only for $\Delta k_l=0$, so identifying the extra massive fermions that close it when $\Delta k_l\neq 0$ would confirm or disprove the construction.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the $\mathfrak{osp}(6|2)$ $\mathrm{AdS}_3$ backgrounds constructed in [69] admit a dual description as the infrared limit of a two-dimensional quiver engineered from the brane box of Figure 2 and Table 2. In the massless limit the cubic profile collapses to $h(r)=Q_2-Q_4 r+\frac{1}{2}Q_6 r^2$, recovering the ABJM/ABJ $\mathrm{AdS}_4\times\mathbb{CP}^3$ vacuum and its Seiberg dualities; the massive cubic term $-\frac{1}{6}Q_8 r^3$ introduces D8/D7 charge, brane creation, and a nontrivial quiver with ranks $N_l$, $N_l+M_l$ and flavours $k_l$, $\Delta q_l$. The paper's claim is that this quiver, after the rotation of the $(1,k)5'$ bound states is taken into account, is anomaly-free and flows to an $\mathcal{N}=(0,6)$ SCFT, and that the brane box therefore describes a backreacted surface defect in ABJ(M). The holographic central charge (45), including shifted-charge corrections, is presented as a concrete prediction for that SCFT.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing assumption is that the two-dimensional quiver, which starts with only three supercharges, flows in the infrared to a conformal fixed point with six supercharges; the paper expects this enhancement but does not prove it.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the proposed duality is correct, the quiver of Figure 5 is an explicit two-dimensional $\mathcal{N}=(0,6)$ SCFT candidate in a sector where no such field theory was previously known.
  • The central-charge formula (45) becomes a sharp prediction for the infrared fixed point, including subleading $1/N$ corrections, so any eventual field-theory computation can be checked against it.
  • Large gauge transformations along the holographic direction are realized as Seiberg-like dualities in the quiver, extending the known ABJM duality cascade to a massive, two-dimensional setting.
  • The massless limit reproduces the ABJM/ABJ vacuum, its central charge, and its Seiberg dualities, so the construction contains the established $\mathrm{AdS}_4/\mathrm{CFT}_3$ story as a consistent limit.
  • The brane box gives a supersymmetric realization of the D8/NS5 embedding proposal for fractional quantum Hall edge states, now interpreted as surface defects within ABJ(M).

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper leaves unproved the enhancement from $\mathcal{N}=(0,3)$ to $\mathcal{N}=(0,6)$; a natural next step is to compute the IR R-current of the quiver via c-extremization and compare the resulting central charge with (45).
  • Since anomaly cancellation closes only when $\Delta k_l=0$, the massive $(0,3)$ sector must hide extra fermionic or bosonic contributions; identifying them would confirm the rotation pattern and may reveal the $(0,6)$ multiplet structure directly.
  • The same brane-box technology could be adapted to other superconformal algebras in the $osp(n|2)$ family, or to $(0,8)$ and large $(4,4)$ classes, since the construction is largely driven by charge conservation and large gauge transformations.
  • The dictionary (37) suggests the cubic term acts as a two-dimensional analogue of the Romans-mass deformation; comparing (45) with the free energy of the deformed ABJM matrix model at strong coupling would test the proposed 3d-to-2d flow.
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.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. This paper studies a class of warped AdS3 solutions in massive type IIA supergravity with N=(0,6) supersymmetry and an osp(6|2) superconformal algebra, following the construction of [69]. It reviews the SO(6)-invariant background with a CP3 internal space controlled by a single cubic function h(r), presents the Abelian T-dual type IIB background preserving N=(0,4) [70], and recovers the massless ABJM/ABJ solution and its central charge. The new part is a proposed IIB brane box combining D3-, NS5-, (1,k)5'-, D7- and fractional D5-branes, which is argued to give a two-dimensional N=(0,3) quiver gauge theory whose infrared limit is expected to enhance to N=(0,6). The paper analyzes the quiver's anomaly structure, relates brane-creation rules to Seiberg-like dualities, and computes a holographic central charge (45) with a massless (0,4) check (48). The advertised interpretation is that the solutions are dual to surface defects in ABJ(M) theory.

