\section*{Appendix \thesection\protect\indent \parbox[t]{11.15cm}{#1}}
\addcontentsline{toc}{section}{Appendix \thesection\ \ \ #1}}
\def\DL#1{{D_{#1}^{{\scriptscriptstyle\rm L}}}}
\def {$AdS_5 \times S^5$} {{$AdS_5 \times S^5$}}
\def \lrcorner {{light-cone}}
\def \cite{\cite}
\def{\rm f}{{\rm f}}
\defplane wave {plane wave}
\def  \wedge {\wedge}
\def \footnote{\footnote}
\def \bibitem{\bibitem}
\def \label {\label}
\def \over {\over}
\def{\cal P}{{\cal P}}
\def {\widehat{L}}{{\widehat{L}}}
\def {\rm x} {{\rm x}}
\def {\rm v} {{\rm v}}
\def {1 \ov 4} {{1 \over 4}}
\def \beta {\beta}
\def \Omega {\Omega}
\def\ltimes {\bowtie}
\jot=7pt
\def \tau {\theta}
\def \sigma{\sigma}
\def \delta {\partial}
\def  \partial{\partial}
\def {\rm F} {{\rm F}}
\newcommand{\eq}[1]{Eq.~(\ref{#1})}
\def {1 \ov 4}{{\textstyle {1\over 4}}}
\def  \textstyle {1\ov 3} { \textstyle {1\over 3}}
\def\hbox{det}{\hbox{det}}
\def\begin{equation}{\begin{equation}}
\def\end{equation}{\end{equation}}
\def \cite {\cite}
\def \kappa {\kappa}
\def \it {\Im}{\it {\Im}}
\def $AdS_5\times S^5\ $ {$AdS_5\times S^5\ $}
\def \ltimes {\ltimes}
\def\oplus_s {\oplus_s}
\def{\cal C} {{\cal C}}
\def{\natural} {{\natural}}
 \def \lrcorner {light-cone\ }
\def {\rm E} {{\rm E}}
\def {\cal E} {{\cal E}}
\hoffset=35pt
\voffset=-1.5cm
\textwidth=15.8cm
\textheight=23cm
\hoffset=-25pt
\voffset=-2.5cm
\catcode`\@=11
\def \lrcorner {light cone\ }
\def {\cal X} {{\cal X}}
\def {\cal X} {{\cal X}}

\def\begin{eqnarray}{\begin{eqnarray}}
\def\end{eqnarray}{\end{eqnarray}}
\def\begin{eqnarray*}{\begin{eqnarray*}}
\def\end{eqnarray*}{\end{eqnarray*}}
\def\begin{equation}{\begin{equation}}
\def\end{equation}{\end{equation}}
\def\begin{array}{\begin{array}}
\def\end{array}{\end{array}}
\def\begin{enumerate}{\begin{enumerate}}
\def\end{enumerate}{\end{enumerate}}
 \def \lambda {\lambda}
 \def\mu {\mu}
\def\sigma {\sigma }
 \def \label {\label}
 \def\begin{equation}{\begin{equation}}
\def\end{equation}{\end{equation}}

\def \cite {\cite}
\def \label {\label}
\def {\rm const} {{\rm const}}
\def {\textstyle { 1 \ov 2}} {{\textstyle { 1 \over 2}} }
\def {\textstyle { 1 \ov 9}} {{\textstyle { 1 \over 9}} }
\def {\textstyle { 1 \ov 6}} {{\textstyle { 1 \over 6}} }
\def {\tx { \ta \ov 2}} {{\tx { \ta \over 2}}}
\def \rho {\rho}
\def { 1 \ov 4}{{ 1 \over 4}}
\def {\rm h} {{\rm h}}
\font\mybb=msbm10 at 11pt
\font\mybbb=msbm10 at 17pt
\def\bb#1{\hbox{\mybb#1}}
\def\bbb#1{\hbox{\mybbb#1}}
\def\bb{Z} {\bb{Z}}
\def\bb{R} {\bb{R}}
\def\bb{E} {\bb{E}}
\def\bb{T} {\bb{T}}
\def\bb{M} {\bb{M}}
\def\bb{K} {\bb{K}}
\def\bb{H} {\bb{H}}
\def\bb{C} {\bb{C}}
\def\bb{A} {\bb{A}}
\def\epsilon  {\epsilon}
\def\bbb{C} {\bbb{C}}
\def {\rm D} {{\rm D}}
\def \footnote {\footnote}
\def \kappa {\kappa}
\def \over {\over}
\def  { 1\ov 2} { { 1\over 2}}
\def  \wedge { \wedge}
\def  \Phi} \def\epsilon {\epsilon { \Phi} \def\epsilon {\epsilon}
\def  g_1}\def \gd { g_2}\def \gt { g_3}\def \gc { g_4}\def \gp { g_5 { g_1}\def \gd { g_2}\def \gt { g_3}\def \gc { g_4}\def \gp { g_5}
\def {\cal F} {{\cal F}}
\def  \partial { \partial}
\def \tau {\theta}
\def \phi {\phi}
\def \end{equation} {\epsilon}
\def \tilde \epsilon {\tilde \epsilon}
\def \psi {\psi}
\def \tilde {\tilde}
\def \gamma {\gamma}
\def \bibitem{\bibitem}
\def\alpha {\alpha }
\def \phi {\phi}
\def \epsilon {\epsilon}
\def \varepsilon {\varepsilon}
\def \sigma {\sigma}
\def \rho {\rho}
\def \rho {\rho}
\def \delta {\delta}
\def \Gamma {\Gamma}
\def \lambda {\lambda}
\def \mu {\mu}
\def \gamma {\gamma}
\def \nu {\nu}
\def \varphi {\varphi}
\def \tilde {\tilde}
\def {\rm x} {{\rm x}}
\def {\rm v} {{\rm v}}
\def {1 \ov 4} {{1 \over 4}}
\def \beta {\beta}
\def \Omega {\Omega}
\def\lrcorner{\lrcorner}

\newcommand{\tfrac}{\tfrac}
\newcommand{\epsilon}{\epsilon}

\def\begin{equation}{\begin{equation}}
\def\end{equation}{\end{equation}}
\def \cite {\cite}
\def \bibitem {\bibitem}
\def \label{\label}
\def {\rm f} {{\rm f}}
\def \footnote {\footnote}
\def u  {u }
\def v  {v}
\def \tau {\tau}
\def {\cal A} { {\cal A} }
\def {\rm w} {{\rm w}}
\def \Sigma {\Sigma}
\def \td u {\tilde u}
\def {\rm p} {{\rm p}}
\def \nonumber {\nonumber}

\newcommand{\cont}[1]{{}_{#1}{}^{#1}}

\newtheorem{corollary}{Corollary}
\newtheorem{proposition}{Proposition}
\newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}
\newtheorem{definition}{Definition}
\newtheorem{lemma}{Lemma}
\newtheorem{remark}{Remark}
\newtheorem{issue}{Issue}
\newtheorem{question}{Question}
\newtheorem{conjecture}{Conjecture}
\newcommand{\noindent{\it Proof: }}{\noindent{\it Proof: }}
\newcommand{\  q.~e.~d. \vspace{0.2in}}{\  q.~e.~d. \vspace{0.2in}}

\begin{document}
\date{November 2002}
\begin{titlepage}
\begin{center}
\vspace*{3.5cm}
{\Large \bf Geometry of all supersymmetric  four-dimensional ${\cal N}=1$ supergravity  backgrounds}\\[.2cm]

\vspace{1.5cm}
 {\large  U.~Gran$^1$, J.~Gutowski$^2$ and   G.~Papadopoulos$^3$  }

\vspace{0.5cm}

${}^1$ Fundamental Physics\\
Chalmers University of Technology\\
SE-412 96 G\"oteborg, Sweden\\

\vspace{0.5cm}
${}^2$ DAMTP, Centre for Mathematical Sciences\\
University of Cambridge\\
Wilberforce Road, Cambridge, CB3 0WA, UK

\vspace{0.5cm}
${}^3$ Department of Mathematics\\
King's College London\\
Strand\\
London WC2R 2LS, UK\\

\end{center}
\vskip 1.5 cm
\begin{abstract}
We solve the Killing spinor equations of ${\cal N}=1$ supergravity, with four supercharges, coupled to any number of vector
and scalar multiplets  in all cases. We find that backgrounds with $N=1$ supersymmetry admit a null, integrable,
Killing vector field. There are two classes of $N=2$ backgrounds. The spacetime in the first class admits a parallel null vector field and
so it is a pp-wave. The spacetime of the other class admits three Killing vector fields, and a vector field
that commutes with the three Killing directions. These backgrounds
are of cohomogeneity one with  homogenous sections  either  $\bb{R}^{2,1}$ or $AdS_3$ and  have
an interpretation as  domain walls.
 The $N=3$  backgrounds are locally  maximally
supersymmetric. There are  $N=3$ backgrounds which arise as discrete identifications of maximally supersymmetric ones.
The maximally supersymmetric backgrounds are locally isometric to either $\bb{R}^{3,1}$ or $AdS_4$.

\end{abstract}
\end{titlepage}
\newpage
\setcounter{page}{1}
\renewcommand{\thefootnote}{\arabic{footnote}}
\setcounter{footnote}{0}

\setcounter{section}{0}
\setcounter{subsection}{0}
\newsection{Introduction}

Four-dimensional supergravity coupled to vector and scalar multiplets with ${\cal N}=1$ supersymmetry, four supercharges,   is
 a minimal supersymmetric extension  of the standard model. Because of this, it has widespread  applications
  in particle physics phenomenology. The  theory
has been developed in stages beginning from the construction of pure supergravity \cite{sugra1, sugra2}. The couplings
to the vector and scalar multiplets were added later\footnote{The theory has appeared  in the literature in many  different conventions.
We shall mostly follow those of \cite{wess}, page 212.}, see e.g.~\cite{wess} and references within.

In recent years and following the work of Paul Tod \cite{tod}, there has been much interest in the systematic understanding of
 supersymmetric configurations of supergravity theories. In lower-dimensional supergravities, the focus has been on the
 classification of supersymmetric solutions of four- and five-dimensional theories  with more than 8 supercharges, see e.g.~\cite{gutowski,ortin, roest}.
 Special
 supersymmetric solutions
 of ${\cal N}=1$ four-dimensional theories are also known. These include the stringy  cosmic strings \cite{vafa, jggp, kallosh}, domain walls
 \cite{cvetic, townsend, gutb}
 and pp-waves.

