Paper detail

Magnetic quivers and line defects -- On a duality between 3d N=4 unitary and orthosymplectic quivers

Supersymmetric Sp(k) quantum chromodynamics with 8 supercharges in space-time dimensions 3 to 6 can be realised by two different Type II brane configurations in the presence of orientifolds. Consequently, two types of magnetic quivers describe the Higgs branch of the Sp(k) SQCD theory. This is a salient example of a general phenomenon: a given hyper-Kahler Higgs branch may admit several magnetic quiver constructions. It is then natural to wonder if these different magnetic quivers, which are described by 3d N=4 theories, are dual theories. In this work, the unitary and orthosymplectic magnetic quiver theories are subjected to a variety of tests, providing evidence that they are IR dual to each other. For this, sphere partition function and supersymmetric indices are compared. Also, we study half BPS line defects and find interesting regularities from the viewpoints of exact results, brane configurations, and one-form symmetry.

preprint2022arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access4 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.