Domain Walls in Strongly Coupled Theories

G. Dvali; M. Shifman

REVIEW

Domain Walls in Strongly Coupled Theories

G. Dvali, M. Shifman

High Energy Physics - Theory · Submitted 11 Dec 1996 · 17 references

Pith's verdict: Two real results — a gauge-boson trapping mechanism and an exact wall tension — with the exactness resting on a BPS assumption the authors themselves flag as unproven.

T0 · AI review

How this review was made: An AI referee (selfhosted/deepseek-v4.1-flash) read the paper on October 29, 2026 and answered a fixed list of questions about it. T0 is the starting level every paper gets. The levels describe how deeply Pith has checked the paper, never the authors.

T0 AI review An AI read the paper and answered a fixed list of questions.
T1 Audit Automatic checks that the references and files the paper relies on exist and match.
T2 Compute The paper's code or calculations re-run with the same results.
T3 Formal statement The claims written out in a formal math language a computer can read.
T4 Proof Those claims proved, and the proof checked by computer.

How Pith checks papers →

· 3 major objections · 6 minor · Ask about this paper · The compiled record · Read the full review →

Challenge this review Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗

Cite ▾

arXiv IDhep-th/9612128 (version 2)

Pith IDZYC4IPCL, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review

CitationG. Dvali, M. Shifman. "Domain Walls in Strongly Coupled Theories." arXiv:hep-th/9612128 (1996). https://pith.science/paper/ZYC4IPCL

Cite this reviewBibTeX for Pith's review of this paper

Claim paper

Why Pith says this

Highlight any text to comment on it.

Editor's note

read the letter

Worth your time, with one caveat you should know before you quote the number. The paper has two results. The first is a clean idea: put a domain wall in a theory where the bulk confines and the core does not. The adjoint scalar goes tachyonic inside the wall, SU(2) breaks to U(1), and the photon exists only where the wall is. It cannot leak out because outside there are no states below Lambda. That is a genuinely new way to localize a vector field, and it is the part that aged well — it is the ancestor of a lot of brane-world model building. The tachyon argument after Eq. (6) is a continuity statement with no bound on kappa, and no explicit photon wavefunction or 2+1 coupling is computed, but for the claim being made — phase mismatch, not mode-by-mode construction — that is adequate. Footnote 2 handles the massless-pion objection honestly, which I appreciated. The second result is the exact tension in N=1 gluodynamics, epsilon = (1/2 pi^2)|Tr|. The arithmetic is consistent: Eq. (9) with N_c = 2 and the general-group formula agree. The SQCD-with-one-flavor route is a real second derivation, not a restatement, and the m -> infinity limit is the right way to get back. But the stress-test note is right about the load-bearing step. Holomorphy controls q(m), the boundary quantity. Saturation is the dynamical statement epsilon = |q|, and the paper asserts it in the core by continuation through exactly the region where the single-field description fails. The authors say so themselves: 'we have no rigorous proof of this statement.' So Eq. (11) is an exact result conditional on an unproven premise. It happens to be correct — later work confirms it — but the paper does not earn it. Two smaller things. Eq. (9), the central-charge anomaly, is quoted and deferred to later publications; that is the authors' own unpublished derivation doing load-bearing work. And the claim that this settles the Z_2T(G) question is stronger than needed: finiteness of epsilon alone gives a wall, and the paper does not separate that from the exact value. Send it out. The mechanism section stands on its own and the SUSY section is a well-posed conjecture with a clear path to a proof.

Referee report

Major objections (3)

