format: text

text:
# Domain walls of N=2 supergravity in five dimensions from hypermultiplet moduli spaces

## 1 Introduction

Five dimensional gauged supergravity has acquired some phenomenological interest due to several recent developments. The work of  showed that the reduction of Horava-Witten theory  to five dimensions is a gauged minimal supergravity admitting a BPS saturated domain wall solution which can be identified with the four-dimensional space-time of a strongly-coupled heterotic compactification . Another direction is provided by the AdS/CFT correspondence . In this framework the domain walls of $`N=8`$ gauged supergravity have a natural interpretation as renormalization group flows in the corresponding field theory. When an embedding of $`N=2`$ supergravity into the $`N=8`$ theory is known, the associated domain walls of the $`N=2`$ theory aquire an RG flow interpretation111It has become customary to use RG flow terminology even when such an embedding is not known, and we shall do so in what follows.. Yet another development is the proposal of  for an alternative to compactification. This scenario requires a domain wall interpolating between two $`AdS_5`$ solutions (of equal vacuum energy density) associated with IR points (critical points for the “superpotential” where the warp factor is exponentially small). Despite intense interest in the subject, there has been limited progress in finding explicit supergravity realizations of such scenarios.

In this regard several no-go theorems were proposed , which state that, under certain assumptions, there are no supersymmetric domain wall solutions connecting IR critical points of the supergravity potential. As it turns out, the relevant assumptions can be violated once one considers coupling to hypermultiplets. In particular, the recent work of  provides a counterexample obtained by coupling the supergravity multiplet to a single hypermultiplet described by a certain non-homogeneous quaternion-Kahler space; in this model, the no-go theorems of  do not apply. This underscores the importance of reconsidering the problem in the general context of inhomogeneous hypermultiplet moduli spaces.

As a general rule, however, one knows quite a bit about flows on the vector/tensor multiplet moduli space, but rather little about their hypermultiplet counterpart. The difficulty in the latter case consists mainly in understanding the associated geometry. It is well-known that the hypermultiplet moduli space must be a quaternion-Kahler space of negative scalar curvature. To trust the supergravity approximation, one must restrict to smooth quaternion-Kahler spaces222In principle, one may allow for curvature singularities in the classical hypermultiplet moduli space. However, one expects such singularities to be removed by quantum effects, for example if the model under consideration can be realized in string/M-theory.. Even restricting to one hypermultiplet (the focus of the present paper), very little is known explicitly for the generic case. In this situation, the quaternion-Kahler condition is equivalent to the requirement that $`M`$ is Einstein-selfdual (ESD). The simplest negative curvature examples are provided by the homogeneous spaces $`SU(2,1)/U(2)`$ (the moduli space of the universal hypermultiplet, i.e. the Bergman metric) and $`EAdS_4=SO(4,1)/SO(4)`$ (the Euclidean version of $`AdS_4`$, also known as the hyperbolic space $`H^4`$ or the hyperbolic metric on the open four-ball). Another class of examples is provided by cohomogeneity one $`SU(2)`$-invariant complete ESD metrics, which were classified in . A distinguished subclass of the latter is provided by those metrics which admit an isometric $`U(2)`$ action. These are the Pedersen metrics on the open four-ball  and their analytic continuations . As it turns out, these are the metrics relevant for the counter-example of 333The authors of  use a parameterization due to , which is quite different from that of  and , and somewhat cumbersome for our purpose. The relation between their coordinates and those of  is described in Appendix A..

What will allow us to make progress is the recent work of Calderbank and Pedersen , which gave an explicit description of the most general ESD space admitting two commuting and linearly independent Killing vector fields. Through an elegant chain of arguments, they showed that such spaces are described by a single function $`F`$ of two variables, which is constrained to obey a linear PDE (namely, $`F`$ must be an eigenfunction of the two-dimensional hyperbolic Laplacian with eigenvalue $`3/4`$). An immediate consequence of this linear description is that one can obtain new solutions (at least locally) by superposing various eigenfunctions $`F`$ — a situation which is quite unexpected at first sight.444Note that an abstract classification of quaternion-Kahler spaces with $`n`$ quaternionic abelian isometries in terms of a single function was infered in , based on the relation to hyperkahler cones with $`n`$ abelian triholomorphic isometries. However in  the relation between the quaternion-Kahler metric and the single function characterizing it is rather implicit and hence more of conceptual than practical significance.

For the case of positive scalar curvature, the work of  has another application: it leads to an elegant description of ESD metrics on certain compact toric orbifolds which include and generalize the models studied a while ago by Galicki and Lawson . As explained in  and , this can be combined with the construction of  and  in order to produce a large class of conical $`G_2`$ metrics, which lead to interesting M-theory backgrounds which produce chiral field theories in four dimensions . The main simplification for the positive curvature case is due to Myers’s theorem, which forces such spaces to be compact (if complete); this makes them amenable to (hyperkahler) toric geometry techniques upon invoking the associated hyperkahler cone/Swann bundle. In particular, this allows one to extract global information by simple computations in integral linear algebra.

When studying hypermultiplets, the ESD space of interest has negative scalar curvature and the isometries of $`M`$ may fail to be compact. Therefore, toric geometry techniques do not always apply. This reflects the well-known observation that the global study of Einstein manifolds of negative scalar curvature is considerably more involved than the positive curvature case. In particular, it is not trivial to find functions $`F`$ for which the metric of  is smooth and complete as required by supergravity applications. A class of such solutions was recently given by Calderbank and Singer , and in this paper we shall restrict to negative curvature models of that type. The metrics of  are smooth and complete, and live on an open subset $`M_+`$ of a toric resolution $`M`$ of an Abelian quotient singularity $`𝐂^2/𝐙_p`$; the set $`M_+`$ contains all irreducible components of the exceptional divisor. To ensure negative scalar curvature, one must require $`c_1(M)<0`$555Compare this with the Gorenstein case $`c_1(M)=0`$ ($`A_{p1}`$ surface singularities), which leads to the well-known hyperkahler metrics of Eguchi–Hanson and Gibbons–Hawking .. These models admit two Killing vectors with compact orbits, and thus they are invariant under a $`U(1)^2`$ action. As pointed out in , such models are a generalization of the Pedersen–LeBrun metrics ; the latter arise as the particular case when $`M=𝒪(p)𝐏^1`$ is the minimal resolution of $`𝐂^2/𝐙_p`$ with the symmetric $`𝐙_p`$ action $`(z_1,z_2)(e^{2\pi i/p}z_1,e^{2\pi i/p}z_2)`$. As mentioned above, the Pedersen metrics are invariant with respect to a larger $`U(2)=SU(2)\times U(1)`$ action and fit into the cohomogeneity one classification of $`SU(2)`$ invariant ESD metrics given by Hitchin .

The main advantage of the metrics of  is that the underlying manifold admits a toric description, even though the metrics themselves have negative scalar curvature. Indeed, the resolution $`M`$ is a (noncompact) toric variety in two complex dimensions, whose combinatorial description is a classical result . In particular, the orbits of the isometric $`T^2`$ action can be described by standard methods of toric geometry . When considering flows on such spaces, this allows for easy identification of the critical points of the relevant superpotential since, in the absence of vector/tensor multiplets, the latter are the fixed points of the U(1) isometry used to gauge the supergravity action .

In fact, the basic picture can be explained quite easily in non-technical language. Recall that the toric variety $`M`$ can be presented as a $`T^2`$\- fibration over its Delzant polytope $`\mathrm{\Delta }_M`$666This fibration arises by considering the moment map $`\mu :M𝐑^2`$ of the $`U(1)^2`$ action with respect to the toric Kahler metric of $`M`$. The Delzant polytope $`\mathrm{\Delta }_M`$ is the image $`\mu (M)𝐑^2`$. Note that the toric Kahler metric of $`M`$ differs from its ESD metric.. In our case, the latter is a noncompact planar polytope and general results  show that the $`T^2`$ fiber of $`M`$ collapses to a point at its vertices and to a circle above its edges. The $`S^1`$ fibrations above the finite edges (whose circle fibers collapse to points at the vertices) give a collection of smooth spheres $`S_j`$ which are holomorphically embedded in $`M`$ — one obtains a copy of $`𝐏^1`$ for every finite edge of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_M`$. A generic isometry fixes only the points $`p_j`$ of $`M`$ sitting above the vertices of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_M`$. As one can obtain an arbitrary number of points $`p_j`$ by taking $`p`$ ($`M`$ is the resolution of $`𝐂^2/𝐙_p`$) to be large, one can produce models with an arbitrarily large number of isolated critical points of the superpotential. This should be contrasted with the Pedersen metrics considered in , which lead to at most two isolated critical points. This observation will allow us to build chains of flows connecting the critical points, and therefore domain wall solutions which interpolate between the associated $`AdS_5`$ backgrounds.

For a general choice of gauged isometry, it turns out that at most one such flow is of Randall-Sundrum type (i.e it connects two IR critical points). Among the rest, there are domain wall solutions which interpolate between a UV and an IR critical point. Some of these may describe RG flows of appropriate dual field theories due to the following chain of arguments. It is believed that 5-dimensional $`N=8`$ gauged supergravity  is a consistent truncation of the 10-dimensional IIB supergravity on $`AdS_5\times S^5`$ (some evidence for this was presented in ). This means that every solution of the former is also a solution of the latter. Although there is no proof at present, this is strongly supported by similarity with two other cases: 4-dimensional $`N=8`$ gauged supergravity, which is known  to be a consistent truncation of 11-dimensional supergravity on $`AdS_4\times S^7`$, and 7-dimensional gauged supergravity, which was shown recently  to be a consistent truncation of 11-dimensional supergravity on $`AdS_7\times S^4`$. Additional, indirect evidence for the consistency of the truncation of IIB SUGRA on $`AdS_5\times S^5`$ to $`d=5`$, $`N=8`$ SUGRA is provided by the numerous studies in $`AdS/CFT`$ (for example ), where that consistency is assumed and domain walls of the supergravity theory are interpreted as RG flows of the corresponding dual field theory. Various quantities, calculated both from the gravity side and from the field theory side, have been successfully matched . For one of these solutions — a domain wall in 5d $`N=8`$ supergravity, which describes an RG flow from $`N=4`$ to $`N=1`$ super Yang-Mills driven by the addition of a mass term for one of the three adjoint chiral superfields  — it was found in  that it can be embedded in 5d $`N=2`$ gauged supergravity. In particular this means that the $`N=2`$ theory is at least in that case a consistent truncation of the 10d IIB theory. This may be by chance, but it may also be that many more domain walls of 5d $`N=2`$ SUGRA can be embedded in the 10d theory and hence can have via the $`AdS/CFT`$ correspondence an interpretation as a RG flow of an appropriate field theory. It would be interesting to explore whether some of our UV-IR flows have such interpretations.

The present paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we recall the necessary ingredients of 5-dimensional $`N=2`$ gauged supergravity, and extract the superpotential and flow equations relevant for coupling the gravity multiplet to a single hypermultiplet described by the metric of . Section 3 describes the subclass of metrics constructed in . In Section 4 we study the general properties of BPS flows for such models. In particular, we give the general flow solutions connecting our critical points and describe the conditions under which such a solution has Randall-Sundrum type (i.e. is an IR-IR flow). Section 5 illustrates this discussion with a few explicit examples, which include and generalize the solution of . Appendix A gives the coordinate transformation relating the Pedersen metrics to the models discussed in .

