Supergravity
In theoretical physics, supergravity (supergravity the-
ory; SUGRA for short) is a field theory that com-
bines the principles of supersymmetry and general rel-
ativity. Together, these imply that, in supergravity,
the supersymmetry is a local symmetry (in contrast to
non-gravitational supersymmetric theories, such as the
Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model). Since the
generators of supersymmetry (SUSY) are convoluted
with the Poincaré group to form a super-Poincaré alge-
bra, it can be seen that supergravity follows naturally from
local supersymmetry.[1]
1 Gravitons
Like any field theory of gravity, a supergravity theory
contains a spin-2 field whose quantum is the graviton.
Supersymmetry requires the graviton field to have a
superpartner. This field has spin 3/2 and its quantum is
the gravitino. The number of gravitino fields is equal to
the number of supersymmetries.
2 History
2.1 Gauge supersymmetry
The first theory of local supersymmetry was proposed by 2.4 11D: the maximal SUGRA
Dick Arnowitt and Pran Nath in 1975[2] and was called
gauge supersymmetry.
2.2 Supergravity
The minimal version of four-dimensional Supergravity
was discovered in 1976 by Dan Freedman, Sergio Fer-
rara and Peter van Nieuwenhuizen,[3] and it was quickly
generalized to many different theories in various num-
bers of dimensions and involving additional (N) super-
symmetries. Supergravity theories with N>1 are usually
referred to as extended supergravity (SUEGRA). Some
supergravity theories were shown to be related to certain
higher-dimensional supergravity theories via dimensional
reduction (e.g. N=1, 11-dimensional supergravity is
7
dimensionally reduced on T to four-dimensional, un-
gauged, N=8 Supergravity). The resulting theories were
sometimes referred to as Kaluza–Klein theories as Kaluza
and Klein constructed in 1919 a 5-dimensional grav-
itational theory, that when dimensionally reduced on
circle, its 4-dimensional non-massive modes describe
electromagnetism coupled to gravity.
2.3 mSUGRA
mSUGRA means minimal SUper GRAvity. The
construction of a realistic model of particle interac-
tions within the N = 1 supergravity framework where
supersymmetry (SUSY) is broken by a super Higgs mech-
anism was carried out by Ali Chamseddine, Richard
Arnowitt and Pran Nath in 1982. In these classes of
models collectively now known as minimal supergrav-
ity Grand Unification Theories (mSUGRA GUT), gravity
mediates the breaking of SUSY through the existence of
a hidden sector. mSUGRA naturally generates the Soft
SUSY breaking terms which are a consequence of the Su-
per Higgs effect. Radiative breaking of electroweak sym-
metry through Renormalization Group Equations (RGEs)
follows as an immediate consequence. mSUGRA is one
of the most widely investigated models of particle physics
due to its predictive power—requiring only four input
parameters and a sign to determine the low energy phe-
nomenology from the scale of Grand Unification.
See also: Gravity-Mediated Supersymmetry Breaking in
the MSSM
One of these supergravities, the 11-dimensional theory,
generated considerable excitement as the first potential
candidate for the theory of everything. This excitement
was built on four pillars, two of which have now been
largely discredited:
• Werner Nahm showed[4] that 11 dimensions was the
largest number of dimensions consistent with a sin-
gle graviton, and that a theory with more dimensions
would also have particles with spins greater than 2.
These problems are avoided in 12 dimensions if two
of these dimensions are timelike, as has been often
emphasized by Itzhak Bars.
• In 1981, Ed Witten showed[5] that 11 was the small-
est number of dimensions that was big enough to
contain the gauge groups of the Standard Model,
namely SU(3) for the strong interactions and SU(2)
times U(1) for the electroweak interactions. To-
day many techniques exist to embed the standard
1
2 2 HISTORY