[§3, Eqs. (10)–(11) and the holomorphy paragraph] The authors candidly state (p. 5) that they have no rigorous proof of BPS saturation, so that acknowledged limitation is not the issue. What remains unresolved is the step 'by holomorphy we conclude it must be satisfied in the central region as well.' Holomorphy controls the m-dependence of the central charge q, a boundary quantity; saturation is the dynamical statement ε=|q|. The central region S²≈0 is precisely where the one-field description fails, and m→∞ drives the wall thickness m^{-1} below Λ̃^{-1}, so the entire wall sits where the semiclassical profile is invalid. A concrete argument is needed — for instance, that the wall lies in a short multiplet and that a discrete number of preserved supercharges cannot change under continuous deformation without a phase transition — or Eq. (11) should be explicitly labeled conditional. As written, if saturation fails, Eq. (11) degrades to the inequality ε ≥ |q|.
[§2, Eq. (6) and the localization claim] The tachyon at κ=0 follows from the exactly solvable −λ'v²sech²(mz) potential, but the statement that the bound state persists 'for a finite range of non-vanishing κ's' is not quantified, and the paper does not exhibit a normalizable transverse zero-mode wavefunction for the photon. The argument given is that the mass gap outside prevents propagation, which is a different and weaker statement than localization of a 4D gauge field. Since the dynamical-compactification application needs a genuine localized mode, the paper should state clearly whether a normalizable zero mode exists or whether the mechanism is 'confinement outside' only.
[Conclusions, p. 7] The sentence 'it settles the issue of spontaneous breaking of Z_{2T(G)} … in favor of the first option' overstates what the derivation supports. This conclusion and the exact tension rest on the same BPS/continuity assumption, so they are not independent confirmations. A finite lower bound ε ≥ |q| would already establish a wall and hence spontaneous breaking, so the Z_{2T(G)} conclusion is more robust than the exact value; but the 'settles' language should be tempered and the logical relation between the two claims made explicit.

Minor objections (6)

[§3, Eq. (12)] The mass term m⁴S² is dimensionally inconsistent with Eq. (13). With W=Λ̃⁵/S²+(m/4)S² one obtains ⟨S²⟩=2Λ̃^{5/2}m^{-1/2}, matching Eq. (13); please correct the coefficient.
[§3, Eq. (11) and the general-group formula] The trace is present in Eq. (11) and dropped in the general-group expression; make the normalization of ⟨λλ⟩ explicit so the two formulas can be compared directly.
[§3, Eq. (9)] The central-extension formula is quoted without derivation and deferred to 'subsequent publications'; a brief check in a simple limit, or a short derivation, would help the reader assess it.
[§3, m→∞ limit] The matching relation between Λ̃ and Λ is not given; stating it would make the final step to Eq. (11) reproducible.
[§2, footnote 2] The possible massless 'pion' in SU(2) with one flavor is noted but not resolved; a sentence on whether it affects the wall solution or the localization argument would help.
[Copyediting] Several typographical errors should be fixed: 'tachionic' (p. 3) should be 'tachyonic', 'equlity' and 'explicitely' (p. 5), 'Shr¨ odinger' (p. 3), 'normaliz able' (p. 3), and the address 'M inneapolis, MN 54555' should read 55455.

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

The paper

The paper claims

Two claims about domain walls in strongly coupled gauge theory: a wall can hold a massless photon because the bulk confines, and in the supersymmetric version the wall's tension is fixed exactly by a central charge.

The reading

The paper argues that a domain wall in a confining non-Abelian gauge theory can act as a trap for massless gauge bosons without any explicit localization profile being put in by hand. Outside the wall the SU(2) theory confines and has a mass gap of order $Lambda$; inside the core an adjoint scalar goes tachyonic, breaks SU(2) down to U(1), and the surviving photon has nowhere to escape to because in the bulk it is again part of a confining theory. The second claim concerns $N=1$ supersymmetric SU(2) gluodynamics, where the gluino condensate breaks a discrete $Z_4$ symmetry to $Z_2$ and a wall must interpolate between the two vacua. If that wall is BPS-saturated — half the supersymmetry transformations acting trivially on it — then its energy per unit area equals the central charge, giving $varepsilon = |q| = (1/2pi^2)|mathrm{Tr}langlelambdalambdarangle|$, an exact result in a strong-coupling regime. The authors also note that a finite, non-zero $varepsilon$ settles a long-running dispute about whether $Z_{2T(G)}$ is spontaneously broken in the usual way.

