Loop corrections to the antibrane potential

Journal of High Energy Physics, Jul 2016

Antibranes provide some of the most generic ways to uplift Anti-de Sitter flux compactifications to de Sitter, and there is a growing body of evidence that antibranes placed in long warped throats such as the Klebanov-Strassler warped deformed conifold solution have a brane-brane-repelling tachyon. This tachyon was first found in the regime of parameters in which the backreaction of the antibranes is large, and its existence was inferred from a highly nontrivial cancellation of certain terms in the inter-brane potential. We use a brane effective action approach, similar to that proposed by Michel, Mintun, Polchinski, Puhm and Saad in [29], to analyze antibranes in Klebanov-Strassler when their backreaction is small, and find a regime of parameters where all perturbative contributions to the action can be computed explicitly. We find that the cancellation found at strong coupling is also present in the weak-coupling regime, and we establish its existence to all loops. Our calculation indicates that the spectrum of the antibrane worldvolume theory is not gapped, and may generically have a tachyon. Hence uplifting mechanisms involving antibranes remain questionable even when backreaction is small.

A PDF file should load here. If you do not see its contents the file may be temporarily unavailable at the journal website or you do not have a PDF plug-in installed and enabled in your browser.

Alternatively, you can download the file locally and open with any standalone PDF reader:

https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2FJHEP07%282016%29132.pdf

Loop corrections to the antibrane potential

Received: March Loop corrections to the antibrane potential Iosif Bena 0 1 Johan Blaback 0 1 David Turton 0 1 0 CEA, CNRS , F-91191 Gif sur Yvette , France 1 Institut de Physique Theorique, Universite Paris Saclay Antibranes provide some of the most generic ways to uplift Anti-de Sitter ux compacti cations to de Sitter, and there is a growing body of evidence that antibranes placed in long warped throats such as the Klebanov-Strassler warped deformed conifold solution have a brane-brane-repelling tachyon. This tachyon was rst found in the regime of parameters in which the backreaction of the antibranes is large, and its existence was inferred from a highly nontrivial cancellation of certain terms in the inter-brane potential. We use a brane e ective action approach, similar to that proposed by Michel, Mintun, Polchinski, Puhm and Saad in [29], to analyze antibranes in Klebanov-Strassler when their backreaction is small, and nd a regime of parameters where all perturbative contributions to the action can be computed explicitly. We nd that the cancellation found at strong coupling is also present in the weak-coupling regime, and we establish its existence to all loops. Our calculation indicates that the spectrum of the antibrane worldvolume theory is not gapped, and may generically have a tachyon. Hence uplifting mechanisms involving antibranes remain questionable even when backreaction is small. Brane Dynamics in Gauge Theories; D-branes; Flux compacti cations 1 Introduction 3 4 5 Discussion A Conventions 2 From bulk solutions to worldvolume theories 2.1 2.2 2.3 The Klebanov-Strassler background The bosonic terms in the worldvolume theory The fermionic terms in the worldvolume theory Loop corrections and non-renormalization theorems Physical interpretation B Fermion masses from D5 polarization 1 5 1). The second is when the backreaction of the antibranes is small in any region where supergravity can be trusted (gsN 1), however one does not truncate to leading order in gsN . The third regime is when one truncates to leading order in gsN 1; this is sometimes referred to as working in the gsN ! 0 limit. The most commonly used systems for studying the physics of antibranes have D3, M2, or D6 charges dissolved in ux, such as the Klebanov-Strassler (KS) warped deformed conifold background [1], the Cvetic-Gibbons-Lu-Pope (CGLP) warped Stenzel background [2], and the Janssen-Meessen-Ort n solution with nite Romans mass [3]. The most precise calculations of the physics of antibranes have been done in the rst (large backreaction) regime. In this regime it was shown that antibrane solutions have a singularity [4{11] which cannot be resolved by brane polarization when the antibranes are smeared and their worldvolume is at [12{14], and moreover cannot be cloaked by a black hole horizon [15{18].1 1Other antibrane singularities such as those corresponding to antibranes with non- at (Anti-de Sitter) worldvolumes [19, 20] can be resolved by brane polarization. There are also antibrane singularities that can be cloaked with a horizon [21]. However, the physics of these antibranes is very di erent from that generically have a brane-brane-repelling tachyon on their worldvolume [24], which may be responsible for the fact that their singularity cannot be cloaked by an event horizon. The third regime of parameters described above corresponds to discarding all physics beyond leading order in gsN 1. In this regime, one can study probe anti-D3 branes in the solution S-dual to the KS geometry. One nds that the probe action describing the polarization of these branes into D5 branes has a metastable minimum [25]; this result has been extrapolated to the original KS regime to argue that anti-D3 branes polarize into NS5 branes and give rise to metastable KS minima [25]. However, as discussed in ref. [24], such polarization can only be reliably described when gsN 1. Furthermore, as explained in ref. [26], calculations that ignore subleading e ects in gsN can give misleading results about metastable vacua: a brane con guration that appears metastable in the gsN ! 0 limit [26{28] can in fact correspond to a vacuum of a di erent theory, and this can only be seen by studying the system at nite gsN .2 Hence, in order to investigate further whether antibranes may or may not be metastable in long warped throats, the only regime amenable to calculations that remains to be explored is the second one, 0 < gsN 1. In an interesting paper, Michel, Mintun, Polchinski, Puhm, and Saad have argued [29] that in this regime, the correct way to describe one or several antibranes in a background with positive charge dissolved in the uxes is to use a so-called \brane e ective action"; this action is obtained by integrating out heavy degrees of freedom to obtain an e ective eld theory (EFT) of light elds on the brane interacting with supergravity elds [30, 31]. The exploration of ref. [29] leaves open the question of whether or not antibranes in the KS solution have a brane-brane-repelling tachyon of the type found in [24]. Indeed, upon examining the brane e ective action of anti-D3 branes localized at the North Pole of the S3 at the bottom of the KS solution, one can easily see that all the terms of this action must transform in representations of the SO(6) R-symmetry group. For example, the interaction potential between two branes is a combination of an SO(6) singlet and a term transforming in the 200 [32], that furthermore must be invariant under the SO(3) SO(3) symmetry preserved by the background and one of the branes. The absence of a tachyon depends on the exact balance of these terms: if the term in the 1 is stronger than the one in the 200 then there is no tachyon, but, if the term in the 200 is stronger than the term in the 1, there will always exist a tachyon. The purpose of this paper is to identify a regime of parameters in which the brane e ective action describing localized anti-D3 branes in the KS solution can be computed, of anti-D3 brane uplifting constructions [22]. For example, the antibranes with non- at worldvolume only polarize when their worldvolume cosmological constant is parametrically large [20]. Similarly, the cloaked solutions of [21] have a very non-generic type of transverse uxes which allow them to evade the blackening no-go theorem of [18], but it is hard to see how antibranes in generic transverse uxes could do the same [23]. 