Significance. The supergravity side—the solution class, the T-duality to type IIB, and the massless ABJM/ABJ limit—is based on prior work and appears internally consistent; the holographic central-charge formula (21) is taken from independent references [73-75], and the massless limit reproduces known ABJM results including the strong-coupling free energy, which is a genuine check. If the conjectured infrared enhancement to N=(0,6) holds, this would provide the first explicit 2d field theory candidate for an osp(6|2) AdS3 dual and a holographic prediction (45) for its central charge, including subleading corrections. The paper is also commendably transparent about the places where its argument is incomplete: the enhancement step, the massive-mode exclusion in the anomaly cancellation, and the q_l-dependent terms in (45) are all explicitly flagged as open. These admissions do not cure the fact that the central field-theory identification is currently conjectural.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 5 (quiver construction and IR enhancement)] The central claim that the brane-box quiver is dual to the osp(6|2) AdS3 solutions is carried by the unproved assertion that the N=(0,3) quiver 'is expected to enhance to N=(0,6) in the infrared.' No enhancement mechanism, superconformal-index argument, or fixed-point analysis is supplied, and the abstract itself notes that no explicit 2d field theories are currently known to realise N=(0,6) supersymmetry. Since the supergravity background preserves osp(6|2), a quiver that remains only (0,3) cannot be its dual; this step is the load-bearing part of the paper and needs either a derivation or a clearly labelled conjecture with falsifiable checks, such as matching the superconformal R-symmetry anomaly or protected spectrum.
  2. [Section 5 (anomaly analysis, Eqs. (36)-(42))] The anomaly analysis is only closed in the massless case. Substituting the recursive relations (38)-(42) into (36) yields cancellation only for Δk_l=0, and the massive case is then settled by the statement that the (0,3) quiver 'is anomaly-free once massive modes are properly excluded.' The massive spectrum associated with the rotation of the (1,k)5' bound state is never given, so the anomaly contributions of those modes cannot be checked. The claim is therefore not a verification but a conjecture about the massive spectrum.
  3. [Section 5 (central charge, Eqs. (45)-(48))] The advertised central-charge prediction contains q_l-dependent terms for which the text states that 'their exact effect on the central charge remains to be understood' and that 'no direct computation exists in the literature.' Equation (48) reproduces only the q=0 terms, so the genuinely massive part of (45) is unverified. In addition, (45) is introduced 'for a suitably completed quiver' without specifying that completion. The holographic formula is a valid supergravity computation, but its status as a field-theory prediction is currently open.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Eqs. (9) and (14)] The constant appearing in the B2 expression is called k in Eq. (9) and then l in Eq. (14) without a definition for l; please unify the notation.
  2. [Eq. (34)] There is a typographical double equality sign in the displayed expression for c^{(3d)}_{hol}; it should read a single equals sign.
  3. [Section 5 (quiver description)] The sentence describing the D5' contributions says they give fundamentals and antifundamentals 'due to their relative positioning with respect to the NS5' and (1,k_l)5-branes'; this parenthetical is ambiguous about which node is which and should be written out explicitly.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the holographic central charge and the corrected charge dictionary are imported from independent references, and the unproven (0,3)-to-(0,6) enhancement is an explicitly admitted conjecture rather than a circular step.

full rationale

The derivation chain in this paper is not circular. The central-charge formula (21) is taken from the independent results [73-75], and the corrected charge dictionary (37) is taken from [89], which is a separate work by Bergman and Lifschytz; neither quantity is fitted to the quiver data or to the quantity that the paper claims to predict. The massless limit provides an external benchmark: equations (33)-(35) reproduce the ABJM central charge and match the supersymmetric localization results [82-85], so the holographic machinery is anchored outside the present construction. The paper's field-theory proposal is admittedly conjectural. It states that the quiver is built with (0,3) supersymmetry and is 'expected to enhance to N=(0,6) in the infrared', and it flags that the q_l-dependent terms in equation (45) 'remain to be understood' because 'no direct computation exists in the literature'. These are open correctness questions about the validity of the proposed duality, not instances in which an output is defined to equal an input. Similarly, the anomaly analysis closes only in the massless case, and the massive spectrum is not given; this is an admitted gap in the argument, but the anomaly equation (36) is not equivalent by construction to the brane-creation rules (38)-(42) that are substituted into it. Finally, the reliance on the authors' previous papers [69] and [70] for the supergravity backgrounds is standard and non-circular: those papers supply the input geometries, while the new claim is a proposed brane-box realization, and the independent massless checks prevent the derivation from reducing to a self-citation chain. No equation in the paper is reused as its own output, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The appropriate finding is therefore no significant circularity.

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

No fitted numerical parameters enter the central claim; the charges Q_p are quantized Page charges and the dictionary (37) is imported from [89]. The main unseen inputs are the conjectural IR enhancement to N=(0,6), the unspecified massive-mode exclusion in the anomaly analysis, and the borrowed supergravity backgrounds. These are recorded as axioms above.

assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Validity of the [69] AdS3 solutions as N=(0,6) massive IIA backgrounds.
    Section 2 quotes the metric, fluxes and BPS conditions from [69] without re-derivation; the present paper's duality claims inherit this.
  • domain assumption T-duality along psi produces the [70] IIB background preserving N=(0,4).
    Section 3 uses the IIB solution from [70] and the supersymmetry count from [50]; it is not re-derived here.
  • domain assumption The corrected charge dictionary (37) from [89] applies to the 2d brane box.
    Equation (37) is imported from Bergman-Lifschytz; the paper assumes its validity in the present defect setting without further check.
  • ad hoc to paper The (0,3) brane box flows to an N=(0,6) SCFT in the IR.
    Section 5 states this expectation without a proof; it is the essential link between the quiver and the osp(6|2) supergravity background.
  • ad hoc to paper Anomaly cancellation in the massive case is restored by excluding massive modes associated with the brane rotation.
    Section 5 asserts the (0,3) quiver is anomaly-free once massive modes are properly excluded, but the exclusion prescription and the resulting spectrum are not given.
  • domain assumption The holographic central charge formula (21) applies to the piecewise cubic profiles (44).
    Equation (21) is cited from [73-75]; the paper extends it to the massive piecewise case without addressing possible boundary contributions.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of ($0,6$) AdS$_3$/CFT$_2$ and surface defects." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/UC63PID2

@misc{pith2026250420864,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: ($0,6$) AdS$_3$/CFT$_2$ and surface defects},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/UC63PID2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.20864}
}
abstract