What carries the argument

Two pieces of machinery carry the argument. The first is the tachyon instability of the adjoint scalar in the kink background: the linearized fluctuation equation for $chi$ is a one-dimensional Schrödinger equation whose potential is negative enough to have a normalizable bound state with negative $omega^2$, so the symmetric point $chi = 0$ is unstable exactly where $eta$ passes through zero, and only there. The second is the central extension of the $N=1$ superalgebra, $lbrace Q^dagger_{dotalpha}, Q^dagger_{dotbeta} rbrace = (N_c/4pi^2)(Sigma_i)_{dotalpha dotbeta} int d^3x, partial_i mathrm{Tr}(lambdalambda)$, which vanishes in the vacuum but not on a wall; the associated Bogomol'nyi bound $M ge |q|$ is saturated when half of supersymmetry acts trivially, converting the bound into the equality $varepsilon = |q|$.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper makes two distinct claims. The first is a mechanism: in a model with an SU(2) gauge field, a fermion doublet, an adjoint scalar $chi$, and a real scalar $eta$ whose kink provides the wall, the $chi$ mass-squared turns negative in the wall core because the potential term proportional to $kappa^2 + v^2(mathrm{tanh}^2(mz) - 1)$ gives a one-dimensional Schrödinger problem with a negative-definite potential. The resulting condensate breaks SU(2) to U(1) only inside the wall, so the photon and the light charged fermions exist in the core and cannot propagate into the confining bulk, where the lightest states have mass of order $Lambda$. The second claim is that the wall of $N=1$ supersymmetric SU(2) gluodynamics is a BPS-saturated state, so its tension is exactly the central charge carried by a conserved current built from $lambda^2$, giving $varepsilon = (1/2pi^2)|mathrm{Tr}langlelambdalambdarangle|$. The authors support this by deforming to SQCD with one light flavor, where the wall is computable in a weakly coupled Higgs phase, and then continuing in the holomorphic mass parameter $m$ to the pure-glue limit.

Load-bearing premise

The exact tension formula rests on the wall in supersymmetric gluodynamics being BPS-saturated, and the paper states outright that it has no rigorous proof of this, offering only the weakly coupled deformation plus holomorphy as support.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Localized gauge bosons on a wall become a concrete ingredient for dynamical compactification scenarios, where the observed three-dimensional world is a defect and the Standard Model fields are its zero modes.
In $N=1$ supersymmetric gluodynamics the wall tension is an exactly known strong-coupling quantity proportional to the gluino condensate, joining the short list of observables computed exactly without weak coupling.
A finite wall tension implies that the discrete $Z_{2T(G)}$ symmetry is spontaneously broken in the conventional way rather than protected by a superselection rule, and that the vacuum angle runs from $0$ to $2pi$ as usually assumed.
For a general gauge group the construction yields $(1/2)T(G)[T(G)-1]$ distinct walls with tensions $varepsilon = (N_c/8pi^2)|e^{2pi i k/T(G)} - e^{2pi i ell/T(G)}|,|langlelambdalambdarangle|$.
The wall carries a massless composite boson and a massless composite fermion in its core, since a residual half of supersymmetry is preserved.

Reading between the lines

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

The localization mechanism needs no fine tuning of the fermion mass $h$: the authors note it survives the limit $h to 0$, which suggests the trapping is a topological consequence of the confining bulk rather than of the kink profile, and would generalize to any defect separating a confining phase from a Higgs phase.
The same logic should apply to walls separating two different confining groups, or a confining group from a Coulomb phase in a larger theory, which would make the mechanism a generic tool for building lower-dimensional gauge sectors rather than a one-model curiosity.
Because the exact tension formula follows from BPS saturation plus holomorphy, an independent lattice computation of the wall tension in pure $N=1$ gluodynamics would test the saturation premise directly, since the condensate itself is already known.
If the wall is BPS, the low-energy theory on its world volume is a three-dimensional supersymmetric Abelian gauge theory, which is a specific enough target to check for the predicted massless composite fermion.

Original abstract

Domain walls in strongly coupled gauge theories are discussed. A general mechanism is suggested automatically leading to massless gauge bosons localized on the wall. In one of the models considered, outside the wall the theory is in the non-Abelian confining phase, while inside the wall it is in the Abelian Coulomb phase. Confining property of the non-Abelian theories is a key ingredient of the mechanism which may be of practical use in the context of the dynamic compactification scenarios. In supersymmetric (N=1) Yang-Mills theories the energy density of the wall can be exactly calculated in the strong coupling regime. This calculation presents a further example of non-trivial physical quantities that can be found exactly by exploiting specific properties of supersymmetry. A key observation is the fact that the wall in this theory is a BPS-saturated state.