2One can also see this from the fact that the action of the tunneling instanton diverges: when gsN > 0 the distance between the supersymmetric and non-supersymmetric brane con gurations diverges at spatial in nity; in the gsN ! 0 limit, this distance is nite but the tension of the branes diverges, and so the tunneling process cannot take place [26]. { 2 { and to use it to evaluate the inter-brane potential to all orders in perturbation theory. As we will discuss in section 4, the diagrams in the brane e ective action approach of ref. [29] correspond to string diagrams in the limit of massless closed strings. For example, at one loop, the string diagram is an annulus. In the opposite eld-theory limit in which the open strings become light, the same string diagram corresponds to a one-loop diagram in the worldvolume gauge theory of the anti-D3 branes. Similarly, the higher-loop diagrams in this theory correspond to limits of string diagrams with more than two boundaries. Since this limit allows explicit computations to be performed, we work in the low-energy gauge theory on the branes. We rst compute the tree-level action, including the terms that are induced by the Upon placing anti-D3 branes in a background with a transverse three-form ux, the fermions on the branes acquire a mass, proportional to the value of the imaginary self-dual (ISD) component of the ux [33]. The ISD three-form ux also induces a scalar trilinear interaction [34, 35]. In addition, anti-D3 branes placed in transverse uxes will generically also have tree-level scalar masses, that can be obtained by expanding the brane potential to quadratic order.3 The tree-level fermion and scalar masses in the action of anti-D3 branes placed in the KS solution (or similar supersymmetric ISD backgrounds) have three important properties. Firstly, of the six Hermitian scalars, three are massive with equal masses, while three are massless. Secondly, of the four Weyl fermions, three are massive and one is massless, and the mass-squared of the three massive fermions is half that of the three massive scalars. Thirdly, the scalar trilinear and the fermion mass term obey a very simple linear relation, discussed in more detail in section 2.3. The rst property follows from the fact that the functions entering in the KS solution only depend on the radial coordinate . This implies that there is a at potential, and hence no force preventing antibranes from moving along the three directions inside the large S3 at the bottom of the KS solution. The second property is even more intriguing, and is a key feature of anti-D3 branes in KS. There are several ways to see this; the most straightforward way would be to match the multiple conventions for these terms and compute them directly. However, we will instead derive this property by computing the potential for a probe antiD3 brane in the KS solution to polarize into a D5 brane wrapping the contracting S2 of the warped deformed conifold. This potential does not allow for brane polarization, but one nds that the quadratic term is twice larger than it would be if the polarization potential were a perfect square. This is described in appendix B. This veri es that the three scalars corresponding to the motion of the brane away from the bottom of the warped deformed conifold have a mass-squared that is twice the would-be supersymmetric value. These two calculations indicate that the sum of the squares of the tree-level scalar masses and the sum of the squares of the tree-level fermion masses are the same, which agrees with the more general result recently found in [32] that this is a property of all D3 branes at equilibrium. Note however that the traceless part of the scalar mass matrix 3When anti-D3 branes are placed in an imaginary anti-self-dual (IASD) background, the fermions are massless. In addition, if the background is of IASD Gran~a-Polchinski-GKP-type [36, 37], the antibranes feel no potential when moving in the transverse directions, and hence the six scalars are also massless. { 3 { depends on the features of the geometry near the location of the branes and hence is not determined by the fermion masses. Having obtained the tree-level brane action, we next compute the eld-theory loop corrections. The easiest way to compute these corrections is to observe that the antibrane worldvolume theory has the following structure. Consider N = 4 Super-Yang-Mills (SYM) theory, broken to N = 1 by giving equal masses to the three chiral multiplets. As we will show, the antibrane worldvolume theory is a particular N = 0 theory originating from this equal-mass N = 1 theory by the addition of a traceless scalar bilinear term (a B-term) that breaks the remaining supersymmetry but preserves the SO(3) SO(3) symmetry. One can then apply a combination of certain general results on niteness obtained by Parkes and West [38{41] to nd that this theory is nite to all orders in perturbation theory. Thus the masses of the chiral multiplets and the B-terms receive no perturbative corrections, which implies that the inter-brane potential along the S3 at the bottom of the deformed conifold is exactly zero. This is the main result of our paper. This result is all the more striking because it agrees exactly with the result obtained 1 by studying backreacted antibranes in the KS solution [24]. Indeed, one can compute the Polchinski-Strassler [42] polarization potential of fully-backreacted antiD3 branes localized in the KS solution and one nds, after a pair of surprising cancellations, that the quadratic piece in the polarization potential along the S3 at the bottom of the warped deformed conifold is exactly zero.4 This in turn indicates that the three scalars that describe the motion of the anti-D3 branes at the bottom of the KS solution are massless 4It is important to emphasize that the underlying reason for this cancellation is not understood, and moving at the bottom of the throat is repulsive [14]. As this expression suggests, the metrics which have a tilde are unwarped. The C4 potential takes the form5 where the function is related to the warp factor e4A by6 2.1 The Klebanov-Strassler background The purpose of this subsection is to review some properties of the KS background [1], to extract certain relations that we need for our analysis, and to introduce notation. We will not give a full review of KS; for more details we refer the reader to ref. [43], which agrees with most of our conventions. The KS background is a supersymmetric, non-compact, Gran~a-Polchinski-GKPtype [36, 37] solution. By this we mean the following. The G3 F3 ie H3 ux has (2,1) complexity, the dilaton e = gs is constant, and the ten-dimensional (string-frame) HJEP07(216)3 metric is a warped product of R3;1 with a Calabi-Yau base: (2.1) (2.2) (2.3) (2.4) (2.5) where 0 is a constant that we gauge x by requiring that ( = 0) = 0. In the KS solution, the Calabi-Yau base is a deformed conifold with topology R+ S2 S3, and all the functions that determine the solution, such as and A above, depend only on the radial direction of the deformed conifold, which is commonly denoted as and parameterizes the R+. the throat, This solution has four supercharges, which are compatible with those of D3 branes. Hence, probe anti-D3 branes experience a potential that forces them to the bottom of ds120 = e2Ads~42 + e 2Ads~62 : C4 = ?