## 2 Flow equations on toric one-hypermultiplet moduli spaces

Consider coupling a single hypermultiplet to the supergravity multiplet in five dimensions. As the theory contains only one gauge field (namely the graviphoton), one can gauge at most one isometry of the hypermultiplet moduli space. The general Lagrangian of gauged minimal supergravity in five dimensions was derived in 777Minimal means $`N=2`$ as in 5d there is no $`N=1`$ gauged supergravity theory.. When no vector/tensor multiplets are present888When including vector/tensor multiplets, the potential can not always be written in this form. See  for details., the scalar potential induced by the gauging takes the form :

$$𝒱=6W^2+\frac{9}{2}g^{XY}_XW_YW,$$
(1)
where $`g_{XY}`$ is the hypermultiplet metric and the ”superpotential” $`W`$ is given by:

$$W=\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}P^rP^r},r=1,2,3.$$
(2)
Here $`\{P^r\}_{r=1}^3`$ is the triplet of prepotentials related to the Killing vector $`K^Y`$ of the gauged isometry:

$$_{XY}^rK^Y=2D_XP^r,$$
(3)
where $`\{^r\}_{r=1}^3`$ is the triplet of Sp(1) curvatures and $`D_X`$ is the full covariant derivative (including the Levi-Civita, Sp($`n`$) and Sp(1) connections for the case of a $`4n`$-dimensional quaternionic space). The factor of $`2`$ is a result of a different normalization w.r.t.  as will be explained below.

Note that we work with the convention  that $`W`$ is always non-negative (i.e. we choose the non-negative square root in (2)). This implies that $`W`$ will fail to be differentiable at a zero of $`W`$ where the directional derivatives do not all vanish. At such a noncritical zero, the function $`W^2`$ is differentiable, and its Hessian is positive semidefinite .

In our example, we take $`n=1`$ and let the hypermultiplet moduli space be described by a $`T^2`$ invariant ESD metric of negative scalar curvature. As shown in , the most general $`T^2`$ invariant ESD metric has the form:

$`d\sigma ^2={\displaystyle \frac{\left|F^24\rho ^2\left(F_\rho ^2+F_\eta ^2\right)\right|}{4F^2}}{\displaystyle \frac{d\rho ^2+d\eta ^2}{\rho ^2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\left[\left(F2\rho F_\rho \right)\alpha 2\rho F_\eta \beta \right]^2+\left[2\rho F_\eta \alpha +\left(F+2\rho F_\rho \right)\beta \right]^2}{F^2\left|F^24\rho ^2\left(F_\rho ^2+F_\eta ^2\right)\right|}}`$ (4)
where $`\alpha =\sqrt{\rho }d\varphi `$, $`\beta =(d\psi +\eta d\varphi )/\sqrt{\rho }`$ and the function $`F(\rho ,\eta )`$ satisfies the equation:

$$\rho ^2(F_{\rho \rho }+F_{\eta \eta })=\frac{3}{4}F.$$
(5)
Note that we use the notation $`F_\rho =_\rho F,F_\eta =_\eta F`$, $`F_{\rho \rho }=_\rho ^2F`$ etc. for the partial derivatives of $`F`$.

In equation (4), one takes $`\rho >0`$ and $`\eta 𝐑`$, while $`\varphi ,\psi `$ are coordinates of periodicity $`2\pi `$. The metric is well-defined for $`F^24\rho ^2(F_\rho ^2+F_\eta ^2)`$ and $`F0`$. It has positive scalar curvature in the regions where $`F^24\rho ^2(F_\rho ^2+F_\eta ^2)>0`$ and negative scalar curvature for $`F^24\rho ^2(F_\rho ^2+F_\eta ^2)<0`$. One can easily check that (4) is normalized so that in the latter case the scalar curvature is $`12`$ as is usual for supergravity applications.

Condition (5) says that $`F`$ is an eigenfunction (with eigenvalue $`3/4`$) of the hyperbolic Laplacian $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{}=\rho ^2(_\rho ^2+_\eta ^2)`$. This is the Laplacian of the standard metric:

$$ds_{}^2=\frac{1}{\rho ^2}(d\rho ^2+d\eta ^2)$$
(6)
on the hyperbolic plane $`^2`$ with coordinates $`\rho >0`$ and $`\eta 𝐑`$. Note that we use the upper half plane model.

The Sp(1) curvatures determined by (4) are :

$`^1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{F^24\rho ^2(F_\rho ^2+F_\eta ^2)}{4F^2\rho ^2}}d\rho d\eta +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{F^2}}d\varphi d\psi `$
$`^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{F_\eta }{F^2\sqrt{\rho }}}d\psi d\rho +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{F^2\sqrt{\rho }}}\left(\rho F_\rho +\eta F_\eta {\displaystyle \frac{F}{2}}\right)d\varphi d\rho `$
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{F^2\sqrt{\rho }}}\left(F_\rho +{\displaystyle \frac{F}{2\rho }}\right)d\psi d\eta +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{F^2\sqrt{\rho }}}\left(\rho F_\eta \eta F_\rho {\displaystyle \frac{\eta }{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{F}{2}}\right)d\varphi d\eta `$
$`^3`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{F^2\sqrt{\rho }}}\left(F_\rho +{\displaystyle \frac{F}{2\rho }}\right)d\psi d\rho +{\displaystyle \frac{1}{F^2\sqrt{\rho }}}\left(\rho F_\eta \eta F_\rho {\displaystyle \frac{\eta }{\rho }}{\displaystyle \frac{F}{2}}\right)d\varphi d\rho `$ (7)
$``$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{F_\eta }{F^2\sqrt{\rho }}}d\psi d\eta {\displaystyle \frac{1}{F^2\sqrt{\rho }}}\left(\rho F_\rho +\eta F_\eta {\displaystyle \frac{F}{2}}\right)d\varphi d\eta .`$
It is easy to check that they satisfy:

$$_{XY}^r^{sYZ}=\delta ^{rs}\delta _X^Z\epsilon ^{rst}_X^t^Z$$
(8)
unlike (2.11) of . Hence these curvatures are normalized to

$$_{XY}^r=J_{XY}^r,$$
(9)
where $`J^r`$ are the three complex structures, and not to $`^r=\frac{1}{2}J^r`$ as in . With this normalization the covariant derivative takes the form

$$D_XP^r=_XP^r+\epsilon ^{rst}\omega _X^sP^t$$
(10)
on a quantity having only an Sp(1) index. Note the slight difference w.r.t. (2.12) of . In (10) $`\{\omega ^s\}_{s=1}^3`$ is the triplet of Sp(1) connections for the curvature (2) :

$$\omega ^1=\frac{F_\eta }{F}d\rho +\left(\frac{1}{2\rho }+\frac{F_\rho }{F}\right)d\eta ,\omega ^2=\frac{\sqrt{\rho }}{F}d\varphi ,\omega ^3=\frac{\eta }{F\sqrt{\rho }}d\varphi +\frac{1}{F\sqrt{\rho }}d\psi .$$
(11)
Using (8) one can solve (3) for the Killing vector:

$$K^Y=\frac{2}{3}^{rYX}D_XP^r.$$
(12)
Again the numerical factor differs slightly from  due to the different normalization of the Sp(1) curvatures and connections. Equation (3) can also be solved for the prepotentials by using the fact that they are eigenfunctions of the Laplacian :

$$D^XD_XP^r=\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}nP^r$$
(13)
(for a $`4n`$-dimensional quaternion-Kahler space). Again this differs by a factor of $`2`$ w.r.t. the footnote after (2.15) in . One obtains:

$$P^r=\frac{1}{4}D_X(K^Zg_{ZY}^{rXY})=\frac{1}{4}^{rXY}_XK_Y,$$
(14)
where the second equality results from the covariant constancy and antisymmetry in $`X`$ and $`Y`$ of the Sp(1) curvature. A domain wall of gauged supergravity,

$$ds^2=e^{2U(t)}dx_{4d}^2+dt^2,$$
(15)
which preserves $`N=1`$ supersymmetry is given by the solution of the following system :

$`_tU`$ $`=`$ $`\pm gW`$
$`_tq^X`$ $`=`$ $`3gg^{XY}_YW,`$ (16)
where $`q^X`$ are the hypermultiplet scalars. The signs in these equations must be chosen consistently (i.e. one must use the minus sign in the second equation if one chooses the plus sign in the first). In order to insure continuity of the derivative of a flow which passes through a noncritical zero of $`W`$, one must switch the sign in the first equation when the flow meets such a point. Accordingly, the sign in the second equation must also be switched there.

Let us gauge the isometry of the metric (4) along the Killing vector:

$$K=_\varphi \lambda _\psi .$$
(17)
Note that we normalize $`K`$ such that the coefficient of its $`_\varphi `$ component equals one.

#### Observation

Equation (3) fixes the prepotentials $`P^r`$ (and thus the superpotential (2)) in terms of a specific choice for the Killing vector $`K`$. In particular, rescaling $`K`$ leads to a rescaling of $`W`$, which can be absorbed by a rescaling of $`t`$ in equations (2). Since the first of these equations determines $`U`$ only up to a constant factor, this rescaling of $`t`$ can be further absorbed into a constant rescaling of the metric (15), upon choosing an appropriate integration constant for $`U`$. In particular, the normalization in (17) amounts to a particular choice of scale for $`t`$ or, equivalently, a choice of scale for the metric (15).

Equation (14) implies:

$$P^1=0,P^2=\frac{1}{2}\frac{\sqrt{\rho }}{F},P^3=\frac{1}{2}\frac{\eta \lambda }{F\sqrt{\rho }}$$
(18)
where we took (5) into account. Using (12), one can check that these prepotentials give (17). Now (2) gives:

$$W=\sqrt{\frac{1}{6F^2}\left[\rho +\frac{(\eta \lambda )^2}{\rho }\right]}.$$
(19)
Because $`W`$ is only a function of $`\rho `$ and $`\eta `$ and the metric (4) (and hence its inverse) is diagonal in $`\rho ,\eta `$, the potential (1) and the ”flow equations” (2) acquire a particularly simple form:

$$𝒱=\frac{1}{F^2}\left(\rho +\frac{(\eta \lambda )^2}{\rho }\right)+\frac{18\rho ^2F^2}{|F^24\rho ^2(F_\rho ^2+F_\eta ^2)|}[(_\rho W)^2+(_\eta W)^2],$$
(20)
and:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\varphi }{dt}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d\psi }{dt}}=0`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{dU}{dt}}`$ $`=`$ $`\pm gW`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\rho }{dt}}`$ $`=`$ $`12g{\displaystyle \frac{\rho ^2F^2}{|F^24\rho ^2(F_\rho ^2+F_\eta ^2)|}}_\rho W`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\eta }{dt}}`$ $`=`$ $`12g{\displaystyle \frac{\rho ^2F^2}{|F^24\rho ^2(F_\rho ^2+F_\eta ^2)|}}_\eta W.`$ (21)
Hence the $`T^2`$ isometry of the one-hypermultiplet moduli space allows us to reduce the four-dimensional flow equations to a two-dimensional problem. The last two relations describe the gradient flow of $`W`$ with respect to the metric $`\frac{|F^24\rho ^2(F_\rho ^2+F_\eta ^2)|}{\rho ^2F^2}(d\rho ^2+d\eta ^2)`$ on the upper half plane (notice that this is conformal to the hyperbolic metric).