model gauge group in supergravity in any num- not compatible with supersymmetry, and could not
ber of dimensions. For example, in the mid and hold quarks or leptons. One suggestion was to re-
late 1980s, the obligatory gauge symmetry in type place the compact dimensions with the 7-sphere,
I and heterotic string theories was often used. In with the symmetry group SO(8), or the squashed 7-
type II string theory they could also be obtained sphere, with symmetry group SO(5) times SU(2).
by compactifying on certain Calabi–Yau manifolds.
Today one may also use D-branes to engineer gauge • Until recently, the physical neutrinos seen in exper-
symmetries. iments were believed to be massless, and appeared
to be left-handed, a phenomenon referred to as the
• In 1978, Eugène Cremmer, Bernard Julia and Joël chirality of the Standard Model. It was very difficult
Scherk (CJS) found[6] the classical action for an 11- to construct a chiral fermion from a compactification
dimensional supergravity theory. This remains to- — the compactified manifold needed to have sin-
day the only known classical 11-dimensional the- gularities, but physics near singularities did not be-
ory with local supersymmetry and no fields of spin gin to be understood until the advent of orbifold
higher than two. Other 11-dimensional theories are conformal field theories in the late 1980s.
known that are quantum-mechanically inequivalent
to the CJS theory, but classically equivalent (that is, • Supergravity models generically result in an unreal-
they reduce to the CJS theory when one imposes istically large cosmological constant in four dimen-
the classical equations of motion). For example, in sions, and that constant is difficult to remove, and so
the mid 1980s Bernard de Wit and Hermann Nico- require fine-tuning. This is still a problem today.
lai found an alternate theory in D=11 Supergravity
with Local SU(8) Invariance. This theory, while • Quantization of the theory led to quantum field the-
not manifestly Lorentz-invariant, is in many ways ory gauge anomalies rendering the theory inconsis-
superior to the CJS theory in that, for example, it tent. In the intervening years physicists have learned
dimensionally-reduces to the 4-dimensional theory how to cancel these anomalies.
without recourse to the classical equations of mo-
tion. Some of these difficulties could be avoided by moving
to a 10-dimensional theory involving superstrings. How-
• In 1980, Peter Freund and M. A. Rubin showed ever, by moving to 10 dimensions one loses the sense of
[8]
that compactification from 11 dimensions preserv- uniqueness of the 11-dimensional theory.
ing all the SUSY generators could occur in two The core breakthrough for the 10-dimensional theory,
ways, leaving only 4 or 7 macroscopic dimensions known as the first superstring revolution, was a demon-
(the other 7 or 4 being compact).[7] Unfortunately, stration by Michael B. Green, John H. Schwarz and David
the noncompact dimensions have to form an anti- Gross that there are only three supergravity models in 10
de Sitter space. Today it is understood that there dimensions which have gauge symmetries and in which
are many possible compactifications, but that the all of the gauge and gravitational anomalies cancel. These
Freund-Rubin compactifications are invariant under were theories built on the groups SO(32) and E8 × E8 ,
all of the supersymmetry transformations that pre- the direct product of two copies of E8 . Today we know
serve the action. that, using D-branes for example, gauge symmetries can
be introduced in other 10-dimensional theories as well.[9]
Thus, the first two results appeared to establish 11 di-
mensions uniquely, the third result appeared to specify
the theory, and the last result explained why the observed 2.6 The second superstring revolution
universe appears to be four-dimensional.
Many of the details of the theory were fleshed out by Peter Initial excitement about the 10-dimensional theories, and
van Nieuwenhuizen, Sergio Ferrara and Daniel Z. Freed- the string theories that provide their quantum comple-
man. tion, died by the end of the 1980s. There were too many
Calabi–Yaus to compactify on, many more than Yau had
estimated, as he admitted in December 2005 at the 23rd
2.5 The end of the SUGRA era International Solvay Conference in Physics. None quite
gave the standard model, but it seemed as though one
The initial excitement over 11-dimensional supergravity could get close with enough effort in many distinct ways.
soon waned, as various failings were discovered, and at- Plus no one understood the theory beyond the regime of
tempts to repair the model failed as well. Problems in- applicability of string perturbation theory.
cluded: There was a comparatively quiet period at the beginning
of the 1990s; however, several important tools were de-
• The compact manifolds which were known at the veloped. For example, it became apparent that the vari-
time and which contained the standard model were ous superstring theories were related by "string dualities",
 3