In this paper, we solve the Killing spinor equations of four-dimensional ${\cal N}=1$ supergravity coupled
to {\it any number} of vector and scalar multiplets in {\it all cases}. For this we use the spinorial geometry approach of \cite{jguggp}.
We find that there are backgrounds
with $N=1$, $N=2$, $N=3$ and $N=4$ supersymmetry. The spacetime metric of backgrounds with $N=1$ supersymmetry
admits an integrable, null, Killing vector field.  Adapting appropriate coordinates, the metric is given in
(\ref{lcmetr}) and  (\ref{frame}).
There are two kinds of $N=2$ backgrounds. One admits a parallel null, Killing vector field and the metric is that
of a pp-wave. The other admits three Killing vector fields and an additional vector field that commutes with the three
Killing ones.  The metric is given in special coordinates (\ref{metrb}). These backgrounds  are of cohomogeneity one with
homogeneous sections either $\bb{R}^{2,1}$ or $AdS_3$.   The $N=3$
backgrounds are locally maximally supersymmetric. However, we have shown by adapting the results
of \cite{FigueroaO'Farrill:2007kb} that there are $N=3$ backgrounds which arise
as discrete quotients of maximally supersymmetric ones.  The maximally supersymmetric backgrounds are locally isometric to either
$\bb{R}^{3,1}$ or $AdS_4$.

This paper has been organized as follows. In section two, we state the Killing spinor equations which arise
from the supersymmetry variation of the fermions of the supergravity theory. In section three, we solve the
Killing spinor equations of $N=1$ backgrounds and describe the geometry of spacetime. In section four,
we investigate the solution of the Killing spinor equations for $N=2$ backgrounds. In section five,
we show that the $N=3$ backgrounds are locally maximally supersymmetric and that the $N=4$ backgrounds
are locally isometric to  either $\bb{R}^{3,1}$ or $AdS_4$. In section six, we give an example of an $N=3$ background which can be constructed
as discrete identification of $AdS_4$ and in section seven we give our conclusions. In appendix A, we present
the integrability conditions of the Killing spinor equations.

\newsection{Killing spinor equations}\label{killing}

The Killing spinor equations can be read off from the supersymmetry transformations of ${\cal N}=1$ supergravity.
There are three  Killing spinor equations associated with the supersymmetry transformations of the fermions
of the gravitational, gauge and scalar multiplets, respectively. After some  apparent changes in notation  from that of   \cite{wess},
the Killing spinor equations of ${\cal N}=1$ supergravity can be written as follows:

The gravitino Killing spinor equation is
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{graveq}
2[\nabla_\mu\epsilon_L+{1\over4} (\partial_iK\, {\cal D}_\mu \phi^i-\partial_{\bar i}K\,{\cal D}_\mu \phi^{\bar i})\epsilon_L]+i e^{{K\over2}} W\gamma_\mu\epsilon_R=0~,
\end{eqnarray}
the gaugino Killing spinor equation is
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{gaugeq}
F^a_{\mu\nu}\gamma^{\mu\nu}\epsilon_L-2i  \mu^a\epsilon_L=0~,
\end{eqnarray}
and the Killing spinor equation associated with the scalar multiplet is
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{mateq}
i \gamma^\mu \epsilon_R {\cal D}_\mu \phi^i- e^{{K\over2}} G^{i\bar j} D_{\bar j} \bar W \epsilon_L=0~,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\nabla$ is the spin connection, $\phi^i$ is a complex scalar  field, $K=K(\phi^i, \phi^{\bar j})$ is the K\"ahler potential
of the (K\"ahler)
 scalar or sigma model manifold $S$, $G_{i\bar j}=\partial_i \partial_{\bar j} K$, $W=W(\phi^i)$ is a (local) holomorphic function on $S$,
\begin{eqnarray}
D_iW=\partial_iW+\partial_iK W~,~~~{\cal D}_\mu \phi^{i}=\partial_\mu\phi^i- A_\mu^a \xi^i_a~,
\end{eqnarray}
 $\xi_a$ are  holomorphic Killing  vector fields on $S$, $A^a$ is the gauge connection with field strength $F^a$ and
$\mu^a$ is the moment map, i.e.
\begin{eqnarray}
G_{i\bar j} \xi_a^{\bar j}=i\partial_i\mu_a~.
\end{eqnarray}
We mostly follow the metric and spinor conventions of \cite{wess}. In particular, the spacetime metric has signature mostly plus,
$\epsilon$ is a Majorana spinor and $\epsilon_{L,R}={1\over2} (1\pm \gamma_5)\epsilon$, where $\gamma_5^2=1$. We have set the gauge coupling to 1.

The gravitino Killing spinor equation is a parallel transport equation for a connection which, apart
from the Levi-Civita part, contains additional terms that depend on the matter couplings. The gauge group
of the Killing spinor equations is $Spin_c(3,1)=Spin(3,1)\times_{\bb{Z}_2} U(1)$. The $Spin(3,1)$ acts on $\epsilon$ with the Majorana representation
while $U(1)$ acts on the chiral component $\epsilon_L$ with the standard 1-dimensional representation and on the anti-chiral $\epsilon_R$
with its conjugate. The additional $U(1)$ gauge transformation is due to the coupling of the spinor $\epsilon$ to the
$U(1)$ connection constructed from the K\"ahler potential $K$ associated with the matter couplings. In what follows,
we  use only the $Spin(3,1)$ component of the gauge group to choose the representatives of the Killing spinors.
Incidentally,
the holonomy of the supercovariant connection is contained in $Pin_c(3,1)$. This can be easily seen from the
expression for the integrability condition of the gravitino Killing spinor equation in appendix A. The additional $U(1)$
component in the holonomy group is again due the the K\"ahler potential coupling mentioned above.

\newsection{N=1 backgrounds}

\subsection{Killing spinor}

The starting point in the spinorial geometry approach \cite{jguggp} to solving Killing spinor equations is the choice of a normal form
for the Killing spinors up to gauge transformations. We have already mentioned that the gauge group is $Spin_c(3,1)$.
It is known that $Spin(3,1)=SL(2,\bb{C})$ and the chiral (Weyl) representation is identified with the standard representation of
$SL(2,\bb{C})$ on $\bb{C}^2$. The Majorana representation which is relevant here is simply ${\bf 2}\oplus \bar {\bf 2}$
with $\bar {\bf 2}$ the complex conjugate of ${\bf 2}$.  Using the explicit realization  of spinors in terms of forms,
 the chiral representation is identified with
even forms, $\Lambda^{{\rm ev}}(\bb{C}^2)$,  and the anti-chiral with odd ones, $\Lambda^{{\rm odd}}(\bb{C}^2)$. Introducing
a Hermitian basis $(e_1, e_2)$ in $\bb{C}^2$ with respect to a Hermitian  inner product $<\cdot, \cdot>$, a basis in $\Lambda^{{\rm ev}}(\bb{C}^2)$
is $(1, e_{12})$, $e_{12}= e_1\wedge e_2$, and a basis in $\Lambda^{{\rm odd}}(\bb{C}^2)$ is $(e_1, e_2)$.
In particular, the gamma matrices act on $\Lambda^{{\rm ev}}(\bb{C}^2)$ and $\Lambda^{{\rm odd}}(\bb{C}^2)$ as
\begin{eqnarray}
\Gamma_0&=&-e_2\wedge+e_2\lrcorner~,~~~\Gamma_2=e_2\wedge+e_2\lrcorner~,
\cr
\Gamma_1&=&e_1\wedge+e_1\lrcorner~,~~~\Gamma_3=i(e_1\wedge-e_1\lrcorner)~,
\label{bas}
\end{eqnarray}
where $\lrcorner$ is the adjoint operation of the form skew-product.
For later use, we also adopt a light-cone Hermitian basis in the space of spinors as
\begin{eqnarray}
\gamma_+ &=& \sqrt{2} \,e_2 \lrcorner~,~~~ \gamma_- = \sqrt{2}\, e_2 \wedge~,
\cr
\gamma_1 &=& \sqrt{2}\, e_1 \wedge~,~~~\gamma_{\bar{1}} = \sqrt{2}\, e_1 \lrcorner~.
\end{eqnarray}
There is one orbit of $SL(2,\bb{C})$ on $\Lambda^{{\rm ev}}(\bb{C}^2)$, and so the chiral
component of $\epsilon$ can be chosen as $1$. In this basis, the Majorana inner product is given by
\begin{eqnarray}
B(\eta_1, \eta_2)=<\Gamma_{12}\, \eta^*_1, \eta_2>~,
\end{eqnarray}
where $<\cdot,\cdot>$ is the Hermitian inner product on $\bb{C}^2$ extended on  $\Lambda^\star(\bb{C}^2)$, and $\eta_1, \eta_2\in \Lambda^\star(\bb{C}^2)$.
Observe that $B$ is a bi-linear. The spacetime forms constructed
as spinor bi-linears are defined as
\begin{eqnarray}
\tau_{\mu_1\dots \mu_k}=B(\eta_1, \gamma_{\mu_1\dots\mu_k}\eta_2)~,~~~k=0,1 \dots, 4~.
\label{bil}
\end{eqnarray}
The Dirac inner product in the (\ref{bas}) basis is $D(\eta_1, \eta_2)=<\Gamma_0\eta_1, \eta_2>$. Equating the Dirac and Majorana conjugates, one finds that the complex conjugation operation
is imposed by the anti-linear map,  $C=-\Gamma_{012}*$, $C^2=1$. Applying this to the spinor $1$, one finds that a   Majorana
representative for the orbit is
\begin{eqnarray}
\epsilon=1+e_1~,~~~~\epsilon_L=1~,~~~\epsilon_R=e_1~.
\label{fks}
\end{eqnarray}
This can be chosen as the first Killing spinor of the theory. The isotropy group of the spinor $1$ in $SL(2,\bb{C})$ is $\bb{C}$.  This will be used
later to choose the second Killing spinor.

\subsection{Solution to the Killing spinor equations}

Evaluating the gravitino equation on the Killing spinor $\epsilon=1+e_1$,  we find that

\begin{eqnarray}
\label{n1graveq}
- \Omega_{+,+-} + \Omega_{+, 1 \bar{1}} + {1 \over 2}
(\partial_iK\, {\cal D}_+ \phi^i-\partial_{\bar i}K\,{\cal D}_+ \phi^{\bar i}) &=& 0~,
\cr
\Omega_{+,+1} &=& 0~,
\cr
- \Omega_{-,+-} + \Omega_{-,1 \bar{1}} + {1 \over 2}
(\partial_iK\, {\cal D}_- \phi^i-\partial_{\bar i}K\,{\cal D}_- \phi^{\bar i}) &=&0~,
\cr
2 \Omega_{-,+ \bar{1}} + \sqrt{2} i e^{K \over 2}  W &=&0
\cr
- \Omega_{1,+-} + \Omega_{1,1 \bar{1}} + {1 \over 2} (\partial_iK\, {\cal D}_1 \phi^i-\partial_{\bar i}K\,{\cal D}_1 \phi^{\bar i}) &=&0~,
\cr
\Omega_{1,+ \bar{1}}=\Omega_{\bar{1},+ \bar{1}} &=&0~,
\cr
- \Omega_{\bar{1},+-}+ \Omega_{\bar{1}, 1 \bar{1}} +
{1 \over 2}(\partial_iK\, {\cal D}_{\bar{1}} \phi^i-\partial_{\bar i}K\,{\cal D}_{\bar{1}} \phi^{\bar i})
+ \sqrt{2} i e^{K \over 2} W &=&0~,
\end{eqnarray}
where $\Omega$ is the spin connection of the four-dimensional spacetime metric.

