SciPost Submission Page
BBBW on the spindle
by Antonio Amariti, Salvo Mancani, Davide Morgante, Nicolò Petri, Alessia Segati
This is not the latest submitted version.
Submission summary
Authors (as registered SciPost users):  Davide Morgante 
Submission information  

Preprint Link:  scipost_202310_00040v2 (pdf) 
Date submitted:  20240718 11:51 
Submitted by:  Morgante, Davide 
Submitted to:  SciPost Physics 
Ontological classification  

Academic field:  Physics 
Specialties: 

Approach:  Theoretical 
Abstract
We study the spindle compactification of families of AdS$_5$ consistent truncations corresponding to M5 branes wrapped on complex curves in CalabiYau threefolds. From the AdS/CFT correspondence these models are dual to $\mathcal{N}=1$ SCFTs obtained by gluing of $T_N$ blocks. The truncations considered here have both vector and hyper multiplets and the analysis of the BPS equations on the spindle allows to extract the central charges. Such analysis gives also consistency conditions for the existence of the solutions. The solutions are then found both analytically and numerically for opportune choices of the charges for some subfamilies of truncations. We then compare our results with the one expected from the field theory side, by integrating the anomaly polynomial.
Author indications on fulfilling journal expectations
 Provide a novel and synergetic link between different research areas.
 Open a new pathway in an existing or a new research direction, with clear potential for multipronged followup work
 Detail a groundbreaking theoretical/experimental/computational discovery
 Present a breakthrough on a previouslyidentified and longstanding research stumbling block
List of changes
We thank the referees for their suggestions. We corrected the typos that found by the first referee and implemented the suggestions from the second referee. It follows a detailed list of changes.
Conceptual
 First bullet: We are grateful to the referee for finding the typos in the coefficient of the anomaly polynomial. We corrected them and checked that they give the right results
 Second bullet: We are extremely grateful to the referee for pointing out a potential misleading interpretation of our results. The deep reason why we referred to the analytic solution in (6.1) as the “universal twist” was hidden, in the previous version of the paper, in the discussion after formula (2.30). Indeed, the requirement of rationality of the exact Rsymmetry imposes some constraints that boil down to a restricted set of choices for the parameter p,q that are exactly the ones that the referee refers to in the report. In this way, indeed, restricting to the gravity sector on the holographic dual side corresponds to a twist along the exact Rsymmetry with the values of p,q, fixed consistently. This is the usual universal twist and as a check we can see that indeed the AdS5 vacuum is recovered in our construction.
 Third bullet: We quoted reference [13] before formula (6.1) in order to clarify the structure of the solution presented in this section. Furthermore, the dependence from the parameter \mathbb{z} of the central charge is now clarified by the comment after formula (6.9) in terms of W_crit, or equivalently R_AdS5
Exposition
 First bullet: We added a comment after equation (23).
 Second bullet: We corrected the typos pointed out by the referee and adjusted the formulas. The anomaly in R2F was removed as suggested by the referee.
 Third bullet: we choose to differentiate between the two epsilons by adding a subscript 2d,4d which should make clearer the discussion.
 Fourth bullet: As commented on the first bullet of the conceptual errors, there were some typos in the anomaly polynomial which we now have fixed
 Fifth bullet: as pointed out, the a_{4d} was not needed and we removed it.
 Sixth bullet: as required by the referee, we added a comment on the limit. Indeed, in the sphere limit the U(1) symmetry enhances to SU(2) and therefore cannot mix with the Rsymmetry anymore. As a consequence the mixing parameter goes to zero, as expected.
 Seventh bullet: we have inserted the missing definitions. In this way the paper should be selfcontained, we thank the referee for pointing out this lack of clarity.
 Eighth bullet: We have inserted the proper citation.
 Ninth bullet: We have cited the paper where (6.1) was originally derived.
 Tenth bullet: We have added a reference to the definition of W_{crit} given in an earlier section of the paper
 Eleventh bullet: as pointed out by the referee, the sentence was misleading and we changed it.
 Twelfth bullet: As noted by the referee, we did not compute the finiteN contributions, so we deleted the highlighted sentence.
Typographic
 First bullet: We think that the explicit formulas are better suited rather than a simple comment about the n_S  >n_S
 Second bullet: The layout was modified to one similar to the field theory result
 Third bullet: We added a comment in the caption of the figure to highlight to which parameters of Table 1 the plots are referenced to.
Current status:
Reports on this Submission
Report
I thank the authors for addressing all the points I raised in my previous report. I am satisfied with the modifications submitted in the second version of the paper.
I am happy to recommend publication, although I would encourage the authors to further clarify within the paper the derivation and interpretation of the universal twist results  particularly in section 2 since in the current version not much has changed on that respect.
Recommendation
Publish (meets expectations and criteria for this Journal)