## 3 Calderbank-Singer spaces

### 3.1 Minimal resolutions of cyclic quotient singularities

Consider a cyclic singularity $`𝐂^2/𝐙_p`$, where the generator of $`𝐙_p`$ acts through:

$$(z_1,z_2)(e^{2\pi i/p}z_1,e^{2\pi iq/p}z_2).$$
(22)
We assume that the integers $`p,q`$ satisfy $`p>q>0`$999 This action embeds diagonally in $`U(2)`$. It embeds in $`SU(2)`$ if and only if $`q+1=p`$, when the singularity $`𝐂^2/𝐙_p`$ is called Gorenstein and has trivial dualizing sheaf; in that case, it is simply an $`A_{p1}`$ surface singularity. In this paper, we are emphatically not interested in the Gorenstein case. We note that non-Gorenstein cyclic singularities arise naturally in the study of normal complex surfaces–this generalizes the better known case of $`A_{p1}`$ singularities, which give local descriptions for the singularities of $`K3`$. The minimal resolution of an $`A_{p1}`$ singularity has trivial first Chern class and carries the multi-Eguchi-Hanson metric, which is hyperkahler. As shown in , such resolutions never carry a toric SDE metric of negative scalar curvature.. We consider the minimal resolution of this singularity, which is a smooth algebraic surface $`M`$ birational with $`𝐂^2/𝐙_p`$ and containing no $`1`$ curves. If $`S_1\mathrm{}S_k`$ denote the irreducible components of its exceptional divisor, then it is a classical fact  that the intersection matrix of these components has the form:

$$(S_iS_j)=\left[\begin{array}{ccccc}e_1& 1& 0& \mathrm{}& 0\\ 1& e_2& 1& \mathrm{}& 0\\ 0& 1& e_3& \mathrm{}& 0\\ \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}& \mathrm{}\\ 0& 0& 0& \mathrm{}& e_k\end{array}\right],$$
(23)
where the diagonal entries are integers satisfying $`e_j2`$. The adjunction formula shows that $`c_1(M)0`$, with $`c_1(M)<0`$ if and only if all $`e_j3`$ and $`c_1(M)=0`$ iff all $`e_j=2`$; the latter case corresponds to $`q=p1`$ (the $`A_{p1}`$ Gorenstein singularity). For what follows, we shall consider exclusively the case $`c_1(M)<0`$.

It is well known that both $`𝐂^2/𝐙_p`$ and its minimal resolution are toric varieties (see, for example, ). As explained in , the toric description of $`X`$ can be extracted with the help of continued fractions. Indeed the integers $`k`$ and $`e_1\mathrm{}e_k`$ are given by the minus101010This differs from the more common ‘plus’ continued fractions. By definition of the expansion (24), the integers $`e_j`$ are required to satisfy $`e_j2`$. continued fraction expansion:

$$\frac{p}{q}=e_1\frac{1}{e_2\frac{1}{e_3\mathrm{}\frac{1}{e_{k1}\frac{1}{e_k}}}},$$
(24)
which we shall denote by $`(e_1\mathrm{}e_k)`$ for simplicity. The toric data of $`M`$ can be determined as follows 111111Our presentation differs from that of  in a few trivial ways. First, reference  uses a different description of the cyclic action, which amounts to the redefinitions $`pq`$ and $`qqp`$. It also writes our second order recursion as a first order recursion for two vectors.. Consider a basis $`(t,t^{})`$ of the two-dimensional lattice $`𝐙^2`$, and define vectors $`\nu _0\mathrm{}\nu _k`$ by the two-step recursion:

$$\nu _{j+1}=e_j\nu _j\nu _{j1}(j=1\mathrm{}k),$$
(25)
with the initial conditions $`\nu _0=t`$ and $`\nu _1=t+t^{}`$. Then $`\nu _{k+1}=(pq)t+pt^{}`$ and $`\nu _0\mathrm{}\nu _{k+1}`$ are the toric generators of the minimal resolution $`M`$, while $`\nu _0`$ and $`\nu _{k+1}`$ are the toric generators of the singularity $`𝐂^2/𝐙_p`$. The latter generate a (strongly convex) cone $`\sigma `$, subdivided by the vectors $`\nu _1\mathrm{}\nu _k`$ which lie in its interior. In fact, these vectors coincide with the vertices of the convex polytope defined by the convex hull of the intersection of $`\sigma \{0\}`$ with the $`𝐙^2`$ lattice. Following , we choose $`t=\left[\begin{array}{c}0\\ 1\end{array}\right]`$ and $`t^{}=\left[\begin{array}{c}1\\ 1\end{array}\right]`$ (always possible via a modular transformation), which gives $`\nu _0=\left[\begin{array}{c}0\\ 1\end{array}\right]`$, $`\nu _1=\left[\begin{array}{c}1\\ 0\end{array}\right]`$ and $`\nu _{k+1}=\left[\begin{array}{c}p\\ q\end{array}\right]`$. Upon writing $`\nu _j=\left[\begin{array}{c}m_j\\ n_j\end{array}\right]`$, relation (25) becomes:

$$m_{j+1}=e_jm_jm_{j1},n_{j+1}=e_jn_jn_{j1}(j1),$$
(26)
with the initial conditions $`(m_0,n_0)=(0,1)`$ and $`(m_1,n_1)=(1,0)`$. These can be recognized as the standard recursion relations for the numerator and denominator of the partial quotients $`q_j=(e_1\mathrm{}e_j)=m_{j+1}/n_{j+1}`$ ($`j=1\mathrm{}k`$) of the continued fraction (24). We remind the reader that the solutions of this recursion have the following properties (all of which can be checked by direct computation or induction):

(a) $`n_0=1<n_1=0<n_2=1<n_3<\mathrm{}<n_{k+1}=q`$ and $`m_0=0<m_1=1<m_2=e_1<\mathrm{}<m_{k+1}=p`$

(b) $`q_1>q_2>\mathrm{}>q_k=p/q`$ .

(c) $`m_jn_{j+1}m_{j+1}n_j=1`$ for $`j=0\mathrm{}k`$ and $`m_{j1}n_{j+1}m_{j+1}n_{j1}=e_j`$ for $`j=1\mathrm{}k`$.

(d) If all $`e_j`$ are strictly greater that two, then $`m_{j+1}m_j>m_jm_{j1}`$ for all $`j=1\mathrm{}k`$ and $`n_{j+1}n_j>n_jn_{j1}`$ for all $`j=2\mathrm{}k`$.

The first part of (c) says that the area of the triangle determined by vectors $`\nu _j`$ and $`\nu _{j+1}`$ equals $`1/2`$ — this is the condition that the subdivision of the cone $`\sigma `$ resolves the singularities of $`𝐂^2/𝐙_p`$.

The situation for the vectors $`\nu _0\mathrm{}\nu _{k+1}`$ is illustrated in figure 1. It shows the case $`p=8`$ and $`q=3`$, which will be discussed in more detail in Subsection 5.3.

### 3.2 The Calderbank-Singer metrics

In , Calderbank and Singer construct toric ESD metrics of negative scalar curvature on the minimal121212In fact, the construction of  applies to a more general class of toric resolutions of $`𝐂^2/𝐙_p`$, which are not necessarily minimal. In this paper, we shall consider their construction only for the case of minimal resolutions. resolutions of cyclic singularities with negative first Chern class. These metrics are invariant with respect to the natural $`T^2`$ action on $`M`$ induced by its structure of toric variety. In view of the results of , they must have the general form (4) with $`F^2<4\rho ^2(F_\rho ^2+F_\eta ^2)`$, where the angular coordinates $`(\varphi ,\psi )`$ parameterize the $`T^2`$ fibers of $`M`$. This is achieved by choosing $`F`$ to be a superposition of elementary eigenfunctions of the type:

$$f(\rho ,\eta ;y)=\sqrt{\rho +\frac{(\eta y)^2}{\rho }},$$
(27)
which are easily seen to satisfy $`\mathrm{\Delta }_{}f=\frac{3}{4}f`$. More precisely, one must choose the linear combination:

$$F(\rho ,\eta )=\underset{j=0}{\overset{k+1}{}}w_jf(\rho ,\eta ;y_j),$$
(28)
where:

$$w_j=\frac{1}{2}(m_jm_{j+1}),y_j=\frac{n_{j+1}n_j}{m_{j+1}m_j}$$
(29)
and we defined $`m_{k+2}=0`$ and $`n_{k+2}=1`$ (addition of $`\nu _{k+2}:=\left[\begin{array}{c}m_{k+2}\\ n_{k+2}\end{array}\right]`$ and thus of $`y_{k+1}`$ amounts to taking the one-point compactification $`\overline{M}`$ of $`M`$). Since we assume $`c_1(M)<0`$, we have $`e_j3`$ for all $`j=1\mathrm{}k`$ and thus $`w_{k+1}=p/2>0>w_0=1/2>w_1>\mathrm{}>w_k`$. The combination (28) is fixed (up to a constant scale factor) by the requirement that the metric (4) extends smoothly to the singular fibers of $`M`$. When considering the metric (4), one identifies topologically the boundary of the Delzant polytope $`\mathrm{\Delta }_M`$ with the boundary $`\rho =0`$ of the upper half plane model of the hyperbolic plane. Then the vertices of the Delzant polytope are mapped to the points $`y_0\mathrm{}y_k`$, and its edges correspond to the intervals determined by these vertices. It is easy to check  that $`y_0>y_1>\mathrm{}>y_k>q/p>y_{k+1}`$, so that the edges of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_M`$ correspond to the intervals $`I_j:=(y_j,y_{j1})`$ sitting at $`\rho =0`$.

Figure 2: General arrangement of $`y_j`$, $`Z`$ and $`\eta _0=q/p`$ in the hyperbolic plane. The simple curve $`Z`$ separates the upper half plane into the regions $`D_{}`$ and $`D_+`$. The latter is the region of interest for the present paper.

Figure 3: The open sets $`M_+`$ and $`M_{}`$ are separated by the conformal infinity $`Y`$. Each region $`M_\pm `$ carries an ESD metric of negative scalar curvature. The point $`p_{k+1}`$ (which lies above $`y_{k+1}`$) is an orbifold point; it is the ‘point at infinity’ of $`\overline{M}`$. The figure also shows the irreducible components of the exceptional divisor, which connect the points $`p_0\mathrm{}p_k`$ lying above $`y_0\mathrm{}y_k`$.