We explore a new class of AdS$_3$ solutions in massive type IIA supergravity preserving $\mathcal{N} = (0,6)$ supersymmetry and realising an $\mathfrak{osp}(6|2)$ superconformal algebra. These solutions exhibit an SO(6)-symmetric internal space constructed from a $\mathbb{CP}^3$, and are fully specified by a single cubic function controlling the fluxes and warping. We propose a brane box configuration underlying the solutions from which we construct a two-dimensional quiver gauge theory whose anomaly structure and central charge we analyse, and from which we can realise Seiberg-like dualities as large gauge transformations. The brane box configuration suggests an interpretation of the solutions as dual to surface defects within the ABJ(M) theory. Our findings provide a concrete setting for exploring holography beyond the ABJM vacuum. Remarkably, no explicit field theories are currently known to realise $\mathcal{N} = (0,6)$ supersymmetry in two dimensions, making our setup a promising and largely unexplored direction for field-theoretic investigations.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.20864 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Type IIB brane configuration for the ABJM/ABJ theory. D3-branes wrap the 𝜓-circle and intersect an NS5′ -brane and a (1, 𝑘) 5 ′ -brane, both extended along (𝑥 0 , 𝑥1 , 𝑟). branes 𝑥 0 𝑥 1 𝑟 𝑥3 𝑥 4 𝑥 5 𝜓 𝑥7 𝑥 8 𝑥 9 𝑁 D3 × × × − − − × − − − NS5′ × × × × × × − − − − (1, 𝑘)5 ′ × × × cos 𝜃 cos 𝜃 cos 𝜃 − sin 𝜃 sin 𝜃 sin 𝜃 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Brane box configuration: 𝑁𝑙 D3-branes extend from 𝜓 = 0 to 𝜋, and 𝑁𝑙 + 𝑀𝑙 from 𝜋 to 2𝜋. fractional D5-branes. The full brane configuration is summarized in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. D5′ -NS5-D7 subsystem illustrating brane creation due to the presence of D7-branes. Brane 𝑥 0 𝑥 1 𝑟 𝑥3 𝑥 4 𝑥 5 𝜓 𝑥7 𝑥 8 𝑥 9 D3 × × × − − − × − − − NS5′ × × × × × × − − − − D5′ × × × − − − − × × × NS5 × × − − − − × × × × D5 × × − × × × × − − − [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Quiver diagram corresponding to D3-branes suspended between NS5- and NS5′ -branes along orthogonal directions. Circles indicate (0, 4) vector multiplets; black, gray, and dashed lines represent twisted hypermultiplets, hypermultiplets, and Fermi multiplets, respectivel…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Quiver diagram associated with our brane setup. contributions to the gauge anomaly from different multiplets are summarized in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

95 extracted references · 12 canonical work pages

  1. [69]

    AdS$_3$ vacua realising $\mathfrak{osp}(n|2)$ superconformal symmetry

    N.T.MacphersonandA.Ramirez,“AdS 3vacuarealising osp(n|2)superconformalsymmetry,” JHEP08(2023), 024 [arXiv:2304.12207 [hep-th]]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2023

  2. [70]

    Holographic1 2-BPS surface defects in ABJM,

    Y. Lozano, N. T. Macpherson, N. Petri and A. Ramírez, “Holographic1 2-BPS surface defects in ABJM,” JHEP08(2024), 044 [arXiv:2404.17469 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2024

  3. [1]

    Microscopic origin of the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy,

    A. Strominger and C. Vafa, “Microscopic origin of the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy,” Phys. Lett. B379 (1996), 99-104 [arXiv:hep-th/9601029 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 1996

  4. [2]

    Microscopic black hole entropy in theories with higher derivatives,

    P. Kraus and F. Larsen, “Microscopic black hole entropy in theories with higher derivatives,” JHEP09 (2005), 034 [arXiv:hep-th/0506176 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2005

  5. [3]

    Central Charges in the Canonical Realization of Asymptotic Symmetries: An Example from Three-Dimensional Gravity,

    J. D. Brown and M. Henneaux, “Central Charges in the Canonical Realization of Asymptotic Symmetries: An Example from Three-Dimensional Gravity,” Commun. Math. Phys.104 (1986), 207-226

    1986

  6. [4]

    Three-Dimensional Gravity Revisited,

    E. Witten, “Three-Dimensional Gravity Revisited,” [arXiv:0706.3359 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  7. [5]

    The Kerr/CFT Correspondence,

    M. Guica, T. Hartman, W. Song and A. Strominger, “The Kerr/CFT Correspondence,” Phys. Rev. D80 (2009), 124008 [arXiv:0809.4266 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2009

  8. [6]

    Partially localized intersecting BPS branes,

    D. Youm, “Partially localized intersecting BPS branes,” Nucl. Phys. B556 (1999), 222-246 [arXiv:hep-th/9902208 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 1999

Show all 95 references
  1. [7]

    Anti-de Sitter D-branes,

    C. Bachas and M. Petropoulos, “Anti-de Sitter D-branes,” JHEP02 (2001), 025 [arXiv:hep- th/0012234 [hep-th]]. 18 (0, 6) AdS3/CFT2 and surface defects Yolanda Lozano

    2001

  2. [8]

    SupersymmetricAdS(3) solutionsoftypeIIBsupergravity,

    J.P.Gauntlett,O.A.P.MacConamhna,T.MateosandD.Waldram,“SupersymmetricAdS(3) solutionsoftypeIIBsupergravity,”Phys.Rev.Lett. 97(2006),171601[arXiv:hep-th/0606221 [hep-th]]

    2006 arXiv

  3. [9]

    Twodimensional N =(0, 4)quivers dual to AdS3 solutions in massive IIA,

    Y.Lozano,N.T.Macpherson,C.NunezandA.Ramirez,“Twodimensional N =(0, 4)quivers dual to AdS3 solutions in massive IIA,” JHEP01(2020), 140 [arXiv:1909.10510 [hep-th]]

    2020 arXiv

  4. [10]

    F-theory and AdS3/CFT2 (2, 0),

    C. Couzens, D. Martelli and S. Schafer-Nameki, “F-theory and AdS3/CFT2 (2, 0),” JHEP06 (2018), 008 [arXiv:1712.07631 [hep-th]]