~4 = e e4A 0 ; In this paper we consider anti-D3 branes localized at the bottom of the deformed conifold, and hence we employ a local R6 coordinate system [24] parameterizing the neighborhood of the branes, ds120 = e2A dx dx + e 2Ag~mndxmdxn ; where the internal metric is given by g~mn = b mn for some constant b that depends on conventions. 5We will use the notation that F5 = ?10dC4, or equivalently that F5 is the internal part of the self-dual ve-form eld strength F5 = (1 + ?10)F5. 6Note that we are using the string-frame metric throughout this paper. This means that there is an extra factor of the (constant) dilaton in this expression compared to the corresponding formula in [37], written using the Einstein-frame metric. For later convenience we introduce complex coordinates with i = 1; 2; 3, in terms of which we have 2 / (x72 + x82 + x92) ; 1 2 1 2 z i p (xi+3 + ixi+6) ; In such a local coordinate system, the local expansion in terms of is now an expansion in x7;8;9 | the local coordinates of the R+ S2. This means that the 2 term of the anti-D3 brane potential will have the form which, as mentioned in the Introduction, can be decomposed as the sum of a quadratic term transforming in the 1 (singlet) of the SO(6) R-symmetry and a term transforming in the 200 traceless symmetric representation, 2 / (x72 + x82 + x92) 1 2 = (x42 + x52 + x62 + x72 + x82 + x92) To derive the supersymmetric term on the anti-D3 brane worldvolume, we will make use of the F5 Bianchi identity dF5 = H3 ^ F3 ; written here for a source-less background, such as the KS solution. Expanding around the bottom of the deformed conifold, and using the fact that e 4A has no linear term in this expansion for KS, we can write the l.h.s. of eq. (2.11) as using the metric and the C4 potential. Hence in real coordinates, or in the complex coordinates introduced before dF5 = e 8A0 d~?6d j0 ; dF5 = 2e 8A0 b 1e where we also used the relation (2.3). To evaluate the r.h.s. of eq. (2.11) we rely on the imaginary self duality of the KS G3 ux, which implies that the NSNS and RR uxes are related by H3 = e ?6 F3. Together with F3 = 12 (G3 + G3), this gives { 6 { where (G3)ijk = jG3j ijk and jG3j is real. Since A a function of only, we can now write HJEP07(216)3 (G3)mnp(G3)mnp = 3(G3)ijk(G3)ijk : 3 2 4 s 1 g2b 2e8A0 jG3j2 i| : In due course we shall also make use of the other quadratic terms in the Taylor expansion of e4A. Again using the fact that A is a function of only, we can use eqs. (2.7){(2.10) to nd that these terms are given by where indices are contracted using the warped metric. Transforming to complex coordinates and using the fact that G3 is purely (2,1), only one type of contraction is non-vanishing, (2.16) (2.17) (2.18) (2.19) (2.20) These terms transform in the 200, unlike the singlet term in (2.18). As one can see from eqs. (2.7){(2.10), the contributions to the potential along the S3 directions coming from the terms in the 1 and the 200 are equal and opposite, while along the R+ S2 directions they add. 2.2 The bosonic terms in the worldvolume theory We now derive the worldvolume gauge theory of anti-D3 branes at the bottom of the KS throat. We start with the bosonic terms in the action, and we compute the fermionic terms in the next subsection. The worldvolume gauge eld will not play an important role, so for ease of presentation we shall suppress it in what follows, with the understanding that the full action contains the usual gauge kinetic terms and covariant derivative couplings. In addition, since the U(1) sector of the gauge theory is free, we focus on the SU(N3) sector. With these points understood, the bosonic part of the theory is given by the DBI and WZ parts of the brane Lagrangian7 p 3 Tr nP [ei {2' C ^ eB2 ]o det(P [Mab]) det(Qmn) ; o 0123 : We work with the string-frame metric. The indices a; b; : : : are ten-dimensional, the indices ; ; : : : are four-dimensional worldvolume indices parallel to the brane, and m; n; : : : are six-dimensional indices transverse to the brane. The tensors in the above expression are 7The Lagrangian is written with explicit signs corresponding to an antibrane in our conventions. We use the generic term brane to refer to both anti-Dp and Dp branes, where explicit signs and dimensions determine the details. { 7 { de ned as follows: 2 `s2 and the D3 brane charge is 3 = 2 =(2 `s)4, where `s is the string length.8 The Hermitian scalars 'm transform in the adjoint of SU(N3) and parameterize the brane positions. We also choose a gauge for B2 such that B2j0 = 0. Expanding in powers of , the DBI Lagrangian becomes { 8 { where we have used the fact mentioned below eq. (2.3) that in our gauge we have ( = 0) = 0 and, hence, at the location of the branes dC6 = F7 = ?10 F3. The two trilinear terms can be combined into an expression involving a particular combination of G3 and its complex conjugate, L tri = G3)mnpTrf'm'n'pg : 3 2 3 e4A0 (G3 i = p 1 2 'i+3 + i'i+6 : It is convenient to introduce complex coordinates that we shall use from now on, In these complex coordinates the full Lagrangian, L = LDBI + LWZ, becomes where a bar on the scalars indicates Hermitian conjugation. 8Our conventions are described in appendix A. 3 i e4A0 e 1 2 e 1 2 e o 1 2 e (2.22) HmnpTrf'm'n'pg + g~mqg~npTr f['m; 'n]['q; 'p]g where as usual the H3 coupling arises from the Taylor expansion of B2, and where we have dropped the constant term proportional to e4A0 . Similarly, expanding the WZ Lagrangian gives 3 i e4A0 Trf'm'n'pg(?6F )mnp i + e4A0 GijkTrf i j kg + h.c. i j g + h.c. g~i{g~j|Trf[ i; j ][ {; |] [ i; |][ j ; {] g + : : : (2.23) (2.24) (2.25) (2.26) In order to proceed we make a constant rescaling of the scalars to obtain a canonicallynormalized kinetic term. This is achieved by de ning ^i i Having done this, we immediately drop the hat from the rescaled expressions and exclusively use the canonically-normalized scalars from now on. After applying the relation (2.18) derived from the Bianchi identity in the previous subsection, the Lagrangian becomes L = i | g i| 2 + + 1 2 2 p pgs e4A0 jG3jb 3=2 p gs1=2 ! i j g + h.c. 2 pgs e4A0 jG3jb 3=2 i{ j|Tr [ i; j ][ {; |] ijkTrf i j kg + h:c: (2.28) will shortly write part of the Lagrangian in terms of an N = 1 superpotential and, as is well-known, the F-term part of the quadrilinear interaction of N = 4 SYM is contained in the superpotential, while the D-term part is not (see for example [44]). We can identify the bilinear and trilinear scalar interactions in the language of soft supersymmetry-breaking. To this end we introduce complex-scalar masses (m2B)i|, B-terms bij , and the (2,1) trilinear interaction rijk via 1 2 bij Trf Lsoft = (m2B)i|Trf By matching these terms with eq. (2.28), we nd the following bosonic soft supersymmetrybreaking terms: Complex-scalar masses: (m2B)i| = m2B i| ; mB 2 pgs e4A0 jG3jb 3=2 ; B-terms: bij = (2,1) trilinear: rijk = m2B ij ; p gs1=2 ! We note that the tree-level B-terms are real. A priori these terms could have had an imaginary part, which would correspond to o -diagonal elements in the real matrix 2.3 The fermionic terms in the worldvolume theory The fermionic part of the action for D3 branes in transverse RR and NSNS three-form uxes was rst explicitly written down in ref. [33] and further studied in refs. [45{47]. { 9 { where indices have been raised with i{. Then the fermion mass matrix is proportional to the complex conjugate of S [33], By expanding the G3 ux at the location of the branes, one nds a diagonal fermion mass matrix with equal entries, (2.31) (2.32) (2.33) (2.34) We now compute the terms in this fermionic action and their precise normalization for antibranes in KS. The calculation deriving the fermion bilinear [33] and that determining the scalar trilinear [34] were performed using di erent conventions, so it is necessary to x the relative normalizations of