A universal counting of black hole microstates in AdS4
HJE
in
Francesco Azzurli 0 1 4 5
Nikolay Bobev 0 1 3 5
P. Marcos Crichigno 0 1 2 5
Vincent S. Min 0 1 3 5
Alberto Zaffaroni 0 1 4 5
0 Celestijnenlaan 200D , B3001 Leuven , Belgium
1 I20126 Milano , Italy
2 Institute for Theoretical Physics, University of Amsterdam
3 Instituut voor Theoretische Fysica, KU Leuven
4 Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di MilanoBicocca
5 Science Park 904 , Postbus 94485, 1090 GL, Amsterdam , The Netherlands
Many threedimensional N = 2 SCFTs admit a universal partial topological twist when placed on hyperbolic Riemann surfaces. We exploit this fact to derive a universal formula which relates the planar limit of the topologically twisted index of these SCFTs and their threesphere partition function. We then utilize this to account for the entropy of a large class of supersymmetric asymptotically AdS4 magnetically charged black holes in Mtheory and massive type IIA string theory. In this context we also discuss novel AdS2 solutions of elevendimensional supergravity which describe the near horizon region of large new families of supersymmetric black holes arising from M2branes wrapping Riemann surfaces.
AdSCFT Correspondence; Black Holes in String Theory

A
1 Introduction
A universal twist of 3d N = 2 SCFTs
2.1
Mtheory and massive type IIA models
2
3
3.1
3.2
3.3
4.1
4.2
4.3
4.4
A simple 4d black hole
Onshell action
Uplift to Mtheory
Uplift to massive IIA
4
Uplift of universal solution to massive IIA
C Details on the construction of the 11D solutions
B.1
Determining the fluxes
B.2 Proving supersymmetry
C.1 BPS equations
C.2 4form equations
C.3 Singularity analysis
ing of black holes, as well as being ultimately responsible for the concrete realization of
the holographic principle in string theory. A famous example of this success story is the
state of affairs changed recently with the results in [3]. The authors of [3] employed a
certain supersymmetric index, ZS1
g , defined in [4] to account for the entropy of a large
class of supersymmetric asymptotically AdS4 black holes arising from M2branes wrapped
on Riemann surfaces. These results were later extended to dyonic black holes in [5]. See
also [6–11] for further recent developments.
Our goal in this work is to build upon this recent success in a number of ways. First, we
show that there is a universal expression for the topologically twisted index in the large N
limit for a large class of N = 2 threedimensional SCFTs.1 Namely, we find that the index
is related to the threesphere free energy, FS3 , of the threedimensional theory through the
simple relation
log ZS1
g = (g
The universality of this relation stems from a universal partial topological twist that is used
in the definition of the twisted index. In general the index depends on a set of background
fluxes for the global symmetries of the N = 2 SCFT as well as a set of complex fugacities. A
given choice of Riemann surface and background fluxes represents a particular topological
twist of the threedimensional theory on
g. It was argued in [3] that for a given such choice
of twist one obtains the degeneracy of vacua after extremizing the index as a function of
the complex fugacities, and this extremal value appears in (1.1). The universal topological
twist, for which the relation in (1.1) is valid, is singled out by choosing the background
fluxes on
g such that the only nonzero flux is in the direction of the exact superconformal
Rsymmetry of the threedimensional N = 2 SCFT.
Such a simple universal relation in QFT should have an equally simple bulk realization
for threedimensional N = 2 SCFTs with a holographic dual. Indeed, we show that there is
a simple black hole solution with a hyperbolic horizon in minimal fourdimensional gauged
supergravity which provides the holographic realization of the relation (1.1). In fact, the
entropy of this black hole, originally found in [12] and later studied further in [13], in the
large N limit is simply given by the twisted index and thus we arrive at a microscopic
understanding of the entropy for this simple universal black hole. An important point
in our story is the fact that this simple black hole solution can be embedded in
elevendimensional and massive type IIA supergravity in infinitely many ways. This provides
further evidence that the relation (1.1) holds (at least in the planar limit) for a large class
of threedimensional N = 2 SCFTs.
In the course of our analysis, we also clarify the relation proposed in [3] between the
topologically twisted index and the entropy of the black hole. According to the holographic
dictionary the logarithm of the partition function of the CFT in the large N limit should
correspond to the onshell action of the dual gravitational background. We show that, for
the universal black hole, the onshell action indeed coincides with (minus) the entropy. This
computation is subtle and it should be done by considering a nonextremal deformation of
the black hole and carefully taking the extremal limit.
1The conditions on the N = 2 theory are discussed in detail in section 2.
– 2 –
. As pointed out in [14] these wrapped
branes constructions implement the partial topological twist for the QFT which describes
the lowenergy dynamics of the branes. For a large number of branes one has to work in
the supergravity limit in which one typically finds a black hole solution with a near
horizon AdS2
g geometry. This holographic construction was first employed for D3 and
M5branes in [15] and later generalized to M2branes in [16].2 This prompts us to seek
generalization of the simple black hole solutions in Mtheory. Due to the complicated
nature of the BPS supergravity equations in elevendimensional supergravity we focus only on
finding explicit solutions for the AdS2 near horizon region of the black hole. Employing this
approach we find a large class of analytic explicit AdS2 solutions of the elevendimensional
supersymmetry equations with nontrivial internal fluxes. The full black hole solution for
which these backgrounds are a nearhorizon limit should correspond to turning on
background magnetic fluxes for the global nonR symmetry in the dual CFT. The entropy of the
black hole should then be captured by the twisted topological index with the given
background global symmetry fluxes. While we do not establish fully this holographic picture
we provide some evidence for its consistency. We should point out that the explicit AdS2
solutions which we find fall into the general classification of such backgrounds in Mtheory
discussed in [18, 19]. Other examples of AdS2 vacua in elevendimensional supergravity of
the class discussed here can be found in [20–23].
We begin our story in the next section with a discussion of a universal partial topological
twist that can be applied to threedimensional N = 2 SCFTs and we argue how for a large
class of these twisted theories one can calculate the topologically twisted index of [4] in the
planar limit. We then proceed in section 3 with a holographic description of the RG flow
induced by the topological twist, which is realized by a black hole in fourdimensional minimal
gauged supergravity. In addition, we show how to embed this black hole in various ways in
Mtheory and massive type IIA string theory. In section 4 we present a large class of AdS2
vacua of elevendimensional supergravity which can be viewed as near horizon geometries of
black holes constructed out of wrapped M2branes. We conclude with some comments and
a discussion on interesting avenues for future research in section 5. In the three appendices
we collect various technical details used in the main text. In appendix A we provide some
details on the calculation of the topologically twisted index for threedimensional N = 2
SCFTs with massive IIA holographic duals. Appendices B and C contain details on the
construction of our massive IIA and elevendimensional supergravity solutions.
Note added.
While we were preparing this manuscript the papers [24, 25] appeared.
In them the authors find a supersymmetric AdS4 black hole solution, with a near horizon
AdS2
g geometry, in the fourdimensional maximal ISO(7) gauged supergravity. We
believe that upon an uplift to massive IIA supergravity this black hole is the same as the
universal black hole discussed in section 3.3 below. Soon after this paper appeared on the
arXiv other supersymmetric AdS4 black hole solutions in massive type IIA supergravity were
studied in [26, 27] and their microstates were counted using the topologically twisted index.
2For a review on branes wrapped on calibrated cycles and further references see [17].
– 3 –
A universal twist of 3d N
= 2 SCFTs
on
R
g
We consider N = 2 superconformal field theories compactified on a Riemann surface
g
of genus g with a topological twist.
This is implemented by turning on a nontrivial
background for the Rsymmetry of the theory. More precisely, there is a magnetic flux
g for the background gauge field AR coupled to the Rsymmetry current such that
dAR = 2 (1
g). This condition ensures that the Rsymmetry background field
precisely cancels the spin connection on
g and the resulting theory preserves two real
supercharges. In general, since the Rsymmetry can mix with global symmetries, the choice of AR
is not unique and there is a family of different twists parametrized by the freedom to turn
ing F maximization [28, 29]. Following the terminology in [30, 31], we refer to a partial
topological twist of the threedimensional theory on
g along the exact superconformal
Rsymmetry as a universal twist.
The degeneracy of ground states of the compactified theory after this partial topological
twist can be extracted from the topologically twisted index Z, which is defined as the twisted
supersymmetric partition function on
g
the salient features of the topologically twisted index.
S1 [4, 8, 9]. Let us briefly summarize some of
The index depends on a set of integer magnetic fluxes n = 21 R
g
F av for the
Cartan generators of the flavor symmetry group, parameterizing the inequivalent twists. A
convenient parameterization for the fluxes is the following. We can assign a magnetic flux
nI to each chiral field
I in the theory with the constraint that, for each term Wa in the
superpotential,4
Since the superpotential has Rcharge 2, this condition ensures that R
and supersymmetry is preserved. The Dirac quantization condition further restricts the
g
dAR = 2 (1
g)
flux parameters nI to be integer.
The index also depends on a set of complex fugacities y for the flavor symmetries.
We can again assign a complex number yI to each chiral field
I in the theory with the
constraint that, for each term Wa in the superpotential,
X
I2Wa
nI = 2(1
g) :
Y
I2Wa
yI = 1 :
(2.1)
(2.2)
It will be important also to consider the complexified chemical potentials
by yI
ei I .
Notice that the chemical potentials are periodic,
I
I , defined
I + 2 .
3By a flavor symmetry here we mean any global symmetry of the N = 2 SCFT which is not the
however we suspect that the universal twist relation (2.9) below is valid more generally.
4In this paper we restrict to threedimensional N = 2 SCFTs which admit a Lagrangian description,
– 4 –
Therefore (2.2) becomes
Using this periodicity we can always choose 0
Re I
2 . With this at hand, (2.3)
implies that P
I2Wa
I 6= 0 unless all I = 0. This will be important in the discussion below.
The topologically twisted index can be evaluated by localization and reduced to a
matrix model [4]. The large N limit of the matrix model has been analyzed in [3] for the
ABJM theory [32] and generalized to other classes of quiver gauge theories with Mtheory
or massive type IIA duals in [6, 7]. The results of this analysis is surprisingly simple. One
finds a consistent large N solution of the matrix model only when
(2.3)
(2.4)
(2.5)
(2.6)
for each term Wa in the superpotential. Under this condition, the logarithm of the
topologically twisted index is given by5
log Z( I ; nI ) = (1
g)i
2
V( I ) + X
I
nI
1
g
I
where the function V was called Bethe potential in [4] and is the YangYang function of
an associated integrable system [9, 33].6 Quite remarkably, in the large N limit, the Bethe
potential V is related to the free energy on S3 of the threedimensional N = 2 theory [6]
through the simple identity
2i
This relation might look puzzling at first sight and deserves some comments. Recall that
the free energy FS3 is a function of a set of trial Rcharges that parameterize a family
of supersymmetric Lagrangians on S3 [28, 34]. The importance of this functional is that
its extremization gives the exact Rcharges of the theory [28]. In (2.6), V is a function of
chemical potentials for the flavor symmetries while FS3 is a function of Rcharges. However,
although the
I parameterize flavor symmetries in the threedimensional theory on
g S1,
I = can be consistently identified with a set of Rcharges
the relation (2.4) ensures that
for the theory on S3.
There is a subtlety that arises when computing the topologically twisted index or the
threesphere free energy. In threedimensional N = 2 SCFTs there are finite counterterms
which affect the imaginary part of the complex function FS3 . These are given by
ChernSimons terms with purely imaginary coefficients for the background gauge fields that couple
to conserved currents, see [29, 35] for a detailed discussion. Moreover, the imaginary part
of log Z is only defined modulo 2 and is effectively O(1) in the large N limit. The upshot
5The formula appears in [6] only for g = S2. The generalization to arbitrary g is straightforward and
discussed in details for ABJM in [8]: the general rule is simply log Zg = (1
g) log Zg=0(nI =(1
g)).