some of which relate weak string-coupling (i.e. perturba- symmetry has a gauge connection associated with it, the
tive) physics in one model with strong string-coupling (i.e. spin connection.
non-perturbative) in another. The following discussion will be in superspace notation,
Then it all changed, in what is known as the second su- as opposed to the component notation, which isn't man-
perstring revolution. Joseph Polchinski realized that ob- ifestly covariant under SUSY. There are actually many
scure string theory objects, called D-branes, which he had different versions of SUGRA out there which are inequiv-
discovered six years earlier, are stringy versions of the alent in the sense that their actions and constraints upon
p-branes that were known in supergravity theories. The the torsion tensor are different, but ultimately equivalent
treatment of these p-branes was not restricted by string in that we can always perform a field redefinition of the
perturbation theory; in fact, thanks to supersymmetry, p- supervierbeins and spin connection to get from one ver-
branes in supergravity were understood well beyond the sion to another.
limits in which string theory was understood. In 4D N=1 SUGRA, we have a 4|4 real differentiable su-
Armed with this new nonperturbative tool, Edward Wit- permanifold M, i.e. we have 4 real bosonic dimensions
ten and many others were able to show that all of the and 4 real fermionic dimensions. As in the nonsupersym-
perturbative string theories were descriptions of differ- metric case, we have a Spin(3,1) principal bundle over M.
ent states in a single theory which Witten named M- We have an R4|4 vector bundle T over M. The fiber of T
theory. Furthermore, he argued that M-theory’s long transforms under the local Lorentz group as follows; the
wavelength limit (i.e. when the quantum wavelength as- four real bosonic dimensions transform as a vector and
sociated to objects in the theory are much larger than the the four real fermionic dimensions transform as a Majo-
size of the 11th dimension) should be described by the rana spinor. This Majorana spinor can be reexpressed as
11-dimensional supergravity that had fallen out of favor a complex left-handed Weyl spinor and its complex con-
with the first superstring revolution 10 years earlier, ac- jugate right-handed Weyl spinor (they're not independent
companied by the 2- and 5-branes. of each other). We also have a spin connection as before.
Historically, then, supergravity has come “full circle”. It We will use the following conventions; the spatial (both
is a commonly used framework in understanding features bosonic and fermionic) indices will be indicated by M,
of string theories, M-theory and their compactifications N, ... . The bosonic spatial indices will be indicated by μ,
to lower spacetime dimensions. ν, ..., the left-handed Weyl spatial indices by α, β,..., and
the right-handed Weyl spatial indices by α̇ , β̇ , ... . The
indices for the fiber of T will follow a similar notation,
3 Relation to superstrings except that they will be hatted like this: M̂ , α̂ . See van
der Waerden notation for more details. M = (µ, α, α̇) .
The supervierbein is denoted by eM̂ N , and the spin con-
Particular 10-dimensional supergravity theories are con-
nection by ωM̂ N̂ P . The inverse supervierbein is denoted
sidered “low energy limits” of the 10-dimensional N
by EM̂ .
superstring theories; more precisely, these arise as the
massless, tree-level approximation of string theories. The supervierbein and spin connection are real in the
True effective field theories of string theories, rather sense that they satisfy the reality conditions
than truncations, are rarely available. Due to string du-
alities, the conjectured 11-dimensional M-theory is re- ∗ M̂ ∗ ∗
eM̂
N (x, θ, θ) = eN ∗ (x, θ, θ) where µ = µ
quired to have 11-dimensional supergravity as a “low en- , α∗ = α̇ , and α̇∗ = α and ω(x, θ, θ)∗ =
ergy limit”. However, this doesn't necessarily mean that ω(x, θ, θ) .
string theory/M-theory is the only possible UV comple-
tion of supergravity; supergravity research is useful inde- The covariant derivative is defined as
pendent of those relations.

N
DM̂ f = EM̂ (∂N f + ωN [f ])
4 4D N = 1 SUGRA The covariant exterior derivative as defined over super-
manifolds needs to be super graded. This means that ev-
Before we move on to SUGRA proper, let’s recapitulate ery time we interchange two fermionic indices, we pick
some important details about general relativity. We have up a +1 sign factor, instead of −1.
a 4D differentiable manifold M with a Spin(3,1) principal
bundle over it. This principal bundle represents the local The presence or absence of R symmetries is optional, but
Lorentz symmetry. In addition, we have a vector bundle if R-symmetry exists, the integrand over the full super-
T over the manifold with the fiber having four real di- space has to have an R-charge of 0 and the integrand over
mensions and transforming as a vector under Spin(3,1). chiral superspace has to have an R-charge of 2.
We have an invertible linear map from the tangent bun- A chiral superfield X is a superfield which satisfies
dle TM to T. This map is the vierbein. The local Lorentz Dα̇ˆ X = 0 . In order for this constraint to be consistent,
4 6 HIGHER-DIMENSIONAL SUGRA