the bosonic and fermionic actions. To x this overall factor, we now examine the form of the fermionic bilinear terms. Recall that upon writing N = 4 SYM in an N = 1 super eld formalism, one obtains three chiral multiplets. The KS background has only (2; 1) primitive three-form ux, so the only additional term in the fermion action is a mass for the three Weyl fermions in the chiral multiplets, and the gaugino remains massless [33]. We write the (2,1) primitive This determines the correct normalization of the fermionic terms in the Lagrangian, and implies that the sum of the squares of the tree-level scalar masses and the sum of the squares of the tree-level fermion masses are the same. This fact agrees with the more general result recently found in ref. [32] that this is a property of all D3 branes at equilibrium in warped compacti cations. Having established this relation between fermion and boson masses, we now observe that the (2; 1) scalar trilinear coupling is proportional to the mass of the fermions. This S{| = S {| ) miFj = mF ij : Next, we observe that the three massive Hermitian scalars have a mass-squared which is twice the one that they would have if supersymmetry had been preserved. This can be seen from computing the polarization potential of a D5 brane carrying anti-D3 brane charge and wrapping the shrinking S2 of the KS background. As outlined in appendix B, the D5 brane polarization potential does not have a nite-radius minimum. However, when the term originating from the mass is halved, the polarization potential becomes a perfect square and has a supersymmetric polarization minimum. Hence the supersymmetric masssquared is half the mass-squared of the three scalars corresponding to motion away from the tip. From the argument made around eq. (2.7) we see that the supersymmetric mass is the mass of the complex scalars, given in eq. (2.30). Thus the mass of the Weyl fermions and the complex scalars are equal, mF = mB = 2 pgs e4A0 jG3jb 3=2 : Lsusy = Tr i j + c gYM 3 ijkTr n i j ko where c is a numerical parameter that depends on conventions. The supersymmetry is broken from N = 4 ! N = 1? by the three equal masses of the chiral multiplets. The i are the chiral multiplet super elds, written in component elds as fact, combined with the equality of fermion and boson masses in the absence of the B-term, allows us to temporarily put aside the B-term (and the D-term quadrilinear interaction), and write the remainder of the Lagrangian in terms of N = 1 super elds. Similar observations have been made in refs. [ 46, 47 ]. The Lagrangian for these terms can then be written as Upon eliminating the auxiliary elds F i, the Lagrangian becomes Lsusy = i i ) ig i = i + p 2 i + 2 i F : (mF )(mF ) i{ Trf i { g miFj Trf jc gYMj2 i{ j|Tr [ i; j ][ {; |] ; where again indices are contracted with i| or its inverse. We can now read o 9 (2.35) (2.36) rijk = mF c gYM ijk : Combining eqs. (2.30), (2.34) and (2.39), we observe that the relation between fermion masses and scalar trilinear couplings takes the explicit form: This simple relation, which is also present in more general theories on D-brane worldvolume, will be a crucial ingredient in our analysis of perturbative corrections, as in general it leads to signi cant simpli cations in beta functions [48]. The supersymmetric Lagrangian (2.38) reproduces the fermionic terms and all terms in the bosonic Lagrangian (2.28) except for the B-terms and the D-term quadrilinear. Thus we see that the B-terms are the only terms responsible for breaking the N = 1 supersymmetry, and making the theory an N = 0? theory. As mentioned earlier, the gauge elds have been suppressed, but can easily be reintroduced. This concludes the calculation of the anti-D3 brane worldvolume tree-level Lagrangian. 9There is a redundancy in conventions in how one exactly chooses the value of the constant c, and how one relates gYM to gs; for our purposes we will not need to x this redundancy. = + + + + + + + + : : : HJEP07(216)3 scalar couplings and the Yukawa couplings. for planar diagrams, and blue for non-planar diagrams. 3 Loop corrections and non-renormalization theorems Having derived the tree-level action of the anti-D3 worldvolume gauge theory, we now proceed to investigate quantum corrections. These corrections would generically cause the masses them to run logarithmically with the energy, and this running can be thought of as coming from the backreaction of the anti-D3 branes on the corresponding supergravity elds. The worldvolume gauge theory of a stack of N3 coincident anti-D3 branes is a U(N3) = SU(N3) U(1) theory. All of the interaction terms derived above, except the mass terms and the B-terms, are anti-symmetrized and hence, as usual, the U(1) sector is free and decouples. In the SU(N3) sector, the diagrams that provide the corrections to the masses of the scalars are summarized schematically in gure 1. These diagrams are the usual eldtheory limit of open-string diagrams (see gure 2). These diagrams come with a factor of gsN3 for each additional boundary, and hence we are in a regime of perturbative control 1. Thus, naively, one would expect a one-loop correction to the scalar mass (1)(m2B) (m2B)tree / gsN3 : In the previous section we derived the structure of how supersymmetry is broken at tree level on anti-D3 branes in KS, W4 = | c gYM 3 ijkTr N{=z4 i j k ! W1 = W4 + } | 1 2 N{=z1? miFj Tr i j } | N{=z0? } ! W1 & B-terms : (3.2) The purpose of this section is to describe how this type of supersymmetry breaking a ects the running of the masses and couplings. Since along the S3 directions there is a perfect cancellation between the supersymmetric scalar mass terms and the real part of the supersymmetry-breaking B-terms, this direction is at at tree level. At loop level there (3.1) are a priori three possibilities. Either the real part of the B-terms and the supersymmetric masses run di erently, and then the spectrum along the S3 becomes either gapped or tachyonic, or they run in the same way, preserving the masslessness of the S3 scalars. Perturbative corrections to supersymmetric gauge theories of the kind we are interested in were investigated by Parkes and West [38{41]. They considered the addition of mass terms that preserve some supersymmetry, and they also applied the spurion method [49] to study theories in which supersymmetry is completely broken. They derived several powerful all-loop results, a subset of which we now combine for our analysis. The rst step in the breaking of supersymmetry is the addition of a mass term to the N = 4 superpotential, resulting in an equal-mass N = 1? theory. This theory was shown to remain nite to all loops [38]. niteness to all orders in perturbation theory [39].10 The second step is to add to the Lagrangian the particular B-terms induced by the KS background. These B-terms have the \X2 Y 2" form (2.10). It was shown that adding such terms, in conjunction with supersymmetric masses, to N = 4 Super Yang-Mills, preserves Combining these two results implies that neither the supersymmetric masses nor the B-terms receive any higher-loop correction, and hence the masslessness of the three scalars along the S3 direction is preserved to all orders in the loop expansion. This absence of these perturbative corrections applies not only to the bosonic masses, but to all terms in the Lagrangian of the anti-D3 brane gauge theory. 