    2018 arXiv

  5. [11]

    Searching for surface defect CFTs within AdS3,

    F. Faedo, Y. Lozano and N. Petri, “Searching for surface defect CFTs within AdS3,” JHEP11 (2020), 052 [arXiv:2007.16167 [hep-th]]

    2020 arXiv

  6. [12]

    AdS 3 solutionsinMassiveIIAwith smallN =(4, 0) supersymmetry,

    Y.Lozano,N.T.Macpherson,C.NunezandA.Ramirez,“AdS 3 solutionsinMassiveIIAwith smallN =(4, 0) supersymmetry,” JHEP01 (2020), 129 [arXiv:1908.09851 [hep-th]]

    2020 arXiv

  7. [13]

    AdS3 Solutions with Exceptional Supersymmetry,

    G. Dibitetto, G. Lo Monaco, A. Passias, N. Petri and A. Tomasiello, “AdS3 Solutions with Exceptional Supersymmetry,” Fortsch. Phys.66 (2018) no.10, 1800060 [arXiv:1807.06602 [hep-th]]

    2018 arXiv

  8. [14]

    Three-dimensionalN = 4 linear quivers and non-Abelian T-duals,

    Y. Lozano, N. T. Macpherson, J. Montero and C. Nunez, “Three-dimensionalN = 4 linear quivers and non-Abelian T-duals,” JHEP11(2016), 133 [arXiv:1609.09061 [hep-th]]

    2016 arXiv

  9. [15]

    AdS3×S2 in IIB with smallN = (4, 0) supersymmetry,

    N. T. Macpherson and A. Ramirez, “AdS3×S2 in IIB with smallN = (4, 0) supersymmetry,” JHEP04 (2022), 143 [arXiv:2202.00352 [hep-th]]

    2022 arXiv

  10. [16]

    N =(2,2)AdS 3 fromD3-braneswrappedon Riemann surfaces,

    C.Couzens,N.T.MacphersonandA.Passias,“ N =(2,2)AdS 3 fromD3-braneswrappedon Riemann surfaces,” JHEP02(2022), 189 [arXiv:2107.13562 [hep-th]]

    2022 arXiv

  11. [17]

    On supersymmetric AdS3 solutions of Type II,

    A. Passias and D. Prins, “On supersymmetric AdS3 solutions of Type II,” JHEP08 (2021), 168 [arXiv:2011.00008 [hep-th]]

    2021 arXiv

  12. [18]

    TwistedN = 1 SCFTs and their AdS3 duals,

    C. Couzens, H. het Lam and K. Mayer, “TwistedN = 1 SCFTs and their AdS3 duals,” JHEP 03 (2020), 032 [arXiv:1912.07605 [hep-th]]

    2020 arXiv

  13. [19]

    N = (0, 2) AdS3 solutions of type IIB and F-theory with generic fluxes,

    C. Couzens, “N = (0, 2) AdS3 solutions of type IIB and F-theory with generic fluxes,” JHEP 04 (2021), 038 [arXiv:1911.04439 [hep-th]]

    2021 arXiv

  14. [20]

    Supersymmetric AdS3 supergravity backgrounds and holography,

    L. Eberhardt, “Supersymmetric AdS3 supergravity backgrounds and holography,” JHEP02 (2018), 087 [arXiv:1710.09826 [hep-th]]

    2018 arXiv

  15. [21]

    Stringy N =(2, 2) holographyforAdS 3,

    S.Datta,L.EberhardtandM.R.Gaberdiel,“Stringy N =(2, 2) holographyforAdS 3,”JHEP 01 (2018), 146 [arXiv:1709.06393 [hep-th]]

    2018 arXiv

  16. [22]

    New AdS2 backgrounds andN = 4 conformal quantum mechanics,

    Y. Lozano, C. Nunez, A. Ramirez and S. Speziali, “New AdS2 backgrounds andN = 4 conformal quantum mechanics,” JHEP03 (2021), 277 [arXiv:2011.00005 [hep-th]]

    2021 arXiv

  17. [23]

    The Worldsheet Dual of the Symmetric Product CFT,

    L. Eberhardt, M. R. Gaberdiel and R. Gopakumar, “The Worldsheet Dual of the Symmetric Product CFT,” JHEP04(2019), 103 [arXiv:1812.01007 [hep-th]]. 19 (0, 6) AdS3/CFT2 and surface defects Yolanda Lozano

    2019 arXiv

  18. [24]

    OnTypeIIAAdS 3 solutionsandmassiveGK geometries,

    C.Couzens,N.T.MacphersonandA.Passias,“OnTypeIIAAdS 3 solutionsandmassiveGK geometries,” JHEP08(2022), 095 [arXiv:2203.09532 [hep-th]]

    2022 arXiv

  19. [25]

    AdS 2 solutionsandtheirmassiveIIAorigin,

    G.DibitettoandN.Petri,“AdS 2 solutionsandtheirmassiveIIAorigin,”JHEP 05(2019),107 [arXiv:1811.11572 [hep-th]]

    2019 arXiv

  20. [26]

    Open and closed string interpretation of SUSY CFT’s on branes with boundaries,

    A. Karch and L. Randall, “Open and closed string interpretation of SUSY CFT’s on branes with boundaries,” JHEP06 (2001), 063 [arXiv:hep-th/0105132 [hep-th]]

    2001 arXiv

  21. [27]