Expression (4) determines an ESD metric (of negative scalar curvature) on the space $`\overline{M}\overline{}^2`$, where $`\overline{}^2`$ is the conformal compactification of the hyperbolic plane (obtained by adding the point at infinity). However, this metric is ill-defined along the set $`Z`$ given by the equation $`F(\rho ,\eta )=0`$. As explained in , this locus is a smooth simple curve which intersects the boundary of $`\overline{}^2`$ in the points $`\eta _0=q/p=1/q_k(y_{k+1},y_k)`$ and $`\mathrm{}`$ (see figure 2). This curve separates $`\overline{}^2`$ into connected components $`D_+`$ (defined by the condition $`F(\rho ,\eta )>0`$) and $`D_{}`$ (defined by $`F(\rho ,\eta )<0)`$, which pull back to two disjoint open subsets $`M_+`$ and $`M_{}`$ of $`\overline{M}`$, separated by a region $`Y`$ defined as the pull-back of $`Z`$. The piece $`D_+`$ contains the points $`y_0\mathrm{}y_k`$, while $`D_{}`$ contains the point $`y_{k+1}`$. The set $`Y`$ is a compact $`T^2`$ fibration over $`Z`$, which coincides topologically with the Lens space $`S^3/𝐙_p`$. It is a conformal infinity for each of the two ESD metrics determined by (4) on the open sets $`M_+`$ and $`M_{}`$ . Note that $`M_+`$ contains the exceptional divisor of the resolution, and that the ESD metric induced on $`M_+`$ is smooth and complete. The metric induced on $`M_{}`$ is a complete orbifold metric, with the orbifold point given by the point at infinity of $`\overline{M}`$, which we denote by $`p_{k+1}`$ (this points sits above $`y_{k+1}`$). Since we are interested in smooth and complete metrics, we shall concentrate on the region $`M_+`$ (see figure 3).

### 3.3 Fixed points of $`U(1)`$ isometries

The fibration of $`M`$ over its Delzant polytope translates into a fibration over $`^2`$. Since the points $`y_j`$ correspond to the vertices of $`\mathrm{\Delta }_M`$, the $`T^2`$ fibers collapse to points above $`y_j`$ and to circles above the intervals $`I_j=(y_j,y_{j1})`$ sitting at $`\rho =0`$. In expression (4), one uses coordinates $`(\varphi ,\psi )`$ along the $`T^2`$ fibers such that the vectors $`_\psi ,_\varphi `$ correspond to the canonical basis of the lattice $`𝐙^2`$. Hence the $`U(1)`$ generator (17) corresponds to the two-vector $`\tau =\left[\begin{array}{c}\lambda \\ 1\end{array}\right]`$. This isometry fixes the sphere $`S_j`$ lying above $`I_j`$ precisely when $`\tau `$ is orthogonal to the generator $`\nu _j`$, i.e. when $`\lambda =\lambda _j:=\nu _j^2/\nu _j^1=n_j/m_j=1/q_{j1}`$. Note that all isometries (17) fix the points $`p_j`$ of $`M`$ lying above $`y_j`$.

## 4 Supersymmetric flows on Calderbank-Singer spaces

### 4.1 Critical points of the superpotential

When the supergravity multiplet is coupled only to hypermultiplets but not to vector/tensor multiplets, it was shown in  and  that the critical points of the superpotential (19) coincide with the fixed points of the associated isometry (17). In view of the discussion above, we find that an isometry of $`M_+`$ with $`\lambda `$ different from $`\lambda _1\mathrm{}\lambda _k`$ fixes exactly the points $`p_0\mathrm{}p_k`$; thus a generic isometry has $`k+1`$ critical points. In the non-generic cases $`\lambda =\lambda _j`$, the isometry fixes $`p_0\mathrm{}p_k`$ together with the entire sphere $`S_j`$.

### 4.2 Asymptotic form of the flow equations and divisorial flows

The superpotential (19) can be written:

$$W=\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}\frac{f(\rho ,\eta ,\lambda )}{F(\rho ,\eta )},$$
(30)
where we used $`F>0`$ on the domain of interest $`D_+`$. Let us write the flow equations (2) as:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dU}{dt}}`$ $`=`$ $`\pm gW`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\rho }{dt}}`$ $`=`$ $`\pm h(\rho ,\eta )`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\eta }{dt}}`$ $`=`$ $`g(\rho ,\eta ),`$ (31)
where:

$`h(\rho ,\eta )`$ $`=`$ $`12g{\displaystyle \frac{\rho ^2F^2}{F^24\rho ^2(F_\rho ^2+F_\eta ^2)}}_\rho W`$
$`g(\rho ,\eta )`$ $`=`$ $`12g{\displaystyle \frac{\rho ^2F^2}{F^24\rho ^2(F_\rho ^2+F_\eta ^2)}}_\eta W.`$ (32)
It is not very hard to check the following asymptotics for $`h,g`$ as $`\rho 0`$:

$`h(\rho ,\eta )`$ $`=`$ $`g\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}}{\displaystyle \frac{\mathrm{\Phi }(\eta \lambda )^2\mathrm{\Theta }}{(\mathrm{\Xi }^2\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Theta })|\eta \lambda |}}\rho +O(\rho ^2)`$
$`g(\rho ,\eta )`$ $`=`$ $`g\sqrt{{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(\mathrm{\Phi }(\eta \lambda )\mathrm{\Xi })sign(\eta \lambda )}{\mathrm{\Xi }^2\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Theta }}}+O(\rho ).`$ (33)
To arrive at these expressions, we defined:

$`\mathrm{\Phi }(\eta )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{j=0}{\overset{k+1}{}}}w_j|\eta y_j|`$
$`\mathrm{\Xi }(\eta )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{j=0}{\overset{k+1}{}}}w_jsign(\eta y_j)`$
$`\mathrm{\Theta }(\eta )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{j=0}{\overset{k+1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{w_j}{|\eta y_j|}}.`$ (34)
In particular, one has $`lim_{\rho 0^+}h(\rho ,\eta )=0`$, so that the gradient lines of $`W`$ become orthogonal to the real axis for $`\rho 0`$. Thus one can find a flow (integral curve) along this axis by setting $`\rho =0`$ consistently in equations (4.2). In this case, the second equation in (4.2) is trivially satisfied and the system reduces to:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dU}{dt}}`$ $`=`$ $`\pm gW(0,\eta )`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\eta }{dt}}`$ $`=`$ $`g_0(\eta ),`$ (35)
where:

$$g_0(\eta )=\underset{\rho 0^+}{lim}g(\rho ,\eta )=g\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}}\frac{[\mathrm{\Phi }(\eta \lambda )\mathrm{\Xi }]sign(\eta \lambda )}{\mathrm{\Xi }^2\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Theta }}.$$
(36)
Up to the factor $`3g`$, the second equation in (4.2) describes the one-dimensional gradient flow of the function:

$$W_0(\eta ):=\underset{\rho 0^+}{lim}W(\rho ,\eta )=\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}\frac{|\eta \lambda |}{\mathrm{\Phi }(\eta )}$$
(37)
with respect to the limiting metric:

$$g_{\eta \eta }^{(0)}=\underset{\rho 0^+}{lim}g_{\eta \eta }=\frac{\mathrm{\Xi }^2\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Theta }}{\mathrm{\Phi }^2}.$$
(38)
This induced metric blows up on the interval $`(\eta _0,\mathrm{})`$ precisely at the points $`\eta =y_j`$ ($`j=0\mathrm{}k`$), but this is a coordinate singularity. Note that (38) is continuous on $`(\eta _0,\mathrm{})\{y_0\mathrm{}y_k\}`$. It is also clear131313This can be checked directly by noticing that $`\sqrt{g_{\eta \eta }^{(0)}}`$ blows up like $`|\eta y_j|^{1/2}`$ for $`\eta y_j`$. Hence the distance $`_{y_j}^{y_{j1}}\sqrt{g_{\eta \eta }^{(0)}}𝑑\eta `$ stays finite. It also follows from the fact that the metric of  is adapted to the toric fibration $`M\mathrm{\Delta }_M`$, which restricts to the two-sphere $`S_j`$ over each interval $`I_j`$. that the length of each interval $`(y_j,y_{j1})`$ is finite with respect to this metric for $`j=1\mathrm{}k`$. The intervals $`(\eta _0,y_k)`$ and $`(y_0,+\mathrm{})`$ have infinite length since they bound the conformal infinity $`Z`$.

Since the region of $`M`$ sitting above each interval $`I_j:=(y_j,y_{j1})`$ $`(j=1\mathrm{}k`$) is the 2-sphere $`S_j`$ (a component of the exceptional divisor), it is clear that flows of type (4.2) lift to flows in $`M_+`$ which are entirely contained inside some $`S_j`$. The intersection matrix (23) shows that the dual graph of $`S_1\mathrm{}S_k`$ is a chain, so $`S_j`$ touches only $`S_{j1}`$ and $`S_{j+1}`$ for $`j=2\mathrm{}k1`$. Let $`\chi _j`$ be a coordinate along the uncollapsed circle above $`I_j`$. Since $`W`$ and the metric (4) are independent of the fiber coordinates, the flow equations (2) require $`\chi _j=const`$ (this can also be seen from equations (2), since $`\chi _j`$ are certain linear combinations of the angular coordinates $`\varphi ,\psi `$). Hence the flow proceeds along the sphere $`S_j`$ at some fixed angular value $`\chi _j`$ (figure 4). Since such flows are restricted to lie in the exceptional divisor, we shall call them divisorial flows.

As explained after relations (2), the sign in equations (4.2) must be switched when the flow passes through a noncritical zero of $`W`$. This means that the divisorial flow equations can be written in the form:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dU}{dt}}`$ $`=`$ $`ϵgW_c`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{d\eta }{dt}}`$ $`=`$ $`ϵg_c(\eta ),`$ (39)
where:

$$W_c(\eta ):=\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}\frac{\eta \lambda }{\mathrm{\Phi }(\eta )}$$
(40)
and:

$$g_c(\eta )=g\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}}\frac{\mathrm{\Phi }(\eta \lambda )\mathrm{\Xi }}{\mathrm{\Xi }^2\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Theta }},$$
(41)
where $`ϵ\{1,1\}`$ is now constant along each given flow 141414For the examples of Section 5, we shall take all divisorial flows to have $`ϵ=+1`$..

Figure 4: Picture of divisorial flows for the case $`k=4`$.

### 4.3 General properties of divisorial flows

To understand the general properties of the flow (4.2), we must analyze the quantities $`\mathrm{\Phi },\mathrm{\Psi }`$ and $`\mathrm{\Xi }`$. Notice that the first function can be written in the form :

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(\eta )=m_j\eta n_j\mathrm{for}\eta I_j=(y_j,y_{j1}).$$
(42)
Using this observation, it is easy to see that $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ has exactly one zero, namely $`\eta =\eta _0=q/p`$ (the point where $`Z`$ meets the axis $`\rho =0`$, see figure 5). Moreover, $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ is strictly greater than zero for $`\eta >\eta _0`$ (the boundary of the domain of interest $`D_+`$) and smaller than zero for $`\eta <\eta _0`$ (the boundary of the complementary domain $`D_{}`$). (In fact, $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ coincides with the limit $`lim_{\rho 0^+}\sqrt{\rho }F`$). In particular, the point $`\eta _0`$ is a conformal infinity for the one-dimensional metric (38), as expected from the fact that the latter is the restriction of (4) to the real axis. Since we are interested in the domain $`D_+`$, we shall restrict to $`\eta >\eta _0`$ in what follows.