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged, kept beside the review and separate from it. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Compiled by classifier-1.13-20260917 via OpenRouter, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 5,482 input tokens, $0.0002 reported.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.04 · states limitation 0.08 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.02 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.08 · compares with prior results 0.15 · mentions code or data availability 0.01.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v2. Results and the main claim are underlined; show every role.

Domain walls in strongly coupled gauge theories are discussed. A general mechanism is suggested automatically leading to massless gauge bosons localized on the wall. In one of the models considered, outside the wall the theory is in the non-Abelian confining phase, while inside the wall it is in the Abelian Coulomb phase. Confining property of the non-Abelian theories is a key ingredient of the mechanism which may be of practical use in the context of the dynamic compactification scenarios. In supersymmetric (N=1) Yang-Mills theories the energy density of the wall can be exactly calculated in the strong coupling regime. This calculation presents a further example of non-trivial physical quantities that can be found exactly by exploiting specific properties of supersymmetry. A key observation is the fact that the wall in this theory is a BPS-saturated state.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#	sentence	role	the authors' own work	states the main conclusion	strength
s0	Domain walls in strongly coupled gauge theories are discussed.	background 0.72	0.38	0.05	asserted 0.76
s1	A general mechanism is suggested automatically leading to massless gauge bosons localized on the wall.	contribution 0.59	0.58	0.58	hedged possibility 0.98
s2	In one of the models considered, outside the wall the theory is in the non-Abelian confining phase, while inside the wall it is in the Abelian Coulomb phase.	result 0.60	0.54	0.16	asserted 1.00
s3	Confining property of the non-Abelian theories is a key ingredient of the mechanism which may be of practical use in the context of the dynamic compactification scenarios.	interpretation 1.00	0.33	0.20	hedged possibility 0.72
s4	In supersymmetric (N=1) Yang-Mills theories the energy density of the wall can be exactly calculated in the strong coupling regime.	result 0.59	0.77	0.10	asserted 1.00
s5	This calculation presents a further example of non-trivial physical quantities that can be found exactly by exploiting specific properties of supersymmetry.	interpretation 0.93	0.81	0.08	asserted 0.99
s6	A key observation is the fact that the wall in this theory is a BPS-saturated state.	result 0.37	0.55	0.11	asserted 1.00

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: theoretical result 1.00 · evidence from proof or derivation 0.91.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read

arXiv listing abstract v2

not examined

full text
figures and tables
references and citing sentences
relations to other papers

levels run

P abstract

not run

S sections
T body sentences
C citations
R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

References

Works cited (17)

[1]

Ya. Zeldovich, I. Kobzarev and L. Okun, JETP 40 (1975) 1; for a review see, e.g. A. Vilenkin, Phys. Rep. 121 (1985) 263

View on Pith 1975
[2]

G. Dvali and M. Shifman, hep-th/9611213, and references therein

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[3]

A. Barnaveli, O. Kancheli, Yad. Fiz. 52 (1990) 905 [ Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 52 (1990) 576]; Preprint TBILISI-HE-2A, 1990 (unpublished)

View on Pith 1990
[4]

N. Seiberg and E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B426 (1994) 19; (E) B430 (1994) 485; Nucl. Phys. B431 (1994) 484

View on Pith 1994
[5]

E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B202 (1982) 253

View on Pith 1982
[6]

A.V. Smilga, hep-th/9607007

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[7]

R. Jackiw and C. Rebbi, Phys. Rev. D13 (1976) 3398; E. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. D24 (1981) 2669

View on Pith 1976
[8]

E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B249 (1985) 557

View on Pith 1985
[9]

M. Voloshin, hep-ph/9609219

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[10]

M. Shifman and A. Vainshtein, Nucl. Phys. B296 (1988) 445

View on Pith 1988
[11]