    Holographyanddefectconformalfieldtheories,

    O.DeWolfe,D.Z.FreedmanandH.Ooguri,“Holographyanddefectconformalfieldtheories,” Phys. Rev. D66(2002), 025009 [arXiv:hep-th/0111135 [hep-th]]

    2002 arXiv

  22. [28]

    Near-horizon solutions for D3- branes ending on 5-branes,

    O. Aharony, L. Berdichevsky, M. Berkooz and I. Shamir, “Near-horizon solutions for D3- branes ending on 5-branes,” Phys. Rev. D84(2011), 126003 [arXiv:1106.1870 [hep-th]]

    2011 arXiv

  23. [29]

    Interface Yang-Mills, supersymmetry, and Janus,

    E. D’Hoker, J. Estes and M. Gutperle, “Interface Yang-Mills, supersymmetry, and Janus,” Nucl. Phys. B753 (2006), 16-41 [arXiv:hep-th/0603013 [hep-th]]

    2006 arXiv

  24. [30]

    Exacthalf-BPSstring-junctionsolutions in six-dimensional supergravity,

    M.Chiodaroli,E.D’Hoker,Y.GuoandM.Gutperle,“Exacthalf-BPSstring-junctionsolutions in six-dimensional supergravity,” JHEP12(2011), 086 [arXiv:1107.1722 [hep-th]]

    2011 arXiv

  25. [31]

    Exact half-BPS Type IIB interface solutions. II. Flux solutions and multi-Janus,

    E. D’Hoker, J. Estes and M. Gutperle, “Exact half-BPS Type IIB interface solutions. II. Flux solutions and multi-Janus,” JHEP06(2007), 022 [arXiv:0705.0024 [hep-th]]

    2007 arXiv

  26. [32]

    Defects in conformal field theory,

    M. Billò, V. Gonçalves, E. Lauria and M. Meineri, “Defects in conformal field theory,” JHEP 04(2016), 091 [arXiv:1601.02883 [hep-th]]

    2016 arXiv

  27. [33]

    Berezinskii-Kosterlitz-Thouless Transition of Two- Component Bose Mixtures with Intercomponent Josephson Coupling,

    M. Kobayashi, M. Eto and M. Nitta, “Berezinskii-Kosterlitz-Thouless Transition of Two- Component Bose Mixtures with Intercomponent Josephson Coupling,” Phys. Rev. Lett.123 (2019) no.7, 075303 [arXiv:1802.08763 [cond-mat.stat-mech]]

    2019 arXiv

  28. [34]

    Exact half-BPS Type IIB interface solutions. I. Local solution and supersymmetric Janus,

    E. D’Hoker, J. Estes and M. Gutperle, “Exact half-BPS Type IIB interface solutions. I. Local solution and supersymmetric Janus,” JHEP06(2007), 021 [arXiv:0705.0022 [hep-th]]

    2007 arXiv

  29. [35]

    Holographic Wilson Loops, Dielectric Inter- faces, and Topological Insulators,

    J. Estes, A. O’Bannon, E. Tsatis and T. Wrase, “Holographic Wilson Loops, Dielectric Inter- faces, and Topological Insulators,” Phys. Rev. D87 (2013) no.10, 106005 [arXiv:1210.0534 [hep-th]]

    2013 arXiv

  30. [36]

    On AdS 3 solutions of Type IIB,

    A. Passias and D. Prins, “On AdS 3 solutions of Type IIB,” JHEP 05 (2020), 048 [arXiv:1910.06326 [hep-th]]

    2020 arXiv

  31. [37]

    N = (1, 1) supersymmetric AdS3 in 10 dimensions,

    N. T. Macpherson and A. Tomasiello, “N = (1, 1) supersymmetric AdS3 in 10 dimensions,” JHEP03(2022), 112 [arXiv:2110.01627 [hep-th]]

    2022 arXiv

  32. [38]

    ExactHalf-BPSFluxSolutionsinM-theory. I: Local Solutions,

    E.D’Hoker,J.Estes,M.GutperleandD.Krym,“ExactHalf-BPSFluxSolutionsinM-theory. I: Local Solutions,” JHEP08(2008), 028 [arXiv:0806.0605 [hep-th]]

    2008 arXiv

  33. [39]

    Exact half-BPS flux solutions in 𝑀 theory with D(2,1;𝑐′;0)2 symmetry: Local solutions,

    J. Estes, R. Feldman and D. Krym, “Exact half-BPS flux solutions in 𝑀 theory with D(2,1;𝑐′;0)2 symmetry: Local solutions,” Phys. Rev. D 87 (2013) no.4, 046008 [arXiv:1209.1845 [hep-th]]. 20 (0, 6) AdS3/CFT2 and surface defects Yolanda Lozano

    2013 arXiv

  34. [40]

    M-theorySolutionsInvariantunder 𝐷(2, 1;𝛾)⊕ 𝐷(2, 1;𝛾),

    C.Bachas,E.D’Hoker,J.EstesandD.Krym,“M-theorySolutionsInvariantunder 𝐷(2, 1;𝛾)⊕ 𝐷(2, 1;𝛾),” Fortsch. Phys.62(2014), 207-254 [arXiv:1312.5477 [hep-th]]

    2014 arXiv

  35. [41]

    TypeIIsolutionsonAdS 3×S3×S3withlargesuperconformalsymmetry,

    N.T.Macpherson,“TypeIIsolutionsonAdS 3×S3×S3withlargesuperconformalsymmetry,” JHEP05 (2019), 089 [arXiv:1812.10172 [hep-th]]

    2019 arXiv

  36. [42]