4 Physical interpretation In this section we discuss the physical signi cance of the all-loop result obtained above. To do this, we rst described the region of parameter space in which we work, and then compare it to previous results. The open string loop expansion is valid for gsN3 1 and, since the U(1) sector is free, we focus on the SU(N3) sector and hence work at N3 > 1. This is the opposite regime to the one used to analyze fully-backreacted antibranes in supergravity (gsN3 1) and we believe that the striking agreement between our results and those of [24] strongly suggests that the scalars corresponding to motion along the S3 at the bottom of the KS solution remain massless for all values of gsN3. We work in the usual low-curvature supergravity limit, where the length scale, L, associated to the curvature of the background is much larger than the string length, `s=L 1. This suppresses higher-derivative terms in the brane action, coming from the Taylor expansion of the supergravity elds, such as 1 X =0 ! gmn(') = (4.1) where p `s=L. Thirdly, we work in the AdS/CFT decoupling regime, in which the low-energy gauge theory on the brane decouples from the supergravity elds. This regime corresponds to 10In addition, the \X2 Y 2" terms preserve niteness to all orders when added to a nite N = 2 theory [40], and preserve two-loop [41] and one-loop [50] niteness in N = 1 gauge theories. r AdS/CFT HJEP07(216)3 out in the di erent limits include: A. [29], B. [23], C. [24], D. The present work. The AdS/CFT-like decoupling limit is shaded in blue, and the vertical (green) dashed line is gsN3 = 1. + + : : : elds [29]. Crosses represent external supergravity elds. + + + : : : represent closed string vertex operators corresponding to the external legs in gure 4. sending the distance r? from the branes to zero with r?= 0 xed [51, 52], which means that one has r 4 ? gsN3( 0)2 Since we work in the weakly-coupled gauge theory, the conjectured bulk dual is stronglycurved and the corresponding sigma-model is strongly-coupled. We depict our regime and compare it to the regimes considered in other works in gure 3. The di erence between our approach and that of [29] is that the latter considers a low-energy EFT involving both brane and supergravity elds, that is valid for r The diagrams that enter in the calculation of this EFT, depicted in gure 4, are the massless-closed-string limit of the string diagrams in gure 5. Our diagrams are simply the light-open-string limit of the same diagrams. For example, if we insert external openstring vertex operators in gure 5, we see that this diagram and the one-loop open-string diagrams in gure 2 are the same. Furthermore, as mentioned above, the would-be eld ? `s. theory corrections to the fermion and boson mass terms can be thought of as representing the correction to the corresponding supergravity elds caused by the backreaction of the brane. Therefore, the diagrams in gure 4 and those in gure 1 compute the same quantity in two di erent regimes. The advantage of our regime is that it allows one to do precise calculations, which, given the current technology of string loop calculations in Ramond-Ramond backgrounds, does not appear possible in the approach of [29] in the near future. Furthermore, it is entirely possible that if such calculations were done, the exact cancellations leading to the at directions along the S3 may not survive in the regime of parameters of [29], and thus the corresponding EFT might have tachyonic terms. A priori, such terms could arise both for multiple branes and for a single brane.11 If such tachyonic terms are present, the dynamics becomes complicated and falls beyond what can be computed with current technology, either analytically or numerically. One can ask whether there may be a nearby metastable minimum that could be used for uplifting to de Sitter (as discussed in [29]); such a minimum would rst need to be found, and then a stability analysis would need to be performed. An analytic approach would be to use the brane e ective action, which involves calculating string diagrams in a Ramond-Ramond background. A numerical approach would be to build a fully-backreacted solution and analyze its stability; this is a cohomogeneity-three problem. Both approaches are currently computationally out of reach. Taken together with the existing results on antibrane instabilities, we believe that the burden of proof for claiming the existence of a new metastable minimum rests on those who would make such a claim. Hence, our reluctance to share the optimism expressed in [29] regarding anti-D3 brane uplift [22]. In the analysis of fully backreacted antibranes in the KS solution [24] it was argued that the cancellation of the bosonic potential along the S3 is not the full story. More speci cally, this cancellation comes from a nontrivial relation between the real part of the B-terms and the trace of the boson mass matrix, but in addition the B-terms could also have imaginary parts that are not prohibited by the symmetry of the problem, and one therefore expects to nd them generically. Such a term would give rise to tachyonic instabilities in o -diagonal directions [24]. In our analysis, the imaginary parts of the B-terms are not present at tree level, and are also not generated by loops. However, since there are no symmetries protecting against such terms, it is entirely possible that they will arise non-perturbatively in gsN3 or at subleading order in the expansions discussed above that take us away from the regime of parameters in which we work (the blue region in gure 3). If such corrections preserve the balance between the real part of the B-terms and the scalar mass terms, then non-zero imaginary parts of the B-terms would give rise to tachyons. While one expects this balance to be preserved in the decoupling limit when interpolating from weak to strong coupling, there is a priori no reason why it should be preserved away from the decoupling limit. This in turn could generate a gap or could lead 11Although, of course, for a single brane, such a tachyon cannot be interpreted as indicating brane-brane repulsion. to tachyons even without non-zero imaginary parts of the B-terms. Thus, while our result does not prove that the potential has a tachyonic direction, it shows that the potential is vulnerable to tachyonic corrections of the types discussed above, which may be expected to be generically present by standard EFT reasoning. Another question which one can ask is whether in our regime of parameters one can see a non-perturbative brane- ux annihilation e ect of the type proposed in [25]. If one rst considers anti-D3 branes in the S-dual of KS geometry, their worldvolume theory has Higgs vacua. These vacua correspond to the polarization of the anti-D3 branes into D5 branes wrapping an S2 inside the S3 at the bottom of the throat. However, in the limit in which we work, `s=L ! 0, the height of the energy barrier that these D5 brane have to traverse in order to trigger brane- ux annihilation is in nite, and hence the tunneling probability of the anti-D3 branes is zero. It is almost certain that this height is also in nite in the KS geometry in our limit, because the size of the S3 that the NS5 brane with anti-D3 brane charge has to sweep out diverges. We note in passing that it has been suggested that anti-D3 brane singularities may possibly be resolved by polarization into NS5-branes [23]. We do not study such polarization in this work, since it requires one to work in the regime of parameters gsN 1, as discussed in the Introduction. We recall however that it was argued in [53] that a tachyonic term in the polarization potential renders this NS5 con guration unstable to developing shape modes that break spherical symmetry. The brane-brane repulsion results in the tachyonic accumulation of anti-D3 density (encoded by the worldvolume ux on the NS5) near the endpoints of the major axis of an NS5 ellipsoid inside the S3. Another possible manifestation of brane-brane repulsion is the expulsion of anti-D3 branes from the NS5 (analogous to the anti-M2 expulsion discussed in [14]). 