Figure 5: The function $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ for the model $`(p,q)=(8,3)`$.

Expression (37) shows that $`W_0(\eta )`$ has a zero at $`\eta =\lambda `$, which will belong to the region of interest only when $`\lambda >\eta _0`$. Notice that:

$$\frac{dW_0}{d\eta }=|\eta \lambda |\frac{\mathrm{\Xi }}{\mathrm{\Phi }^2}+\frac{sign(\eta \lambda )}{\mathrm{\Phi }}\mathrm{for}\eta >\eta _0,$$
(43)
where we used the relation $`\frac{d\mathrm{\Phi }}{d\eta }=\mathrm{\Xi }`$. While this quantity does not vanish at $`\eta =\eta _j`$, the gradient field (36) does vanish there because $`\mathrm{\Theta }`$ (and thus $`g_{\eta \eta }^{(0)}`$ given in (38)) blows up at these points. Once again, this is a peculiarity of our coordinate system. It is clear from (43) that the derivative of $`W_0`$ is discontinuous at $`y_j`$. The same is true for the gradient field $`g_0(\eta )`$. Taking $`\eta I_j:=(y_j,y_{j1})`$, we obtain:

$$W_0(\eta )=\frac{1}{m_j\sqrt{6}}\frac{|\eta \lambda |}{\eta \lambda _j}=\frac{sign(\eta \lambda )}{m_j\sqrt{6}}\left[1\frac{\lambda \lambda _j}{\eta \lambda _j}\right]\mathrm{for}\eta I_j.$$
(44)
(remember that $`\lambda _j=n_j/m_j`$ is the value of $`\lambda `$ corresponding to the isometry which fixes $`S_j`$). By property (b) of Subsection 3.1, we have $`\eta _0=1/q_k>1/q_{j1}=\lambda _j`$, so that $`\eta \lambda _j>0`$ for $`\eta >\eta _0`$. Thus $`W`$ is constant on $`(y_j,y_{j1})`$ if $`\lambda =\lambda _j`$, in agreement with the fact that the isometry defined by this value of $`\lambda `$ fixes the locus $`S_j`$. Since $`\lambda _j<y_j`$, we find that $`W_0`$ is nonsingular (and non-negative) along this interval. It will be monotonous on the entire interval unless $`\lambda (y_j,y_{j1})`$, in which case (assuming $`\lambda >\lambda _j`$) it decreases for $`\eta (y_j,\lambda )`$ and increases for $`\eta (\lambda ,y_{j1})`$. It is also clear that the sign-corrected superpotential (40) is always monotonous on $`I_j`$ and will be strictly increasing if $`\lambda >\lambda _j`$:

$$W_c(\eta )=\frac{1}{m_j\sqrt{6}}\left(1\frac{\lambda \lambda _j}{\eta \lambda _j}\right)\mathrm{for}\eta I_j.$$
(45)
With this assumption on $`\lambda `$, $`W_c`$ is concave (has negative second derivative) on $`I_j\{\lambda \}`$. Finally, note that the sign-corrected gradient field (41) is continuous along $`I_j`$ and vanishes at the endpoints of this interval. Due to our choice of coordinates, the $`\eta `$-derivative of $`W_c`$ (computed from within the interval) does not vanish at the endpoints of $`I_j`$. However, $`g_c`$ vanishes there due to the curvature singularity of the restricted metric.

Equations (4.2) can be integrated by quadratures on each interval $`I_j`$. In fact, it is possible to obtain the general form of the solution of the second equation along such an interval. To find it, let us assume that $`\eta I_j`$. Then it is easy to check that $`\mathrm{\Xi }(\eta )=m_j`$. Combining this with $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\eta )=m_j\eta n_j`$ allows us to compute:

$`\mathrm{\Xi }^2\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Theta }`$ $`=`$ $`m_j^2m_j(\eta \lambda _j){\displaystyle \underset{i=0}{\overset{k+1}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{w_i}{|\eta y_i|}}`$
$`\mathrm{\Phi }(\eta \lambda )\mathrm{\Xi }`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda m_jn_j,`$ (46)
where we used $`\lambda _j=n_j/m_j`$. To simplify the first expression, write $`|\eta y_i|=ϵ_{ij}(\eta y_i)`$, where $`ϵ_{ij}=sign(\eta y_i)`$ equals $`+1`$ for $`ij`$ and $`1`$ otherwise. Using $`\frac{\eta \lambda _j}{\eta y_i}=1+\frac{y_i\lambda _j}{\eta y_i}`$, we obtain:

$$\mathrm{\Xi }^2\mathrm{\Phi }\mathrm{\Theta }=m_j\underset{i=0}{\overset{k+1}{}}ϵ_{ij}\frac{w_i(y_i\lambda _j)}{\eta y_i},$$
(47)
where we used $`_{i=0}^{k+1}w_jϵ_{ij}=_{i=0}^{k+1}w_jsign(\eta y_i)=\mathrm{\Xi }=m_j`$.

This allows us to write the sign-corrected gradient in the form:

$$g_c(\eta )=g\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}}\frac{\lambda \lambda _j}{_{i=0}^{k+1}ϵ_{ij}\frac{w_i(y_i\lambda _j)}{\eta y_i}}.$$
(48)
The second equation in (4.2) now integrates to:

$$𝑑\eta \frac{1}{g_c(\eta )}=ϵt,$$
(49)
with

$$𝑑\eta \frac{1}{g_c(\eta )}=\frac{1}{g(\lambda \lambda _j)}\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}\underset{i=0}{\overset{k+1}{}}ϵ_{ij}w_i(y_i\lambda _j)\mathrm{ln}|\eta y_i|+\mathrm{constant}.$$
(50)
Equation (49) gives the implicit form of the solution $`\eta (t)`$ on the interval $`I_j`$:

$$\underset{i=0}{\overset{k+1}{}}ϵ_{ij}w_i(y_i\lambda _j)\mathrm{ln}|\eta y_i|=g\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}}(\lambda \lambda _j)ϵt.$$
(51)
To arrive at this relation, we used the freedom of performing a flow re-parameterization $`tt+\mathrm{constant}`$ in order to absorb the additive constant of integration 151515A similar re-parameterization can be used to clear the denominators in the logarithms of (51), an observation which will be used repeatedly in the examples of Section 5. (this re-parameterization does not affect the behavior of the flow for $`t\pm \mathrm{}`$).

To understand the behavior of (51) near the endpoints of $`I_j`$, let us compute:

$`ϵ_{jj}w_i(y_j\lambda _j)\mathrm{ln}|\eta y_j|`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2m_j}}\mathrm{ln}|\eta y_j|`$
$`ϵ_{j1,j}w_i(y_{j1}\lambda _j)\mathrm{ln}|\eta y_{j1}|`$ $`=`$ $`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2m_j}}\mathrm{ln}|\eta y_j|,`$ (52)
where we used the first relations in (c) of Subsection 3.1. Since $`\mathrm{ln}(0^+)=\mathrm{}`$, this shows that $`\eta `$ tends to $`y_j`$ for $`ϵ(\lambda \lambda _j)t\mathrm{}`$ and to $`y_{j1}`$ for $`ϵ(\lambda \lambda _j)t+\mathrm{}`$. Thus the flow starts at one end of $`I_j`$ at $`t=\mathrm{}`$ and reaches the other end at $`t=+\mathrm{}`$.

### 4.4 Flows of Randall-Sundrum type

Recall that a flow is of Randall-Sundrum  type if it connects two ‘IR critical points’ of $`W`$, i.e. two critical points for which the matrix $`^\mathrm{\Lambda }_\mathrm{\Sigma }W`$ is negative semidefinite when computed on the side of the flow  (remember that $`W`$ is always non-negative with our conventions). In our case, this definition does not strictly apply, since the metric blows up at the critical points in our coordinates, so that $`^\mathrm{\Lambda }_\mathrm{\Sigma }W`$ will vanish there. Instead, we shall retreat to the more physical definition which requires an exponentially decreasing warp factor near the endpoints of the flow.

In our models, a divisorial flow along $`I_j`$ turns out to have this type if the restricted superpotential $`W_0`$ attains local maxima at the endpoints $`y_j,y_{j1}`$ of the flow 161616This condition assures that the sign-corrected gradient field has the appropriate behavior in our models. Indeed, equations (4.2) show that the solution (51) asymptotes to a constant near the endpoints of $`I_j`$ (since the gradient $`g_c`$ vanishes there), so that $`U`$ tends to $`ϵ\times signW_c(y_j)\times \mathrm{}`$ and $`ϵ\times signW_c(y_{j1})\times \mathrm{}`$ at the endpoints. Choosing $`ϵ`$ such that $`ϵ(\lambda \lambda _j)>0`$, the solution (51) flows from $`y_j`$ to $`y_{j1}`$ and $`e^{2U}`$ will have Randall-Sundrum behavior if $`signW_c(y_j)=ϵ`$ and $`signW_c(y_{j1})=+ϵ`$. This means that $`W_c`$ must change sign inside $`I_j`$, so that $`W_0`$ must vanish there, in which case the endpoints of $`I_j`$ are local maxima (when viewed from within $`I_j`$) for the restriction of $`W_0`$ to this interval. (by this we mean local maxima for the restriction of $`W_0`$ to $`I_j`$, i.e. $`y_j`$ is a local maximum when ‘viewed from the right’ and $`y_{j1}`$ is a local maximum when ‘viewed from the left’). As in , this condition requires that the flow pass through a zero of $`W_0`$, so that it proceeds between a minimum and a maximum of the sign-corrected superpotential $`W_c`$. In view of the discussion above, this happens if and only if the flow parameter $`\lambda `$ belongs to the interval $`I_j`$. Fixing $`\lambda (y_k,y_0)\{y_1\mathrm{}y_{k1}\}`$, one finds a unique interval $`I_j`$ $`(j=1\mathrm{}k`$) containing $`\lambda `$. The flow along this interval is of Randall-Sundrum type, while flows along the remaining intervals connect UV/IR fixed points (figure 6). In particular, this proves the existence of Randall-Sundrum flows (for a certain range of $`\lambda `$) for every model in our family. We also note that flows with $`\eta >y_0`$ or $`\eta <y_k`$ will necessarily extend to the conformal infinity $`Z`$, since $`W`$ grows to infinity there. Such unbounded flows correspond to domain walls which connect a degenerate solution (associated with the conformal infinity) with one of the $`AdS_5`$ solutions defined by the critical points $`y_0`$ or $`y_k`$. An unbounded flow of this type will pass through a zero of $`W`$ if $`\lambda (\eta _0,y_0)`$ or $`\lambda (y_k,+\mathrm{})`$ respectively. For the remainder of this paper we shall concentrate on divisorial flows, which proceed along one of the finite intervals $`I_j`$.

Figure 6: Schematic depiction of divisorial flows for $`\lambda (y_2,y_1)`$ (without considering the angular variables $`\chi _j`$ along the two-spheres). The figure shows the case $`k=3`$ with $`ϵ=+1`$ and $`\lambda >\lambda _j`$. A point is defined to be of UV/IR type if the associated warp factor is exponentially increasing/decreasing in $`t`$ as the flow approaches that point.