    AllN =(8, 0) AdS3 solutions in 10 and 11 dimensions,

    A. Legramandi, G. Lo Monaco and N. T. Macpherson, “AllN =(8, 0) AdS3 solutions in 10 and 11 dimensions,” JHEP05(2021), 263 [arXiv:2012.10507 [hep-th]]

    2021 arXiv

  37. [43]

    AdS 3 fromM-branesatconicalsingularities,

    G.DibitettoandN.Petri,“AdS 3 fromM-branesatconicalsingularities,”JHEP 01(2021),129 [arXiv:2010.12323 [hep-th]]

    2021 arXiv

  38. [44]

    AdS spacetimes from wrapped D3-branes,

    J. P. Gauntlett and O. A. P. Mac Conamhna, “AdS spacetimes from wrapped D3-branes,” Class. Quant. Grav.24 (2007), 6267-6286 [arXiv:0707.3105 [hep-th]]

    2007 arXiv

  39. [45]

    Half-BPS Janus solutions in AdS7,

    A. Conti, G. Dibitetto, Y. Lozano, N. Petri and A. Ramírez, “Half-BPS Janus solutions in AdS7,” JHEP12(2024), 198 [arXiv:2407.21619 [hep-th]]

    2024 arXiv

  40. [46]

    New AdS3/CFT2 pairs in massive IIA with (0, 4) and (4, 4) supersymmetries,

    Y. Lozano, N. T. Macpherson, N. Petri and C. Risco, “New AdS3/CFT2 pairs in massive IIA with (0, 4) and (4, 4) supersymmetries,” JHEP09(2022), 130 [arXiv:2206.13541 [hep-th]]

    2022 arXiv

  41. [47]

    Fromlargetosmall N =(4,4)supercon- formal surface defects in holographic 6d SCFTs,

    P.Capuozzo,J.Estes,B.RobinsonandB.Suzzoni,“Fromlargetosmall N =(4,4)supercon- formal surface defects in holographic 6d SCFTs,” JHEP08 (2024), 094 [arXiv:2402.11745 [hep-th]]

    2024 arXiv

  42. [48]

    N =(4, 4) supersymmetric AdS3 solutions in𝑑 = 11,

    A. Conti and N. T. Macpherson, “N =(4, 4) supersymmetric AdS3 solutions in𝑑 = 11,” [arXiv:2408.17303 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  43. [49]

    AdS(3) solutions of IIB supergravity from D3-branes,

    N. Kim, “AdS(3) solutions of IIB supergravity from D3-branes,” JHEP01 (2006), 094 [arXiv:hep-th/0511029 [hep-th]]

    2006 arXiv

  44. [50]

    On deformations of AdS3 solutions, supersymmetry and𝐺- structures,

    A. Ramirez and S. Zacarias, “On deformations of AdS3 solutions, supersymmetry and𝐺- structures,” [arXiv:2504.11207 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  45. [51]

    New𝐴𝑑𝑆 3×𝑆2 T-duals with N =(0, 4) supersymmetry,

    Y. Lozano, N. T. Macpherson, J. Montero and E. Ó. Colgáin, “New𝐴𝑑𝑆 3×𝑆2 T-duals with N =(0, 4) supersymmetry,” JHEP08(2015), 121 [arXiv:1507.02659 [hep-th]]

    2015 arXiv

  46. [52]

    F-theory and AdS3/CFT2,

    C. Couzens, C. Lawrie, D. Martelli, S. Schafer-Nameki and J. M. Wong, “F-theory and AdS3/CFT2,” JHEP08(2017), 043 [arXiv:1705.04679 [hep-th]]

    2017 arXiv

  47. [53]

    𝑀-stringsandAdS 3 solutionstoM-theory with smallN =(0, 4) supersymmetry,

    Y.Lozano,C.Nunez,A.RamirezandS.Speziali,“ 𝑀-stringsandAdS 3 solutionstoM-theory with smallN =(0, 4) supersymmetry,” JHEP08(2020), 118 [arXiv:2005.06561 [hep-th]]

    2020 arXiv

  48. [54]

    NewN =(0, 4) AdS3 near-horizons in Type IIB,

    F. Faedo, Y. Lozano and N. Petri, “NewN =(0, 4) AdS3 near-horizons in Type IIB,” JHEP 04(2021), 028 [arXiv:2012.07148 [hep-th]]

    2021 arXiv

  49. [55]

    Theholographicdualof 𝐴𝑑𝑆 3×𝑆3×𝑆3×𝑆1,

    D.Tong,“Theholographicdualof 𝐴𝑑𝑆 3×𝑆3×𝑆3×𝑆1,”JHEP 04(2014),193[arXiv:1402.5135 [hep-th]]. 21 (0, 6) AdS3/CFT2 and surface defects Yolanda Lozano

    2014 arXiv

  50. [56]

    AN = 2 supersymmetric AdS4 solution in M-theory with purely magnetic flux,

    Y. Lozano, N. T. Macpherson and J. Montero, “AN = 2 supersymmetric AdS4 solution in M-theory with purely magnetic flux,” JHEP10(2015), 004 [arXiv:1507.02660 [hep-th]]

    2015 arXiv

  51. [57]

    Large superconformal near- horizons from M-theory,

    Ö. Kelekci, Y. Lozano, J. Montero, E. Ó. Colgáin and M. Park, “Large superconformal near- horizons from M-theory,” Phys. Rev. D93(2016) no.8, 086010 [arXiv:1602.02802 [hep-th]]

    2016 arXiv

  52. [58]

    A holographic dual for string theory on AdS3×S3×S3×S1,

    L. Eberhardt, M. R. Gaberdiel and W. Li, “A holographic dual for string theory on AdS3×S3×S3×S1,” JHEP08(2017), 111 [arXiv:1707.02705 [hep-th]]