6What we call V( I ) here is the extremal value with respect to the eigenvalues ui of the Bethe functional
V[ I ; ui], defined in [3, 6, 7].
– 5 –
of this discussion is that the physically unambiguous quantity in the large N limit are the
real parts of the topologically twisted index and the free energy on S3.
There is an additional important point in the story. To obtain the degeneracy of vacua
of the compactified theory for a given choice of the flux parameters, nI , one has to extremize
the function Z( I ; nI ) with respect to the fugacities
I [3]. This prescription is analogous
to the extremization principles that exist in four [36], three [28], and twodimensional [37, 38]
SCFTs with an Abelian Rsymmetry.
After this short introduction to the topologically twisted index we are ready to discuss
the universal twist. This is obtained by choosing fluxes nI proportional to the exact UV
Rcharges
I and these, as we already mentioned, can be found by extremizing FS3 [28].
From the identification (2.6) it is clear that the Bethe potential V is also extremized at the
values
I . Given the normalizations (2.1) and (2.4), we find that the universal twist is
determined by
It is easy to see that, for this choice of fluxes, log Z in (2.5) is also extremized at
I
:
I
= 0 ;
log Z( I ; nI ) = (g
1)FS3
I
;
where we made use of (2.6) and (2.7).
Equation (2.9) amounts to a universal relation between the value of the index of the
universal twist of a 3d N = 2 SCFT and the free energy on S3 of the same superconformal
theory in the planar limit. For theories with a weakly coupled holographic dual this identity
should translate into a universal relation between the entropy of some universal black hole
solution and the AdS4 supersymmetric free energy. As we discuss in detail in section 3 this
expectation indeed bears out for the case of hyperbolic Riemann surfaces, i.e. for g > 1.
It is worth pointing out that the universal relation in (2.9) is the threedimensional
analog of the universal relation among central charges established in [30] for twisted
compactifications of fourdimensional N = 1 SCFTs on R
2
g
.
8 A notable difference is that
for fourdimensional SCFTs the universal relation can be established at finite N . It would
be most interesting to study subleading, i.e. nonplanar, corrections to the universal relation
in (2.9).9
7We note in passing that if one imposes 1nIg = I before extremizing FS3 then the second term in (2.5)
vanishes. Thus, after using (2.6) we find that the extremization of FS3 is the same as the extremization of
the topologically twisted index.
8Similar relations can be established for SCFTs with a continuous Rsymmetry in various dimensions
and with different amount of supersymmetry [31].
operator insertions were discussed in [39].
9It is interesting to note that similar relations between FS3 and partition functions on S1
g with line
– 6 –
(2.7)
I =
I :
(2.8)
(2.9)
The derivation of (2.9) is based on the large N identities (2.5) and (2.6), which in turn can
be established for a large class of YangMillsChernSimons theories with fundamental and
bifundamental chiral fields with Mtheory or massive type IIA duals. We now discuss the
class of theories for which these identities are valid.
Consider first superconformal theories dual to Mtheory on AdS4
SE7, where SE7 is a
SasakiEinstein manifold. Many quivers describing such theories have been proposed in the
literature. Most of them are obtained by dimensionally reducing a “parent” fourdimensional
quiver gauge theory with bifundamentals and adjoints with an AdS5
SE5 dual, and then
the twisted index of such theories scales as N 3=2 for N
adding ChernSimons terms and flavoring with fundamentals. In such theories, the sum of
all ChernSimons levels is zero, P
a ka = 0. Holography predicts that the S3 free energy and
ka. The large N behavior of the
S3 free energy has been computed in [40] and successfully compared with the holographic
predictions only for a particular class of quivers. In particular, for the method in [40]
to work, the bifundamental fields must transform in a real representation of the gauge
group and the total number of fundamentals must be equal to the total number of
antifundamentals. It turns out that, under the same conditions, the topologically twisted index
scales like N 3=2 and the identities (2.5) and (2.6) are valid [6]. This particular class of quivers
include all the vectorlike examples in [41–43] and many of the flavored theories in [44, 45].
In particular, the latter includes the dual of AdS4
Q1;1;1=Zk and AdS4
N 0;1;0=Zk. The
conditions are also satisfied for the N = 3 necklace and Db  and Ebtype quivers [46–50],
as well as the quiver for the nontoric manifold V 5;2 discussed in [51]. The evaluation
of the index in the large N limit for most of these examples is given in [7], where the
identities (2.5) and (2.6) are also verified by explicit computation. For the “chiral” theories
discussed in [41–43], on the other hand, it is not known how to properly take the large
N limit in the matrix model to obtain the correct scaling predicted by holography. This
applies both for the topologically twisted index and for the S3 partition function. This
class of quivers includes interesting models, like the quiver for M 1;1;1 proposed in [43] and
further studied in [52].
Consider now superconformal theories dual to warped AdS4
Y6 flux vacua of massive
type IIA. A wellknown example is the N
= 2 U(N ) gauge theory with three adjoint
multiplets and a ChernSimons coupling k described in [53]. It corresponds to an internal
manifold Y6 with the topology of S6. This has been generalised in [54] to the case where
Y6 is an S2 fibration over a general KählerEinstein manifold KE4. The dual field theory is
obtained by considering the fourdimensional theory dual to AdS5
SE5, where SE5 is the
fivedimensional SasakiEinstein with local base KE4, reducing it to three dimensions and
adding a ChernSimons term with level k for all gauge groups.10 The large N limit at fixed
k of the S3 free energy has been computed in [53] and [54] and shown to scale as N 5=3,
as predicted by holography. The large N limit of the topologically twisted index has been
10The original example in [53] has KE4 = CP2, SE5 = S5, and the superconformal theory is obtained by
reducing N = 4 SYM to threedimensions and adding a ChernSimons coupling with level k. The solution
in [54] is obtained by replacing CP2 with more general KE4 manifolds.
– 7 –
computed in [6]. The identities (2.5) and (2.6) also hold for massive type IIA. The explicit
derivation was not reported in [6] and is given in appendix A. Notice that for massive type
IIA quivers there is no need to restrict to vectorlike models.
The discussion above shows that there is a large number of threedimensional
superconformal theories with Mtheory or massive type IIA duals for which relation (2.9) formally
holds. However, it is important to notice that not all of them really admit a universal twist
since we need to restrict ourselves to N = 2 SCFTs with rational Rcharges. Indeed, since
nI and g are integers, the relation in (2.7) implies that the exact Rcharge of the fields
must be rational. This slightly restricts the class of theories where we can perform the
universal twist. However, we can still find infinitely many models for which the Rcharges
are rational and the universal twist exists. Since N = 3 theories necessarily have rational
Rcharges this applies to the N = 3 necklace quivers [46, 47] as well as the Db  and Ebtype
quivers [48–50], and the N = 3 quiver for N 0;1;0 [44, 55, 56]. In addition, one can check
that the N = 2 quivers for Q1;1;1 [45] and V 5;2 [51] in Mtheory have rational Rcharges.
The same holds for the theory in [53] and some of its generalizations in massive type IIA.11
3
A simple 4d black hole
Here we provide the holographic description of the universal twisted compactification of
3d N = 2 SCFTs discussed in the previous section. As we shall show, this corresponds to
the supersymmetric magnetically charged AdS4 black hole of [12, 13], thus providing the
appropriate field theory interpretation of this solution. We also review the known uplift of
this solution to Mtheory and provide a new uplift to massive IIA supergravity.
The appropriate supergravity is 4d minimal N = 2 gauged supergravity [58], with eight
supercharges and bosonic content the graviton and an SO(2) gauge field, dual to the stress
energy tensor and Rsymmetry current, respectively. The bosonic action reads12
I =
1
with G(N4) the 4d Newton constant. We have chosen the cosmological constant such that the
AdS4 vacuum of the theory has RAdS4 =
12 and LAdS4 = 1. The magnetically charged
black hole solution of [12, 13] preserves two supercharges and is given by13
Z
2
ds42 =
F =
1
2
11The Rcharges for Mtheory vacua can be computed using volume minimization [57] and for massive
type IIA by amaximization [36]. The result is generically irrational. However, we can easily find special
classes of SE7 or SE5 where the result is rational.
12Here we follow the conventions in [3] and truncate the N = 8 supergravity to the minimal one by setting
La = 1 ( ij = 0), Aa = A, and set the coupling constant g = 1=p2 which in turn amounts to setting the
radius of the AdS4 vacuum to one.
13A generalization to include rotation while maintaining supersymmetry was also found in these references.
– 8 –
(3.1)
(3.2)
where ds2H2 = x12 dx21 + dx22 is the local constantcurvature metric on a Riemann surface
2
g of genus g > 1,14 normalized such that RH2 =
2. Using the GaussBonnet theorem
the volume of the Riemann surface is then vol( g) = 4 (g
1). Dirac quantization of the
flux requires 21 R
g
F 2 Z, which holds for any genus g. We note the solution has a fixed
magnetic charge, set by supersymmetry. The entropy of this extremal black hole is given
in terms of the horizon area by the standard BekensteinHawking formula
As will soon become clear the large N limit of the topologically twisted index reproduces
exactly this entropy. However, there is a slight subtlety in this story. According to the
standard holographic dictionary the logarithm of the partition function of the CFT (in the
appropriate large N limit) should correspond to a properly regularized onshell action of
the dual gravitational background, rather than the black hole entropy. In the next section
we clarify this relation, showing that the black hole entropy in (3.3) is indeed closely related
to the onshell action and thus to the topologically twisted index.
3.1
Onshell action
We are interested in calculating the value of the Euclideanized action (3.1), evaluated
onshell for the solution (3.2).
This action is divergent unless properly regularized by
counterterms, following the standard holographic renormalization prescription, which we
carry out explicitly next. As we show, this is intimately related to the entropy of the black
hole. The regularized action we consider is given by:15
SBH =
Area
4G(N4) =
(g
1)
2G(N4)
is the induced metric on the boundary, defined by the radial cutoff
= r, and K is
the trace of the extrinsic curvature of this boundary metric. Taking r ! 1 leads to a
divergence in IEinst+Max, which is cancelled by Ict+bdry, where we have collected the appropriate
counterterms as well as boundary terms necessary for a welldefined variational principle.
An important additional subtlety arises, however, in the explicit evaluation of IEucl for the
extremal solution (3.2). Indeed, it is easy to see that this integral is naively not well defined,
as the integrand of IEucl for this solution vanishes, while the integration over Euclidean time
R01 d leads to infinity as a consequence of the solution being extremal and thus T = 0. To
obtain the correct finite result we thus consider a nonextremal deformation of the solution,
compute IEucl for the nonextremal solution and take the extremal limit at the end.
14As discussed in [13], there is no supersymmetric static black hole solution with g = 0; 1.
15See for example section 4.4 of [59] as a reference for the counterterms. With respect to their
normalizations we have F there = F here=2.
– 9 –
There are two nonextremal deformations. One amounts to allowing for a generic
magnetic charge Q under the graviphoton, and a second to adding a mass . This
nonextremal generalization was discussed in [12, 13] and the solution reads
The extremal solution is recovered for Q ! 1=2 and
! 0. The horizon radius 0 is
obtained by solving the quartic equation V ( 0) = 0. The temperature T of the black hole can
be obtained by requiring the Euclidean metric to be free of conical singularities, which gives
T = jV 0( 0)j =
4
2
1
0
In the extremal limit 0 ! 1=p2 and T ! 0. Evaluating the onshell action (3.4) for
general values of Q and
we find16
IEucl =
(g
1)
2G(N4)
0
Q
2
= 1=T is the Euclidean time periodicity. Taking the extremal limit of this
expression gives the finite answer
Iextr =
(g
1)
2G(N4)
+ O (Q
1=2)1=2
+ O
1=2 :
Comparing this to the entropy (3.3) of the extremal black hole, we thus have
On the other hand, the holographic dictionary relates the gravitational onshell action to
the partition function of the dual CFT as I =
log Z, leading to the satisfying expression
We have thus shown that the black hole entropy can be identified with the topologically
twisted index of the dual CFT to leading order in N . This relation was argued to hold more
generally for a class of black holes in nonminimal gauged supergravity in [3]; it would be
interesting to establish this explicitly by generalizing the computation above to this larger
16Based on general thermodynamics arguments one would expect the nonsupersymmetric onshell action
to obey the relation I =
(M
ST
Q), where M , Q, and
, are the mass, charge and chemical potential
of the black hole. See [60] for a recent discussion on this relation for asymptotically AdS4 black holes.