If $`\lambda I_j=(y_j,y_{j1})`$, then the values of the superpotential at the endpoints of this interval are given by (44):

$$W_0(y_j)=\frac{1}{m_j\sqrt{6}}\frac{|y_j\lambda |}{\eta \lambda _j},W_0(y_{j1})=\frac{1}{m_j\sqrt{6}}\frac{|y_{j1}\lambda |}{\eta \lambda _j}.$$
(53)
Requiring $`W_0(y_j)=W_0(y_{j1})`$ with $`\lambda I_j`$ gives $`\lambda =\frac{y_j+\alpha _jy_{j1}}{1+\alpha _j}`$, where $`\alpha _j:=\frac{y_j\lambda _j}{y_{j1}\lambda _j}`$. Using property (c) of Subsection 3.1, we obtain $`\alpha _j=\frac{m_jm_{j1}}{m_{j+1}m_j}`$, which leads to the following expression for $`\lambda `$:

$$\lambda =\frac{n_{j+1}n_{j1}}{m_{j+1}m_{j1}}:=\lambda ^{(j)}.$$
(54)
Thus we can always choose $`\lambda `$ such that $`W`$ has equal values at the endpoints of a Randall-Sundrum flow. With this choice of flow parameter, we obtain:

$$W_0(y_j)=W_0(y_{j1})=\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}\frac{e_j2}{m_{j+1}m_{j1}},$$
(55)
where we used property (c) of Subsection 3.1. We also note that $`\lambda ^{(j)}\lambda _j=\frac{2}{m_j(m_{j+1}m_{j1})}>0`$, so that a Randall-Sundrum flow will satisfy:

$`\eta (t)y_j\mathrm{for}ϵt\mathrm{}`$
$`\eta (t)y_{j1}\mathrm{for}ϵt+\mathrm{}.`$ (56)
In particular, $`\eta `$ flows from the lower to the upper end of $`I_j`$ if one takes $`ϵ=+1`$.

At a critical point of $`W`$, the potential (1) takes the form:

$$𝒱=6W^2.$$
(57)
This nonpositive quantity gives the cosmological constant of $`AdS_5`$, which is the supergravity solution at that point in the moduli space. With the choice of isometry given in (54), the flow between $`y_j`$ and $`y_{j1}`$ interpolates between two $`AdS_5`$ solutions with the same value of the cosmological constant.

## 5 Examples

### 5.1 Models with $`k>1`$ for low values of $`p`$

Models with $`k=1`$ and negative $`c_1(M)`$ are very frequent: for each value of $`p`$, one obtains such a model by setting $`q=1`$ (this leads to the Pedersen metrics , see below). Models with negative $`c_1`$ become increasingly sparse as one increases $`k`$. Let us order all models increasingly by lexicographic order in $`(p,q)`$. Then it is not hard to check that a given value of $`k`$ is first realized for $`p/q=f_{2k+2}/f_{2k}=(3\mathrm{}3)`$, where $`f_1=1,f_2=1,f_3=2,f_4=3,f_5=5\mathrm{}`$ are the Fibonacci numbers. In particular,

(a) $`k=2`$ is first realized by $`(p,q)=(8,3)`$

(b) $`k=3`$ is first realized by $`(p,q)=(21,8)`$

(c) $`k=4`$ is first realized by $`(p,q)=(55,21)`$

(d) $`k=5`$ is first realized by $`(p,q)=(144,55)`$ .

It is clear that one can realize any value of $`k`$ (since finite minus continued fractions represent the rationals). We shall illustrate the general discussion of the previous section by giving a detailed analysis of Randall-Sundrum flows for the Pedersen metrics and for the models (a) and (b).

### 5.2 The Pedersen-LeBrun metrics

In , H. Pedersen constructed a one-dimensional family of $`U(2)`$ invariant ESD metrics of negative scalar curvature on the unit open four-ball $`B^4`$. These metrics are characterized by a parameter171717One allows $`m^2`$ to be positive or negative, so that $`m`$ may be imaginary. $`m^2>1`$ which fixes their behavior near the $`S^3`$ boundary. In fact, the unit 3-sphere is a conformal infinity for these spaces, if the former is endowed with the Berger metric:

$$ds^2=\sigma _1^2+\sigma _2^2+I_3\sigma _3^2,$$
(58)
where $`I_3=\frac{1}{m^2+1}>0`$ and $`\sigma _i`$ are three left-invariant one-forms on $`S^3=SU(2)`$ such that $`d\sigma _i=ϵ_{ijk}\sigma _j\sigma _k`$. These metrics are smooth and complete on $`B^4`$ for any $`m^2>1`$; their explicit form is given in Appendix A.

When $`m^2(1,0)I_3>1`$, these can be continued to complete metrics ‘on the other side’ of $`S^3`$, provided that $`|m|=\frac{p2}{p}`$ for some integer $`p>2`$ . In this case, the Pedersen ansatz and its continuation induce (up to a $`p`$-fold cover) smooth metrics on disjoint open subsets $`M_{}`$ and $`M_+`$ of the minimal resolution $`M=𝒪(p)𝐏^1`$ of $`𝐂^2/𝐙_p`$, where the generator of $`𝐙_p`$ acts through:

$$(z_1,z_2)(e^{2\pi i/p}z_1,e^{2\pi i/p}z_2).$$
(59)
These sets $`M_+`$ and $`M_{}`$ are separated by a common conformal infinity, namely the Lens space $`Y=S^3/𝐙_p`$, carrying the conformal structure induced by the Berger metric. The conformal structures on $`M_+`$ and $`M_{}`$ agree along $`Y`$, and define a unique conformal structure on $`M`$; the latter was discovered by LeBrun in the context of scalar-flat Kahler metrics .

An interesting property of the Pedersen-LeBrun models is that they interpolate between the hyperbolic metric on $`B^4`$ and the Bergman metric181818We remind the reader that the hyperbolic metric on $`B^4`$ is the homogeneous metric on the symmetric space $`SO(4,1)/SO(4)`$ (also known as $`EAdS_4`$), while the Bergman metric is the homogeneous metric on $`SU(2,1)/U(2)`$ (also known as the metric of the universal hypermultiplet). . The hyperbolic metric arises for $`m=0I_3=1`$, while the Bergman space is obtained in the limit $`m^21I_3\mathrm{}`$. In the second case, the conformal structure induced on $`S^3`$ degenerates to a left-invariant CR structure .

As shown in , the Pedersen-LeBrun metrics are the only smooth and complete ESD metrics of negative scalar curvature which admit a $`U(2)`$ isometry with 3-dimensional generic orbits. They form a special subclass in Hitchin’s classification of complete and $`SU(2)`$ invariant ESD metrics. Since such metrics admit an obvious $`T^2`$ symmetry, they also fit into the framework of .

The Pedersen-LeBrun metrics were recently considered in , though in a different parameterization which originates in the work of . Since the metrics of  are ESD and $`U(2)`$-invariant of negative scalar curvature, Hitchin’s classification assures us that they coincide with the Pedersen-LeBrun spaces. In appendix A, we give the explicit coordinate transformations which reduce the models of  to the Pedersen form.

By using their coordinates, the authors of  build a flow of Randall-Sundrum type on the subset $`M_+`$ of $`M`$ for a certain choice of gauged isometry. In fact, the relevant isometry is a Cartan $`U(1)`$ factor inside the $`SU(2)`$ subgroup of the decomposition $`U(2)=U(1)\times SU(2)`$. Since this is a subgroup of a $`T^2U(2)`$, it is natural to reconsider this problem from the point of view of the present paper. Below, we show how the flow of  can be recovered with our techniques.

In the framework of , the Pedersen metrics arise for $`q=1`$. This immediately gives $`k=1`$ and $`e_1=p`$. Thus the exceptional divisor consists of a single two-sphere of self-intersection $`p`$. The condition $`p3`$ implements the constraint $`c_1(M)<0`$. The recursion relations (26) give:

$$(m_0,n_0)=(0,1),(m_1,n_1)=(1,0),(m_2,n_2)=(p,1).$$
(60)
The toric generators of $`M`$ for the case $`p=3`$ are shown in figure 7.

Figure 7: Toric generators $`\nu _0,\nu _1`$ and $`\nu _2`$ for $`(p,q)=(3,1)`$. The figure does not show the vector $`\nu _3=\left[\begin{array}{c}0\\ 1\end{array}\right]`$ added when compactifying the minimal resolution.

Figure 8: The function $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ for the model $`(p,q)=(3,1)`$. The figure indicates the points $`y_2=0`$, $`y_1=1/2`$ and $`y_0=1`$, as well as the bordering value $`\eta _0=1/3`$.

One also has the formal pair $`(m_3,n_3)=(0,1)`$. This gives:

$$y_0=1,y_1=\frac{1}{p1},y_2=0;\eta _0=1/p$$
(61)
and:

$$w_0=1/2,w_1=(p1)/2,w_2=p/2.$$
(62)
Hence the defining function $`F`$ has the form:

$$F(\rho ,\eta )=\frac{1}{2}\left[f(\rho ,\eta ,1)(p1)f(\rho ,\eta ,\frac{1}{p1})+pf(\rho ,\eta ,0)\right].$$
(63)
The boundary $`(1/p,\mathrm{})`$ of $`D_+`$ contains the points $`y_0=1`$ and $`y_1=1/(p1)`$, while the point $`y_2=0`$ belongs to the boundary $`(\mathrm{},1/p)`$ of $`D_{}`$. The function $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ has the form:

$$\mathrm{\Phi }(\eta )=\frac{1}{2}\left[|\eta 1|(p1)|\eta \frac{1}{p1}|+p|\eta |\right].$$
(64)
This is plotted in figure 8 (for the case $`p=3`$). The isometry defined by $`\lambda ^{(1)}=2/p`$ has the property $`W_0(y_1)=W_0(y_0)=\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}(12/p)`$. Figure 9 shows the level lines of the superpotential for $`p=3`$ and $`\lambda =\lambda ^{(1)}=2/3`$.

Figure 9: Level lines of the superpotential for $`(p,q)=(3,1)`$ and $`\lambda =2/3`$. In the color version of this figure, increasing values of $`W`$ are represented by a red shift in the coloring of the level lines. The vertical bold black curve represents the conformal infinity $`Z`$. In this plot, we use the convention in which the superpotential is non-negative throughout $`D_+`$.

Figure 10: The restriction of $`W`$ to the line $`\rho =0`$ for $`\lambda =2/3`$. The superpotential vanishes for $`\eta =\lambda `$. Note that the directional derivatives of $`W`$ disagree at the points $`y_1,y_0`$. The gradient of $`W_0`$ does vanish at these points, since the restricted metric blows up there.

Figure 11: The restricted metric $`g_{\eta \eta }^{(0)}`$ for $`(p,q)=(3,1)`$. As explained in the text, the metric has a coordinate singularity at $`y_1=1/2`$ and $`y_0=1`$.

Figure 12: The restricted gradient field $`g_0(\eta )`$ for $`(p,q)=(3,1)`$ and $`\lambda =2/3`$. The vertical axis is measured in units of the coupling constant $`g`$. Note the discontinuity at $`\eta =\lambda `$. This is eliminated when considering the sign-corrected field $`g_c(\eta )`$ of equation (48).