5 Discussion In this paper we have computed the potential of anti-D3 branes placed at the bottom of the KS throat, in the regime 0 < gsN 1 and in the AdS/CFT limit, to all orders in perturbation theory. We rst computed the tree-level Lagrangian, and determined the pattern of (soft) supersymmetry breaking. We then applied certain well-established results on niteness to show that this Lagrangian does not receive corrections to all loops in perturbation theory, and hence three of the scalars on the worldvolume of the anti-D3 branes in KS remain massless to all orders in the loop expansion. The fact that this result matches the one obtained in the fully-backreacted regime (gsN3 1) in ref. [24] is strong evidence that the spectrum of anti-D3 branes in KS does not become gapped in any regime of parameters where exact calculations can be made. Furthermore, since there is no symmetry prohibiting an imaginary B-term in the e ective action on the branes, and since such a term will always introduce tachyons, the optimism about brane-brane-repelling tachyons disappearing when gsN3 1 appears premature. Although the explicit analysis performed in this paper is for the KS background, we expect the masslessness of some of the worldvolume scalars to be a generic feature of antiD3 branes in conical highly-warped geometries: for a conical geometry to be regular at its HJEP07(216)3 bottom it is necessary to have some nite cycle, such as the S3 of the deformed conifold or the S2 of the resolved conifold. From the perspective of the worldvolume theory of an antibrane at the bottom of this geometry, this would imply that some of the scalars are massless at tree level and hence the B-term will be nonzero. In a generic conical geometry with ISD uxes the theory on the anti-D3 branes will contain fermion bilinears and scalar trilinears, that will consist of both \supersymmetric" terms (of the kind we found in KS) coming from the primitive (2,1) components of G3, and also non-supersymmetric terms coming from the (0,3) and the non-primitive (1,2) G3 components. For example, a (0,3) component would introduce a hijkTrf scalar trilinear term and a gaugino mass M . The relation between hijk and M is exactly of the same form as that between the supersymmetric fermion masses and scalar trilinear i j k g + h.c. couplings that we analyzed in detail in section 2.3, and this, combined with the vanishing of the mass supertrace at tree level [32], implies that the beta-functions of the theory will vanish both at one and two loops [48, 54{56].12 Hence, the scalars that are massless at tree level will remain massless at least to two loops. A similar argument can be made for a more generic background that contains a combination of primitive (2,1), (0,3), and non-primitive (1,2) ux: these uxes would give rise to a symmetric 4 4 fermion mass matrix that can be diagonalized (this corresponds to changing the complex structure), and the resulting theory would be the one with (2,1) and (0,3) uxes discussed above. Our result appears to be in tension with the argument that the spectrum of antiD3 branes in the KS geometry is gapped [57], and also with the related argument that separated anti-D3 branes at the bottom of the KS solution should be screened by ux and therefore should attract each other [58]. To explicitly compute the e ect of this screening on the potential between two anti-D3 branes, one must perform a full string calculation, which cannot be done with current technology. However, in the limit where the branes are close to each other, this string calculation reduces to our eld-theory calculation, which nds that the tree-level masslessness of three of the six scalars that describe the anti-D3 branes is preserved to all loops. Therefore, the spectrum of the anti-D3 branes remains un-gapped in our regime of parameters. Hence, the intuition that antibranes at the bottom of KS are screened and therefore attract each other does not appear to give the correct physics in either of the two regimes of parameters where precise calculations can be done: the regime we have considered and the large-backreaction regime [24]. The absence of a gap may also be problematic for phenomenological applications. When the KS throat is glued to a compact manifold, the gluing introduces perturbations to the KS throat, which in turn can give very small masses to the scalars that are massless in the in nite KS solution. These masses were estimated in ref. [59], and were found to be exponentially smaller than the typical mass scale of the light elds at the bottom of the throat, and hence phenomenologically problematic. Had our calculations found instead that the inter-brane degrees of freedom were gapped, there would have only been three such light elds, corresponding to the center-of-mass degrees of freedom, and these elds 12In particular, this implies that the mass supertrace will remain zero at one and two loops [32]. could presumably have been uplifted in some other way. However, uplifting 3N3 massless modes appears a more and more onerous task as one increases N3. It would be interesting to compare these corrections to those discussed in section 4, in particular to see whether any possible tachyonic term could overwhelm these very light masses. We have also discussed the regime of parameters in which our calculation is done and its relation to the brane e ective action approach of [29]: the Feynman diagrams that enter in our eld-theory calculation arise from the light-open-string limit of string diagrams, which in the opposite massless-closed-string limit, reduce to the supergravity amplitudes considered in [29]. There is another di erence between these approaches, which has to do with the number of anti-D3 branes we consider. The theory on N3 anti-D3 branes has a U(N3) gauge group, and its dynamics can be split in an SU(N3) sector and a U(1) sector. The U(1) sector describes the center-of-mass motion of the branes, and is a free theory, re ecting the fact that there is no potential to the stack of antibranes (or a single antibrane) moving together on the S3, as mentioned in [29]. It is important to note that this fact is not a result of a calculation done using the brane e ective action, but simply a result of symmetry considerations.13 As we have noted, when going away from our eld-theory limit, both the U(1) and the SU(N3) sectors may receive corrections, which are capable of introducing a gap or a tachyon. There is no symmetry that prohibits these corrections, even for the U(1) sector, although the interpretation of the possible existence of a tachyon for a single antibrane is unclear. Our result that the brane-brane potential along the S3 at the bottom of the KS solution remains at agrees exactly with the strong-coupling calculation of [24]. In [24] it was furthermore argued that the symmetries of the problem do not prohibit the existence of another term in the brane-brane potential (an imaginary part of the B-terms) and thus, following the usual EFT reasoning, one expects that such a term will generically be present. This term does not a ect the value of this potential along the S3 but on the other hand gives rise to a brane-brane repelling tachyon along a direction misaligned with the S3. It is important to ask whether a similar term could possibly also appear and give rise to a brane-brane-repelling tachyon in the weak-coupling regime in which we work. In the eld theory on the branes this term is zero at tree level, and one can also show that the betafunctions associated to its running are exactly zero. Hence one possibility is that this term is exactly zero in the weak-coupling regime, and only appears in the large-backreaction regime. However, if one examines the problem a bit deeper, and excludes mathematical oddities, this possibility