Iextr =
SBH :
SBH = log Z :
orders in N .
S3 boundary is given by [61]17
which using (3.3) leads to the relation
Finally, let us recall that the renormalized onshell action for Euclidean AdS4 with an
With the identification (3.11) one recognizes this result as the holographic analog of the
universal field theory relation (2.9). Thus, the result (3.13) provides strong evidence that the
AdS4 black hole (3.2) describes the RG flow from 3d N = 2 SCFTs with a universal
topological twist on
g to superconformal quantum mechanical theories with two supercharges.
We emphasize that although the black hole solution (3.2) is derived as a
supersymmetric solution of minimal gauged supergravity, it is also a solution to nonminimal gauged
supergravity, with the additional vector and hyper multiplet bosonic fields set to zero.18
The fact that “freezing” the vector multiplets to zero is consistent corresponds to the
property of universality of the topological twist (2.7). In other words, as the vector multiplet
scalars in the gauged supergravity are not sourced along the flow from AdS4 to AdS2
realized by the black hole (3.2), there is no mixing between Rsymmetry and flavor symmetry
along the flow and the Rsymmetry in the IR coincides with the one in the UV. This is
consistent with the field theory discussion of section 2.
3.2
Uplift to Mtheory
Here we review the uplift of the universal solution in (3.2) to elevendimensional
supergravity, which was carried out in [62]. The metric and fourform read19
(3.12)
(3.13)
(3.14)
ds121 = L
2
ds42 + ds72 ;
dimensional KählerEinstein space with RiKjE = 8giKjE and Kähler form J , with d
where ds7jA=0 is a sevendimensional SasakiEinstein with RiSjE7 = 6giSjE7 , dsKE is a
six= 2J ,
F = dA = volH2 , ds24 is given in (3.2), and 4 is with respect to this fourdimensional metric.
This solution of elevendimensional supergravity can be interpreted as the backreaction of N
M2branes wrapping a supersymmetric cycle in a CalabiYau fivefold. This point of view
was discussed in [16], following the ideas in [15], for the case where the SasakiEinstein
manifold is S7 and thus the sixdimensional KählerEinstein space is CP3.
17With slight abuse of notation we define the CFT free energy as F = log Z = I.
18This can be checked, for instance, by setting na = 2
19Compared to equation (2.3) in [62] we have introduced an overall scale L.
; ~ = 0 ; La = 1 in the BPS equations (A.27) in [3].
The fourdimensional Newton constant is given by
1
Using (3.16) and (3.17) we compute the properly normalized horizon area, obtaining the
This is consistent with (3.13) and the wellknown expression for the holographic free energy
In order for this local supergravity solution to extend to a well defined Mtheory
background, some of its parameters should be properly quantized. The quantization condition
on G4 reads
where N is an integer determining the number of M2branes and `11 is the Planck length in
eleven dimensions. This translates into the quantization of the AdS4 length scale in terms
of the Planck length,20
N =
1
energy on S3 is given by FS3 =
p
3 2 k1=2N 3=2 [63] and thus
It is instructive to unpack this equation for a couple of examples of wellknown
threedimensional SCFTs. For the special case of the ABJM theory, i.e., Y7 = S7=Zk, the free
This result is correctly reproduced by the topologically twisted index for the ABJM theory.
This follows from the general discussion in section 2, which is model independent. It is
nonetheless instructive to see explicitly how this works. The topologically twisted index for
ABJM is given by [3, 5]
p
3
log ZABJM =
2 k1=2N 3=2p
I ; nI are, respectively, the chemical potentials and fluxes associated to the four
chiral bifundamental fields of ABJM, subject to the constraints P4
20Upon a reduction to 10d type IIA supergravity the 11d Planck length is related to the string length
and coupling constant via the equation `11 = lsgs1=3.
PI nI = 2(1
whose dual SCFT was discussed in [45].
4p k1=2N 3=2 [40]. Then, from (3.13) we have
The exact Rsymmetry corresponds to
I =
g)=2. We see that g must be odd. We obtain log ZABJM = SBAHBJM,
As another example, we can consider the SasakiEinstein manifold Y7 = Q1;1;1=Zk
The free energy on S3 is given by FS3 =
SBH
Q1;1;1
= (g
4
Ai is 2=3 and that of Bi is 1=3 [40]. Quantization of fluxes then requires g
integer multiple of 3. The topologically twisted index was computed in [7] and it is easy to
, again in agreement with the general result in section 2.22
check that log ZQ1;1;1 = SBH
Q1;1;1
with the general result (2.9).
Combining the results in [40] and [7] one can check many other examples, all in agreement
As discussed in section 2, the universal twist is not only possible for theories with an
Mtheory dual, but also for field theories with massive IIA duals with an N 5=3 scaling of
the free energy. We discuss this next.
3.3
Uplift to massive IIA
Here we discuss new black hole solutions in massive IIA supergravity, obtained by uplifts of
the 4d solution (3.2). This can be done by using the formulae of [64–66], where the uplift
of the SU(
3
)invariant sector of 4d N = 8 supergravity with ISO(7) gauging is given. The
bosonic content of the 4d SU(
3
)invariant sector is the graviton ea , 6 scalars '; ; ; a; ; ~,
2 electric vectors A0; A1 and their magnetic duals A~0; A~1, 3 twoforms B0; B1; B2 and 2
threeforms C0; C1. One should keep in mind that these are not all independent as, e.g.,
the field strengths of C0; C1 can be dualized into functions of the scalar fields, see [66] for
more details.
Since we are interested in solutions that asymptote to the N = 2 supersymmetric AdS4
vacuum of the theory described in [53], and we expect the scalars to be set to constant values,
we set them to the values of the AdS4 vacuum solution, provided in (B.3). The electric
potential A1 is identified (up to a normalization, which we fix by using the massive IIA
equations of motion) with the gauge field A of the minimal fourdimensional theory in (3.1).
With this at hand we can use the uplift formulae of [64–66], reproduced in (B.1), to obtain
explicit expressions for the bosonic fields of the tendimensional massive IIA supergravity,
i.e., the metric, the dilaton, ^, as well as the two, three, and fourform fluxes: F^2, H^3,
21See formula (28) in [5], where the notations are: uI =
I and pI =
nI and the case k = 1 is considered.
For k > 1 there could be ambiguities related to other saddle points, but we still expect (3.21) to hold.
22The free energy on S3 is given by formula (6.15) in [40] and the twisted index for g = 0 by formula (5.47)
in [7]. The generalization to general genus g > 0 is obtained by log Zg = (1
g) log Zg=0(ni=(1
g)) [8]. As
discussed in [40], the exact Rcharge of the fields Ai is
Ai =
= 2=3 and that of the fields Bi is
Ai =
= 1=3,
From formula (5.47) in [7] we find log ZQ1;1;1
= (g
while
m=0. The fluxes for the universal twist are then nAi = 2(1
g)=3, nBi = (1
1) 34p3 k1=2N 3=2.
g)=3 and t + ~t = 0.
(see (B.2)), A1 = 31g dxx21 is the connection on the Riemann surface, and
where ds24 is the black hole metric (3.2), ds2CP2 is the standard Einstein metric on CP2
We note that (3.23) can be obtained from the AdS4 vacuum solution of [53] by the simple
replacement ds2AdS4 ! ds24 and d
! d
+ gA1. The massive IIA form fields, however,
are not so easily obtained and require more work. The basic point is that in order to
determine these one must find a further truncation of the remaining SU(
3
)invariant fields
consistent with the duality transformations of [66] and the equations of motion, which
due to the connection on the Riemann surface is nontrivial. We discuss this in detail in
appendix B.1. Here we simply present the final answer:
F^2 =
H^3 =
F^4 =
+
1
m
1
g2
m
g
2=3
4 sin2( ) cos( )
g(cos(2 )+3)(cos(2 )+5)
3 sin( )(cos(2 ) 3)
g(cos(2 )+5)2
^d
3 cos( )
cos(2 )+5 H(12)
1 p
2
3 cos( ) 4 H(12) ;
m
g
m
g
2=3
1=3
8 sin3( )
g(cos(2 )+3)2
vol4 +
p3g
sin4( )(3 cos(2 )+7)
g(cos(2 )+3)2
J ^J
d ^J +
3 sin( )d ^ 4H(12) ;
!
and F^4, respectively. The metric and dilaton read
g(cos(2 )+3)(cos(2 )+5)
4(cos(2 )+5) ^d ^ 4H(12) cos(2 )+3 4 H(12) ^J ;
p3 sin2( )
where J = 12 d is the Kähler form on CP2, H(12)
and
4 is the hodge dual with respect to ds4.
dA1, vol4 is the volume form of ds4,
We have explicitly checked that (3.23)
and (3.25) indeed satisfy the equations of motion of massive IIA supergravity.23 At large
the solution is locally asymptotic to the N = 2 AdS4 solution of [53] and thus (3.23)
and (3.25) describe the twisted compactification of the corresponding threedimensional
field theory dual, consisting of a U(N ) ChernSimons theory at level k with three adjoints
superfields i
.
23These equations can be found in equation (A.5) of [64].
Based on our field theory analysis we actually expect (3.23) and (3.25) to be part of
a more general class of solutions, where the CP2 is replaced by a general KählerEinstein
base. As an example, we have explicitly checked that replacing
1
6
1
Thus, the black hole solutions reported here describe the compactifications of these 3d
SCFTs on a Riemann surface, twisted by the exact superconformal Rsymmetry.
To ensure that the local supergravity solution given in (3.23) and (3.25) extends to a
well defined string theory background, it should be properly quantized.24 The fourform
quantization condition in massive IIA reads25
N =
1
(2 `s)5
Z
M6
e 21 ^
1
6
4 F^(4) + B^(2) ^ dA^(
3
) +
m B^(2) ^ B^(2) ^ B^(2) ;
(3.28)
where N is an integer determining the number of D2branes, and the potentials B^(2); A^(
3
)
can be found in [65]. We can evaluate this for the solution in (3.23) and (3.25) for a general
base B. Using the explicit expression for the background fluxes presented in appendix B.1
SasakiEinstein Y5, i.e.,
in (3.23) (along with suitable replacements of J and
in (3.25)) is also a solution of the
equations of motion.
More generally, replacing CP2 by a generic KählerEinstein base B leads to a large
family of new massive IIA black holes, which are asymptotic to the AdS4 solutions described
in [54]. As discussed there, the 3d field theory duals are obtained from a 4d parent field
Y5 dual, with B corresponding to the KählerEistein base of the
(3.26)
(3.27)
(3.29)
(3.30)
ds2Y 5 = 2 + ds2B :
where we integrated over 0
nearhorizon AdS2 radii:
Using (3.24) this translates into a quantization condition on the asymptotic AdS4 and the
and used the identity 12 J ^ J ^ d
= dvol(Y5).
LAdS2 =
LAdS4 =
1
2
`sn1=24
255=4837=24
N
vol(Y5)
5=24
;
where we have used that asymptotically ds24 ! ds2AdS4 , while close to the horizon ds24 !
14 (ds2AdS2 + 2ds2 g ) and defined n
2 `sm. Note that the quantization condition on LAdS4
24In the case of ds42 = ds2AdS4 this was carried out in [54] for a general base B. The quantization for the
black hole solution here is very similar and we provide it here for completeness.
25See for example equation (4.11) in [65].