{ }
we require the integrability conditions that Dα̇ˆ , Dβ̇ˆ = 5 N = 8 supergravity in 4 dimen-
ˆ
cγ̇ˆ ˆ Dγ̇ˆ for some coefficients c. sions
α̇β̇

Unlike nonSUSY GR, the torsion has to be nonzero, at N=8 Supergravity is the most symmetric quantum field
least with respect to the fermionic directions. Already, theory which involves gravity and a finite number of
even in flat superspace, Dα̂ eα̇ˆ + Dα̇ˆ eα̂ ̸= 0 . In one fields. It can be found from a dimensional reduction of
version of SUGRA (but certainly not the only one), we 11D supergravity by making the size of 7 of the dimen-
have the following constraints upon the torsion tensor: sions go to zero. It has 8 supersymmetries which is the
most any gravitational theory can have since there are 8
half-steps between spin 2 and spin −2. (A graviton has
γ̂
Tα̂β̂ = 0 the highest spin in this theory which is a spin 2 particle).
More supersymmetries would mean the particles would
have superpartners with spins higher than 2. The only the-
Tα̂µ̂β̂ = 0 ories with spins higher than 2 which are consistent involve
an infinite number of particles (such as String Theory and
Higher-Spin Theories). Stephen Hawking in his A Brief
T ˆµ̂ˆ = 0
α̇β̇ History of Time speculated that this theory could be the
Theory of Everything. However, in later years this was
T µ̂ˆ = 2iσ µ̂ ˆ abandoned in favour of String Theory. There has been
α̂β̇ α̂β̇ renewed interest in the 21st century with the possibility
that this theory may be finite.
ν̂
Tµ̂α̂ =0

ρ̂
Tµ̂ν̂ =0 6 Higher-dimensional SUGRA
Here, α is a shorthand notation to mean the index runs
over either the left or right Weyl spinors. Main article: Higher-dimensional supergravity

The superdeterminant of the supervierbein, |e| , gives us

the volume factor for M. Equivalently, we have the vol- Higher-dimensional SUGRA is the higher-dimensional,
ume 4|4-superform eµ̂=0 ∧ · · · ∧ eµ̂=3 ∧ eα̂=1 ∧ eα̂=2 ∧ supersymmetric generalization of general relativity. Su-
ˆ ˆ pergravity can be formulated in any number of dimen-
eα̇=1 ∧ eα̇=2 .
sions up to eleven. Higher-dimensional SUGRA focuses
If we complexify the superdiffeomorphisms, there is a upon supergravity in greater than four dimensions.
gauge where Eα̇µˆ = 0 , Eα̇βˆ = 0 and Eα̇β̇ˆ = δα̇β̇ . The The number of supercharges in a spinor depends on the
resulting chiral superspace has the coordinates x and Θ. dimension and the signature of spacetime. The super-
R is a scalar valued chiral superfield derivable from the charges occur in spinors. Thus the limit on the number
supervielbeins of supercharges cannot be satisfied in a spacetime of ar-
( 2 ) and spin connection. If f is any superfield,
D̄ − 8R f is always a chiral superfield. bitrary dimension. Some theoretical examples in which
this is satisfied are:
The action for a SUGRA theory with chiral superfields X,
is given by
• 12-dimensional two-time theory

∫ [ ] • 11-dimensional maximal SUGRA

3( 2 )
S= d4 xd2 Θ2E D̄ − 8R e−K(X̄,X)/3 + W (X) +c.c.
8 • 10-dimensional SUGRA theories

where K is the Kähler potential and W is the • Type IIA SUGRA: N = (1, 1)
superpotential, and E is the chiral volume factor. • IIA SUGRA from 11d SUGRA
Unlike the case for flat superspace, adding a constant to • Type IIB SUGRA: N = (2, 0)
either the Kähler or superpotential is now physical. A
constant shift to the Kähler potential changes the effec- • Type I gauged SUGRA: N = (1, 0)
tive Planck constant, while a constant shift to the super-
• 9d SUGRA theories
potential changes the effective cosmological constant. As
the effective Planck constant now depends upon the value • Maximal 9d SUGRA from 10d
of the chiral superfield X, we need to rescale the super-
vierbeins (a field redefinition) to get a constant Planck • T-duality
constant. This is called the Einstein frame. • N = 1 Gauged SUGRA
 5