M. Shifman and A. Vainshtein, Nucl. Phys. B277 (1986) 456; Nucl. Phys. B359 (1991) 571

View on Pith 1986
[12]

E. Witten and D. Olive, Phys. Lett. B78 (1978) 97

View on Pith 1978
[13]

S. Ferrara, C.A. Savoy, and B. Zumino, Phys. Lett. 100 (1981) 393; for a review see, e.g. G.W. Gibbons, in Supersymmetry, Supergravity and Related Topics, Proc. XV GIFT Int. Seminar on Theoret. Phys., Eds. F. del ´Aguila, J. de Azc´ arraga and L. Ib´ anez, (World Scientiﬁc, Singapore,1985), page 147

View on Pith 1981
[14]

A. Morozov, M. Olshanetsky and M. Shifman, Nucl. Phys. B304 (1988) 291

View on Pith 1988
[15]

I. Aﬄeck, M. Dine and N. Seiberg, Nucl. Phys. B241 (1984) 493; Nucl. Phys. B256 (1985) 557

View on Pith 1984
[16]

A. Vainshtein, V. Zakharov and M. Shifman, Uspekhi Fiz. Nauk 146 (1985) 683 [Sov. Phys. - Uspekhi 28 (1985) 709

View on Pith 1985
[17]

J. Wess and B. Zumino, Phys. Lett. B49 (1974) 52. 8

View on Pith 1974

Forward citations

Cited by 22 Pith papers

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

Supergravity and a Confining Gauge Theory: Duality Cascades and $\chi$SB-Resolution of Naked Singularities
hep-th 2000-07 accept novelty 9.0 of 10

A repeating chain of Seiberg dualities in an N=1 gauge theory corresponds to decreasing five-form flux in a gravity background, and chiral symmetry breaking deforms the conifold into a smooth confining geometry.
Magnetic bion condensation: A new mechanism of confinement and mass gap in four dimensions
hep-th 2007-09 accept novelty 8.0 of 10

Confinement in QCD with adjoint fermions on a small circle arises from condensation of magnetic bions, topologically null bound states of a BPS monopole and a KK antimonopole, not from monopole condensation.
Branes and N=2 Theories in Two Dimensions
hep-th 1997-07 conditional novelty 8.0 of 10

The M theory lift of a Type IIA brane configuration reproduces the exact quantum vacua, discrete chiral symmetry breaking, and BPS soliton masses of two-dimensional N=2 sigma models, including the CP^{n-1} and Grassma...
Branes And The Dynamics Of QCD
hep-th 1997-06 conditional novelty 8.0 of 10

A fivebrane wrapped n times on a hidden circle reproduces the n vacua, confining strings, and domain walls of pure N=1 super Yang-Mills, and the QCD string is shown topologically to end on the domain wall.
Deconfinement on $\mathbb{Z}_{F}$ and Axion Domain Walls
hep-th 2026-10 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

In a center-stabilized compactification of QCD, probe particles of N-ality N/gcd(N,F) are deconfined on Z_F domain walls when gcd(N,F)>1, and the wall tensions differ from those in pure Yang-Mills.

Show 17 more citing papers

Supercurrents and Brane Currents in Diverse Dimensions
hep-th 2011-05 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

The most general N=1 supercurrent in four dimensions is a 16+16 operator multiplet whose failure to decompose into smaller multiplets is exactly the presence of string or domain-wall charges in the supersymmetry algebra.
Selecting Gauge Theories on an Interval by 5D Gauge Transformations
hep-th 2006-04 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

Coset-N/subgroup-D boundary conditions on a 5D interval violate Ward-Takahashi identity and tree-level unitarity, and are excluded by requiring consistent restricted 5D gauge transformations.
GUT Color-Triplet Around the Corner: The Story of an Overlooked Lightness
hep-ph 2026-11 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

Color-triplet Higgs partners can be light (TeV) in supersymmetric SO(10) GUTs due to Yukawa coupling suppression from supersymmetry breaking, leading to lifetimes from seconds to longer than the universe's age.
Domain Walls From Confining Bubbles: $SU(N_{c})$ Yang Mills at Finite $\theta$
hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A nonzero theta angle weakens supercooling in SU(Nc) Yang-Mills confinement and makes any resulting domain-wall gravitational-wave signal invisible except under severe fine-tuning.
Baryons, Skyrmions and $\theta$-periodicity anomaly in chiral and vector-like gauge theories
hep-th 2025-10 unverdicted novelty 6.0 of 10