Let us specialize this to the two simple cases considered above, namely CP2 and P
1
P1,
with corresponding Y5’s equal to S5 and Y 1;0, respectively. We recall that for a U(N )G
gauge theory, where each factor has the same ChernSimons level k, the parameter n is
related to the ChernSimons levels by n = Gk [67].
For Y5 = S5 we have vol(Y5) =
3 and n = k and (3.32) reads
SBSH5 = (g
1) 21=331=65 1N 5=3k1=3 :
The dual threedimensional field theory is a U(N ) ChernSimons theory with three adjoints
superfields i and superpotential W =
1
; 3] [40]. The index is explicitly computed in
appendix A; it is given by (A.15) and (A.16), where
g). The exact Rsymmetry corresponds to
1 +
2 +
3 = 2
and n1 + n2 + n3 =
i = 2 =3 and the universal twist to
g)=3. Quantization of fluxes requires g
1 to be an integer multiple of 3. We
2(1
ni = 2(1
then see that the index is given by
while the free energy on S3 is given by equation (A.9),
log Z = (g
1) 21=331=65 1N 5=3k1=3(1
i=p3) ;
FS3 =
21=331=65 1N 5=3k1=3(1
i=p3) :
1
coincides with the one obtained in [54]. This is expected since our solution is asymptotic to
the solutions discussed there. Similarly, the fourdimensional Newton constant is given by26
Putting all this together, we can compute the properly normalized horizon area and obtain
the following general formula for the black hole entropy:
HJEP02(18)54
As expected this leads to log Z = (g
1)FS3 , in agreement with our general argument in
section 2.
We also note that both log Z and FS3 are complex but as discussed above
equation (2.7) we should focus on the real part.
We then arrive at the following, by
now familiar, relation between the black hole entropy and the SCFT partition functions;
SBH = Re log Z = (g
1)ReFS3 .
Similarly, for Y 5 = Y 1;0 one has vol(Y5) = 16273 , n = 2k and (3.32) reads
SBYH1;0 = (g
1) 313=620 1N 5=3k1=3 :
26For a solution of the form ds120 = e2 L2 ds42 + ds62 , the effective fourdimensional Newton constant
is given by 1=G(N4) = (1=G(N10)) L6 R d6xpg6e8 , with 16 G(N10) = (2 )7`s8, following the conventions used
in [53]. Note in particular that in [53] they set gs = 1.
The threedimensional field theory dual is a U(N )
U(N ) gauge theory with four
bifundamentals I with the same quiver and superpotential as the 4d N = 1 KlebanovWitten
theory [68]. In this case the exact Rsymmetry corresponds to
I =
g)=2, which requires g to be odd. The topologically twisted index,
computed explicitly in appendix A, correctly reproduces the entropy in (3.36).
As a final consistency check of the supergravity discussion of these new massive IIA black
hole solutions here we show explicitly that the solution in (3.23) and (3.25) preserves two
supercharges. The supersymmetry variations of the fermionic fields are given in [69] and read27
)
1
p e 21 ^H^
Plugging in the background (3.23) and (3.25) and setting these variations to zero we obtain
a set of differential equations for , with the following solution (see appendix B.2 for details):
= jgttj1=4e 32 67
where gtt the timetime component of the 10d metric in (3.23). The quantity R( 1; 2) is
an dependent “rotation operator,” defined as
where the functions 1;2 = 1;2( ) are given in (B.29), and
is a constant tendimensional
spinor obeying the projection conditions
1 =
2 =
3 =
4 = 0 :
Here we have defined the projectors
1
3
1
2
1
2
1
1 +
Using (3.39) one may alternatively express (3.40) as projection conditions on :
Bpq $ B^pq.
1 =
2 = b 3 = b 4 = 0 ;
27The conventions of this reference are related to ours by
$
12 ^, Fmnpq $ 21 F^mnpq, Gpqr $ H^pqr,
(3.38)
(3.39)
(3.40)
(3.41)
where we defined the “rotated projectors,”
b 3
R( 1; 2) 3 R
1
Similar rotated projectors have appeared in [70, 71], albeit in a somewhat different class of
supergravity solutions with internal fluxes. Note that the
3 projector can be understood
as a dielectric deformation of the standard D2brane projector due to the internal fluxes.
The four projection conditions in (3.40) determine that the black hole solution of interest
preserves 2 out of the 32 supercharges of the massive IIA supergravity.28 Note this is half
the number of supercharges of the AdS4 solution of [53], since the 2 projector is absent in
The discussion thus far has been restricted to the socalled universal twist of 3d N = 2
SCFTs and its holographic dual description in terms of a magnetically charged black hole in
AdS4. As emphasized, the universal twist is characterized by the fact that the background
magnetic flux in the CFT is only along the direction of the 3d superconformal Rsymmetry.
Most 3d N = 2 SCFTs with holographic duals, however, admit continuous flavor symmetries
and it is natural to study the behavior of these theories in the presence of magnetic fluxes
for these global symmetries, as well as their holographic duals. In this section we begin
exploring this question for a class of 3d N = 2 SCFTs arising from M2branes placed at the
tip of a CY4 conical singularity in Mtheory. It is wellknown that upon backreaction of the
branes this setup leads to a supersymmetric FreundRubin vacuum of Mtheory of the form
AdS4
X7 where X7 is a SasakiEinstein manifold which is the base of the CY4 cone. We
have already mentioned a few of these spaces above, for example M 1;1;1, Q1;1;1, and V 5;2.
Many other examples of such SasakiEinstein manifolds with explicit metrics are known in
the literature (see for example [72] and references thereof). In addition to the omnipresent
Reeb vector, which exists on all such spaces and is dual to the superconformal Rsymmetry,
these examples of SasakiEinstein manifolds typically have additional isometries, which are
dual to mesonic flavor symmetries in the dual CFT. In addition, if the sevendimensional
manifold has nontrivial twocycles (and thus by Poincaré duality fivecycles) the dual CFT
has continuous baryonic symmetries. After placing the 3d SCFT on S1
g we can turn
on background magnetic fluxes for these mesonic and baryonic flavor symmetries while
still preserving supersymmetry.29 The holographic dual description of this setup should be
given by a magnetically charged supersymmetric black hole which preserves (at least) two
supercharges and is asymptotic to the original AdS4
X7 background. The near horizon
limit of this black hole should be given by a warped product of the form AdS2 w M9 where
28As usual here we discuss only the Poincaré type supercharges. For a supersymmetric background with
an AdS factor in the metric the number of supercharges is doubled due to the presence of superconformal
supercharges.
29From the point of view of the M2brane picture this corresponds to wrapping the M2branes on g
which then by the general result in [14] automatically implements the topological twist and fibers the CY4
over the Riemann surface.
the manifold M9 is a fibration of the SasakiEinstein space X7 over
g
. Our goal in this
section is to construct explicit examples of such warped AdS2 supersymmetric vacua of
elevendimensional supergravity.
A few comments on our strategy to attack this technically challenging problem are in
order. A classification of warped AdS2 solutions of 11d supergravity was given in [18, 19].
The result of these papers is that the manifold M9 should be given as a U(1) bundle over
an eightdimensional Kähler manifold. The metric on this eightdimensional space should
obey a certain fourthorder nonlinear PDE.30 Finding explicit expressions for such metrics
is a challenging problem to tackle (see however [20, 74, 75] for some examples) so we employ
a different strategy, which closely follows the one in [30] where many explicit AdS3 vacua of
type IIB supergravity with (0; 2) supersymmetry were constructed. To be more concrete we
propose an Ansatz for the metric and fourform flux, G4 of the 11d theory and impose the
vanishing of the gravitino supersymmetry variation as well as the equations of motion and
the Bianchi identity for G4. We show that all solutions within our Ansatz are determined
by a single function satisfying a nonlinear ODE. This nonlinear equation admits quartic
polynomial solutions which lead to a rich class of supergravity solutions. This class contains
the near horizon AdS2 region of the universal solution (3.14) as a special case.
After this brief introduction let us proceed with the construction of our solutions.
The elevendimensional space is of the form AdS2
w M9 where M9 is a ninedimensional
manifold given by a sevendimensional space M7 fibered over a Riemann surface g
:
g to be compact (i.e. with no punctures) and have a constantcurvature
M7 ,! M9
ds2 g = e2h(x1;x2) dx12 + dx22 ;
h(x1; x2) = < 12 log 2
8
>
>
>
>
:
log 1+x21+x22
2
log x2
g = 0
g = 1 :
g > 1
(4.1)
(4.2)
We will take
metric,31 given by
with
The Ansatz for M7 will be modelled on a large class of sevendimensional SasakiEinstein
manifolds found and studied in [72, 77], denoted by Y p;q(B), where B, in our case, is a
fourdimensional KählerEinstein manifold that can be either CP1
CP1 or CP2, upon which the
full manifold is constructed. M7 is then spanned by the four coordinates on B and (y; ; ),
the latter two being angles. In particular,
is the angle associated to the Reeb vector of
M7. Thus, we employ an elevendimensional metric Ansatz which has explicit AdS2, g
30It is curious to note that such Kähler manifolds have appeared recently in a seemingly unrelated context
31In principle, this assumption could be relaxed but the analysis is more involved. In addition the results
of [76] suggest that all the interesting physics in the IR is captured by the constantcurvature metric.
We have limited the discussion in this work to the large N limit of the topologically
twisted index which, for theories with a holographic dual, is captured by the supergravity
approximation of string or Mtheory. It is of great interest to go beyond this limit, both in
the field theory as well as in the gravitational analysis. On the field theory side it is natural
to ask whether some remnant of the universal twist relation in (1.1) survives beyond the
large N approximation. There might be reasons to be cautiously optimistic, given that
similar universal relations were derived in [30, 31] for the conformal anomaly coefficients of
evendimensional SCFTs related by RG flows across dimensions. On the gravity side the
problem is equally challenging. One has to find subleading (in N ) corrections to the entropy
of the universal black hole presented in section 3. Perhaps the methods employed in [85]
can be useful in finding these corrections.42 It is worth noting that a similar question was
addressed successfully in [88] for the subleading corrections to the S3 partition function for
threedimensional N = 2 theories with an AdS4 dual in Mtheory. Resolving this question
for the class of asymptotically AdS4 black holes studied here is bound to teach us important
lessons about holography and the quantum structure of black holes.
Acknowledgments
We would like to thank Francesco Benini, Davide Cassani, Friðrik Gautason, Adolfo
Guarino, Seyed Morteza Hosseini, Dario Martelli, Noppadol Mekareeya, Krzysztof Pilch, James
Sparks, and Phil Szepietowski for interesting discussions. FA is partially supported by
INFN. The work of NB is supported in part by the starting grant BOF/STG/14/032 from
KU Leuven and by an Odysseus grant G0F9516N from the FWO. The work of VSM is
supported by a doctoral fellowship from the Fund for Scientific Research — Flanders (FWO)
and in part by the ERC grant 616732HoloQosmos. NB and VSM are also supported by the
KU Leuven C1 grant ZKD1118 C16/16/005, by the Belgian Federal Science Policy Office
through the InterUniversity Attraction Pole P7/37, and by the COST Action MP1210 The
String Theory Universe. PMC is supported by Nederlandse Organisatie voor
Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (NWO) via a Vidi grant. The work of PMC is part of the Delta ITP
consortium, a program of the NWO that is funded by the Dutch Ministry of Education,
Culture and Science (OCW). AZ is partially supported by the INFN and ERCSTG grant
637844HBQFTNCER. NB and AZ would like to thank KIAS, Seoul for warm hospitality
in the beginning stages of this project.
A
The large N index for massive IIA theories
The large N limit of the topologically twisted index for threedimensional N = 2 SCFTs
with massive type IIA holographic duals has been derived in [6]. Here we present some
more details on this construction.43 The Bethe potential V( I ) is obtained by extremizing
an auxiliary functional V[ I ; (t); v(t)] with respect to the density (t) and the distribution
of eigenvalues u(t) = N 1=3(i t + v(t)) of the matrix model. The functional V[ I ; (t); v(t)]
42Other related work on corrections to black hole entropy beyond the leading order includes [86, 87].
