6d SCFTs, 5d dualities and Tao web diagrams
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract We propose 5d descriptions of 6d $$ \mathcal{N}=\left(1,\ 0\right) $$ N = 1 , 0 superconformal field theories arising from Type IIA brane configurations with an O8−-plane. We T-dualize the brane diagram along a compactification circle and obtain a 5-brane web diagram with two O7−- planes. The gauge theory description of the resulting 5d theory for a given 6d superconformal field theory is not unique, and we argue that the non-uniqueness leads to various dual 5d gauge theories. There are three sources which lead to the 5d dualities. One type comes from either resolving both or one of the two O7−-planes. The two situations give us two different ways to read off a 5d gauge theory from essentially the same web diagram. The second type originates from different distributions of D5 or D7-branes, shifting the gauge group ranks of the 5d quiver theory. The last one comes from the 90 or 45 degree rotations of the 5-brane web diagram, which is a part of the SL(2, ℤ) duality of Type IIB string theory, leading to completely different group structure. These lead to a very rich class of dualities between 5d gauge theories whose UV completion is the same 6d superconformal field theory. We also explore Higgsing of the 6d theories and their 5d counterparts. Decoupling the same flavors from the dual 5d theories gives rise to another dual 5d theories whose UV completion is the same 5d superconformal field theory. Finally we propose the 6d description of 5d theories which is obtained by a generalization of 5d T N theories with additional flavors, which turns out not to be in the class of Type IIA brane construction generically.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.010 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".