The supergravity theories that have attracted the most in- 9 References
terest contain no spins higher than two. This means, in
particular, that they do not contain any fields that trans-
9.1 Historical
form as symmetric tensors of rank higher than two under
Lorentz transformations. The consistency of interacting • P. Nath and R. Arnowitt, “Generalized Super-Gauge
higher spin field theories is, however, presently a field of Symmetry as a New Framework for Unified Gauge
very active interest. Theories”, Physics Letters B 56 (1975) 177.
• D.Z. Freedman, P. van Nieuwenhuizen and S. Fer-
7 See also rara, “Progress Toward A Theory Of Supergravity”,
Physical Review D13 (1976), pp. 3214–3218.
• General relativity • E. Cremmer, B. Julia and J. Scherk, “Supergravity
• Grand Unified Theory theory in eleven dimensions”, Physics Letters B76
(1978), pp. 409–412. scanned version
• M-theory
• P. Freund and M. Rubin, “Dynamics of dimensional
• Nature timeline
reduction”, Physics Letters B97 (1980) pp 233–235.
• Quantum mechanics
• Ali H. Chamseddine, R. Arnowitt, Pran Nath, “Lo-
• String Theory cally Supersymmetric Grand Unification”, " Phys.
Rev.Lett.49:970,1982”
• Supermanifold
• Super-Poincaré algebra • Michael B. Green, John H. Schwarz, “Anomaly
Cancellation in Supersymmetric D=10 Gauge The-
• Supersymmetry ory and Superstring Theory”, Physics Letters B 149
• Supermetric (1984), pp. 117–122.

9.2 General
8 Notes
• Bernard de Wit (2002), Supergravity
[1] P. van Nieuwenhuizen, Phys. Rep. 68, 189 (1981)
• A Supersymmetry Primer (1998); updated in 2006.
[2] P. Nath and R. Arnowitt, “Generalized Super-Gauge
Symmetry as a New Framework for Unified Gauge The- • Adel Bilal, Introduction to supersymmetry (2001),
ories”, Physics Letters B 56 (1975) 177 ArXiv hep-th/0101055 (a comprehensive introduc-
[3] D.Z. Freedman, P. van Nieuwenhuizen and S. Ferrara, tion to supersymmetry).
“Progress Toward A Theory Of Supergravity”, Physical
Review D13 (1976) pp 3214–3218.
• Friedemann Brandt, Lectures on supergravity
(2002), ArXiv hep-th/0204035 (an introduction to
[4] Werner Nahm, “Supersymmetries and their representa- 4-dimensional N = 1 supergravity).
tions”. Nuclear Physics B 135 no 1 (1978) pp 149-166,
doi:10.1016/0550-3213(78)90218-3 • Wess, Julius; Bagger, Jonathan (1992). Supersym-
metry and Supergravity. Princeton University Press.
[5] Ed Witten, “Search for a realistic Kaluza-Klein the-
ory”. Nuclear Physics B 186 no 3 (1981) pp 412-428, p. 260. ISBN 0-691-02530-4.
doi:10.1016/0550-3213(81)90021-3
[6] E. Cremmer, B. Julia and J. Scherk, “Supergravity theory
in eleven dimensions”, Physics Letters B76 (1978) pp 409-
412,
[7] Peter G.O. Freund; Mark A. Rubin (1980). “Dynamics of
dimensional reduction”. Physics Letters B. 97 (2): 233–
235. Bibcode:1980PhLB...97..233F. doi:10.1016/0370-
2693(80)90590-0.
[8] “Laymans Guide to M-Theory [jnl article] - M. Duff
(1998) WW.pdf | String Theory | Elementary Particle”.
Scribd. Retrieved 2017-01-16.
[9] Blumenhagen, R.; Cvetic, M.; Langacker, P.; Shiu, G.
(2005). “Toward Realistic Intersecting D-Brane Models”.
arXiv:hep-th/0502005 [hep-th].
6 10 TEXT AND IMAGE SOURCES, CONTRIBUTORS, AND LICENSES