43Some of these results arise from discussions with S. M. Hosseini and N. Mekareeya.
HJEP02(18)54
for a generic YangMillsChernSimons theory with bifundamentals in the limit N
constructed as follows. There is a contribution
dt (t) t v(t) +
for each ChernSimons coupling ka and a contribution
dt
1
(t)2
iv0(t)
;
where g+(u)
u3
6
2
u2 + 32 u, for any bifundamental field with chemical potential
I .
These formulae are derived under the assumption that 0
I
2 . Since the Bethe
equations involve multivalued functions, one must treat this with care. Setting all ka = k,
(A.1)
(A.2)
(t)2
!
;
(A.3)
(A.4)
(A.5)
(A.6)
Gk
2
dt
v(t)2)) + X g+( I ) 1
I
where G is the number of gauge groups. It is easy to extremize this functional with respect
X
I2a
for each term Wa in the superpotential. The distribution of eigenvalues and the Bethe
(t) =
3
4Gkt2
6p3(PI g+( I ))
V = i
313=6
20
1
i
p
3
;
y(t) =
X g+( I )
I
t
p ;
3
!2=3
(Gk)1=3N 5=3 :
=
3pGk X g+( I )
I
!2=3
;
We can compare the result with the free energy on S3 derived in [40, 54]. Although the set
of rules for constructing V and FS3 seem different, the final result is the same. Indeed we
find again relation (2.6)
2i
I
In order to check this relation, it is important to remember that, although
I are
parameterizing global symmetries, due to (A.4), the quantities
I =
behave for all calculational
purposes as Rsymmetry parameters. To this end it is convenient to introduce trial central
charges for the parent 4d quiver using the standard formulae [89]
where we take a trace over all fermions and we assign Rcharge
multiplet and Rcharge 1 to the gauginos. In the large N limit, for theories with an AdS
dual, we have c = a, and therefore
Tr R =
G + X
1
N 2 = 0 :
(A.8)
Using this it follows that, in the large N limit,
X g+( I ) =
X
I
2i
=
I
6
3 "
3 "
6
X
I
I
2G
3
(1
V(
I
I
I
#
+ G
=
1
1
5
I
I
3
3
I
1
!
1
3
#
6N 2 Tr R3 =
(t)2
:
I
I
1
(t)2
1 iv0(t)
(t)2
(t)2
;
(A.13)
=
25=331=6
i
p
3
Comparing this result with (3.30) in [54] we finally find
The index at large N is obtained by combining (6.9) and (6.10) in [6] and reads44
log Z =
N 5=3
We want now to prove that
g) + X(nI
1 + g)g+0( I )
log Z = i(1
1 "
2 V( I )
X
I
I
dt X
I
= iN 5=3 Z
= iN 5=3 Z
dt X
I
"
dt
g+0( I )
X g+0( I )+
44The introduction of g is straightforward — see section 6 of [8].
Proof. First notice that we can consider all the
I in (A.11) as independent variables and
impose the constraints P
I2a
I = 2
the differential operator in (A.11) and the topological twist constraint P
only after differentiation. This is due to the form of
as it is easy to check by an explicit computation. To prove (A.11), we promote the explicit
factors of
appearing in g+ to a formal variable
. Notice that the “onshell” Bethe
potential V, at large N , is a homogeneous function of g+ and therefore of
I and , i.e.
I2a nI = 2(1
g),
I ;
) =
2 V( I ; ) :
X nI
I
I
dt X nI g+0( I ) 1
(t)2
iv0(t)
:
(A.14)
Multiplying (A.13) by (1 g) and using (A.14) and (A.10) we see that indeed (A.11) holds.
It is always possible to choose a parametrization for the
I , subject to the constraint
in (A.4), such that the trial central charge a is a homogeneous function of degree three. In
this case, (A.11) simplifies to
log Z = i X nI
I
= c^(N Gk)1=3 X nI
I
;
where we defined c^
in [40], with three adjoints i and superpotential W =
i=p3). For example, for the ChernSimons theory
I I = 2 we find
U(N ) theory with equal ChernSimons couplings k based on
the conifold quiver with superpotential W = A1B1A2B2
A1B2A2B1 and the constraint
P4
The previous derivation is based on the assumption (A.4). In principle, it is possible
that there exist other extrema of V in regions where P
might contribute to the index. For example, for the quiver in [53], since 0
I2a I = 2 n with n 6= 1, and they
I
2
we
can have
1 +
2 +
3 = 0; 2 ; 4 ; 6 . It is easy to see that the cases 0 and 6 give singular
solutions for (t) and 4 is related to 2 by the redefinition ^ i = 2
I . We have checked
in many models that, for the case of the universal twist, where the fluxes are proportional
to the exact Rcharges, the other solutions are singular or related to P
I2a
I = 2 by some
discrete symmetry. However, we have no general proof of this fact. In general, one must
alway check whether there are other saddle points for different values of the sum P
For those other saddle points, the index theorem (A.11) does not hold and one needs to
I2a I .
perform an explicit computation to check whether they contribute or not.
2
X
1
2
1 1 1
;
+ gA1 and the standard Einstein metric on CP2 is given by
ds24 from section 3 and ranges of the angles used is 0
where we write des4 for the 4d metric, as it will turn out to be related by a rescaling to
2 , 0
. Furthermore,
ds2CP2 = d 2 +
sin2
4
12 + 22 + cos2
32 ;
1
2
3
cos 3d 1 + sin 1 sin 3d 2 ;
sin 3d 1
sin 1 cos 3d 2 ;
d 3 + cos 1d 2 ;
sin2
2
3 ;
J =
d ;
1
2
In this appendix, we provide the details of the uplift of the universal solution (3.2) to
massive IIA supergravity using the formulae of [64–66]. The metric and dilaton read
F^(2) = dA^(1) + mB^(2) ;
H^(
3
) = dB^(2) ;
F^(4) = dA^(
3
) + A^(1) ^ dB^(2) +
mB^(2) ^ B^(2) :
1
2
where J is the Kähler form on CP2, normalized such that RCP2 J ^ J = 2 volCP2 =
Since we are interested in solutions that are asymptotic to the AdS4 vacuum of the
theory with N = 2 supersymmetry we set the scalars to (see equation (7) in [53] or table 3
in [66]):
1
3
e ' =
p
2
3
m
g
1
3
;
= ~ = 0 ;
e
= p
1
2
m
g
1
3
:
We discuss the scalar a below. For the solution of interest, the 4d metric and connection read
2
des4 =
m1=3
2p3g7=3 ds42 ;
A1 =
1 dx1
3g x2
:
B.1
Determining the fluxes
Here we show how to obtain the uplifted fluxes (3.25). The massive IIA field strengths
F^2; H^3; F^4 are given in terms of their potentials by (see, e.g., equation (A.4) in [64])
(B.1)
d ^H(12) +
2m
a sin( ) cos( )d ^H(03) +
sin( ) cos( ) m 2=3
3 sin3( ) cos( ) m 1=3
sin3( ) cos( ) m 2=3
2gm
g
2g2 2 sin2( )+3 cos2( )
sin( ) cos( )d ^H(
3
)1 +
sin4( ) m 1=3
g
sin2( ) cos2( ) m 2=3
2g 2 sin2( )+3 cos2( )
J sin2( ) cos( ) m 2=3
g sin2( )+2 cos2( ) 2 sin2( )+3 cos2( )
2 sin3( ) m 2=3
d ^J
gm sin2( )+2 cos2( )
sin3( ) cos( ) m 2=3
g2m sin2( )+2 cos2( )
Da^d ^J
^d ^H(02) +
sin3( ) cos( ) m 1=3
^d ^H(12)
4g2 2 sin2( )+3 cos2( )
4 sin2( )+5 cos2( )
^d ^J
^d ^H~(2)0
sin( ) cos( ) ^d ^H~(2)1
3g
3g2
H(02) ^J
sin2( )J ^H~(2)1
3g2
2g3 sin2( )+2 cos2( ) 2 sin2( )+3 cos2( )
J ^J 2 sin2( )+5 cos2( )
2g3 sin2( )+2 cos2( )
2
sin2( ) cos2( ) m 2=3
gm sin2( )+2 cos2( )
+
sin4( ) m 1=3
g
H(12) ^J
2g2 sin2( )+2 cos2( )
^H(03) +
sin2( ) ^H(
3
)2 +H(04) cos2( )+H(14) sin2( ) ;
The uplifted potentials A^(1); B^(2); A^(
3
) are given in terms of SU(
3
)invariant fields in
equation (2.6) of [65].
Plugging these into (B.5), together with the values for the scalar
fields (B.3), gives
F^2 =
sin( )Da^d
3 sin( ) m 2=3
2 sin2( )+cos2( )
^d
2g 2 sin2( )+3 cos2( )
2
H(02) cos( )
sin( )d ^H~(2)0
g
H(03) cos( )
where we replaced exterior derivatives of the invariant potentials A0, A1, A~0, A~1, B0, B1,
B2, C0, C1 by their field strengths, defined as,
H(02) = dA0 +mB0 ;
H(2)0 = dA~0 +gB0 ;
~
H(03) = dB0 ;
1
2
H(04) = dC0 +H(02) ^B0
mB0 ^B0 ;
H(
3
)1 = dB1
gA0 ^B0 +mA~0 ^B0 +2g(C1
C0)
+
1
2
A ^dA~0 +A~0 ^dA0
0
A ^dA~1
1
1
3
H(12) = dA1 ;
H(2)1 = dA~1
~
H(
3
)2 = dB2 ;
H(14) = dC1
3
1 A~1 ^dA1 :
2gB2 ;
1
3
H(12) ^B2 ;
(B.6)
(B.7)
(B.8)
(B.9)
(B.10)
(B.11)
(B.12)
(B.13)
The gauge potential A1, and corresponding field strength H(12), are identified with the
graviphoton A, and field strength F , of section 3 up to a normalization, provided in (B.4).
To fully determine the uplifted fluxes (B.6)–(B.8) we must determine the remaining
SU(
3
)invariant forms H(02); H~(2)0; H~(2)1; H(03); H(
3
)1; H(
3
)2; H(04); H(14) in terms of the data of the
minimal supergravity. A naive guess would be to set these to zero to obtain the minimal
theory, but this is inconsistent with the duality relations of [66]. To determine the consistent
result we note that setting
Da
da + gA0
mA~0 = 0
is consistent with the equations of motion of the Lagrangian (3.7) in [66]. Taking an exterior
derivative of this equation implies g dA0 = m dA~0 and from the definitions (B.9) and (B.10),
HJEP02(18)54
Then, using (B.14) and (B.15) in the duality relations (3.17), (3.18), (3.19) in [66], we obtain
H~(2)0 =
1
2
g 1=3
m
H(03) = H(
3
)1 = H(
3
)2 = 0 ;
3 4 H(12)) ;
H~(2)1 =
3
2
m
1=3
H(12) + p
3 4 H(12) ;
H(04) = H(14) = p3g3
vol4
m
1=3
:
(B.14)
(B.15)
(B.16)
We see from here that it would have been inconsistent to set the fields H(02), H~(2)0, H~(2)1,
H(04), H(14) to zero since they are related to vol4 and H(12) by the duality relations. Finally,
plugging (B.15) and (B.16) into the massive IIA field strengths (B.6) and (B.7) and (B.8)
we obtain the result presented in (3.25). To minimize the possibility of mistakes introduced
during this unwieldy uplifting procedure we have checked explicitly that the uplifted
massive IIA black hole background is a solution of the tendimensional equations of motion.
We now proceed to show that it preserves two supercharges.