The gaugino equation ({\ref{gaugeq}}) acting on $1+e_1$ gives
\begin{equation}
F^a_{+ 1} =F^a_{+-}=0, \qquad   F^a_{1 \bar{1}} -i \mu^{(a)}=0~,
\label{n1gsol}
\end{equation}
and similarly the Killing spinor equation of the scalar multiplet  ({\ref{mateq}}) gives
\begin{equation}
{\cal D}_+ \phi^i =0, \qquad \sqrt{2} i {\cal{D}}_1 \phi^i = e^{K \over 2} G^{i \bar{j}} D_{\bar{j}} {\bar{W}}~.
\label{n1msol}
\end{equation}
The equations (\ref{n1graveq})-(\ref{n1msol}) is the linear system associated with the $N=1$ supersymmetric backgrounds.

To solve the linear system, substitute ${\cal D}_+ \phi^i =0$
into ({\ref{n1graveq}}) to find that the gravitino equations can be rewritten as
\begin{equation}
\label{auxgrav1}
\Omega_{+,+-} = \Omega_{+,1 \bar{1}} =
\Omega_{+,+1} = \Omega_{-,-+} = \Omega_{1,+ \bar{1}}
= \Omega_{1,+1} = \Omega_{-,+1}+\Omega_{1,+-}=0~,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
\Omega_{-,1 \bar{1}} + {1 \over 2} (\partial_iK\, {\cal D}_- \phi^i-\partial_{\bar i}K\,{\cal D}_- \phi^{\bar i})
&=& 0~,
\cr
i\sqrt{2}e^{{K \over 2}} W+2\Omega_{-,+ \bar{1}}&=&0~,
\cr
\Omega_{-,+1} + \Omega_{1,1 \bar{1}}
+{1 \over 2}  (\partial_iK\, {\cal D}_1 \phi^i-\partial_{\bar i}K\,{\cal D}_1 \phi^{\bar i}) &=& 0~.
\label{n1geomb}
\end{eqnarray}
In what follows, we explore the consequences of the above conditions on the geometry of spacetime.

\subsection{Geometry}
To proceed, write the metric in a light-cone Hermitian frame as
\begin{eqnarray}
ds^2= 2 {\bf{e}}^- {\bf{e}}^++2 {\bf {e}}^1 {{\bf e}}^{\bar 1}~.
\label{lcmetr}
\end{eqnarray}
The spacetime form bilinears associated with the Killing spinor, see (\ref{bil}), are
proportional to ${\bf{e}}^-$ and ${\bf{e}}^-\wedge ({\bf{e}}^1$+${\bf{e}}^{\bar 1})$, and their
spacetime duals.
Setting ${\bf{e}}^-=X_\mu dy^\mu$, it is easy to see that
 ({\ref{auxgrav1}}) implies that
\begin{equation}
\nabla_{(\mu} X_{\nu)} =0,  \qquad {\bf{e}}^{-} \wedge {d\bf{e}}^{-} =0,\qquad  {\bf{e}}^{-}\wedge {\bf{e}}^{\bar{1}} \wedge d {\bf{e}}^1 =0 \ .
\label{geomcon}
\end{equation}
Observe also that ${\bf{e}}^{-}\wedge {\bf{e}}^1 \wedge d {\bf{e}}^1 =0$.

The first condition in (\ref{geomcon}) implies that the metric admits a null Killing vector field.
While the second implies that the distribution defined by $X$ is integrable.
As a result the metric can be written as in (\ref{lcmetr}) with
\begin{eqnarray}
{\bf{e}}^-=H du~,~~~{\bf{e}}^+ = dv + V du + w_i dx^i~,~~~{\bf {e}}^1=\beta_1 dx^1+\beta_2 dx^2~,
\label{frame}
\end{eqnarray}
where $u,v,x^i$, $i=1,2$, are real coordinates,  $H,V,w_i$ are real spacetime functions independent of $v$ and $\beta_1, \beta_2$ are complex
spacetime functions. Substituting these into the last condition in (\ref{geomcon}), we find that the frame ${\bf e}^1$ and so its complex conjugate
${\bf e}^{\bar 1}$
can be chosen independent of $v$.

In fact, the basis given in ({\ref{frame}}) can be simplified further; one can work
in a gauge for which $w_1=w_2=0$ in ${\bf{e}}^+$.  To see how such a gauge may be chosen, consider the $Spin(3,1)$ gauge transformation generated
by $R \gamma_{+1} + {\bar{R}} \gamma_{+ \bar{1}}$ for $R \in \bb{C}$, which leaves invariant $1+e_1$.
It is straightforward to see that this
gauge transformation corresponds to the following change of basis
\begin{eqnarray}
{\bf{e}}^- & \rightarrow & {\bf{e}}^-
 \cr
{\bf{e}}^+ & \rightarrow & {\bf{e}}^+ -4|R|^2 {\bf{e}}^- -2 {\bar{R}} {\bf{e}}^1 -2 R {\bf{e}}^{\bar{1}}
 \cr
{\bf{e}}^1 & \rightarrow & {\bf{e}}^1 +2R {\bf{e}}^-
 \cr
{\bf{e}}^{\bar{1}} & \rightarrow & {\bf{e}}^{\bar{1}} +2 {\bar{R}} {\bf{e}}^- \ .
\end{eqnarray}
By making such a gauge transformation, one can set $w_1=w_2=0$ in ${\bf{e}}^+$.
Finally, a co-ordinate transformation in $x^1$, $x^2$ can be used to
eliminate the $du$ term from ${\bf{e}}^1$.
The basis is then given by  ({\ref{frame}}), with $w_1=w_2=0$.

The last two conditions in (\ref{n1geomb}) can be rewritten as
\begin{eqnarray}
\sqrt{2} e^{{K\over2}} W {\bf e}^--\star ({\bf e}^1\wedge d{\bf e}^-)=0~,
\cr
\star d({\bf e}^-\wedge {\bf e}^{\bar 1})-{1\over \sqrt{2}} e^{{K\over2}} \bar W {\bf e}^--
{i\over 2} (\partial_iK\, {\cal D}_1 \phi^i-\partial_{\bar i}K\,{\cal D}_1 \phi^{\bar i}){\bf e}^- &=& 0~,
\end{eqnarray}
where the orientation of the spacetime is chosen as $\epsilon_{-+1\bar 1}=-i$. The first condition in (\ref{n1geomb})
cannot be written in a more covariant form. However, if one takes the fields to be independent of $u$, then the connection
part vanishes.

To solve (\ref{n1gsol}), one can locally  always choose the gauge $A_+^a=0$. The first two conditions in (\ref{n1gsol}) will then imply that
the remaining components of $A$ are independent of $v$. There is no general procedure to give an explicit solution
for the last condition (\ref{n1gsol}).

Next turn into the conditions (\ref{n1msol}) that arise from the Killing spinor equations of the matter multiplet.
In the gauge $A_+^a=0$, the first condition in (\ref{n1msol}) implies that the scalar fields can be taken
to be independent of $v$, $\partial_v\phi=0$. The last condition in (\ref{n1msol}) can be interpreted as a
holomorphic flow equation. The construction of explicit solutions will depend on the form of the K\"ahler potential
and $W$, and so of the details of the model.

\newsection{N=2 backgrounds}

\subsection{Killing spinors}

The first Killing spinor is the same as that of the $N=1$ case investigated above. So we set $\epsilon_1=\epsilon$, where $\epsilon$ is given in (\ref{fks}).
To choose the second Killing spinor, consider the most general Majorana spinor
\begin{eqnarray}
\epsilon_2= a 1+be_{12}+ C (a 1+be_{12})~,~~~a,b\in \bb{C}~.
\end{eqnarray}
The isotropy group of  $\epsilon_1$  in $Spin(3,1)$ is  $\bb{C}$. This  can be used to simplify the
expression for $\epsilon_2$.
There are two cases to consider.
If $b=0$, the $\bb{C}$ isotropy transformation leaves $\epsilon_2$ invariant and
\begin{eqnarray}
\epsilon_2=a 1+ \bar a e_1~.
\label{sksa}
\end{eqnarray}
Linear independence of $\epsilon_1$ and $\epsilon_2$ requires that ${\rm Im}\, a\not=0$.

Next suppose that  $b\not=0$.  After a $\bb{C}$ transformation with parameter $\lambda$,  one has
\begin{eqnarray}
\epsilon_2'= (a+\lambda b) 1+ b e_{12}+C[(a+\lambda b) 1+ b e_{12}]~.
\end{eqnarray}
Setting  $\lambda=-{a\over b}$, one can choose the normal form of $\epsilon_2$ as
\begin{eqnarray}
\epsilon_2=b e_{12}-\bar b e_2~.
\label{sksb}
\end{eqnarray}
So the second Killing spinor can be chosen either as in (\ref{sksa}) or as in (\ref{sksb}) with $a,b$ promoted
to complex spacetime functions.