    2017 arXiv

  53. [59]

    BPS objects in D = 7 supergravity and their M-theory origin,

    G. Dibitetto and N. Petri, “BPS objects in D = 7 supergravity and their M-theory origin,” JHEP12 (2017), 041 [arXiv:1707.06152 [hep-th]]

    2017 arXiv

  54. [60]

    6d surface defects from massive type IIA,

    G. Dibitetto and N. Petri, “6d surface defects from massive type IIA,” JHEP01 (2018), 039 [arXiv:1707.06154 [hep-th]]

    2018 arXiv

  55. [61]

    Tensionless string spectra on AdS3,

    M. R. Gaberdiel and R. Gopakumar, “Tensionless string spectra on AdS3,” JHEP05 (2018), 085 [arXiv:1803.04423 [hep-th]]

    2018 arXiv

  56. [62]

    N =(3, 3) holography onAdS3×( S3× S3× S1)/Z2,

    L. Eberhardt and I. G. Zadeh, “N =(3, 3) holography onAdS3×( S3× S3× S1)/Z2,” JHEP 07(2018), 143 [arXiv:1805.09832 [hep-th]]

    2018 arXiv

  57. [63]

    Surface defects in the D4− D8 brane system,

    G. Dibitetto and N. Petri, “Surface defects in the D4− D8 brane system,” JHEP01 (2019), 193 [arXiv:1807.07768 [hep-th]]

    2019 arXiv

  58. [64]

    1/4 BPS solutions and the AdS3/CFT2 correspondence,

    Y. Lozano, N. T. Macpherson, C. Nunez and A. Ramirez, “1/4 BPS solutions and the AdS3/CFT2 correspondence,” Phys. Rev. D101 (2020) no.2, 026014 [arXiv:1909.09636 [hep-th]]

    2020 arXiv

  59. [65]

    AdS3 solutions in massive IIA, defect CFTs and T-duality,

    Y. Lozano, N. T. Macpherson, C. Nunez and A. Ramirez, “AdS3 solutions in massive IIA, defect CFTs and T-duality,” JHEP12(2019), 013 [arXiv:1909.11669 [hep-th]]

    2019 arXiv

  60. [66]

    DerivingtheAdS 3/CFT2correspondence,

    L.Eberhardt,M.R.GaberdielandR.Gopakumar,“DerivingtheAdS 3/CFT2correspondence,” JHEP02(2020), 136 [arXiv:1911.00378 [hep-th]]

    2020 arXiv

  61. [67]

    AdS3 solutions with fromN =(3, 0) from S3×S3 fibrations,

    A. Legramandi and N. T. Macpherson, “AdS3 solutions with fromN =(3, 0) from S3×S3 fibrations,” Fortsch. Phys.68(2020) no.3-4, 2000014 [arXiv:1912.10509 [hep-th]]

    2020 arXiv

  62. [68]

    N=(0,4) black string chains,

    C. Couzens, Y. Lozano, N. Petri and S. Vandoren, “N=(0,4) black string chains,” Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022) no.8, 086015 [arXiv:2109.10413 [hep-th]]

    2022 arXiv

  63. [71]

    N = 6 supersymmetric AdS2× CP3×Σ2,

    A. Conti, Y. Lozano and N. T. Macpherson, “N = 6 supersymmetric AdS2× CP3×Σ2,” [arXiv:2503.23585 [hep-th]]. 22 (0, 6) AdS3/CFT2 and surface defects Yolanda Lozano

  64. [72]

    Hyper-Kahlermanifolds and multiply intersecting branes,

    J.P.Gauntlett,G.W.Gibbons,G.PapadopoulosandP.K.Townsend,“Hyper-Kahlermanifolds and multiply intersecting branes,” Nucl. Phys. B500(1997), 133-162 [arXiv:hep-th/9702202 [hep-th]]

    1997 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Entanglementasaprobeofconfinement,

    I.R.Klebanov,D.KutasovandA.Murugan,“Entanglementasaprobeofconfinement,”Nucl. Phys. B796 (2008), 274-293 [arXiv:0709.2140 [hep-th]]

    2008 arXiv

  66. [74]

    Type IIB supergravity solutions with AdS5 from Abelian and non-Abelian T dualities,

    N. T. Macpherson, C. Núñez, L. A. Pando Zayas, V. G. J. Rodgers and C. A. Whiting, “Type IIB supergravity solutions with AdS5 from Abelian and non-Abelian T dualities,” JHEP02 (2015), 040 [arXiv:1410.2650 [hep-th]]

    2015 arXiv

  67. [75]

    Compactifications of the Klebanov-Witten CFT and new AdS3 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 AdS3 backgrounds,” JHEP 05 (2015), 062 [arXiv:1503.07527 [hep-th]]

    2015 arXiv

  68. [76]

    Fractional M2-branes,

    O. Aharony, O. Bergman and D. L. Jafferis, “Fractional M2-branes,” JHEP11 (2008), 043 [arXiv:0807.4924 [hep-th]]

    2008 arXiv

  69. [77]

    N=6 superconformal Chern- Simons-matter theories, M2-branes and their gravity duals,

    O. Aharony, O. Bergman, D. L. Jafferis and J. Maldacena, “N=6 superconformal Chern- Simons-matter theories, M2-branes and their gravity duals,” JHEP 10 (2008), 091 [arXiv:0806.1218 [hep-th]]

    2008 arXiv

  70. [78]

    D-brane Charges in Gravitational Duals of 2+1 Dimensional Gauge Theories and Duality Cascades,