B.2
Proving supersymmetry
Here we give the details establishing supersymmetry of the black hole solution (3.23), (3.25)
in massive IIA supergravity. It is useful to define the following basis of vielbeins
dt ;
e2 = e L
1
2
1
d ;
dx2
x2
;
3 ;
(B.17)
dx1
x2
1
2
;
e1 = e L
e3 = e L
e5 = ! sin( ) 1
e6 = ! sin( ) 1
e7 = ! sin( ) 1
e8 = ! sin( ) 1
e9 = ! e 21 (' 2 )X 1=2d ;
e10 = ! sin( )X 1=2
e4 = e L
1=2d ;
1=2 sin
1=2 sin
2
2
1=2 sin cos
1 ;
2 ;
2
2
1=2 ;
where
e
2
(cos(2 ) + 3)1=2(cos(2 ) + 5)1=8 ;
2 5=8g 25=12m1=12 ;
21=231=4g1=6
L
2
!
1
3
e L !0 :
In our conventions 11 =
The general supersymmetry variations of massive IIA are written in (3.37). Using
the basis (B.17) and plugging in the massive IIA forms (3.25) we obtain a series of
differential equations for .
Assuming that the spinor is independent of the coordinates
; 3 leads to a series of algebraic equations along these directions. It is
useful to take linear combinations of (3.37), such as
1
1
2
2 = N0 2 2
3 2
3
3
4
4 =
1 + 2 2 + 2
1
;
(B.19)
21 . We continue with
2N0 3
3
2
where N 1
0
211=16 p4cos(2 ) + 3 1p6cos(2 ) + 5 2q4 gm25 . The above equation is solved by
taking the spinor be proportional to q
which is solved by the dependence
Using this we find
/ e 23 34 :
5
5
8
8 /
678(3
cos(2 )) + 2 5 cos(2 ) + 6 348 sin2( )
:
This is solved by imposing to be in the kernel of the following two projectors
1
2
1
1
Using these projectors to replace 34 and 58 by 67 we can write
2 2
5
5 = N0
1 +
2 3 1267
9(22 sin(2 ) + sin(4 )
96 cot( ))
p2(16 cos(2 ) + cos(4 ) + 31)
+
4 1210 sin( )
(cos(2 ) + 3)pcos(2 ) + 5
p
3 6710(cos(2 ) + 3) csc( )
2pcos(2 ) + 5
!
:
This equation can be interpreted as imposing a further projection condition (one can check
that the combination on the right hand side of (B.24) indeed squares to itself as a projector
should). Now we can use the results so far to replace the
34; 58; 9 gamma matrices.
(B.18)
(B.20)
(B.21)
(B.22)
(B.23)
(B.24)
Doing so, we see that all variations vanish, except for
1;2;3;4;9. The following combination
is useful
2(cos(2 )+5)+2 3 167
1
1 + 3
3 = N0 4p3 6710 sin( )pcos(2 )+5
+12 167 +2 3 2(cos(2 )+5) 6(cos(2 )+3) :
The two equations (B.24) and (B.25) can be solved by imposing to be in the kernel of the
following two projectors:
2
2 3 cos2( ) 2
!
cos(2 ) + 3
!
!
;
where
3
; 4 are the standard projectors
and R( 1; 2) is a rotation operator defined by
3
4
1
2
1
2
1 +
1 +
134 ;
67910 ;
with the “angles” 1 = 1( ); 2 = 2( ) defined as the following functions of
b 3
b 4
1
2
1
2
cos( 1=2)
cos( 2=2)
p
1
1
b 3 =
b 4 =
1
2
1
2
(B.25)
(B.26)
(B.27)
(B.28)
;
(B.29)
(B.30)
The reason for the notation with the “hat” in these two projectors will be made clear
below. Together with (B.23), we have now imposed four projectors, leaving 32
2 4 = 2
supercharges. We note the projectors (B.26) can be rewritten, inspired by the discussion
in [70, 71], in a more insightful way as
1 + cos( 2) 134 + sin( 2) cos( 1) 2 + sin( 1) 9
= R( 1; 2) 3R
1 ( 1; 2) ;
= R( 1; 2) 4R
1
s pcos(2 )+5
p
6 cos( )
2pcos(2 )+5
cos( )
pcos(2 )+3
;
;
sin( 1=2)
sin( 2=2)
s p
6 cos( )+pcos(2 )+5
2pcos(2 )+5
1
p
2
s
cos(2 )+5
:
The spinor can thus be written as
= R( 1; 2)~;
(B.31)
where ~ is a spinor in the kernel of the unrotated projectors 1
; 2
; 3
; 4. The only
equation remaining at this point is
9 = 0, which can be solved by taking ~ to be proportional
to the function e =2 defined in (B.18).
We thus find that our massive type IIA black hole solution is indeed supersymmetric,
with the following explicit Killing spinor
=
r
1
2
e =2e 32 67
(B.32)
where
is a constant spinor in the kernel of the four projectors
there are a total of 2 supercharges preserved. Note that the factor q
1
; 2
; 3
; 4 and hence
21 e =2 is precisely
proportional to jgttj1=4, where gtt is the timetime component of the tendimensional metric
Details on the construction of the 11D solutions
In this appendix we give the details of the derivation of the family of solutions of eleven
dimensional supergravity described in section 4. Before starting, it is convenient to choose
(C.1)
(C.2)
e2 = f2ehdx1 ; e3 = f2ehdx2 ;
e0 =
f1 dt ;
z
e4 = f3dy ;
e6 = f5E1 ;
e10 = f7D ;
e1 =
f1 dz ;
z
e5 = f4D ;
e7 = f5E2 ;
e8 = f5E3 ;
e9 = f5E4 ;
where (t; z) are the Poincaré coordinates for AdS2 and E1;2;3;4 is a vierbein on the Kähler
manifold B such that
We can thus rewrite the 4form as
JB = E1 ^ E2 + E3 ^ E4 :
G4 = e0 ^ e1 ^ g1 e2 ^ e3 + g2 e4 ^ e5 + g3 e5 ^ e10 + g4 e4 ^ e10 + g5 e6 ^ e7 + e8 ^ e
+ e6 ^ e7 + e8 ^ e
BPS equations
Imposing the vanishing of the gravitino variations in elevendimensional supergravity gives
the following Killing spinor equation:
= r " +
G4
288
8
" = 0 :
(C.3)
Motivated by the symmetry of the problem and the underlying M2brane interpretation we
impose the following projection conditions on ":
23" = 45" = 67" = 89" = 1 10" = i" :
Equation (C.3) leads to the system of differential equations:45
1 f7 (c~ f8c)
4
f 2
2
1 f7f80
4 f3f4
1 f7 (a
4
f 2
5
f 0
2
f2f3
f 0
5
f5f3
3
f1
f 0
1
2f1f3
6
+ g4 = 0 ;
21 cff224 = 0 ;
f4b
2f52 = 0 ;
1 f 0
2 f7f3
7 + g4 = 0 ;
6
+ g1 + g2 + 2g5 = 0 ;
2g1 + g2 + 2g5 = 0 ;
12
12
12
some constraints on the in and ln coefficients,
and a set of PDEs for ":
i1 =
2i2 ; l1 = i2 ; l2 = i2 ; i5 = l4 = 0 ;
4
2 f4 f3f4
f 0
2
2cff242 + f4b
f 2
5
" = 0 ;
i
rB
i
i
3
4
f7
+2 f7 (a f8b) f7f80 + g1 +g2 +2g5 " = 0 ;
f 2
5
f3f4
45Here it is convenient to anticipate one of results from the Bianchi identity for G4, namely g3; i4; l3 = 0.
(C.4)
(C.5)
(C.6)
(C.7)
(C.8)
(C.9)
(C.10)
(C.11)
(C.12)
(C.13)
(C.14)
(C.15)
(C.16)
(C.17)
(C.18)
(C.19)
(C.20)
(C.21)
where riB denotes the covariant derivative on B and i = 1; 2; 3; 4 spans its four real
Let us now solve for the dependence of " on the various coordinates. From (C.14) we
deduce that it is constant in time. We also assume that @x1" = @x2" = 0 and that " does not
depend on the coordinates of B, checking a posteriori the consistency of such assumption.
The coefficients f1 and f7 are related by (C.5) and (C.8), which can be combined to
obtain
and thus
with !1 an integration constant.
f 0
f1
1 =
f 0
f7
7 ;
f7 = 2!1f1 ;
1
2
Then, adding (C.10), (C.11) and (C.12) and using (C.9) and (C.22), (C.21) leads to
Then, from equations (C.18) and (C.19) we find
Using the constant curvature metric (4.2), the combination on the r.h.s. of this equation is
constant and proportional to , the normalized curvature of the Riemann surface g
,
Thus, we find the dependence of " on
is given by
with !2 a constant satisfying
8
>1
>
= <
0
for g = 0
for g = 1 :
>
>: 1 for g > 1
c!2 + c~!1 =
2
:
f 0
2f1
1 " =
d p
dy
f1 " ;
" / p :
1
z
" = ei(!2 +!1 )r f1
z "0 ;
(C.22)
(C.23)
(C.24)
(C.25)
(C.26)
(C.27)
(C.28)
HJEP02(18)54
while (C.15) the one on z:
with "0 a constant spinor.
One can think of this algebraic constraint as the supergravity implementation of the
topological twist condition in the dual 3d N = 2 SCFT.
Equations (C.16) and (C.5) allow us to determine also the dependence on y:
Combining this result with (C.24), (C.25) and (C.27) we see that
can be rewritten by (C.29) as
since other combinations, such as
!B12 + !34 = AB (a!1 + b!2) ;
B
coordinates on B, for both CP1
metric, we have that
Let us now turn to condition (C.20). Referring to (C.1) and (C.2) for the indices of the
CP1 and CP2, equipped with the standard FubiniStudy
where !B is the spin connection in B. Therefore equation (C.20):
!B13 = !B24 = !B23 = !41 ;
B
4 B
1 !jk (j+5)(k+5)" = iAB (a!1 + b!2) "
!31 86 + !24 79 " = !B31 + !24
B B B
78" = 0 ;
vanish identically. On the other hand, the fact that B is Einstein, implies that its Ricci
2form is proportional to its Kähler form by a constant 2q:
1
2
1
2
(C.29)
(C.30)
HJEP02(18)54
(C.31)
(C.32)
(C.33)
(C.34)
d!Bi j + !Bi k ^ !Bk j JB ij = 2qJB :
We notice now that when one computes the only nonvanishing contributions to (C.31) from
the Riemann 2form, namely the components (1; 2) and (3; 4), the quadratic part vanishes
because of (C.29). For instance one finds
!B 3 ^ !B32 + !B1 4 ^ !B42 = 0 :
1
b!2 + a!1 = q :
Therefore, taking the differential in (C.30), we can replace the first member with the second
of (C.31) and, by (4.5), arrive at the following constraint:
From equations (C.9), (C.10), (C.11), (C.12) and (C.5), we can express the functions gi in
terms of the metric funtions:
and find the constraint
f7 (c~ f8c)
f 2
2
1
f1
g1 =
g4 =
g5 =
g2 = f7f80 +
f3f4
1
f1
3 1 ;
f1f3
f7 (a
+ 2 f7 (a
f7f80 =
f3f4
1
f1
which then can be solved by using (C.23) to eliminate f7. This results in the relation,
f22f54f12
f8b) f22f12f52
(C.35)
We note that f3 is in fact redundant, as it can be set to an arbitrary function by redefinitions
of the coordinate y. A convenient choice is such that
f1(y)f3(y)f4(y) = K ;
(C.36)
HJEP02(18)54
with K an arbitrary constant; we consider this as an equation determining f4. Taking
also (C.23) into account, we are left with f1;2;3;5;8 as five independent functions. It is
convenient to trade these for F1;2;3;5;6, defined by:
F1
f22f54; F2
f1f22; F3
f1f52; F5
K f12f22f54 ; F6
f 2
3
f8f13f22f54 :
(C.37)
In terms of this new basis, equations (C.6) and (C.7) simplify to
and thus
with S2 and S3 integration constants.