\subsection{Solution to the Killing spinor equations}

\subsubsection{$\epsilon_2=a 1+ \bar a e_1$}
Consider first the case for which $\epsilon_2=a 1+ \bar a e_1$. The linear system is easy to read off from that of the $N=1$ case.
In particular, the supercovariant connection along the $-$ light-cone direction gives
\begin{eqnarray}
2a \Omega_{-,+\bar 1}+i \sqrt{ 2} \bar a e^{{K\over2}} W=0~.
\end{eqnarray}
Comparing this condition with those of the $N=1$ case, one concludes that either $W=0$ on the field configurations $\phi$ of the solution\footnote{
This does not imply that $W$ vanishes. It means that $W$ vanishes on the solution for $\phi$.}
or $a=\bar a$. If the latter is the
case, then it turns out that $a$ is also constant and so $\epsilon_2$ is not linearly independent from $\epsilon_1$.
It remains to choose $W=0$. In such a case, one finds that the parameter $a$ is constant, i.e.~$a\in \bb{C}$, and the additional conditions to those of $N=1$ are
\begin{eqnarray}
\Omega_{-,+1}=0~,~~~{\cal D}_1\phi^i=0~,~~~W=0~.
\end{eqnarray}
Combining these with those of $N=1$ backgrounds, we find that the gravitino and matter Killing spinor equations give
\begin{eqnarray}
\label{auxgrav2}
\Omega_{+,+-} = \Omega_{+,1 \bar{1}} =
\Omega_{+,+1} = \Omega_{-,-+} = \Omega_{1,+ \bar{1}}
= \Omega_{1,+1} = \Omega_{-,+1}=\Omega_{1,+-}=0~,
\end{eqnarray}
and
\begin{eqnarray}
\Omega_{-,1 \bar{1}} + {1 \over 2} (\partial_iK\, {\cal D}_- \phi^i-\partial_{\bar i}K\,{\cal D}_- \phi^{\bar i})= 0~,~~~\Omega_{1,1 \bar{1}}
-{1 \over 2} \partial_{\bar i}K\,{\cal D}_1 \phi^{\bar i} = 0~,
\cr W=\partial_jW=0~,~~~{\cal D}_1\phi^i={\cal D}_+\phi^i=0~.
\label{n2pp}
\end{eqnarray}
There are no additional conditions that arise from the gaugino Killing spinor equation apart from those that we have found
in the $N=1$ case (\ref{n1gsol}).

\subsubsection{$\epsilon_2=b e_{12}-\bar b e_2$}

Next consider the case where $\epsilon_2=b e_{12}-\bar b e_2$. The gravitino Killing spinor equation gives
\begin{eqnarray}
\partial_+b=0~,~~~~ b \Omega_{+,-1}+ \bar b \Omega_{-,+\bar 1}=0~,
\cr
\partial_-b-\Omega_{-,1\bar1} b=0~,~~~\Omega_{-,-1}=0~,
\cr
\partial_1 b-b(\Omega_{1,-+}+\Omega_{+,-1}+\Omega_{1,1\bar1})=0~,~~~\Omega_{1,-1}=0~,
\cr
\partial_{\bar 1}b-b\Omega_{\bar1,1\bar1}=0~,~~~\Omega_{\bar1, -1}=0~,
\label{n2dsol}
\end{eqnarray}
where we have used the $N=1$ relations to simplify the expressions.
Moreover the gaugino Killing spinor equation gives
\begin{eqnarray}
F^a_{-1}=0~,~~~~F^a_{1\bar 1}+i \mu^a=0~.
\label{n2gsol}
\end{eqnarray}
In addition, the Killing spinor equation associated with the matter multiplet gives
\begin{eqnarray}
{\cal D}_-\phi^i=0~,~~~i\sqrt{2}\,\, \bar b \,\,{\cal D}_{\bar 1} \phi^i+b e^{{K\over2}} G^{i\bar j}D_{\bar j}\bar W=0~.
\label{n2msol}
\end{eqnarray}

\subsection{Geometry}

\subsubsection{$\epsilon_2=a 1+ \bar a e_1$}

The geometric constraints  (\ref{auxgrav2}) imply that
 $X={\bf{e}}^-$ is covariantly constant with respect to the Levi-Civita connection. So the spacetime admits
 a parallel null Killing vector field. Such a spacetime has an interpretation as a pp-wave. Note, however, that
 the cosmic string solutions \cite{vafa} and their generalizations \cite{jggp, kallosh} also admit a null parallel vector field
 and so belong to this class
 of solutions.  In particular,  one can
choose co-ordinates $v,u$ such that $X={\partial \over \partial v}$
is a Killing vector, and ${\bf{e}}^- = du$, i.e.~the frame can be chosen as in (\ref{frame}) with $H=1$.
We have used the same symbol $X$ to denote the one-form  and the dual vector field.

The investigation of remaining conditions is similar to
that of the $N=1$ case. In particular the first condition in (\ref{n2pp}) does not have a
straightforward interpretation unless one takes the fields to be independent of $u$. In such a case
the connection term vanishes. The second condition in (\ref{n2pp})
can be written as
\begin{eqnarray}
\star d(e^-\wedge e^1)-
{i\over 2} (\partial_iK\, {\cal D}_1 \phi^i-\partial_{\bar i}K\,{\cal D}_1 \phi^{\bar i}){\bf e}^- = 0~.
\end{eqnarray}
The conditions on $W$ in (\ref{n2pp}) imply that the solution for the scalars should be chosen such that
the superpotential $W$ and its first derivative vanish.

The restrictions on $\phi$ in (\ref{n2pp}) can be interpreted as light-cone pseudo-holomorphicity
conditions. However notice that the light-cone almost-hermitian distribution $({\bf e}^+, {\bf e}^1)$
is not integrable in general. However if one takes the fields to be independent of $u$, $({\bf e}^+, {\bf e}^1)$
is integrable and ${\cal D}_+\phi^i={\cal D}_1\phi^i=0$ are light-cone holomorphicity conditions. Moreover
in such a case, one can always choose a gauge locally such that $A_+^a=A_1^a=0$, since $F_{+1}=0$, and so
write $\partial_+\phi^i=\partial_1\phi^i=0$.

\subsubsection{$\epsilon_2=b e_{12}-\bar b e_2$}

To analyze the conditions (\ref{n2dsol}) which arise from the Killing spinor equations in this case,
it is convenient to define the 1-forms
\begin{equation}
X= {\bf{e}}^-, \qquad Y= |b|^2 {\bf{e}}^+, \qquad Z = {\bar{b}} {\bf{e}}^1 + b {\bf{e}}^{\bar{1}},
\qquad W =  i {\bar{b}} {\bf{e}}^1 -i b {\bf{e}}^{\bar{1}} \ .
\label{frem}
\end{equation}
Observe that $Z$ is orthogonal to $X, Y, W$, and $W$ is orthogonal to $X, Y, Z$.
Then it is straightforward to show that the Killing spinor equations imply that
$X$, $Y$ and $Z$ are all Killing vectors. Furthermore, $W$ is closed, $d W =0$.
In addition, one finds the following constraints on the vector field commutators:
\begin{equation}
[W, X] = [W, Y] = [W, Z] =0
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
[X,Y] = c Z, \qquad [X, Z]=-2c X, \qquad [Y, Z]=2cY~,
\end{equation}
where $c=b(\Omega_{-,+1}-\Omega_{+,-1})$ and we use the same symbols to denote the vector fields their dual
one-forms.

Consider the commutator $[X,Y] = c Z$. Since $W$ commutes with the other three vector field, the Jacobi identity
implies that $Wc=0$. Similarly, the Jacobi identity for $Z, X$ and $Y$ together with the linear independence
of these three vector field imply that $Xc=Yc=Zc=0$. So $c$ can be taken to be a constant.

Next, since $Z$ and $W$ commute one can choose coordinates $x, y$ such that $Z=\partial_x$ and $W=\partial_y$. Moreover,
the rest of the commutators imply that there are additional coordinates  $u$, $v$ such that
\begin{equation}
X= e^{2cx} \partial_v , \qquad Y= e^{-2cx}\bigg((c^2 v^2+2c\lambda(u)v+\nu(u)) \partial_v
+(cv+\lambda(u)) \partial_x + \rho(u)\partial_y+ \partial_u  \bigg) \ ,
\label{vf}
\end{equation}
where $\lambda, \nu$ and $\rho$ are arbitrary functions of $u$. The functions $\lambda$ and $\rho$ can be eliminated
using a $u$-depedent shift transformation in $v$ and $y$. The resulting expression for $Y$ is as in (\ref{vf}) with $\lambda=\rho=0$.
The rest of the vector fields remain unchanged.
Using (\ref{frem}),  one can compute the frame
in terms of the coordinates $x,y,v,u$ to find
\begin{eqnarray}
{\bf e}^-&=&e^{2cx} |b|^2 du~,~~~{\bf e}^+= e^{-2cx} (dv-(c^2 v^2+\nu) du)~,~~~
\cr
{\bf e}^{1}&=&b [(dx-idy)- cv du]~,~~
{\bf e}^{\bar 1}=\bar b [(dx+idy)- cv du]~.
\end{eqnarray}

Hence the spacetime metric can be written as
\begin{eqnarray}
ds^2=2|b|^2 [ds^2(M_3)+dy^2]~,
\label{metrb}
\end{eqnarray}
where
\begin{equation}
ds^2(M_3) = du (dv-(c^2 v^2+\nu) du)+(dx-cv du)^2 \ ,
\end{equation}
and $\nu$ is a function of $u$, $\nu=\nu(u)$.
However, by direct examination of the Riemann curvature tensor, we find that
the 3-manifold with metric $ds^2(M_3)$ is either $\bb{R}^{2,1}$ if $c=0$, or $AdS_3$ if $c \neq 0$.

The function $b$ depends only on $y$, satisfying
\begin{equation}
{d b \over dy} = \sqrt{2} |b|^2 e^{{K \over 2}} W
+{1 \over \sqrt{2}} e^{{K \over 2}} b \big( b \partial_i K G^{i \bar{j}}
D_{\bar{j}} \bar{W} - \bar{b} \partial_{\bar{i}} K G^{\bar{i} j} D_j W \big) \ .
\label{f1}
\end{equation}
If $b$ is taken to be real, the above equation can be further simplified to write
\begin{eqnarray}
{d \log b \over dy} = \sqrt{2}  e^{{K \over 2}} {\rm Re}\, W~,~~~ i {\rm Im}\, W+{1\over 2} \big(  \partial_i K G^{i \bar{j}}
D_{\bar{j}} \bar{W} -  \partial_{\bar{i}} K G^{\bar{i} j} D_j W \big) =0 \ .
\end{eqnarray}
Clearly, the spacetime is of cohomogeneity one with homogenous section either $AdS_3$ or $\bb{R}^{2,1}$. So
this class of $N=2$ solutions can be thought of as domain wall spacetimes.

The gaugino Killing spinor equation implies that
\begin{equation}
F^a =0, \qquad \mu^a =0~.
\end{equation}
So the gauge connection is flat and can locally be set to zero. The vanishing of the moment map restricts the
scalars to lie on a K\"ahler quotient of $S$.

The scalars $\phi^i$ are independent of $v$. Since we have set $A=0$ locally,
the additional constraints on ${\cal{D}} \phi^i$
imply that $\partial_x\phi^i=\partial_u\phi^i=0$.
Moreover, the remaining Killing spinor equations of the scalar multiplet (\ref{n2msol})  gives
\begin{equation}
{d \phi^i \over dy} = -\sqrt{2}\, b e^{{K \over 2}} G^{i \bar{j}} D_{\bar{j}} {\bar{W}}~.
\label{f2}
\end{equation}
Observe that this expression depends on $b$. This is again a flow equation driven by the holomorphic potential $W$.
One can change parameterisation to simplify the flow equations (\ref{f1}) and (\ref{f2}). The construction of
explicit solutions depends on the details of the models.

