ﻻ يوجد ملخص باللغة العربية
We give a very simple derivation of the forms of $N=2,D=10$ supergravity from supersymmetry and $SL(2,bbR)$ (for IIB). Using superspace cohomology we show that, if the Bianchi identities for the physical fields are satisfied, the (consistent) Bianchi identities for all of the higher-rank forms must be identically satisfied, and that there are no possible gauge-trivial Bianchi identities ($dF=0$) except for exact eleven-forms. We also show that the degrees of the forms can be extended beyond the spacetime limit, and that the representations they fall into agree with those predicted from Borcherds algebras. In IIA there are even-rank RR forms, including a non-zero twelve-form, while in IIB there are non-trivial Bianchi identities for thirteen-forms even though these forms are identically zero in supergravity. It is speculated that these higher-rank forms could be non-zero when higher-order string corrections are included.
The maximal supergravity theory in three dimensions, which has local SO(16) and rigid $E_8$ symmetries, is discussed in a superspace setting starting from an off-shell superconformal structure. The on-shell theory is obtained by imposing further cons
We construct the most general gaugings of the maximal D=6 supergravity. The theory is (2,2) supersymmetric, and possesses an on-shell SO(5,5) duality symmetry which plays a key role in determining its couplings. The field content includes 16 vector f
This paper is a companion to our earlier work arXiv:0710.3440 in which the projective superspace formulation for matter-coupled simple supergravity in five dimensions was presented. For the minimal multiplet of 5D N=1 supergravity introduced by Howe
The projective superspace formulation for four-dimensional N = 2 matter-coupled supergravity presented in arXiv:0805.4683 makes use of the variant superspace realization for the N = 2 Weyl multiplet in which the structure group is SL(2,C) x SU(2) and
The superspace formulation of N=1 conformal supergravity in four dimensions is demonstrated to be equivalent to the conventional component field approach based on the superconformal tensor calculus. The detailed correspondence between two approaches