appears quite unlikely. Rather, if the brane-brane-potential on the S3 remains at all the way from weak to strong coupling, and the tachyon-inducing term is considerable at large gsN3, one expects that a leftover of this term, however small, will be visible at weak coupling, perhaps as a non-perturbative e ect. Whenever this term is 13There has also been interest in studying bound states of an anti-D3 brane and an O3 plane [60{64], which entirely removes the six anti-D3 scalar degrees of freedom, and hence any potential brane-brane repelling tachyons. Besides the fact that these objects have nite charge but zero mass and so strongly violate the BPS bound, these constructions so far lack the explicitness available in KS. not exactly zero, a brane-brane-repelling tachyon is present [24], and thus we expect that this tachyon will be present at all nite values of gsN3. Finally, let us comment on the implications of our result for the possibility of using antiD3 branes in long warped KS-like throats to uplift the cosmological constant and obtain a landscape of metastable de Sitter solutions in String Theory. Our computation found a at direction in the brane-brane potential which is preserved at all loops, indicating that the system is ungapped and is vulnerable to tachyons which, from an EFT perspective, are likely to be present. Therefore anti-D3 brane uplifting mechanisms remain questionable even when backreaction is small. Our paper thus contains yet another calculation that a priori could have either agreed or disagreed with the viability of anti-D3 brane uplifting constructions. Taken together with the negative results obtained in the large backreaction regime [4{18], our result further adds to the evidence against the existence of a de Sitter multiverse obtained using antibranes.14 Acknowledgments We thank Daniel Baumann, Micha Berkooz, Ulf Danielsson, Emilian Dudas, Anatoly Dymarsky, Mariana Gran~a, Stanislav Kuperstein, Emil Martinec, Stefano Massai, Praxitelis Ntokos, Giulio Pasini, Joe Polchinski, Andrea Puhm, Rodolfo Russo, and Thomas Van Riet for useful discussions. This work was supported by the John Templeton Foundation Grant 48222. The work of I.B. was also supported by the ERC Starting Grant 240210 String-QCD-BH, and by a grant from the Foundational Questions Institute (FQXi) Fund, a donor advised fund of the Silicon Valley Community Foundation on the basis of proposal FQXi-RFP3-1321 (this grant was administered by Theiss Research). The work of J.B. and D.T. was also supported by the CEA Eurotalents program. A Conventions In this appendix we record our conventions and their relation to those used in a selection of related literature [33, 34, 45{47, 62]. Our conventions are: G3 F3 e H3 and EMN BMN , which implies that the RR elds strengths are F = dC + H ^ C; Our Hodge-star conventions are those described in appendix A of [66]; The anti-D3 brane worldvolume theory has interaction terms induced by ISD uxes, ?6G3 = iG3. Our H3 = dB2 has the opposite sign compared to that of refs. [ 34, 46, 47, 62 ]. Ref. [ 45 ] does not follow the same Hodge-star conventions as us, and ref. [46] switches to a mostlyminus signature for their four-dimensional theory while we keep strictly to a mostly-plus signature. Note that we also start from the string-frame brane action, which is a choice that becomes irrelevant after the constant rescaling done in eq. (2.27). 14If one desires, one can even quantify this evidence in a Bayesian approach [ 65 ]. B In addition, we di er from ref. [34] in our conventions for the RR elds. We have gs 1H3 while ref. [34] has Fn H3. Finally, in our conventions we have `s2 = 0. Fermion masses from D5 polarization As discussed in section 2.3, the relative normalizations of the bosonic and fermionic actions can be directly derived from the D5 polarization potential. In the KS background a D5 brane carrying anti-D3 brane charge and wrapping the shrinking S2 at a nite distance, , from the bottom of the deformed conifold, has the action VD5 = 2 N3c2 2 c3 3 + 1 where c2;3;4 are constants. Details of the derivation of this potential can be found for example in ref. [13]. This potential has no minimum away from = 0, and hence anti-D3 branes in KS cannot polarize into D5 branes. We are interested in the coe cient c2: this is proportional to @2(e4A + )j0 and is hence proportional to the mass-squared of the scalars that correspond to motion away from the bottom of the warped deformed conifold. Now, if we deform the potential by taking c2 ! c2=2, the potential can now be written as a perfect square. Explicitly, the deformed potential is V~D5 = b 2 gs 128 N3 2 p 2b22 e4A0 jG3j gs N3 !2 : (B.2) This expression has been translated into our conventions using the local R6 coordinates of ref. [24] (modi ed to be consistent with our complex coordinates de ned in eq. (2.8)) and the KS conventions found in ref. [13]. This deformed potential obtained by c2 ! c2=2 has a supersymmetric minimum at nonzero . Thus, the mass-squared of the three massive Hermitian scalars in the undeformed potential is twice its would-be supersymmetric value, i.e. the mass-squared of the fermions. Open Access. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY 4.0), which permits any use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited. [1] I.R. Klebanov and M.J. Strassler, Supergravity and a con ning gauge theory: duality cascades and SB resolution of naked singularities, JHEP 08 (2000) 052 [hep-th/0007191] [INSPIRE]. [2] M. Cvetic, G.W. Gibbons, H. Lu and C.N. Pope, Ricci at metrics, harmonic forms and brane resolutions, Commun. Math. Phys. 232 (2003) 457 [hep-th/0012011] [INSPIRE]. [3] B. Janssen, P. Meessen and T. Ort n, The D8-brane tied up: string and brane solutions in massive type IIA supergravity, Phys. Lett. B 453 (1999) 229 [hep-th/9901078] [INSPIRE]. [4] I. Bena, M. Gran~a and N. Halmagyi, On the existence of meta-stable vacua in Klebanov-Strassler, JHEP 09 (2010) 087 [arXiv:0912.3519] [INSPIRE]. 05 (2011) 053 [arXiv:1102.1734] [INSPIRE]. [INSPIRE]. (Anti-)brane backreaction beyond perturbation theory, JHEP 02 (2012) 025 [arXiv:1111.2605] [INSPIRE]. and singularities, JHEP 09 (2013) 123 [arXiv:1301.5647] [INSPIRE]. [arXiv:1303.1809] [INSPIRE]. anti-brane singularities, JHEP 10 (2012) 078 [arXiv:1205.1798] [INSPIRE]. Klebanov-Strassler, JHEP 09 (2013) 142 [arXiv:1212.4828] [INSPIRE]. (2014) 173 [arXiv:1402.2294] [INSPIRE]. (2013) 063012 [arXiv:1212.5162] [INSPIRE]. [arXiv:1409.0534] [INSPIRE]. JHEP 04 (2014) 064 [arXiv:1309.2949] [INSPIRE]. [16] I. Bena, J. Blaback, U.H. Danielsson and T. Van Riet, Antibranes cannot become black, Phys. Rev. D 87 (2013) 104023 [arXiv:1301.7071] [INSPIRE]. Nucl. Phys. B 883 (2014) 107 [arXiv:1310.1372] [INSPIRE]. [17] A. Buchel and D.A. Galante, Cascading gauge theory on dS4 and string theory landscape, [18] J. Blaback, U.H. Danielsson, D. Junghans, T. Van Riet and S.C. Vargas, Localised anti-branes in non-compact throats at zero and nite T , JHEP 02 (2015) 018 [19] F. Apruzzi, M. Fazzi, D. Rosa and A. Tomasiello, All AdS7 solutions of type-II supergravity, [20] D. Junghans, D. Schmidt and M. Zagermann, Curvature-induced resolution of anti-brane singularities, JHEP 10 (2014) 034 [arXiv:1402.6040] [INSPIRE]. [21] G.S. Hartnett, Localised anti-branes in ux backgrounds, JHEP 06 (2015) 007 [arXiv:1501.06568] [INSPIRE]. Rev. D 68 (2003) 046005 [hep-th/0301240] [INSPIRE]. [22] S. Kachru, R. Kallosh, A.D. Linde and S.P. Trivedi, De Sitter vacua in string theory, Phys. [23] D. Cohen-Maldonado, J. Diaz, T. van Riet and B. Vercnocke, Observations on uxes near anti-branes, JHEP 01 (2016) 126 [arXiv:1507.01022] [INSPIRE]. (2015) 146 [arXiv:1410.7776] [INSPIRE]. [25] S. Kachru, J. Pearson and H.L. Verlinde, Brane/ ux annihilation and the