    O. Aharony, A. Hashimoto, S. Hirano and P. Ouyang, “D-brane Charges in Gravitational Duals of 2+1 Dimensional Gauge Theories and Duality Cascades,” JHEP01 (2010), 072 [arXiv:0906.2390 [hep-th]]

    2010 arXiv

  71. [79]

    Anomalies in string theory with D-branes,

    D. S. Freed and E. Witten, “Anomalies in string theory with D-branes,” Asian J. Math.3 (1999), 819 [arXiv:hep-th/9907189 [hep-th]]

    1999 arXiv

  72. [80]

    AnomalousradiusshiftinAdS(4)/CFT(3),

    O.BergmanandS.Hirano,“AnomalousradiusshiftinAdS(4)/CFT(3),”JHEP 07(2009),016 [arXiv:0902.1743 [hep-th]]

    2009 arXiv

  73. [81]

    SomeNewResultsin 𝐴𝑑𝑆 4/𝐶𝐹𝑇3Duality,

    O.Bergman,S.HiranoandG.Lifschytz,“SomeNewResultsin 𝐴𝑑𝑆 4/𝐶𝐹𝑇3Duality,”J.Phys. Conf. Ser.462 (2013) no.1, 012003

    2013

  74. [82]

    From weak to strong coupling in ABJM theory,

    N. Drukker, M. Marino and P. Putrov, “From weak to strong coupling in ABJM theory,” Commun. Math. Phys.306 (2011), 511-563 [arXiv:1007.3837 [hep-th]]

    2011 arXiv

  75. [83]

    Multi-MatrixModelsandTri-Sasaki Einstein Spaces,

    C.P.Herzog,I.R.Klebanov,S.S.PufuandT.Tesileanu,“Multi-MatrixModelsandTri-Sasaki Einstein Spaces,” Phys. Rev. D83(2011), 046001 [arXiv:1011.5487 [hep-th]]

    2011 arXiv

  76. [84]

    Summing Up All Genus Free Energy of ABJM Matrix Model,

    H. Fuji, S. Hirano and S. Moriyama, “Summing Up All Genus Free Energy of ABJM Matrix Model,” JHEP08(2011), 001 [arXiv:1106.4631 [hep-th]]

    2011 arXiv

  77. [85]

    ABJM theory as a Fermi gas,

    M. Marino and P. Putrov, “ABJM theory as a Fermi gas,” J. Stat. Mech.1203(2012), P03001 [arXiv:1110.4066 [hep-th]]

    2012 arXiv

  78. [86]

    (0,4)braneboxmodels,

    A.HananyandT.Okazaki,“(0,4)braneboxmodels,”JHEP 03(2019),027[arXiv:1811.09117 [hep-th]]. 23 (0, 6) AdS3/CFT2 and surface defects Yolanda Lozano

    2019 arXiv

  79. [87]

    Three-dimensionalgaugedynamicsfrombraneconfigurations with (p,q)-fivebrane,

    T.Kitao,K.OhtaandN.Ohta,“Three-dimensionalgaugedynamicsfrombraneconfigurations with (p,q)-fivebrane,” Nucl. Phys. B539 (1999), 79-106 [arXiv:hep-th/9808111 [hep-th]]

    1999 arXiv

  80. [88]

    Branes and supersymmetry breaking in three-dimensional gauge theories,

    O. Bergman, A. Hanany, A. Karch and B. Kol, “Branes and supersymmetry breaking in three-dimensional gauge theories,” JHEP10(1999), 036 [arXiv:hep-th/9908075 [hep-th]]

    1999 arXiv

  81. [89]

    Branes and massive IIA duals of 3d CFT’s,

    O. Bergman and G. Lifschytz, “Branes and massive IIA duals of 3d CFT’s,” JHEP04(2010), 114 [arXiv:1001.0394 [hep-th]]

    2010 arXiv

  82. [90]

    Electrostatic description of five-dimensional SCFTs,

    A. Legramandi and C. Nunez, “Electrostatic description of five-dimensional SCFTs,” Nucl. Phys. B974 (2022), 115630 [arXiv:2104.11240 [hep-th]]

    2022 arXiv

  83. [91]

    The gauge dual of Romans mass,

    D. Gaiotto and A. Tomasiello, “The gauge dual of Romans mass,” JHEP01 (2010), 015 [arXiv:0901.0969 [hep-th]]

    2010 arXiv

  84. [92]

    Superconformal Algebras in Two-dimensions With Arbitrary𝑁,

    M. A. Bershadsky, “Superconformal Algebras in Two-dimensions With Arbitrary𝑁,” Phys. Lett. B174 (1986), 285-288

    1986

  85. [93]

    Exact two-dimensional superconformal R-symmetry and c- extremization,

    F. Benini and N. Bobev, “Exact two-dimensional superconformal R-symmetry and c- extremization,” Phys. Rev. Lett.110(2013) no.6, 061601 [arXiv:1211.4030 [hep-th]]

    2013 arXiv

  86. [94]

    Two-dimensionalSCFTsfromwrappedbranesandc-extremization,

    F.BeniniandN.Bobev,“Two-dimensionalSCFTsfromwrappedbranesandc-extremization,” JHEP06 (2013), 005 [arXiv:1302.4451 [hep-th]]

    2013 arXiv

  87. [95]

    Quantum Hall Effect in a Holographic Model,

    O. Bergman, N. Jokela, G. Lifschytz and M. Lippert, “Quantum Hall Effect in a Holographic Model,” JHEP10(2010), 063 [arXiv:1003.4965 [hep-th]]. 24

    2010 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.