The isometry fixing the interval $`I_1:=(y_1,y_0)=(\frac{1}{p1},1)`$ has parameter $`\lambda _1=0`$. Therefore, the $`\varphi `$-circle collapses above this interval, while the fibration of the $`\psi `$-circle between $`y_1`$ and $`y_0`$ gives the exceptional divisor $`S_1`$ (this is the $`𝐏^1`$ base of the fibration $`𝒪(p)𝐏^1`$).

On the interval $`I_1`$, we have $`\mathrm{\Phi }(\eta )=\eta `$ and $`\mathrm{\Xi }=m_1=1`$. Therefore (see figures 10-12):

$`W_0(\eta )`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}}{\displaystyle \frac{|\eta \lambda |}{\eta }}`$
$`g_0(\eta )`$ $`=`$ $`\lambda g\sqrt{6}{\displaystyle \frac{(\eta 1)\left((p1)\eta 1\right)}{p2}}sign(\eta \lambda ).`$ (65)
The sign-corrected functions $`W_c`$ and $`g_c`$ are plotted in figure 13.

Figure 13: Sign-corrected superpotential $`W_c`$ and gradient field $`g_c`$ on the interval (1/2,1) (for $`\lambda =2/3`$). Note continuity of $`g_c`$ and the zero of $`W_c`$ at $`\eta =\lambda `$.

Figure 14: The flow $`\eta (t)`$ along the interval $`(1/2,1)`$ for $`(p,q)=(3,1)`$ and $`\lambda =2/3`$. This flow is of Randall-Sundrum type.

The solution (51) takes the following form on the interval $`I_1`$ (if one chooses $`ϵ=+1`$):

$$\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{ln}|\eta 1|\frac{1}{2}\mathrm{ln}|\eta \frac{1}{p1}|=g\sqrt{\frac{3}{2}}\lambda t.$$
(66)
Upon clearing denominators in the logarithms and absorbing the resulting constant by a shift of $`t`$ (see the footnote after equation (51)), we obtain $`\mathrm{ln}((p1)\eta 1)\mathrm{ln}(1\eta )=g\lambda \sqrt{6}t`$, which gives:

$`\eta (t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{e^{\lambda \sqrt{6}gt}+1}{(p1)e^{\lambda \sqrt{6}gt}+1}}`$
$`U(t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{6}}\left[(p2)\mathrm{ln}(e^{\lambda \sqrt{6}gt}+1)(\lambda 1)\sqrt{6}gt\right].`$ (67)
(this solution satisfies $`\eta (\mathrm{})=y_1=\frac{1}{p1}`$ and $`\eta (+\mathrm{})=y_0=1`$). $`\eta (t)`$ is plotted in figure 14 for $`p=3`$ and $`\lambda =2/3`$. For $`\lambda =\lambda ^{(1)}=2/p`$, the solution for $`U`$ becomes:

$$U(t)=\frac{p2}{6}\mathrm{ln}\left[2\mathrm{cosh}(\frac{\sqrt{6}}{p}gt)\right].$$
(68)
For each $`\lambda I_1`$, the flow (5.2) has Randall-Sundrum type and proceeds along a meridian of the two-sphere $`S_1`$ (figure 15).

Figure 15: Divisorial flows for the Pedersen models. The flows proceed along the meridians of the $`𝐏^1`$ base of $`M`$, between the two critical points located at the poles $`p_1`$,$`p_0`$. The interval $`I_1=(\frac{1}{p1},1)`$ sits along the axis connecting these poles.

Let us discuss the relation with . Since we don’t know the explicit coordinate transformation between the Calderbank-Pedersen metric (4) and the parameterization used in , we cannot immediately compare our solution for $`\eta `$ with the solution for their coordinate $`x`$. However, we can compare the warp factors, since in both cases they depend only on the fifth space-time coordinate (denoted by $`\rho `$ in  and by $`t`$ in the present paper). The solution given in equation (94) of  has the form:

$$e^{2U(\rho )}=[\mathrm{cosh}(2g\rho )]^{\frac{2}{3}(nr_{})(n+r_+)},$$
(69)
where $`r_\pm =n\pm \sqrt{4n^21}`$191919Equation (94) of  actually reads $`e^{2U(\rho )}=[\mathrm{cosh}(2g\rho )]^{\frac{1}{3}(nr_{})(n+r_+)}`$. The missing factor of $`2`$ in the exponent is due to a typo in , as one can check that equations (91), (92) and (93) of that paper give $`e^{U(\rho )}=[\mathrm{cosh}(2g\rho )]^{\frac{1}{3}(nr_{})(n+r_+)}`$. We also note a missing factor of $`g`$ in the RHS of the first equation (92) of .. So $`(nr_{})(n+r_+)=(2n+\sqrt{4n^21})\sqrt{4n^21}`$. Our solution (68) gives:

$$e^{2U(t^{})}=2^{\frac{2p}{3}}[\mathrm{cosh}(2gt^{})]^{\frac{p2}{3}},$$
(70)
where we have rescaled $`t^{}=\frac{\sqrt{6}t}{2p}`$, which should be identified with the coordinate $`\rho `$ of . This change of scale is due to the different normalization chosen in  for the Killing vector (17). Together with the power of two prefactor in (70), this can be absorbed into a constant rescaling of the spacetime metric (15), as explained in the observation following equation (17).

Hence to compare the solutions we must compare the exponents in (69) and (70). Using $`p=\frac{2}{1|m|}`$ and the relation $`m^2=(1\frac{1}{4n^2})`$, we obtain:

$$p=\frac{2}{1\sqrt{1\frac{1}{4n^2}}}=\frac{4n}{2n\sqrt{4n^21}}.$$
(71)
Hence

$$p2=\frac{2\sqrt{4n^21}}{2n\sqrt{4n^21}}=\frac{2\sqrt{4n^21}(2n+\sqrt{4n^21})}{4n^2(4n^21)}=2\sqrt{4n^21}(2n+\sqrt{4n^21}).$$
(72)
This agrees with the exponent of (69).

Observation It may seem that our restricted superpotential disagrees with that plotted in Figure 2 of . However, the authors of  use a parameterization in which the $`𝐏^1`$ base of $`M`$ (=the exceptional divisor $`S_1`$) is mapped onto the complex plane after removing the point at infinity (this plane is parameterized by $`x+iy`$, where $`x,y`$ are the real coordinates on $`𝐏^1`$ used in Section 5 of ). In this case, the critical points (corresponding to the poles of $`𝐏^1`$) sit at $`y=0`$ and $`x=\pm 1`$, and the flow of  proceeds along the real axis between $`x_{}`$ and $`x_+`$. In our description, the segment $`[x_{},x_+]`$ corresponds to a meridian connecting the poles, while the entire real axis corresponds to the full circle $`S^1𝐏^1=S^2`$ which contains this meridian. When following this circle, one covers our interval $`[y_1,y_0]`$ twice: once as one passes from $`x_{}`$ to $`x_+`$, and once again when going from $`x_+`$ to the point at infinity and back to $`x_{}`$ from the other side of the real axis. The first step gives the restriction of $`W_c`$ to $`[y_0,y_1]`$, which should map to the restriction of the potential of  to the interval $`[x_{},x_+]`$ after an appropriate change of coordinates. A moment’s thought shows that the second step should be responsible for the rest of figure 2 of : when following the other meridian determined by our big circle, one obtains the restriction of figure 2 of  to $`(\mathrm{},x_{}][x_+,\mathrm{})`$ upon applying the appropriate change of coordinates to a second copy of the restriction of $`W_c`$ to our interval $`[y_1,y_0]`$.

### 5.3 The model (p,q)=(8,3)

In this case, the Calderbank-Singer metric is defined on the minimal resolution of the orbifold $`𝐂^2/𝐙_8`$ with action:

$$(z_1,z_2)(e^{\pi i/4}z_1,e^{3\pi i/4}z_2).$$
(73)
The intersection matrix of the exceptional $`𝐏^1`$’s is given by (23), with the integers $`e_j`$ determined by the continued fraction expansion:

$$p/q=8/3=(3,3)=3\frac{1}{3}.$$
(74)
The minimal resolution has negative $`c_1`$ since $`e_1,e_23`$. The model has $`k=2`$, which gives four distinguished points $`y_0\mathrm{}y_{k+1}`$ on the conformal boundary of $`^2`$. Solving the recursion relations (26) gives: $`(m_0,n_0)=(0,1)`$, $`(m_1,n_1)=(1,0)`$, $`(m_2,n_2)=(3,1)`$ and $`(m_3,n_3)=(8,3)`$. As explained above, one also adds the formal values $`(m_4,n_4)=(0,1)`$. The quantities $`y_0\mathrm{}y_3`$ and $`w_0\mathrm{}w_3`$ are given by (29):

$`(y_0\mathrm{}y_3)`$ $`=`$ $`(1,1/2,2/5,1/4)`$
$`(w_0\mathrm{}w_3)`$ $`=`$ $`(1/2,1,5/2,4).`$ (75)
The conformal boundary $`Z=\{F=0\}`$ meets the real axis in the point $`\eta _0=q/p=3/8`$. The spheres $`S_1,S_2`$ are fixed by the isometries defined by the following values of $`\lambda `$:

$$(\lambda _0\mathrm{}\lambda _4)=(\mathrm{},0,1/3,3/8,\mathrm{}).$$
(76)
The toric generators $`\nu _0\mathrm{}\nu _3`$ are shown in figure 1 of Section 3. The exceptional divisor of such models consists of two spheres $`S_1`$ and $`S_2`$, associated with the intervals $`I_1=(y_1,y_0)=(1/2,1)`$ and $`I_2=(y_2,y_1)=(2/5,1/2)`$ (figure 16). Figures 17 and 18 show the level lines of the superpotential for $`\lambda =2/3`$ and $`\lambda =3/7`$.

Figure 16: The exceptional divisor for $`(p,q)=(8,3)`$. The Randall-Sundrum flows constructed below proceed along the meridians of one of the spheres.

Figure 17: Level lines of the superpotential for $`(p,q)=(8,3)`$ and $`\lambda =2/3`$. Increasing values of $`W`$ are represented by a red shift in the coloring of the level lines. The vertical bold black curve represents the conformal infinity $`Z`$. The superpotential is taken to be non-negative throughout $`D_+`$.

Figure 18: Level lines of the superpotential for $`(p,q)=(8,3)`$ and $`\lambda =3/7`$.

Figure 19: Sign-corrected superpotential $`W_c`$ and gradient field $`g_c`$ on the interval (1/2,1) for $`\lambda =2/3`$.

Figure 20: Flow along the interval $`I_1=(1/2,1)`$ for $`\lambda =2/3`$.