In chiral SU(N) gauge theories with mixed one- and two-index matter, the CFL-phase coset topology yields no Skyrmions yet permits stable heavy baryons protected by unbroken symmetries, unlike vector-like models; theta...
Cosmic strings and domain walls of the QCD quark condensate with and without a hidden axion
hep-ph 2025-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

The QCD quark condensate supports eta-prime and pion string-wall defects that exist without a hidden axion, and these windings make the minimal axion string anomaly-free.
Degenerate Domain Walls in Supersymmetric Theories
hep-th 2025-01 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

In supersymmetric QCD with any number of flavors, the number of degenerate k-domain walls is exactly N!/((N-k)!k!), split into locally distinguishable and topologically distinct classes.
Bulk-Brane Duality in Field Theory
hep-th 2006-03 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A wall-antiwall system in 4D N=2 SQED on a cylinder is dual at low energies to 3D N=2 SQED with two matter superfields and a Chern-Simons term.
On the Moduli Space of the Cascading SU(M+p)xSU(p) Gauge Theory
hep-th 2005-11 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

The cascading conifold gauge theory's moduli space splits into branches labelled by an R-symmetry integer and a cascade step, each branch a symmetric product of deformed conifolds whose deformation is set by gluino co...
(Anti-)Stokes Scattering on the Domain Wall String
hep-th 2024-12 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Meson scattering off a (2+1)-dimensional domain wall string can excite or de-excite the string's shape mode, and this paper gives the leading-order probability densities for both processes, including forward and backw...
Gravitational Waves from Domain Walls in Pulsar Timing Array Datasets
astro-ph.CO 2022-04 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Cosmic domain walls with tension near (40-100 TeV)^3 annihilating at 20-50 MeV provide a fit to NANOGrav and IPTA pulsar timing data statistically comparable to supermassive black hole binaries.
Symmetries and Strings in Field Theory and Gravity
hep-th 2010-11 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

Discrete gauge theories carry an emergent one-form symmetry whose BF description fixes which cosmic strings can be stable and explains recently found constraints on supergravity.
Supersymmetric Solitons and How They Help Us Understand Non-Abelian Gauge Theories
hep-th 2007-03 accept novelty 3.0 of 10

The review argues that non-Abelian flux tubes in N=2 SQCD carry orientational moduli governed by a two-dimensional CP(N-1) model, and that confined monopoles appear as kinks of that worldsheet theory.
Lectures on Supersymmetry Breaking
hep-ph 2007-02 accept novelty 3.0 of 10

Supersymmetry breaking is organized into four worked mechanisms, with the conclusion that realistic and generic breaking requires living in a long-lived metastable vacuum.
TASI Lectures on Solitons
hep-th 2005-09 accept novelty 3.0 of 10

The lectures give a unified, moduli-space-centered account of instantons, monopoles, vortices and domain walls, showing how each arises from another by dimensional reduction, a scalar vev, or a mass deformation.
Large and infinite extra dimensions
hep-ph 2001-04 accept novelty 3.0 of 10

A pedagogical survey of brane-world models in which extra dimensions are large or infinite, covering how matter is trapped on a brane and what observable signatures large, warped or infinite extra dimensions would produce.
A review of gravitational waves from cosmic domain walls
hep-ph 2017-03 accept novelty 2.0 of 10

Unstable cosmic domain walls with tension between roughly 10^3 and 10^12 GeV and annihilation temperatures between 10^-2 and 10^9 GeV produce a stochastic gravitational wave background that pulsar timing arrays, LIGO,...

How later papers used it

83 later papers cite it

Evidence: substantial. 67 of the citing papers share no author with it, and 9 of those carry a confident label from Pith's citation classifier.