Furthermore, the complicated equation (C.35) becomes
F20 = cK; F30 = bK ;
F2 = cK y + S2; F3 = bK y + S3 ;
F 0
K
F1 = 2!1
6 + c~F32 + 2aF2F3 :
F6 =
F 0 4!2F2F32 :
5
4!1
Finally, F6 can be found through (C.17), which, after using (C.5), (C.25), (C.24) and (C.36),
reads
Thus, at this point the solution is completely controlled by the single function F5, which is
determined by the Bianchi identity for G4, as we discuss next.
C.2
4form equations
The equation of motion for the 4form,
(C.38)
(C.39)
(C.40)
(C.41)
d 11 G4 = 0 ;
implies the following relations:
g4i2f12f7f3f54 + i2f7f12f54 0 +bi2f3f4f7f12f52 = 0 ;
i2f7f12f52f22 0 ci2f3f4f7f12f52 +2bi2f3f4f22f7f12 +g4i2f12f7f3f22f52 = 0 ;
i2f80 f7f12f52 +i2f3f4f7f12f52 (a bf8) (g2i2 g5i2) f12f3f4f54 = 0 ;
2i2f3f4f22f7f12 (a bf8)+i2f80 f7f12f52f22 i2f3f4f7f12f52 (c~ cf8)
g2f22f54f7 0 cg1f3f4f52f62f7 2bg5f3f4f22f52f7 = 0 ;
f8g2f22f54f7 0 +2ag5f3f4f52f22f7
g4f22f4f54 0 6f22f3f4f54i22 = 0 :
defining
we arrive at
which is solved by
for some constant I0.
I
i
2
f 2
1
It turns out that after imposing the BPS equations studied above, all these equations
are satisfied automatically. The first two are actually equivalent to the conditions (C.51)
and (C.52) implied by the Bianchi identity that we examine later, after inserting (C.5)
and (C.23). Equations (C.44), (C.45), (C.46) are identically satisfied when we plug (C.33)
and (C.13) in. The same happens to (C.47) and (C.48) using (C.36) and (C.38).
dG4 = 0 ;
provides a wealth of information: it implies, as mentioned before, that g3 = i4 = l3 = 0
and the four additional equations
bf22f3f4i1 cf52f3f4l1 + f2 f5 i2 0 f2 f3f7i5 (a bf8) f5 f3f7l4 (c~ cf8) = 0 ;
2 2 2 2
bf12f3f4g2 f12f3f7g4 (a bf8)+ f1 f5 g5 0 = 0 ;
2 2
2 2 2
f1 f2 g1 0 c f1 f3f4g2
2
f1 f3f7g4 (c~ cf8) = 0 ;
bf52f3f4l1 + f5 l2 0 f5 f3f7l4 (a bf8) = 0 :
4 2
While (C.50) is satisfied automatically, the value of i2, the last unknown coefficient
appearing in G4 we are left with, is determined by (C.51) and (C.52). Using (C.38) and
(C.42)
(C.43)
(C.44)
(C.45)
(C.46)
(C.47)
(C.48)
(C.49)
(C.50)
(C.51)
(C.52)
(C.53)
(C.54)
HJEP02(18)54
Thus, the only remaining equation is (C.49), which is a fourthorder nonlinear ODE
for F5. Remarkably, this equation can be integrated twice into the secondorder ODE:46
1
KF2F32
F502 + 2F5 F 00 2K 4qF2F3 + F 2
5 3
+ P3 = 0 ;
(C.55)
where (y) and P3(y) satisfy the simple differential equations:
00 = 24KF2 FI04 ;
3
2
P300 = 32Kq ( F3 + qF2) :
Using (C.39) and for b 6= 0 one may write (C.55) as (4.11).
the most general polynomial solution is at most quartic, i.e.,
Although we have not found the most general solution to (C.55), one can show that
n yn ;
4
n=0
(C.56)
where
n are real constants. Plugging this into (C.55) leads to a set of algebraic equations
for the coefficients n and the other parameters specifying the solution:
6 42 3 4bK3(b +4cq)+4b2cK6q(b +cq) = 0 ;
+2K2 2bK3q b2 S2 +5bc S3 +4bcqS2 +2c2qS3
12
K
b K3qS32S2 +32bK3q2S3S22 +16c K3qS33 + 64
cK3q2S32S2 = 0 ;
3
4
K 0b2 bK3(b +4cq) 6 4
2
K 1b2 4K2(b S3 +2bqS2 +2cqS3) 3 3
+b2S3(KS3(cp1 +16qS2( S3 +qS2)) 4 2( S3 +4qS2))
3 4(b S3 +2bqS2 +2cqS3)
+16bcK3qS3(7 S3 +8qS2) = 0 ;
+b4K2p0S2 +2b3KS3(cKp0 +p1S2) 12c2KI02 = 0 ;
4 0b3( 2 KS3( S3 +4qS2))+S2 b3Kp0S32 4bS2I02 8cS3I02
2b3 = 0 ;
1
K
4 1b3S3( S3 +4qS2)+2b4Kp0S3S2 +b3S32(cKp0 +p1S2) 16bcS2I02 8c2S3I02
4 0b3 2K2(b S3 +2bqS2 +2cqS3) 3 3 = 0 :
(C.57)
46The same technical simplification happens in the analysis of supersymmetric AdS3 solution of type IIB
supergravity in [30].
All the solutions discussed in this paper correspond to different solutions to this set of
algebraic constraints.
We note that assuming b 6= 0 the sixth equation above becomes
cKI02(bS2
S3b
3
after solving the others. When instead b = 0, one of the equations is not independent of
the others. In both cases, the system leaves (at least) one free parameter.
C.3
Singularity analysis
The metric (4.7) could in principle have conical singularities when y = y~ such that F5(y~) = 0.
In this section, we analyze what happens in these points and show that they are regular.
Let us consider the following linear combination of the angles
and :
= W
0 !
W =
w1 w2
w3 w4
W invertible :
Under this transformation the metric retains its structure, i.e., upon some redefinitions of
the functions Fn, we can rewrite it in the same form, with new parameters given by
c
c~
= W
c0 !
b
a
= W
b0 !
(C.58)
dsy2 = K
3 Bdy2 +
y~)2 F~0
5
2
det2 W
w4F~2F~32
F~6w2
2 D 2C :
1
A
Assuming y > y~ and performing the change of variables r2
2 (y
y~) and choosing
w4 = 4!2, w2 =
4!1 and w1; w3 so that det W = 1 and using (C.41) we obtain
F~0
5
dsy2 = K
p3F1F22F34 dr2 + r2D 2 :
We thus see that there are no conical singularities, provided
from (C.58), we see that, using (C.32), we can set !2 to zero by an appropriate W .
2 [0; 2 ].47
Moreover,
Open Access.
This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons
Attribution License (CCBY 4.0), which permits any use, distribution and reproduction in
any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.
47Again, this is very similar to the regularity analysis of the solutions in [30].
References
2081 [hepth/9504147] [INSPIRE].
[2] A. Sen, Extremal black holes and elementary string states, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 10 (1995)
[3] F. Benini, K. Hristov and A. Zaffaroni, Black hole microstates in AdS4 from supersymmetric
localization, JHEP 05 (2016) 054 [arXiv:1511.04085] [INSPIRE].
[4] F. Benini and A. Zaffaroni, A topologically twisted index for threedimensional
supersymmetric theories, JHEP 07 (2015) 127 [arXiv:1504.03698] [INSPIRE].
[5] F. Benini, K. Hristov and A. Zaffaroni, Exact microstate counting for dyonic black holes in
AdS4, Phys. Lett. B 771 (2017) 462 [arXiv:1608.07294] [INSPIRE].
[6] S.M. Hosseini and A. Zaffaroni, LargeN matrix models for 3d N = 2 theories: twisted index,
free energy and black holes, JHEP 08 (2016) 064 [arXiv:1604.03122] [INSPIRE].
[7] S.M. Hosseini and N. Mekareeya, LargeN topologically twisted index: necklace quivers,
dualities and SasakiEinstein spaces, JHEP 08 (2016) 089 [arXiv:1604.03397] [INSPIRE].
[8] F. Benini and A. Zaffaroni, Supersymmetric partition functions on Riemann surfaces, Proc.
Symp. Pure Math. 96 (2017) 13 [arXiv:1605.06120] [INSPIRE].
[9] C. Closset and H. Kim, Comments on twisted indices in 3d supersymmetric gauge theories,
JHEP 08 (2016) 059 [arXiv:1605.06531] [INSPIRE].
[10] S.M. Hosseini, A. Nedelin and A. Zaffaroni, The Cardy limit of the topologically twisted index
and black strings in AdS5, JHEP 04 (2017) 014 [arXiv:1611.09374] [INSPIRE].
[11] A. CaboBizet, V.I. GiraldoRivera and L.A. Pando Zayas, Microstate counting of AdS4
hyperbolic black hole entropy via the topologically twisted index, JHEP 08 (2017) 023
[arXiv:1701.07893] [INSPIRE].
[12] L.J. Romans, Supersymmetric, cold and lukewarm black holes in cosmological
EinsteinMaxwell theory, Nucl. Phys. B 383 (1992) 395 [hepth/9203018] [INSPIRE].
[13] M.M. Caldarelli and D. Klemm, Supersymmetry of Antide Sitter black holes, Nucl. Phys. B
[14] M. Bershadsky, C. Vafa and V. Sadov, Dbranes and topological field theories, Nucl. Phys. B
545 (1999) 434 [hepth/9808097] [INSPIRE].
463 (1996) 420 [hepth/9511222] [INSPIRE].
[15] J.M. Maldacena and C. Núñez, Supergravity description of field theories on curved manifolds
and a no go theorem, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 16 (2001) 822 [hepth/0007018] [INSPIRE].
[16] J.P. Gauntlett, N. Kim, S. Pakis and D. Waldram, Membranes wrapped on holomorphic
curves, Phys. Rev. D 65 (2002) 026003 [hepth/0105250] [INSPIRE].
[17] J.P. Gauntlett, Branes, calibrations and supergravity, hepth/0305074 [INSPIRE].
[18] N. Kim and J.D. Park, Comments on AdS2 solutions of D = 11 supergravity, JHEP 09
(2006) 041 [hepth/0607093] [INSPIRE].
[19] J.P. Gauntlett and N. Kim, Geometries with Killing Spinors and Supersymmetric AdS
Solutions, Commun. Math. Phys. 284 (2008) 897 [arXiv:0710.2590] [INSPIRE].
[20] J.P. Gauntlett, N. Kim and D. Waldram, Supersymmetric AdS3, AdS2 and Bubble Solutions,
JHEP 04 (2007) 005 [hepth/0612253] [INSPIRE].
[arXiv:1703.10833] [INSPIRE].
[21] N. Kim, The Backreacted Kähler Geometry of Wrapped Branes, Phys. Rev. D 86 (2012)
067901 [arXiv:1206.1536] [INSPIRE].
charges, JHEP 10 (2012) 120 [arXiv:1208.1494] [INSPIRE].
[22] A. Donos and J.P. Gauntlett, Supersymmetric quantum criticality supported by baryonic
[23] N. Kim, Comments on AdS2 solutions from M2branes on complex curves and the
[24] A. Guarino, BPS black hole horizons from massive IIA, JHEP 08 (2017) 100
[25] A. Guarino and J. Tarrío, BPS black holes from massive IIA on S6, JHEP 09 (2017) 141
[26] S.M. Hosseini, K. Hristov and A. Passias, Holographic microstate counting for AdS4 black
holes in massive IIA supergravity, JHEP 10 (2017) 190 [arXiv:1707.06884] [INSPIRE].
[27] F. Benini, H. Khachatryan and P. Milan, Black hole entropy in massive Type IIA, Class.
Quant. Grav. 35 (2018) 035004 [arXiv:1707.06886] [INSPIRE].
[28] D.L. Jafferis, The Exact Superconformal RSymmetry Extremizes Z, JHEP 05 (2012) 159
[arXiv:1012.3210] [INSPIRE].