string dual of a nonsupersymmetric eld theory, JHEP 06 (2002) 021 [hep-th/0112197] [INSPIRE]. con gurations in MQCD, JHEP 11 (2006) 088 [hep-th/0608157] [INSPIRE]. HJEP07(216)3 realized gauge theories, Nucl. Phys. B 755 (2006) 239 [hep-th/0606061] [INSPIRE]. dynamics, JHEP 09 (2015) 021 [arXiv:1412.5702] [INSPIRE]. (1975) 157 [INSPIRE]. Rev. D 65 (2002) 025011 [hep-th/0104170] [INSPIRE]. [31] W.D. Goldberger and M.B. Wise, Renormalization group ows for brane couplings, Phys. [32] I. Bena, M. Gran~a, S. Kuperstein, P. Ntokos and M. Petrini, D3-brane model building and the supertrace rule, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (2016) 141601 [arXiv:1510.07039] [INSPIRE]. [33] M. Gran~a, D3-brane action in a supergravity background: the fermionic story, Phys. Rev. D 66 (2002) 045014 [hep-th/0202118] [INSPIRE]. [34] R.C. Myers, Dielectric branes, JHEP 12 (1999) 022 [hep-th/9910053] [INSPIRE]. [35] W. Taylor and M. Van Raamsdonk, Multiple D0-branes in weakly curved backgrounds, Nucl. Phys. B 558 (1999) 63 [hep-th/9904095] [INSPIRE]. Rev. D 63 (2001) 026001 [hep-th/0009211] [INSPIRE]. [36] M. Gran~a and J. Polchinski, Supersymmetric three form ux perturbations on AdS5, Phys. [37] S.B. Giddings, S. Kachru and J. Polchinski, Hierarchies from uxes in string compacti cations, Phys. Rev. D 66 (2002) 106006 [hep-th/0105097] [INSPIRE]. [38] A.J. Parkes and P.C. West, N = 1 supersymmetric mass terms in the N = 4 supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory, Phys. Lett. B 122 (1983) 365 [INSPIRE]. [39] A. Parkes and P.C. West, Finiteness and explicit supersymmetry breaking of the N = 4 supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory, Nucl. Phys. B 222 (1983) 269 [INSPIRE]. [40] A. Parkes and P.C. West, Explicit supersymmetry breaking can preserve niteness in rigid N = 2 supersymmetric theories, Phys. Lett. B 127 (1983) 353 [INSPIRE]. [41] A. Parkes and P.C. West, Finiteness in rigid supersymmetric theories, Phys. Lett. B 138 (1984) 99 [INSPIRE]. theory, hep-th/0003136 [INSPIRE]. [42] J. Polchinski and M.J. Strassler, The string dual of a con ning four-dimensional gauge [43] C.P. Herzog, I.R. Klebanov and P. Ouyang, Remarks on the warped deformed conifold, in the proceeding of Modern trends in string theory: 2nd Lisbon school superstrings on g theory superstrings, July 13{17, Lisbon, Portugal (2001), hep-th/0108101 [INSPIRE]. [hep-th/0312232] [INSPIRE]. Phys. B 689 (2004) 195 [hep-th/0311241] [INSPIRE]. 07 (2012) 188 [arXiv:1206.0754] [INSPIRE]. (1999) 101 [hep-ph/9903365] [INSPIRE]. 65 [INSPIRE]. [INSPIRE]. nite N = 1 supersymmetric gauge theories, Phys. Lett. B 148 (1984) 317 [INSPIRE]. [51] J.M. Maldacena, The large-N limit of superconformal eld theories and supergravity, Int. J. Theor. Phys. 38 (1999) 1113 [Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 2 (1998) 231] [hep-th/9711200] [44] J.M. Maldacena, Strings in at space and plane waves from N = 4 super Yang-Mills, Ann. Calabi-Yau orientifolds with D-branes and uxes, Nucl. Phys. B 690 (2004) 21 [52] O. Aharony, S.S. Gubser, J.M. Maldacena, H. Ooguri and Y. Oz, Large-N eld theories, string theory and gravity, Phys. Rept. 323 (2000) 183 [hep-th/9905111] [INSPIRE]. [53] I. Bena and S. Kuperstein, Brane polarization is no cure for tachyons, JHEP 09 (2015) 112 [arXiv:1504.00656] [INSPIRE]. [54] S.P. Martin and M.T. Vaughn, Two loop renormalization group equations for soft supersymmetry breaking couplings, Phys. Rev. D 50 (1994) 2282 [Erratum ibid. D 78 (2008) 039903] [hep-ph/9311340] [INSPIRE]. [55] Y. Yamada, Two loop renormalization group equations for soft SUSY breaking scalar interactions: supergraph method, Phys. Rev. D 50 (1994) 3537 [hep-ph/9401241] [INSPIRE]. [56] I. Jack and D.R.T. Jones, Soft supersymmetry breaking and niteness, Phys. Lett. B 333 (1994) 372 [hep-ph/9405233] [INSPIRE]. [57] S. Kachru, Fluxes and moduli stabilization, website, video and lecture notes, (2012). [58] O. DeWolfe, S. Kachru and H.L. Verlinde, The giant in aton, JHEP 05 (2004) 017 [hep-th/0403123] [INSPIRE]. [59] O. Aharony, Y.E. Antebi and M. Berkooz, Open string moduli in KKLT compacti cations, Phys. Rev. D 72 (2005) 106009 [hep-th/0508080] [INSPIRE]. [60] A.M. Uranga, Comments on nonsupersymmetric orientifolds at strong coupling, JHEP 02 (2000) 041 [hep-th/9912145] [INSPIRE]. [61] R. Kallosh and T. Wrase, Emergence of spontaneously broken supersymmetry on an anti-D3-brane in KKLT dS vacua, JHEP 12 (2014) 117 [arXiv:1411.1121] [INSPIRE]. [62] E.A. Bergshoe , K. Dasgupta, R. Kallosh, A. Van Proeyen and T. Wrase, D3 and dS, JHEP 05 (2015) 058 [arXiv:1502.07627] [INSPIRE]. [5] I. Bena , G. Giecold and N. Halmagyi , The backreaction of anti-M 2 branes on a warped Stenzel space , JHEP 04 ( 2011 ) 120 [arXiv: 1011 .2195] [INSPIRE]. [6] A. Dymarsky , On gravity dual of a metastable vacuum in Klebanov-Strassler theory , JHEP [7] I. Bena , G. Giecold, M. Gran~a, N. Halmagyi and S. Massai, The backreaction of anti-D3 branes on the Klebanov-Strassler geometry , JHEP 06 ( 2013 ) 060 [arXiv: 1106 .6165] [8] J. Blaback , U.H. Danielsson , D. Junghans , T. Van Riet , T. Wrase and M. Zagermann , [9] I. Bena , M. Gran~a, S. Kuperstein and S. Massai, Anti-D3 branes: singular to the bitter end , Phys. Rev. D 87 ( 2013 ) 106010 [arXiv: 1206 .6369] [INSPIRE]. [10] F.F. Gautason , D. Junghans and M. Zagermann , Cosmological constant, near brane behavior [11] G. Giecold , F. Orsi and A. Puhm , Insane anti-membranes?, JHEP 03 ( 2014 ) 041 [12] I. Bena , D. Junghans , S. Kuperstein , T. Van Riet , T. Wrase and M. Zagermann , Persistent [13] I. Bena , M. Gran~a, S. Kuperstein and S. Massai , Polchinski-Strassler does not uplift [14] I. Bena , M. Gran~a, S. Kuperstein and S. Massai, Tachyonic anti-M 2 branes , JHEP 06 [15] I. Bena , A. Buchel and O.J.C. Dias , Horizons cannot save the landscape , Phys. Rev. D 87 [26] I. Bena , E. Gorbatov , S. Hellerman , N. Seiberg and D. Shih , A note on (meta)stable brane [27] S. Franco and A.M. . Uranga, Dynamical SUSY breaking at meta-stable minima from D-branes at obstructed geometries , JHEP 06 ( 2006 ) 031 [ hep -th/0604136] [INSPIRE]. [28] H. Ooguri and Y. Ookouchi , Landscape of supersymmetry breaking vacua in geometrically [29] B. Michel , E. Mintun , J. Polchinski , A. Puhm and P. Saad , Remarks on brane and antibrane [30] T. Damour , A new and consistent method for classical renormalization , Nuovo Cim. B 26 [46] P.G. Camara , L.E. Iban ~ez and A.M. Uranga , Flux induced SUSY breaking soft terms , Nucl. [47] P. McGuirk , G. Shiu and F. Ye , Soft branes in supersymmetry-breaking backgrounds , JHEP [48] I. Jack and D.R.T. Jones , Nonstandard soft supersymmetry breaking , Phys. Lett. B 457 [49] L. Girardello and M.T. Grisaru , Soft breaking of supersymmetry, Nucl. Phys. B 194 ( 1982 ) [50] D.R.T. Jones , L. Mezincescu and Y.P. Yao , Soft breaking of two loop Henri Poincare 4 ( 2003 ) S111 [Braz . J. Phys . 34 ( 2004 ) 151]. [45] M. Gran ~a, T.W. Grimm, H. Jockers and J. Louis , Soft supersymmetry breaking in [63] R. Kallosh , F. Quevedo and A.M. Uranga , String theory realizations of the nilpotent goldstino , JHEP 12 ( 2015 ) 039 [arXiv: 1507 .07556] [INSPIRE]. [64] I. Garc a-Etxebarria, F. Quevedo and R. Valandro , Global string embeddings for the nilpotent goldstino , JHEP 02 ( 2016 ) 148 [arXiv: 1512 .06926] [INSPIRE]. [65] J. Polchinski , Why trust a theory? Some further remarks (part 1) , arXiv: 1601 .06145 [66] U.H. Danielsson , S.S. Haque , G. Shiu and T. Van Riet , Towards classical de Sitter solutions


This is a preview of a remote PDF: https://link.springer.com/content/pdf/10.1007%2FJHEP07%282016%29132.pdf

Iosif Bena, Johan Blåbäck, David Turton. Loop corrections to the antibrane potential, Journal of High Energy Physics, 2016, 132, DOI: 10.1007/JHEP07(2016)132