Pith read 23 of the 178 citing sentences, choosing only those whose citation markers point at this paper alone, and wrote the paraphrases from them. The summary, the counts, the evidence level, the links and the quotes come from code; the summary counts the papers listed below. A later paper is listed under a label when Pith's citation classifier gives one of its sentences that label at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), Pith's reading finds that the citing paper itself did it, and a second check confirms the paraphrase against the sentence. This section lists uses only. It does not list criticism or disagreement, so their absence here says nothing about how the paper has been received. Papers that share an author with this one are listed apart, under "By the same authors". A quote is the citing authors' own sentence, shown when their paper's licence is CC BY, CC BY-SA or CC0. JSON

1 later paper by other authors is listed below: 1 built on it.

Builds on it 1 of 2 papers with this label

Extended the mechanism of this paper's work on the static four dimensional domain wall to the dynamical domain wall model.

Localization of Vector Field on Dynamical Domain Wall (2016) · 1.00 · paraphrased: the licence does not allow quoting

How the literature uses it

75 arXiv papers cite this in 155 sentences

Each citing sentence is taken from the citing paper's LaTeX source and typed by Pith's classifier. A label appears at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), a contest at 0.7 or more; the quoted words are the citing authors'. How each label was checked · JSON

Papers whose main result relates to this one's

Found among the papers closest to this one by title and main claim. Pith's classifier compared each pair's main results and a second model family confirmed the relation; checked against two further families, shown conflicts agreed 118 times in 120 and shown same results 218 times in 239. The quoted sentence is the other paper's main claim.

States the same result 1 paper

We present a mechanism of gauge field localization on a domain wall within the framework of strongly coupled pure Yang-Mills theory.

Domain walls and gauge field localization in strongly-coupled pure Yang-Mills theories · 0.91

Papers citing it · 115 sentences without a confident label

Builds on it 1 paper

Let us apply the above formulation to the case of $N=1$ pure $SU(N)$ Yang-Mills [ref] .

Notes on Operator Equations of Supercurrent Multiplets and the Anomaly Puzzle in Supersymmetric Field Theories · Central extension of $N=1$ algebra and BPS domain walls · 0.88

Uses its method or tool 2 papers

In particular, the requirement that massless gauge bosons be dynamically localised to the wall is most plausibly met by invoking the Dvali-Shifman mechanism [ref] .

SO(10) domain-wall brane models · The Dvali-Shifman domain-wall brane setup · 0.83
We look for solutions of [ref] which describe BPS domain walls that preserve 1/2 supersymmetry and interpolate between two vacua, which are reached as $x^3→-∞$ and $x^3→+∞$ and are separated by the membrane, i.e. [equation] To this end we follow the well known method (see e.g. [ref] ).

How $\mathcal N=1$, $D=4$ SYM domain walls look like · BPS domain wall solutions sourced by the membrane in the VY effective theory · 0.98

Compares with it 3 papers

Note also that in the supersymmetric limit $m→0$, the tension $T=8 m_Q^1/2 |Λ|^5/2$ agrees exactly with the tension of the BPS saturated domain-wall [ref] .

Spontaneous CP Breaking in a QCD-like Theory · $F=1, N=2$: Exact Results Again · 0.99
Hence, [equation] Restoring the dimensions and using the one-loop renormalization group result for the strong scale, we obtain [equation] Note that, for $n_f=1$, this gives a new derivation of the domain wall tension in $N=1$ SYM, a result obtained earlier by Dvali and Shifman [ref] .

Magnetic bion condensation: A new mechanism of confinement and mass gap in four dimensions · Domain wall tensions and area law of confinement · 0.91
This mechanism is reminiscent of [ref] .

Five-Dimensional Gauge-Higgs Unification: A Standard Model-Like Spectrum · The Higgs Phase · 0.88

Cites it as support 1 paper

Thick branes also demonstrate the required ability to trap particles, as matter fields in the presence of the solitonic background have been shown to possess eigenstates localized around the brane [ref]

Solitonic Brane Inflation · Introduction · 0.98

Cites it as background 26 papers

Some time ago, Dvali and Shifman proposed a field-theoretic mechanism for the localization of a gauge field on a hypersurface (brane) embedded in higher dimensional spacetime (bulk) [ref] .