\newsection{N=3 and N=4 backgrounds}

\subsection{Killing spinors}

To find the Killing spinors of $N=3$ backgrounds, we use the gauge group to bring the normal to the Killing spinors to a canonical form
as in  \cite{preons}. Since
there is a single orbit of $Spin(3,1)$ on the space of Majorana spinors, we can always choose the normal direction to the three Killing spinors to
 be  $i(e_2+e_{12})$ with respect
 to the Majorana inner product, $A(\zeta, \eta)=<\Gamma_{12}\zeta^*, \eta>$,
where $<,>$ is the standard Hermitian inner product. The orthogonal directions to $i(e_2+e_{12})$ are
 $\{\eta_r\}=\{1+e_1, e_2-e_{12}, i(e_2+e_{12})\}$. So
the three Killing spinors can be chosen as
\begin{eqnarray}
\epsilon_r=\sum_s f_{rs} \eta_s~,~~~r,s=1,2,3~,
\label{n3ks}
\end{eqnarray}
where $(f_{rs})$ is a real $3\times 3$ invertible matrix of spacetime functions. Schematically we write $\epsilon=f\eta$.

In the $N=4$ backgrounds, the Killing spinors can again be written as a linear combination of the basis $\{1+e_1, i(1-e_1), e_2-e_{12}, i(e_2+e_{12})\}$
of Majorana spinors with real spacetime functions as coefficients. Next we shall solve the Killing spinor equations for both cases.

\subsection{Solution to the Killing spinor equations}

Let us begin with the $N=3$ case. We shall first solve the Killing spinor equations locally.
To proceed observe that (\ref{n3ks}) implies that schematically $\epsilon_L=f \eta_L$ and $\epsilon_R=f \eta_R$. Substituting this
into the  gaugino (\ref{gaugeq}) and chiral (\ref{mateq}) Killing spinor equations, one finds
that the
dependence on $(f)$ can be eliminated, because $f$ is invertible.
Moreover the conditions that one obtains  are those of (\ref{n1gsol}), (\ref{n1msol}), and
(\ref{n2gsol}) and (\ref{n2msol}) for $b=1$ and $b=i$. These  imply that
\begin{eqnarray}
F^a_{\mu\nu}={\cal D}_\mu\phi^i=D_i W=\mu^a=0~.
\label{n3sol}
\end{eqnarray}
Since the gauge connection is flat, we can locally set the gauge potential to vanish, $A^a_\mu=0$. As a result the second equation implies that
$\phi$ are constant. Substituting these data into the gravitino Killing spinor equation, and taking its integrability condition,
we find that
\begin{eqnarray}
R_{\mu\nu, \rho\sigma} \gamma^{\rho\sigma}\eta_L+2 e^K W\bar W \gamma_{\mu\nu}\eta_L=0~.
\label{n3int1}
\end{eqnarray}
Clearly the integrability condition takes values in $\mathfrak{spin}(3,1)$. Since the isotropy group of three linearly independent spinors
in $Spin(3,1)$ is the identity, (\ref{n3int1}) implies that
\begin{eqnarray}
R_{\mu\nu, \rho\sigma}=- e^K W\bar W (g_{\mu\rho} g_{\nu\sigma}-g_{\mu\sigma} g_{\nu\rho})~.
\label{n3int}
\end{eqnarray}
It is easy to see that (\ref{n3sol}) and (\ref{n3int}) are precisely the conditions that one gets for backgrounds that admit $N=4$
supersymmetries. So one concludes that $N=3$ backgrounds admit locally an additional
supersymmetry and so are locally maximally supersymmetric. Furthermore (\ref{n3int}) implies that the spacetime
is either $\bb{R}^{3,1}$ or $AdS_4$. In the former case,  $e^K|W|^2=0$  and in the latter $e^K|W|^2\not=0$ when
 evaluated at the constant maps $\phi$, respectively.

The moment map condition in (\ref{n3sol}), $\mu^a=0$, together with the remaining constant gauge transformations imply
that the constant maps $\phi$ take values in a K\"ahler quotient of the sigma model target space $S$. It remains to investigate
$D_i W=0$. Suppose that we have chosen some constant maps $\phi=\phi_0$. If $W(\phi_0)=0$, then  $D_i W=0$ implies that
$\partial_i W(\phi_0)=0$. So $W$ and its first derivative vanish at $\phi=\phi_0$.
On the other hand if $W(\phi_0)\not=0$, $D_i W=0$ relates the value of the first derivative of $W$ to that
of the K\"ahler potential at $\phi=\phi_0$.

\newsection{Supersymmetric Quotients}

Supersymmetric solutions of ${\cal N}=1$ four-dimensional supergravity theories can be constructed by
taking quotients of maximally supersymmetric solutions with respect to a discrete subgroup of the isometry group. Here we shall not
investigate all possible cases, instead we shall present an explicit construction
of an  $N=3$ background
from a discrete quotient of $AdS_4$. A similar question has been raised in \cite{FigueroaO'Farrill:2007kb}
in the context of ${\cal{N}}=2$ supergravity theory.
To proceed, consider the gravitino Killing spinor equation equation for an $N=3$ solution
which is locally isometric to $AdS_4$. We take the gauge connection to be trivial and so the scalars to be constant. As $W$ and $K$ are constant, it is convenient to
set
\begin{equation}
W = -i R e^{i \theta}
\end{equation}
for real $R$, $\theta$, with $R>0$. Furthermore, define $\ell$ by
\begin{equation}
\ell = {e^{-{K \over 2}} \over R}
\end{equation}
and set
\begin{equation}
\hat{\epsilon}= e^{-{i\theta \over 2}} \epsilon_L + e^{{i\theta \over 2}} \epsilon_R \ .
\end{equation}
Observe that $\hat{\epsilon}$ is Majorana. Then the Killing spinor equation
implies that
\begin{equation}
\nabla_\mu {\hat{\epsilon}} +{1 \over 2 \ell} \gamma_\mu {\hat{\epsilon}}=0~.
\end{equation}
The general solution to this equation has been constructed in
\cite{FigueroaO'Farrill:2007kb} using the same notation. In particular, one defines the following
real basis for $AdS_4$:
\begin{eqnarray}
{\bf{e}}^0 &=& \ell \cosh \rho  (dt + {1 \over 2} r^2 dx)~,
\cr
{\bf{e}}^1 &=& {\ell \over 2} r^2 \cosh \rho dx~,
\cr
{\bf{e}}^2 &=& \ell d \rho~,
\cr
{\bf{e}}^3 &=& {\ell \over r} \cosh \rho dr \ ,
\end{eqnarray}
for $x, \rho \in \bb{R}$, $t \in [0,2 \pi)$, $r>0$. The smooth quotient
is obtained by making the identification $x \sim x+2k$.
In order to demonstrate how taking this quotient
breaks the supersymmetry from $N=4$ to $N=3$, it
suffices to exhibit four Majorana spinors which are globally
well-defined on $AdS_4$, such that three of these spinors
remain globally well-defined in the quotient geometry, whereas the
fourth fails to be globally well-defined.
These Majorana spinors can be read off directly from equation
(24) of \cite{FigueroaO'Farrill:2007kb}:

\begin{eqnarray}
{\hat{\epsilon}}_1 &=& e^{{i \pi \over 4}}
\bigg( 2r (\cosh {\rho \over 2} -i \sinh {\rho \over 2}) (1+e_{12})
+2r (\sinh {\rho \over 2} -i \cosh {\rho \over 2})(e_1-e_2) \bigg)~,
\cr
{\hat{\epsilon}}_2 &=& 2 e^{it} (\cosh {\rho \over 2} + i \sinh {\rho \over 2})1
-2 e^{it} (\sinh {\rho \over 2} +i \cosh {\rho \over 2}) e_2
\cr
&+& 2 e^{-it} (\cosh {\rho \over 2} -i \sinh {\rho \over 2}) e_1
+2 e^{-it} (\sinh {\rho \over 2} -i \cosh {\rho \over 2}) e_{12}~,
\cr
{\hat{\epsilon}}_3 &=& 2i e^{it} (\cosh {\rho \over 2} + i \sinh {\rho \over 2})1
-2i e^{it} (\sinh {\rho \over 2} +i \cosh {\rho \over 2}) e_2
\cr
&-& 2 ie^{-it} (\cosh {\rho \over 2} -i \sinh {\rho \over 2}) e_1
-2i e^{-it} (\sinh {\rho \over 2} -i \cosh {\rho \over 2}) e_{12}~,
\cr
{\hat{\epsilon}}_4 &=& i e^{{i \pi \over 4}}
\bigg( {2 \over r} (1-ir^2 x)(\cosh {\rho \over 2} -i \sinh {\rho \over 2}) 1
-{2 \over r}(1+ir^2 x)(\sinh {\rho \over 2} -i \cosh {\rho \over 2}) e_1
\cr
&-&{2 \over r}(1-ir^2 x)(\sinh {\rho \over 2} -i \cosh {\rho \over 2}) e_2
-{2 \over r}(1+ir^2 x)(\cosh {\rho \over 2}-i \sinh {\rho \over 2}) e_{12} \bigg) \ .
\end{eqnarray}
Clearly, ${\hat{\epsilon}}_1$, ${\hat{\epsilon}}_2$
and ${\hat{\epsilon}}_3$ remain well-defined on making the
identification $x \sim x+2k$. However, as
${\hat{\epsilon}}_4$ contains terms linear in $x$,
${\hat{\epsilon}}_4$ fails to be globally well-defined in this
quotient of $AdS_4$, and hence this solution is an $N=3$ solution. It may worth re-investigating the number of supersymmetries
preserved by this solutions after introducing appropriate flat but no trivial gauge and scalar fluxes.

\newsection{Conclusions}

We have solved the Killing spinor equations of ${\cal N}=1$ supergravity coupled to any number of vector and scalar multiplets.
In particular, we have determined the geometry of spacetime in all cases. We have shown
that there are backgrounds with any number of supersymmetries ranging from $N=1$ to $N=4$.  $N=1$ backgrounds admit
a single null, integrable, Killing vector. $N=2$ backgrounds  admit either a single parallel, null, vector field or three Killing vector
fields. In the former case, the spacetime has an interpretation as a pp-wave.  In the latter, the metric can be written
in special coordinates, and the spacetime is of co-homogeneity one with homogenous section either $\bb{R}^{2,1}$ or $AdS_3$.
Such backgrounds can be thought of as domain walls.
$N=3$ backgrounds are locally maximally supersymmetric. In addition there are backgrounds which admit $N=3$
supersymmetry which can be constructed as discrete identifications of maximally supersymmetric ones. The maximally
supersymmetric backgrounds are locally isometric to either $\bb{R}^{3,1}$ or $AdS_4$.