10 Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses

10.1 Text
• Supergravity Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supergravity?oldid=780858604 Contributors: AxelBoldt, Michael Hardy, TakuyaMu-
rata, Angela, Charles Matthews, Phys, Bevo, Robbot, Gandalf61, Giftlite, Herbee, LeYaYa, Fropuff, Moyogo, Jeremy Henty, Leonard
G., Urvabara, Arivero, Masudr, Dmr2, Srbauer, Markryherd, Physicistjedi, Axl, Wtmitchell, Japanese Searobin, Linas, Kzollman, Mpatel,
GregorB, Canderson7, Drbogdan, Marasama, Gurch, LeCire~enwiki, Chobot, Roboto de Ajvol, Hillman, Conscious, E. Menay, Hell-
bus, Wimt, Smoggyrob, QmunkE, Ilmari Karonen, Caco de vidro, SmackBot, Melchoir, FlashSheridan, Vald, Chris the speller, Colonies
Chris, QFT, BWDuncan, TheST, Kuru, Jim.belk, JarahE, Michaelbusch, Zero sharp, CapitalR, Jorbesch, Crichigno, CmdrObot, Mya-
suda, Equendil, Phatom87, Pyro95819, Mbell, Marek69, WVhybrid, West Brom 4ever, Icep, Shlomi Hillel, Yill577, David Eppstein,
N.Nahber, Andre.holzner, Mschel, EdBever, Freeboson, Wesino, WJBscribe, Fuenfundachtzig, Signalhead, Cuzkatzimhut, Jickle, Rob-
dunst, WereSpielChequers, Caltas, Wing gundam, Paolo.dL, Oxymoron83, Lightmouse, JL-Bot, EmanWilm, RS1900, ClueBot, ArdClose,
Mild Bill Hiccup, JavierReynaldo, Vivio Testarossa, Mastertek, Pqnelson, AnonyScientist, Goulu, Truthnlove, Addbot, Some jerk on the In-
ternet, Wentuq, Luckas-bot, Yobot, Bility, AnomieBOT, ArthurBot, Omnipaedista, Gsard, Hep thinker, FrescoBot, Paine Ellsworth, Pxpt,
Tom.Reding, Casimir9999, Wornsear, EmausBot, Slightsmile, Wikipelli, HiW-Bot, ZéroBot, Cogiati, Arbnos, Quantumor, Terraflorin,
Bbeehvh, ClueBot NG, Joefromrandb, Widr, Helpful Pixie Bot, Bibcode Bot, BG19bot, Altaïr, BattyBot, Jeremy112233, M0532062613,
Jamesx12345, Mamzypig99, Bitprior, Monkbot, AHusain3141, KasparBot, Profusionex, Fan.castaly, JohnStarling, HepThStringTheorist,
It’sAllinthePhrasing and Anonymous: 80

10.2 Images
• File:Calabi-Yau-alternate.png Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/5/55/Calabi-Yau-alternate.png License: CC
BY-SA 2.5 Contributors: Transferred from en.wikipedia to Commons by Lunch. Original artist: The original uploader was Lunch at English
Wikipedia
• File:Lock-green.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/65/Lock-green.svg License: CC0 Contributors: en:File:
Free-to-read_lock_75.svg Original artist: User:Trappist the monk
• File:Nuvola_apps_kalzium.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/8b/Nuvola_apps_kalzium.svg License:
LGPL Contributors: Own work Original artist: David Vignoni, SVG version by Bobarino
• File:Stylised_Lithium_Atom.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6f/Stylised_atom_with_three_Bohr_
model_orbits_and_stylised_nucleus.svg License: CC-BY-SA-3.0 Contributors: based off of Image:Stylised Lithium Atom.png by Halfdan.
Original artist: SVG by Indolences. Recoloring and ironing out some glitches done by Rainer Klute.
• File:Text_document_with_red_question_mark.svg Source: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a4/Text_document_
with_red_question_mark.svg License: Public domain Contributors: Created by bdesham with Inkscape; based upon Text-x-generic.svg
from the Tango project. Original artist: Benjamin D. Esham (bdesham)

10.3 Content license

• Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0