Domain walls and gauge field localization in strongly-coupled pure Yang-Mills theories · Introduction · 0.95
This paper was devoted to the investigation of the duality between the gauge-field localization mechanism of [ref] and the physics of the Josephson junction.

Localization of Gauge Fields and Monopole Tunnelling · Conclusions · 0.81
In particular, an $𝒩=1$ SYM theory with a gauge group $SU(N)$ has $N$ degenerate supersymmetric vacua associated with different values of the gluino condensate, as was first conjectured in [ref] .[To be concrete, in this paper we will deal with the unitary gauge groups $G=SU(N)$, though the obtained results are valid for a generic simply connected $G$, in which case the number of SYM vacua is equal to the dual Coxeter number $h(G)$ of the gauge group $G$.] As such, there should exist domain wall configurations of SYM fields which interpolate between spatial regions of the theory with two different vacua and preserve one-half of $𝒩=1$, $D=4$ supersymmetry (so called 1/2 BPS domain walls) [ref] .[Generic properties of BPS domain walls in $N=1$, $D=4$ supersymmetric theories (and of other extended solitons in various dimensions) were considered earlier in [ref] .] The domain walls in pure S

Supermembranes and domain walls in $\mathcal N=1$, $D=4$ SYM · Introduction · 0.84

Discussion

Disagree with the review, or know something it missed? Leave a comment, highlight any passage above to comment on it, or challenge this review formally.

[1] [1]

Ya. Zeldovich, I. Kobzarev and L. Okun, JETP 40 (1975) 1; for a review see, e.g. A. Vilenkin, Phys. Rep. 121 (1985) 263

View on Pith 1975

[2] [2]

G. Dvali and M. Shifman, hep-th/9611213, and references therein

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[3] [3]

A. Barnaveli, O. Kancheli, Yad. Fiz. 52 (1990) 905 [ Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 52 (1990) 576]; Preprint TBILISI-HE-2A, 1990 (unpublished)

View on Pith 1990

[4] [4]

N. Seiberg and E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B426 (1994) 19; (E) B430 (1994) 485; Nucl. Phys. B431 (1994) 484

View on Pith 1994

[5] [5]

E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B202 (1982) 253

View on Pith 1982

[6] [6]

A.V. Smilga, hep-th/9607007

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[7] [7]

R. Jackiw and C. Rebbi, Phys. Rev. D13 (1976) 3398; E. Weinberg, Phys. Rev. D24 (1981) 2669

View on Pith 1976

[8] [8]

E. Witten, Nucl. Phys. B249 (1985) 557

View on Pith 1985

[9] [9]

M. Voloshin, hep-ph/9609219

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[10] [10]

M. Shifman and A. Vainshtein, Nucl. Phys. B296 (1988) 445

View on Pith 1988

[11] [11]

M. Shifman and A. Vainshtein, Nucl. Phys. B277 (1986) 456; Nucl. Phys. B359 (1991) 571

View on Pith 1986

[12] [12]

E. Witten and D. Olive, Phys. Lett. B78 (1978) 97

View on Pith 1978

[13] [13]

S. Ferrara, C.A. Savoy, and B. Zumino, Phys. Lett. 100 (1981) 393; for a review see, e.g. G.W. Gibbons, in Supersymmetry, Supergravity and Related Topics, Proc. XV GIFT Int. Seminar on Theoret. Phys., Eds. F. del ´Aguila, J. de Azc´ arraga and L. Ib´ anez, (World Scientiﬁc, Singapore,1985), page 147

View on Pith 1981

[14] [14]

A. Morozov, M. Olshanetsky and M. Shifman, Nucl. Phys. B304 (1988) 291

View on Pith 1988

[15] [15]

I. Aﬄeck, M. Dine and N. Seiberg, Nucl. Phys. B241 (1984) 493; Nucl. Phys. B256 (1985) 557

View on Pith 1984

[16] [16]

A. Vainshtein, V. Zakharov and M. Shifman, Uspekhi Fiz. Nauk 146 (1985) 683 [Sov. Phys. - Uspekhi 28 (1985) 709

View on Pith 1985

[17] [17]

J. Wess and B. Zumino, Phys. Lett. B49 (1974) 52. 8

View on Pith 1974