We have not been able to solve explicitly all the equations. Supersymmetry imposes strong
restrictions in all backgrounds which admit more than one supersymmetry,  $N>1$. Some of the remaining equations are either holomorphic
flow or standard flow type of equations. So many qualitative results can be obtained by investigating the properties of
the vector fields which generate the flow. In particular, the $N=2$ domain wall backgrounds are associated with standard flow equations.
Explicit solutions can be obtained for special models.
Although, we have given an example of an $N=3$ background which can be constructed as discrete identification of
a maximally supersymmetric one based on \cite{FigueroaO'Farrill:2007kb}, we have not investigated all $N=3$ backgrounds that can be obtained in this way.
It may be possible to construct all such backgrounds utilizing the results of \cite{simon}.

\section*{Acknowledgements}
 The work of UG is funded by the Swedish Research Council.

\setcounter{section}{0}


\section{Grassroots knowledge sharing}

During the last decades, the sharing of information and knowledge has gone through an unheard
rapidisation. Both the amount of information shared, as well as the speed in which this happens,
has taken a huge flight. In many fields of progress, professional organisations were more ad-
vanced then ‘amateur knowledge sharers’. Remarkably, in some fields this has changed over the
years. On the Internet, many succesful grassroots initiatives have popped up, that still didn’t
make it to the somewhat static and controlled environment of professional business organisa-
tions. Think of free-software projects, but also of free-information projects, as wikis, weblogs,
and open news sites like Indymedia. \citep{Moller2005}

In this paper, we will examine on of the most popular and upcoming knowledge sharing
enablers on the Internet: wikis. Consequently, we will discuss why wikis are not (yet) adequate
for a professional environment, and what could be changed to have companies adapt the power
of wiki-based knowledge sharing too.

\section{Wikis}

\citet{Moller2005}[page vii, translated] defines wikis as “open websites that can be edited by every
visitor.”\footnote{The original definition is: “offene Websites, die jeder Besucher bearbeiten kann.”} We will extend this definition in two ways: (1) we explicitly state that modifying can
also include deleting information, and (2) we mention the fact that a wiki is in fact a knowledge
base. Hence, we come up with the following defition of a wiki:

\begin{quotation}

\noindent a piece of software that allows users to add, modify, and/or delete information from a
knowledge base via the web

\end{quotation} \normalfont

The exact functionality of the wiki differs per software package~\--- the
so-called wiki engine~\--- and the configuration of the engine. For instance,
some wikis allow every anonymous visitor to alter the information, where as
others only allow registered users to do this. Some engines allow multimedia
uploads (like images or sound files), where others have functionality to
prevent `edit conflicts'.

Wikis are invented by Ward Cunningham, and elaborated upon by \citet{Leuf01}.

\subsection{Characteristics}

\label{characteristics}

We can distinguish six prominent characteristics of wikis. Wikis are by nature
(1) anarchistic, (2) collaborative, (3) connected, (4) organic, (5)
self-healing, (6) based on trust.

\subsubsection*{Anarchistic}

Wikis are anarchistic in the sense that there is no power structure. In
general, no user has more rights then any other user.  On many wikis, anonymous
users have the same rights as registered users. Sometimes some power structure
is established. For instance, on Wikipedia there are sysops (system operators)
that have additional functionality for the revertion of vandalism. Because of
the anarchistic nature, a power structure can lead to conflicts between users,
e.g., when assigning new sysops.

Because of the equality of rights, there is also no division of labour. There
is no director that tells subordinates what to do.  Each individual can select
the role that best fits his or her preferences.

\subsubsection*{Collaborative}

A wiki is for the most part a collaboration tool. The users work together to
create a certain end-product, whether that be a report, a reference guide, or
an encyclopedia. Its strength is in its ability to facilitate users to
cooperate without a division of labour has been made in advance. With support
for so-called `edit conflicts' users can even work on the same page on the same
time.

A wiki is less good at supporting communication between users. Many wikis also
contain discussion pages, but for elaborate discussions other tools, like
e-mail or web-based forums, provide better functionality.

\subsubsection*{Connected}

The pages in a wiki generally are not ordered in a prescribed way, like in a book. Just like on
the World Wide Web, wikipages are interlinked in a network structure. Organising knowledge
in a network instead of a sequence appeares to be a natural way of knowledge representation, as
also knowledge in books on its turn can be seen as networked knowledge. Or as \citet{Focault1972}[p. 23] puts it: “The frontiers of a book are never clear-cut: beyond the title, the first lines, and
the last full stop, beyond its internal configuration and its autonomous form, it is caught up in a
system of references to other books, other texts, other sentences: it is a node within a network.”

Creating links in a wiki is generally very easy: applying the linking syntax to a certain term,
usually putting it between brackets or writing it in camel case\footnote{The early wikis used camel case for linking. Camel case is glueing words together and replacing spaces by a capital-
ization of the next character. Examples of this are camelCase (lower camel case, starting with a lower case character) and WikiWikiWeb (upper camel case, starting with a capital). Text and titles with camel case terms might look odd to the average reader, and some claim the success of modern wikis is partly because of the abandoning of camel case.}, immediately creates a link to a
wikipage which has that term as a title.

\subsubsection*{Organic}

Because of the lack of control and delegated division of labour, a wiki expands
itself in an organic way. Information on one subject can be very detailled,
whereas other equally important subjects might get not elaborated upon. The
direction in which a wiki expands depends largely on its community, with all
its \--- perhaps uncommon \--- interests, hypes and trends. For instance, the
Dutch Wikipedia has an very active user living in Thailand.  For this reason,
the information on Thailand in the Dutch Wikipedia is unproportianlly large,
compared to, e.g., the African countries.

\subsubsection*{Self-healing}

Wikis are sensitive to vandalism: malicious users deleting information or
inserting incorrect information. Especially wikis that allow unregistred users
to make changes encounter this problem. However, a wiki, especially wikis with
a large community, have a high potential of self-healing. The famous citation
by \citet{Raymond97} on open-source software development, ``Given enough eyes,
all bugs are shallow'',\footnote{Raymond calls this ‘Linus’s Law’.} applies to wikis too.  As a lot of people read the
pages, if the community is large enough amongst them might be experts in the
fields, vandalism and incorrect information are likely to be corrected in a
fair amount of time.

Generally in the large Wikipedias, reverting obvious vandalisms is a matter of
seconds to minutes. The real problem however lies with incorrect information
that looks plausible or is generally believed to be plausible. Wikis might be
sensitive to hoaxes and urban myths. However, the German Wikipedia shows to
outperform the more established Encarta and Brockhaus, even concerning content
quality \citep{Kurzidem04}.

\subsubsection*{Based on trust}

Wikicommunities heavily on the trust between its users. Since it is so easy to
revert changes, conflicts can quickly result in `edit wars' where multiple
users keep on reverting each others changes because they don't agree. And
because of the anarchistic character, there is no arbitrator to make a final
decision. Of course they community can create a consensus, e.g., by voting, but
there is no way to enforce the result of the consensus upon the users in
conflict.

\subsection{Advantages}

From the characteristics in the previous subsection, we can tell that wikis have several advan-
tages over other collaboration tools. Wikis allow users to work on the same document, or the
same part of the document, at the same time. And users can at any time consult the latest version
of the document, without the editors having to send out copies of the new version.

Another important advantages is that it takes away the role of editor, or rather: it makes
everyone an editor. It is quicker and easier to do then any other publish method, and hence it
expands quicker and is more up to date. And in most cases, its self-healing capabilities function
well enough to remove or correct the ‘junk’ that gets uploaded.

Each user can, within certain limitations, select his/her own role. This means that users
get more satisfaction out of their work and can be more motivated. Also, giving users certain
freedom stimulates the creative process, which can result in unexpected new findings. Hypothet-
ically, this creative process can even transcend organisational boundaries, so that people from
different departments can work on documents or concepts that turn out to be relevant to both
departments.

\subsection{Successful examples}

\label{sec:examples}

On the Internet, there exist several successful wikis. The most well-known and
undoubtly most successful example is Wikipedia, a descendant of the Nupedia
project.\footnote{Nupedia was a project to create an open-content encyclopedia
with a peer-review system. Its main editor, Larry Sanger, resigned in 2002, and
in 2003 the website went down.} Wikipedia is an effort to create an open
encyclopedia in several languages by means of wiki software, started by Jimmy
Wales. The content of the encyclopedia is available to users under the GNU Free
Documentation License. The English language Wikipedia \--- with over 440.000
articles\footnote{Last checked on the 4th of January, 2005.} \--- is larger
than the Encyclop\ae dia Brittanica \--- with 120.000 articles in the on-line
version, the biggest edition.\footnote{According to
\url{http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclopedia_Brittanica}.}

Wikipedia uses the MediaWiki software. There are several Wikipedia-related
projects that also use this wiki engine, such as Wiktionary (dictionary),
Wiki\-Books (textbooks and manuals), Wiki\-Quote,
Wiki\-Source (previously published documents) and Wiki\-News.

Other well-known wikis include are the Meat\-Ball\-Wiki (about on-line culture
and communities), the Linux\-Wiki, Wiki\-Travel (a travel guide), and the
Switch\-Wiki, which aims to be a list of all available wikis around the globe.

\section{Applying Wikis in Organisations}

All successful examples of wiki implementations mentioned in section
\ref{sec:examples} are freely available on the Internet, and its user community
consists completely of volunteers. Wikis are now gaining
attention in professional organisation, and companies like Socialtext and JotSpot now provide
wiki services to companies (see section \ref{sec:overviewprof}). The application of wikis in business might pro-
vide a new way of knowledge sharing and might connect people with similar interest that are
organisationally dispersed. However, before implementing the software straight away in a busi-
ness environment, we see a few points of attention. We will discuss them in four groups: (1)
motivational considerations, (2) authoritan considerations, (3) strategic considerations, and (4)
effectivity considerations

\subsection{Motivational concerns}

The volunteers that fill the wikis on the Internet do not gain much by doing
so. The users might add their knowledge because they expect to get other
knowledge in return.\footnote{Please note that this section is higly
speculative. Without proper research one cannot claim anything about the
motives of strangers. Pitfalls, like `projection'~\--- the ascription of the
authors own motives to the members of the wiki community~\---, are luring.} The
volunteers that edit and add knowledge, often also use the wiki for their own
reference. However, when a wiki grows large enough, we can see a `prisoner's
dilemma'\footnote{A prisoner's dilemma is a situation in which the best
rational decision for single individuals turns out to result in a suboptimal
result for the group. This best rational strategy can be a so-called `dominant
strategy', a strategy that is best whatever the other player does.  \citep[p.
76\--77]{DoumaSchreuder98}} developping: one user's contributions do not make a
significant difference to the size or quality of the wiki.  Therefore, the
benefits are available anyhow, whether the user makes an effort to add more
knowledge or not.\footnote{In smaller wikis this symptom might not appear,
because a user feels he or she makes a significant contribution to the wiki.
And when a wiki grows, more users might feel attracted to it and start to share
too. Thus, on a small wiki a user might feel the contributions are beneficial
for gaining own knowledge.} This situation resembles well-known economic
examples of prisoner's dilemmas, e.g., an inhabitant not donating voluntary
money to its country's security system, because the total outcome of the money
collection will not be significantly affected by the individual's decision
whether or not to donate, and therefor the individual's expected benefits are
the same in any case.