[29] C. Closset, T.T. Dumitrescu, G. Festuccia, Z. Komargodski and N. Seiberg, Contact Terms,
Unitarity and FMaximization in ThreeDimensional Superconformal Theories, JHEP 10
[30] F. Benini, N. Bobev and P.M. Crichigno, Twodimensional SCFTs from D3branes, JHEP
(2012) 053 [arXiv:1205.4142] [INSPIRE].
07 (2016) 020 [arXiv:1511.09462] [INSPIRE].
JHEP 12 (2017) 065 [arXiv:1708.05052] [INSPIRE].
[31] N. Bobev and P.M. Crichigno, Universal RG Flows Across Dimensions and Holography,
[32] O. Aharony, O. Bergman, D.L. Jafferis and J. Maldacena, N=6 superconformal
ChernSimonsmatter theories, M2branes and their gravity duals, JHEP 10 (2008) 091
[arXiv:0806.1218] [INSPIRE].
[33] N.A. Nekrasov and S.L. Shatashvili, Bethe/Gauge correspondence on curved spaces, JHEP
01 (2015) 100 [arXiv:1405.6046] [INSPIRE].
03 (2011) 127 [arXiv:1012.3512] [INSPIRE].
[34] N. Hama, K. Hosomichi and S. Lee, Notes on SUSY Gauge Theories on ThreeSphere, JHEP
[35] C. Closset, T.T. Dumitrescu, G. Festuccia, Z. Komargodski and N. Seiberg, Comments on
ChernSimons Contact Terms in Three Dimensions, JHEP 09 (2012) 091
[arXiv:1206.5218] [INSPIRE].
[36] K.A. Intriligator and B. Wecht, The exact superconformal R symmetry maximizes a, Nucl.
Phys. B 667 (2003) 183 [hepth/0304128] [INSPIRE].
[37] F. Benini and N. Bobev, Exact twodimensional superconformal Rsymmetry and
cextremization, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110 (2013) 061601 [arXiv:1211.4030] [INSPIRE].
[38] F. Benini and N. Bobev, Twodimensional SCFTs from wrapped branes and cextremization,
JHEP 06 (2013) 005 [arXiv:1302.4451] [INSPIRE].
[39] C. Closset, H. Kim and B. Willett, Supersymmetric partition functions and the
threedimensional Atwist, JHEP 03 (2017) 074 [arXiv:1701.03171] [INSPIRE].
Theories on the ThreeSphere, JHEP 06 (2011) 102 [arXiv:1103.1181] [INSPIRE].
[41] A. Hanany, D. Vegh and A. Zaffaroni, Brane Tilings and M2 Branes, JHEP 03 (2009) 012
[42] A. Hanany and A. Zaffaroni, Tilings, ChernSimons Theories and M2 Branes, JHEP 10
[43] D. Martelli and J. Sparks, Moduli spaces of ChernSimons quiver gauge theories and
AdS4=CF T3, Phys. Rev. D 78 (2008) 126005 [arXiv:0808.0912] [INSPIRE].
[44] D. Gaiotto and D.L. Jafferis, Notes on adding D6 branes wrapping Rp3 in AdS4
CP 3,
JHEP 11 (2012) 015 [arXiv:0903.2175] [INSPIRE].
[45] F. Benini, C. Closset and S. Cremonesi, Chiral flavors and M2branes at toric CY4
singularities, JHEP 02 (2010) 036 [arXiv:0911.4127] [INSPIRE].
[46] D.L. Jafferis and A. Tomasiello, A Simple class of N = 3 gauge/gravity duals, JHEP 10
(2008) 101 [arXiv:0808.0864] [INSPIRE].
[47] C.P. Herzog, I.R. Klebanov, S.S. Pufu and T. Tesileanu, MultiMatrix Models and TriSasaki
Einstein Spaces, Phys. Rev. D 83 (2011) 046001 [arXiv:1011.5487] [INSPIRE].
[48] D.R. Gulotta, J.P. Ang and C.P. Herzog, Matrix Models for Supersymmetric ChernSimons
Theories with an ADE Classification, JHEP 01 (2012) 132 [arXiv:1111.1744] [INSPIRE].
[49] P.M. Crichigno, C.P. Herzog and D. Jain, Free Energy of Dn Quiver ChernSimons Theories,
JHEP 03 (2013) 039 [arXiv:1211.1388] [INSPIRE].
046 [arXiv:1702.05486] [INSPIRE].
[50] P.M. Crichigno and D. Jain, Nontoric Cones and ChernSimons Quivers, JHEP 05 (2017)
[51] D. Martelli and J. Sparks, AdS(40/CFT(
3
) duals from M2branes at hypersurface
singularities and their deformations, JHEP 12 (2009) 017 [arXiv:0909.2036] [INSPIRE].
[52] F. Benini, C. Closset and S. Cremonesi, Quantum moduli space of ChernSimons quivers,
wrapped D6branes and AdS4/CFT3, JHEP 09 (2011) 005 [arXiv:1105.2299] [INSPIRE].
[53] A. Guarino, D.L. Jafferis and O. Varela, String Theory Origin of Dyonic N = 8 Supergravity
and Its ChernSimons Duals, Phys. Rev. Lett. 115 (2015) 091601 [arXiv:1504.08009]
amaximization, JHEP 01 (2016) 048 [arXiv:1507.05817] [INSPIRE].
[55] Y. Imamura, D. Yokoyama and S. Yokoyama, Superconformal index for largeN quiver
ChernSimons theories, JHEP 08 (2011) 011 [arXiv:1102.0621] [INSPIRE].
[56] S. Cheon, D. Gang, S. Kim and J. Park, Refined test of AdS4/CFT3 correspondence for
N = 2; 3 theories, JHEP 05 (2011) 027 [arXiv:1102.4273] [INSPIRE].
[57] D. Martelli, J. Sparks and S.T. Yau, SasakiEinstein manifolds and volume minimisation,
Commun. Math. Phys. 280 (2008) 611 [hepth/0603021] [INSPIRE].
[58] D.Z. Freedman and A.K. Das, Gauge Internal Symmetry in Extended Supergravity, Nucl.
Phys. B 120 (1977) 221 [INSPIRE].
[59] D. Martelli, A. Passias and J. Sparks, The supersymmetric NUTs and bolts of holography,
Nucl. Phys. B 876 (2013) 810 [arXiv:1212.4618] [INSPIRE].
[60] A. CaboBizet, U. Kol, L.A. Pando Zayas, I. Papadimitriou and V. Rathee, Entropy
functional and the holographic attractor mechanism, arXiv:1712.01849 [INSPIRE].
[61] R. Emparan, C.V. Johnson and R.C. Myers, Surface terms as counterterms in the AdS/CFT
[62] J.P. Gauntlett and O. Varela, Consistent KaluzaKlein reductions for general supersymmetric
[63] N. Drukker, M. Mariño and P. Putrov, From weak to strong coupling in ABJM theory,
[64] A. Guarino and O. Varela, Consistent N = 8 truncation of massive IIA on S6, JHEP 12
HJEP02(18)54
071 [arXiv:1509.07117] [INSPIRE].
[65] O. Varela, AdS4 solutions of massive IIA from dyonic ISO(7) supergravity, JHEP 03 (2016)
[66] A. Guarino and O. Varela, Dyonic ISO(7) supergravity and the duality hierarchy, JHEP 02
[67] D. Gaiotto and A. Tomasiello, The gauge dual of Romans mass, JHEP 01 (2010) 015
[68] I.R. Klebanov and E. Witten, Superconformal field theory on threebranes at a CalabiYau
singularity, Nucl. Phys. B 536 (1998) 199 [hepth/9807080] [INSPIRE].
[69] L.J. Romans, Massive N=2a Supergravity in TenDimensions, Phys. Lett. B 169 (1986) 374
arXiv:1605.03245 [INSPIRE].
[70] K. Pilch, A. Tyukov and N.P. Warner, N = 2 Supersymmetric Janus Solutions and Flows:
From Gauged Supergravity to Mtheory, JHEP 05 (2016) 005 [arXiv:1510.08090] [INSPIRE].
[71] K. Pilch, A. Tyukov and N.P. Warner, Flowing to Higher Dimensions: A New
StronglyCoupled Phase on M2 Branes, JHEP 11 (2015) 170 [arXiv:1506.01045] [INSPIRE].
[72] J.P. Gauntlett, D. Martelli, J.F. Sparks and D. Waldram, A New infinite class of
SasakiEinstein manifolds, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 8 (2004) 987 [hepth/0403038]
[73] J.P. Ang, M. Roček and J. Schulman, KählerEinstein and Kähler scalar flat supermanifolds,
[74] O.A.P. Mac Conamhna and E. O Colgain, Supersymmetric wrapped membranes, AdS2 spaces
and bubbling geometries, JHEP 03 (2007) 115 [hepth/0612196] [INSPIRE].
[75] A. Donos, J.P. Gauntlett and N. Kim, AdS Solutions Through Transgression, JHEP 09
(2008) 021 [arXiv:0807.4375] [INSPIRE].
Math. Phys. 318 (2013) 429 [arXiv:1109.3724] [INSPIRE].
[76] M.T. Anderson, C. Beem, N. Bobev and L. Rastelli, Holographic Uniformization, Commun.
[77] D. Martelli and J. Sparks, Notes on toric SasakiEinstein sevenmanifolds and AdS4=CF T3,
JHEP 11 (2008) 016 [arXiv:0808.0904] [INSPIRE].
08 (2013) 124 [arXiv:1305.0730] [INSPIRE].
[78] N. Halmagyi, M. Petrini and A. Zaffaroni, BPS black holes in AdS4 from Mtheory, JHEP
[79] D. Cassani, P. Koerber and O. Varela, All homogeneous N = 2 Mtheory truncations with
supersymmetric AdS4 vacua, JHEP 11 (2012) 173 [arXiv:1208.1262] [INSPIRE].
JHEP 07 (2017) 040 [arXiv:1610.08858] [INSPIRE].
(2010) 085 [arXiv:0911.4926] [INSPIRE].
gauged supergravity, JHEP 03 (2011) 037 [arXiv:1012.3756] [INSPIRE].
symmetry, JHEP 04 (2011) 047 [arXiv:1012.4314] [INSPIRE].
HJEP02(18)54
Microstates, Gen. Rel. Grav. 44 (2012) 1207 [arXiv:1108.3842] [INSPIRE].
Corrections and Central Charges from Wrapped M5branes, JHEP 12 (2014) 042
[arXiv:1408.2538] [INSPIRE].
attractors in 4d gauged supergravity, JHEP 05 (2016) 173 [arXiv:1603.00039] [INSPIRE].
Supergravity, Class. Quant. Grav. 31 (2014) 015012 [arXiv:1210.6057] [INSPIRE].
[hepth/9708042] [INSPIRE].
3 sin3( ) cos( )(cos(2 )+9) I = to the Ith chiral 2 sin(2 ) 9 2g2 + 2g5 = 0 ; [1] A. Strominger and C. Vafa , Microscopic origin of the BekensteinHawking entropy , Phys.
backreacted Kähler geometry , Eur. Phys. J. C 74 ( 2014 ) 2778 [arXiv: 1311 .7372] [INSPIRE].
correspondence , Phys. Rev. D 60 ( 1999 ) 104001 [ hep th/9903238] [INSPIRE].
AdS solutions , Phys. Rev. D 76 ( 2007 ) 126007 [arXiv: 0707 .2315] [INSPIRE]. [80] A. Amariti and C. Toldo , Betti multiplets, flows across dimensions and cextremization , [81] S.L. Cacciatori and D. Klemm , Supersymmetric AdS4 black holes and attractors , JHEP 01 [82] G. Dall'Agata and A. Gnecchi , Flow equations and attractors for black holes in N = 2 U(1 ) [84] N. Halmagyi , BPS Black Hole Horizons in N = 2 Gauged Supergravity , JHEP 02 ( 2014 ) 051