To find a Randall-Sundrum flow on the interval $`I_1=(1/2,1)`$, we pick a value for $`\lambda I_1`$ and compute the form of the gradient field $`g_0(\eta )`$ of equation (36) along this interval. Taking into account the sign prefactors, one obtains:

$$g_c(\eta )=\lambda g\sqrt{6}\frac{(\eta 1)(2\eta 1)(5\eta 2)(4\eta 1)}{8\eta ^2+5\eta 4}.$$
(77)
The solution of (4.2) is given implicitly by the equation:

$$\mathrm{ln}(1\eta )\mathrm{ln}(2\eta 1)2\mathrm{ln}(5\eta 2)+2\mathrm{ln}(4\eta 1)=\lambda \sqrt{6}gt,$$
(78)
where we used the freedom to shift $`t`$ in order to absorb a term $`\mathrm{ln}\left(\frac{25}{8}\right)`$ from the left hand side. This solution is plotted in figure 20 for the choice $`\lambda =2/3`$, which ensures $`W_c(1/2)=W_c(1)=\frac{1}{3\sqrt{6}}`$. The full flow proceeds along some fixed meridian of the sphere $`S_1`$.

For $`\lambda ,\eta I_2=(2/5,1/2)`$, one obtains:

$$g_c(\eta )=g\sqrt{6}\frac{(3\lambda 1)(\eta 1)(2\eta 1)(5\eta 2)(4\eta 1)}{64\eta ^259\eta +13},$$
(79)
with sign-corrected superpotential $`W_c(\eta )=\frac{1}{\sqrt{6}}\frac{\eta \lambda }{3\eta 1}`$.

The divisorial flow $`\eta (t)`$ is given by the equation:

$$2\mathrm{ln}(1\eta )\mathrm{ln}(12\eta )+\mathrm{ln}(5\eta 2)+2\mathrm{ln}(4\eta 1)=(3\lambda 1)\sqrt{6}gt.$$
(80)
This flow is plotted in figure 22, for $`\lambda =3/7`$. With this value of $`\lambda `$, one has $`W_c(2/5)=W_c(1/2)=\frac{\sqrt{6}}{42}`$. The full flow proceeds along some fixed meridian of the sphere $`S_2`$.

Figure 21: Sign-corrected superpotential and gradient field on the interval $`I_2=(2/5,1/2)`$ (for $`\lambda =3/7`$).

Figure 22: Flow along the interval $`I_2=(2/5,1/2)`$ for $`\lambda =3/7`$.

### 5.4 The model (p,q)=(21,8)

In this case, we have $`k=3`$ and $`e_1=e_2=e_3=3`$. The recursions (26) give:

$`(m_0\mathrm{}m_5)`$ $`=`$ $`(0,1,3,8,21,0)`$
$`(n_0\mathrm{}n_5)`$ $`=`$ $`(1,0,1,3,8,1).`$ (81)
The curve $`Z`$ intersects the line $`\rho =0`$ at $`\eta _0=8/21`$. One easily computes:

$`(y_0\mathrm{}y_4)`$ $`=`$ $`(1,1/2,2/5,5/13,1/3)`$
$`(w_0\mathrm{}w_4)`$ $`=`$ $`(1/2,1,5/2,13/2,21/2)`$
$`(\lambda _1\mathrm{}\lambda _4)`$ $`=`$ $`(0,1/3,3/8,8/21).`$ (82)
The function $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ for this model is shown in figure 24 below. The points $`(y_0\mathrm{}y_3)=(1,1/2,2/5,5/13)`$ belong to $`D_+`$, while $`y_4=1/3`$ (added when compactifying the minimal resolution) belongs to $`D_{}`$. The boundary of $`D_+`$ contains three finite length intervals $`I_1=(1/2,1)`$, $`I_2=(2/5,1/2)`$ and $`I_3=(5/13,2/5)`$. One obtains flows of Randall-Sundrum type along these intervals (with equal values of $`W`$ at the endpoints of the flow) for the following values of $`\lambda `$ (see equation (54)):

$$(\lambda ^{(1)},\lambda ^{(2)},\lambda ^{(3)})=(2/3,3/7,7/18).$$
(83)
Equation (51) gives the following expressions for the Randall-Sundrum flows along these intervals:

$`I_1:\mathrm{ln}(1\eta )`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{ln}(2\eta 1)2\mathrm{ln}(5\eta 2)5\mathrm{ln}(13\eta 5)+7\mathrm{ln}(3\eta 1)`$
$`=g\sqrt{6}\lambda t`$
$`I_2:\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}\mathrm{ln}(1\eta )`$ $`+`$ $`\mathrm{ln}(12\eta )\mathrm{ln}(5\eta 2)2\mathrm{ln}(13\eta 5)`$
$`=`$ $`g\sqrt{6}(3\lambda 1)t`$
$`I_3:\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}5}\mathrm{ln}(1\eta )`$ $`+`$ $`2\mathrm{ln}(12\eta )\mathrm{ln}(25\eta )\mathrm{ln}(13\eta 5)7\mathrm{ln}(3\eta 1)`$ (84)
$`+`$ $`=g\sqrt{6}(8\lambda 3)t.`$
The geometry of these flows is shown in figure 23. Figures 25, 26 and 27 plot the solutions (5.4) for the values of $`\lambda `$ given in (83). From (55) we find the superpotentials: $`W_0^{(I_1)}(1)=\frac{1}{3\sqrt{6}},W_0^{(I_2)}(\frac{1}{2})=\frac{1}{7\sqrt{6}},W_0^{(I_3)}(\frac{2}{5})=\frac{1}{18\sqrt{6}}`$.

Figure 23: Randall-Sundrum flows for $`(p,q)=(21,8)`$.

Figure 24: The function $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ for $`(p,q)=(21,8)`$.

Figure 25: Flow of Randall-Sundrum type for $`\lambda =2/3`$.

Figure 26: Flow of Randall-Sundrum type for $`\lambda =3/7`$.

Figure 27: Flow of Randall-Sundrum type for $`\lambda =7/18`$.

## 6 Conclusions

We constructed an infinite family of gauged N=2 supergravities in 5 dimensions admitting Randall-Sundrum flows. The matter content of these models consists of a single hypermultiplet described by the complete and smooth quaternion-Kahler four-manifolds constructed recently by Calderbank and Singer. These metrics are defined on an open subset of the minimal resolution of a cyclic singularity, and have negative scalar curvature provided that this resolution has negative definite first Chern class. They admit a $`T^2`$’s worth of isometries and generalize the well-known Pedersen metrics , which admit a larger $`U(2)`$ symmetry.

By using the coordinates of , we found a very simple expression for the superpotential obtained by gauging one of the toric isometries, and showed that the associated flow preserves each of the two-spheres which form the irreducible components of the exceptional divisor. Moreover, the restriction of the flow to the exceptional divisor can be described by a simple ordinary differential equation, which can be integrated by quadratures. We also showed that the restriction of the flow to each given sphere is of Randall-Sundrum type for an appropriate range of choices of the gauged isometry. The models obtained in this manner allow for an arbitrary number of critical points.

For a few models in this class, we performed a detailed study of such ‘divisorial’ flows and gave explicit constructions in the Randall-Sundrum case. Finally, we pointed out that the models considered recently in  are the well-known Pedersen metrics, albeit discussed in a different parameterization. They form the simplest case of the family analyzed in the present paper. Clearly our models give an infinite number of counterexamples to the no-go theorems mentioned in the introduction. As in , the reason is very simple: such theorems were formulated for supergravity coupled only to vector/tensor multiplets or they assumed homogeneity of the hypermultiplet moduli space. Finally, the result of  relies on non-positivity assumptions for the scalar potential which fail to hold along our flows: one has $`𝒱>0`$ when the flow passes through the zero of $`W`$.

It would be interesting to study possible RG flow interpretations of the domain wall solutions interpolating between UV and IR critical points, which were also found in the present paper. A more challenging question is whether our models embed consistently in string/M-theory.

###### Acknowledgments.

The authors thank M. Roček for support and interesting conversations. This work was supported by the Research Foundation under NSF grant PHY-0098527.

## Appendix A Relation between different coordinate systems for the Pedersen metrics

The Pedersen metric  has the form:

$$g=\frac{1}{(1\rho ^2)^2}\left[\frac{1+m^2\rho ^2}{1+m^2\rho ^4}d\rho ^2+\rho ^2(1+m^2\rho ^2)(\sigma _1^2+\sigma _2^2)+\frac{\rho ^2(1+m^2\rho ^4)}{1+m^2\rho ^2}\sigma _3^2\right],$$
(85)
where $`\sigma _i`$ are the standard $`SU(2)`$ left-invariant one-forms, obeying $`d\sigma _i=ϵ_{ijk}\sigma _j\sigma _k`$:

$`\sigma _1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\mathrm{sin}\psi d\theta +\mathrm{cos}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta d\varphi )`$
$`\sigma _2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(\mathrm{cos}\psi d\theta +\mathrm{sin}\psi \mathrm{sin}\theta d\varphi )`$
$`\sigma _3`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}(d\psi +\mathrm{cos}\theta d\varphi )`$ (86)
with $`0\theta <\pi `$, $`0\varphi <2\pi `$ and $`0\psi <4\pi `$. Clearly $`\sigma _1^2+\sigma _2^2=\frac{1}{4}(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\varphi ^2)`$.

Behrndt and Dall’Agata give several different parameterizations of their metric and also the coordinate transformations between them. For convenience, let us take the parameterization (43) of 202020This form of the metric is valid only when the parameter $`\kappa `$ of  equals one, which is exactly the case we are interested in.:

$`ds^2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{dr^2}{V(r)}}+V(r)(d\tau +2n\mathrm{cos}\theta d\varphi )^2+(r^2n^2)(d\theta ^2+\mathrm{sin}^2\theta d\varphi ^2),`$
$`V(r)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{rn}{r+n}}[(r+n)^2+14n^2].`$ (87)
One obtains (85) from (A) by the following coordinate transformation:

$$r=\frac{\rho ^2}{2n(1\rho ^2)}+n,\tau =2n\psi $$
(88)
and the identification $`m^2=\frac{1}{4n^2}1`$. Actually doing this results in four times the metric (85). But this was to be expected since the scalar curvature of (A) is normalized to $`12`$, whereas Pedersen  normalizes the cosmological constant to $`12`$ (i.e. the scalar curvature to $`12\times 4=48`$). The extra factor of 4 coming as a result of the coordinate transformation (88) accounts for that difference.

Taking $`n=1/2`$ in the metric (A) and performing the coordinate transformation (88) again with $`n=1/2`$ one obtains:

$$\frac{4}{(1\rho ^2)^2}\left[d\rho ^2+\rho ^2(\sigma _1^2+\sigma _2^2+\sigma _3^2)\right],$$
(89)
which is the metric of Euclidean $`AdS_4`$ space, normalized so that the scalar curvature is $`12`$. The same metric (89) (without the factor of $`4`$) one obtains from (85) upon setting $`m=0`$.

Another form of the Pedersen metric is :

$$g=\frac{1}{(\mathrm{cos}\rho ^{}M\mathrm{sin}\rho ^{})^2}\left[(1+M\mathrm{cot}\rho ^{})[d\rho ^{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}+4\mathrm{sin}^2\rho ^{}(\sigma _1^2+\sigma _2^2)]+\frac{4M^2}{1+M\mathrm{cot}\rho ^{}}\sigma _3^2\right].$$
(90)
Its relation to (85) is given by:

$$\mathrm{cos}\rho ^{}=\frac{1}{\sqrt{1+\frac{\rho ^4}{M^2}}},M=\frac{1}{m}.$$
(91)
Again one obtains four times (85) due to different normalizations between  and .