An elucidation of the contributor's motivation of large wikis should therefore
be sought in other area's. Users can feel good sharing knowledge that other
people might need~\--- a philantrophic motivation~\---, they might enjoy taking
credit for their well-written articles, or they might enjoy being a member of a
certain community. Some Wikipedia contributors maintain a list of articles
they've worked on, and frequently well-written articles are honoured, e.g., by
a writing contest or by announcing them on the main page of the wiki. These are
clues that might indicate the second option. Indications of the third options
are the lively communities existing on many wiki, including non-wiki-related
chats\footnote{Some wikis even have a designated area for off-topic chats, like
the \emph{Village pump} on the English Wikipedia, and \emph{De kroeg} (the pub)
on the Dutch Wikipedia.}, and real-life meetings.

In a professional environment, these motivations might change. A career holds a
high priority to people in most modern societies, and many professionals
maintain a competitive attitude towards co-workers. Knowledge is power, and
this yields no place for philantrophic attitutes. An encyclopedia as Wikipedia
contains mainly basic knowledge in expert fields, and general practicioners and
legal experts that in their free time share this basic knowledge on Wikipedia
will not loose much power. In a professional organisation, the knowledge to be
shared is more focussed and therefore more inclined to go in-depth, resulting
in a higher power-loss risk.

Professional organisations that want their knowledge base (their wiki) filled
with the knowledge that lives within the organisation have two main options.
First, they can stimulate or reinforce their employees to add knowledge to the
wiki. This can, for instance, be done by setting periodic quota that employees
have to meet, or to reward qualitative or quantitative contributions made by
employees. These measures tend to stimulate quantity over quality, so
management should well think through the implications of the measures the
enforce. The second option is the disolvement of the prisoner's dilemma as much
as possible. This can, for instance, be done by clustering a large wiki, or by
setting special fields of attention. In this way, the user becomes more aware
of certain interesting areas in the wiki, by which useful contributions from
co-workers become more visible. Also, this might improve the community-feeling
in certain parts of the wiki.

\subsection{Authoritan concerns}

Organisations are generally build around a certain authoritan model, where
certain people (usually managers) have responsibility for subparts of the
organisation, or the organisation as a whole in the case of top management, and
delegate tasks to subordinates. During the years the models of organisations
have changed, going from hierarchical pyramids via networked organisation with
high employee autonomy back to a sort of hierarchical diamond. However, the
concepts of resposibility and delegating tasks have always been in place.

As discussed in subsection \ref{characteristics}, wikis are anarchistic by
nature. In a pure wiki, there are no users with a higher authority as others,
and each individual picks its own tasks.\footnote{However, there might be peer
pressure to perform additional tasks. For instance, contributors can be
encouraged by fellow contributors to pay more attention to their spelling
errors, or to add keywords for classification to their new articles. However,
these requests have to be made in a friendly and co-operative way since there
are no methods of enforcement.} This might conflict with the labour divisions
that already have been established within an organisation. Managers are not
likely to give up their possibilities of delegating tasks, and moreover, in
discussions regard content people might use their position in the organisation
as an argument, thereby overruling `real' arguments.

\subsection{Strategic concerns}

Organisations usually like to have control of the direction in which they are
developing. For this reason, it creates a mission statement, a strategy, and
goals. \citep[p.40\--44]{Daft98} A wiki, on the contrary, develops in an
organic way. Since there generally is no authority, developments cannot be
affected in a top-down fashion. However, sometimes bottom-up developments can
steer the information expansion, e.g., by organising a `theme week' in which
contributors are stimulated to focus their attention on a (yet undervalued)
topic. For wikis to become useful in organisations, more control over the
knowledge expansion is needed.

\subsection{Effectivity concerns}

One concern of large organisation is division in departments and units. This
division is needed to keep the organisation managable, but at the same time it
creates barriers between people that might work in related areas, and the
organisation would benefit from knowledge sharing between those people. The
trend of organisations adopting `people finder' applications, that allow
employees to search for other people based on their areas of expertise, reflect
this need. Wikis might also break down these barriers. When several people of
different departments work on a specific set of pages related to their area of
work, they will get to know each other and each other's expertises. However, it
is still a question whether a wiki can break down these barriers, or that the
organisational boundaries will also create matching clusters of pages without
much connections between the clusters.

\section{Overview of wikis in an professional environment}

\label{sec:overviewprof}

Wikis are getting more and more noticed by the professional world, as we can tell from the
appearance of management articles about wikis, like \citet{Rand2004} and \citet{Sharma2004}, and the
note about wikis in Gartner’s ‘Hype cycle for emerging technologies’ \citep{Bradshaw2004}.
Several companies offer commercial services that, to some extend, resemble wikis. Social-
Text\footnote{\url{http://www.socialtext.com}} offers a software package which provides a simple wiki interface. Users can post notes, in a log style, and integrate this with their e-mail. It is aimed at unstructured, ad hoc collaboration, and can therefore be positioned somewhere between wikis and collaborative weblogs. In
general, wikis are more stuctured and persistend then SocialText. A competing company called
JobSpot\footnote{\url{http://www.jobspot.com}} provides an easy interface, with WYSIWYG editor, to access a relational database that
keeps contact information of clients and maintains a calendar. Other database applications can
be created. JobSpot focusses more on storing data, than on creating documents. Netomat\footnote{\url{http://www.netomat.net}} offers
multimedia whiteboards for real-time collaboration. Users can collaborate using many types of
multimedia, but the knowledge isn’t stored in a manner that allows retrieval at a later point. All
three commercial products have some flavour of wikis, but are not exactly it.

On the open-source side of wiki developments, a wiki engine called TWiki\footnote{\url{http://www.twiki.org}}
is geared more
towards a professional application then other wiki engines. For instance, it allows the creation
of forms so that users can easily enter data that will be grouped on wiki pages. Also, the best
known wiki engine, MediaWiki, is used by several companies, like Gartner and Novell.\footnote{According to \url{http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Sites_using_MediaWiki}.}

\section{Conclusions}

In this paper, we took a look at a new, original, and increasinly popular piece of collaboration
software: wikis. They have a six prominent characteristics, namely anarchistic, collaborative,
connected, organic, self-healing, and based on trust. Wikis provide new ways of working and
can turn out to be beneficial to professional organisations. Several commercial services that
have a wiki flavour already exist.

However, for wikis to become succesful in professional organisations and to provide an
added value in the organisation’s knowledge management, several modifications concerning the
software and its surrounding policy have to be considered. We have elaborated upon motiva-
tional, authoritan, strategic, and effectivity concerns. For a wiki to be succesfull in professional
organisations, these concerns have to be met by changes in the software or by attention and
action of the management

\bibliographystyle{natbib}


\section{Introduction \label{sec:intro}}

Some time ago Fern\'{a}ndez et al \cite
{FMT89a,FMT89b,F92,FG93,F95,F95b,F95c,F96,F96b,F97,F08} developed a method for
the accurate calculation of eigenfunctions and eigenvalues for bound states
and resonances of separable quantum--mechanical models. This
approach is based on Pad\'{e} approximants built from the Taylor expansion
of a regularized logarithmic derivative of the eigenfunction. If such
rational approximations are forced to yield an additional coefficient of the
Taylor expansion, then the physical eigenvalue is given by a convergent sequence of
roots of Hankel determinants constructed from the coefficients of that
series. One merit of this approach, called Riccati--Pad\'{e} method (RPM),
is the great convergence rate of such sequences in most cases, and that the same equation
applies to bound states and resonances\cite
{FMT89a,FMT89b,F92,FG93,F95,F95b,F95c,F96,F96b,F97,F08}. Besides, in some cases
the sequences yield upper and lower bounds to the eigenvalues\cite{FMT89b}.

The approach just mentioned was mainly applied to quantum--mechanical models
with asymptotic boundary conditions at infinity\cite
{FMT89a,FMT89b,F92,FG93,F95,F95b,F95c,F96,F96b,F97,F08}, but it was suggested
that it may be suitable for bounded problems as well\cite{F96}. In this
paper we try the RPM on the bounded anharmonic oscillator recently discussed
by Ciftci and Ateser\cite{CA07} that may be suitable for the study of
quarkonium physics.

In Sec.~\ref{sec:method} we outline the main features of the RPM. In
Sec.~\ref{sec:model} we apply the RPM to the bounded oscillator proposed by
Ciftci and Ateser\cite{CA07}. In Sec.~\ref{sec:spurious} we briefly address
the problem of spurious roots. In Sec.~\ref{sec:central} we show that the RPM
applies to the central--field version of the bounded oscillator. Finally, in
Sec.~\ref{sec:conclusions} we draw some conclusions.

\section{Method \label{sec:method}}

In this section we outline the main features of the Riccati--Pad\'{e} method
(RPM). For concreteness we consider the dimensionless Schr\"{o}dinger
equation with an even--parity potential $V(x)$%
\begin{equation}
\psi ^{\prime \prime }(x)+[E-V(x)]\psi (x)=0  \label{eq:Schrodinger}
\end{equation}
with yet unspecified boundary conditions. We assume that the Taylor
expansion
\begin{equation}
V(x)=\sum_{j=0}^{\infty }V_{j}x^{2j}  \label{eq:V_series}
\end{equation}
converges in a neighbourhood of $x=0$.

The modified logarithmic derivative $f(x)=s/x-\psi ^{\prime }(x)/\psi (x)$
satisfies the Riccati equation
\begin{equation}
f^{\prime }(x)+\frac{2s}{x}f(x)-f(x)^{2}-\frac{s(s-1)}{x^{2}}+V(x)-E=0
\label{eq:Riccati}
\end{equation}
where the fourth term disappears when $s=0$ or $s=1$ that correspond to even
or odd states $\psi (x)$, respectively. The Taylor expansion
\begin{equation}
f(x)=x\sum_{j=0}^{\infty }f_{j}x^{2j}  \label{eq:f_series}
\end{equation}
also converges in a neighbourhood of $x=0$ and the coefficients $f_{j}$
depend on the eigenvalue $E$.

The Pad\'{e} approximant
\begin{equation}
\lbrack N+d/N]=x\frac{\sum_{j=0}^{N+d}a_{j}x^{2j}}{\sum_{j=0}^{N}b_{j}x^{2j}}
\label{eq:Pade}
\end{equation}
yields exactly the first $2N+d+1$ coefficients of the series (\ref
{eq:f_series}). We look for the values of $E$ that allow the Pad\'{e}
approximant to produce the next coefficient $f_{2N+d+1}$ exactly. Such
energy values are given by the roots of the Hankel determinant $H_{D}^{d}=0$
with matrix elements $f_{d+i+j-1}$, $i,j=1,2,\ldots ,D$, where $D=N+1$ is
the matrix dimension, and $d=0,1,\ldots $ is the displacement\cite
{FMT89a,FMT89b,F92,FG93,F95,F95b,F95c,F96,F96b,F97,F08}.

Each Hankel determinant exhibits many roots but one easily identifies
convergent sequences $E_{n}^{[D]}$, $D=2,3,\ldots $ that approach the actual
eigenvalues $E_{n}$ of the Schr\"{o}dinger equation~(\ref{eq:Schrodinger}).
If one such sequence is monotonously increasing\ (decreasing), then each
element provides a lower (upper) bound to the eigenvalue. This property
of the Hankel sequences was already proved for some problems\cite{FMT89b}.

Another interesting feature of the RPM is that one does not have to take
into account the boundary conditions explicitly. The method selects the
appropriate values of $E$ according to the singularities of the potential as
we shall see below.

\section{The model \label{sec:model}}

Ciftci and Ateser\cite{CA07} studied the Schr\"odinger equation~(\ref{eq:Schrodinger})
with the potential
\begin{equation}
V(x)=\frac{a^{2}x^{2}}{\left( 1-x^{2}/R^{2}\right) ^{2}}  \label{eq:V_BO}
\end{equation}
where $a,R>0$, $-R<x<R$, and the boundary conditions $\psi (\pm R)=0$ which are obviously
determined by the poles of $V(x)$. We begin our analysis by noticing that the change of
variables $x=Lq$ leads to
\begin{equation}
\Phi ^{\prime \prime }(q)+\left[ L^{2}E-\frac{a^{2}L^{4}q^{2}}{\left(
1-L^{2}q^{2}/R^{2}\right) ^{2}}\right] \Phi (q)=0  \label{eq:SchrBOtrans}
\end{equation}
where $\Phi(q)=\psi(Lq)$. Therefore, it is clear that one can choose
either $a$ or $R$ equal to unity
without loss of generality as follows from the obvious equalities
$E(a,R)=R^{-2}E(aR^{2},1)=a E(1,aR)$. From a purely numerical point of
view it is convenient to calculate $R^{2}E(1,R)$ for small $R$ and
$E(1,R)$ for large $R$ because $\lim_{R\rightarrow
0}R^{2}E_{n}(1,R)=(n+1)^{2}\pi ^{2}/4$ and $\lim_{R\rightarrow \infty
}E_{n}(1,R)=2n+1$, where $n=0,1,\ldots $ (from now on it should be assumed
that $a=1$ unless otherwise stated).

We first show that the RPM yields the exact harmonic oscillator eigenvalues
when $R\rightarrow \infty $. For example, the determinant of smallest
dimension for $s=0$ and $d=0$ is
\begin{equation}
H_{2}^{0}=\frac{%
E^{6}R^{4}-27E^{4}R^{4}+324E^{3}R^{2}+51E^{2}R^{4}-675E^{2}-324ER^{2}-25R^{4}-81%
}{4725R^{4}}
\end{equation}
so that
\begin{equation}
\lim_{R\rightarrow \infty }H_{2}^{0}=\frac{(E^{2}-25)(E^{2}-1)^{2}}{4725}
\label{eq:H_2^0(HO)}
\end{equation}
which clearly shows that two roots of the Hankel determinant give exactly the
eigenvalues for the first two states of even parity of the harmonic oscillator.

On the other hand, present implementation of the RPM is unable to yield exact
eigenvalues for
$R<\infty $, and the convergence rate of the sequence of roots of the Hankel
determinants decreases as $R$ decreases. However, the RPM provides remarkably
accurate results for all $R$ as shown in what follows.

Table~\ref{tab:table1} shows two
sequences of roots of the Hankel determinants that converge towards the
ground--state eigenvalue of the bounded oscillator given as
$R^{2}E_{0}(1,R),$ for $R=0.1$. The first ten digits of present result
agree with those reported by Ciftci and Ateser\cite{CA07}. The velocity of
convergence of the RPM sequences is as remarkable as in previous
applications of the method to problems with asymptotic boundary conditions
at infinity\cite{FMT89a,FMT89b,F92,FG93,F95,F95b,F95c,F96,F96b,F97,F08}.

We have decided to keep 20 digits in all our results although in some cases
not all of them are exact. In this way one can clearly estimate the accuracy
of an entry by its agreement with the neighbours in the same column and row,
making it easier to appreciate the appearance of new stable digits as $D$ or
$d$ increases.

Table~\ref{tab:table2} shows the ground--state energy for some values of $R$
and the smallest determinant dimension at which all the reported digits are stable
($d=0$ in all cases).

The convergence rate of the RPM sequence decreases as the quantum number
increases. The reason is that $N$ should increase in order to take into
account the increasing oscillation of the excited states. Table~\ref
{tab:table3} shows two RPM sequences converging towards the eigenvalue $%
E_{2} $ for $R=1$. The first sixt digits of our result agree with those
reported by Ciftci and Ateser\cite{CA07}.

\section{Spurious roots \label{sec:spurious}}

As said above, the Hankel determinants exhibit many roots and one has to
select those corresponding to the chosen state and model. Equation (\ref
{eq:H_2^0(HO)}) shows that there is a double root corresponding to the
ground state $E_{0}=1$, and a single root corresponding to the next higher
even state $E_{2}=5$. Multiple roots in an exactly solvable problem become
multiple sequences converging to the eigenvalue of a nontrivial problem\cite
{FMT89a,FMT89b,F92,FG93,F95,F95b,F95c,F96,F96b,F97,F08}.
However, one easily identifies the sequence with the best convergence rate
looking for the root of $H_{D+1}^{d}$ closest to the previously chosen root
of $H_{D}^{d}$. As $D$ increases, more roots appear in the neighbourhood of
the actual eigenvalue which is an additional indication of sound convergence.

The change of variables $x\rightarrow ix$ transforms the Hamiltonian operator
with potential $V(x)=\frac{x^2}{(1-x^2/R^2)^2}$ into minus the Hamiltonian
operator with
potential $V_2(x)=\frac{x^2}{(1+x^2/R^2)^2}$. This transformation accounts for the
spurious roots $E=-1$ and $E=-5$ in equation (\ref{eq:H_2^0(HO)})
(for $R \rightarrow \infty$) as discussed earlier in a more general way\cite{F96}.
When $R<\infty$ the potential $V_2(x)$ does not support bound states (the RPM does
no longer select Dirichlet boundary conditions at $\pm R$, and $-\infty<x<\infty$).
In this case one expects resonances with complex values of $E$,
and outgoing or ingoing waves as $x\rightarrow\pm\infty$ \cite{F95}. For example,
when $R=1$ there is
a sequence of Hankel roots that converge towards $E=-0.015565600439810503080$ that
appears to be minus the real part of a resonance of $V_2(x)$. The complex part of
this resonance seems to be quite small. We do not discuss this feature of the RPM
any further because we are mainly interested in bounded oscillators.

\section{Central--field models \label{sec:central}}

Ciftci and Ateser\cite{CA07} mention a possible application of a three--dimensional
bounded oscillator to quarkonium physics. The application of the
RPM to central--field models is straightforward\cite{FMT89a,F92,F95c,F95}.
The Riccati equation for
the radial part of the Schr\"{o}dinger equation becomes
\begin{equation}
f^{\prime }(r)+\frac{2s}{r}f(r)-f(r)^{2}-\frac{s(s-1)}{r^{2}}+V(r)+\frac{%
l(l+1)}{r^{2}}-E=0  \label{eq:Ricati_CF}
\end{equation}
where $f(r)=s/r-\psi ^{\prime }(r)/\psi (r)$ and $\psi (0)=0$. In this case
$l=0,1,\ldots $ is the angular--momentum quantum number and we choose $s=l+1$
in order to remove the centrifugal term and make $f(r)$
regular at origin\cite{FMT89a,F92,F95c,F95}. When $l=0$ the results are
identical to those of the odd
states of the one--dimensional problem that satisfy the same boundary
condition at origin. Table~\ref{tab:table4} shows two Hankel sequences
converging towards $E_{1}$ (or the energy of the ground state of the
central--field model) when $R=1$. The first six digits of our result agree with
those reported by Ciftci and Ateser\cite{CA07}.

It is worth mentioning that the sequences shown in tables
\ref{tab:table1}, \ref{tab:table3},
and \ref{tab:table4} are monotonously increasing, and, therefore, they
provide lower bounds to the corresponding eigenvalues of this particular
model.

\section{Conclusions \label{sec:conclusions}}

We have shown that the RPM gives accurate eigenvalues for some one--dimensional
and central--field bounded oscillators. The approach automatically selects the physical
energies according to the singularities of the potential--energy function.
In addition to enlarging the field
of application of the RPM we have verified that the perturbation variant of
the AIM proposed by Ciftci and Ateser\cite{CA07} yields reasonably accurate
results for most physical purposes. However, the RPM appears to be much
more accurate and straightforward. It does not require factorization of the
asymptotic behaviour of
the wavefunction, and its Hankel sequences converge monotonously from below, providing
lower bounds to the eigenvalues of this particular model. In this respect the RPM is
a suitable complement to the variational methods that render upper bounds.

Besides, the AIM has not yet proved suitable for the calculation of complex
eigenvalues that the RPM yields easily and accurately\cite{F95c,F95,F96,F96b,F08}.
It is worth mentioning that the RPM is not restricted to the Schr\"odinger
equation. We have
recently applied a variant of the RPM, which we may call Pad\'e--Hankel
method, to nonlinear two--point
boundary value problems, obtaining very accurate results for the
unknown parameters in several models of physical interest\cite{AF07}.