Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Local Operator Algebras of Charged States in Gauge Theory and Gravity

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A formally unitary intertwiner maps local operator algebras to physical BRST-invariant charged algebras, preserving space-like commutativity and carrying local results into gauge theory and gravity.

desk verdict A genuinely new automorphism-based approach to physical charged operators, solid in QED/Yang-Mills, but the gravity extension rests on an unproved and likely false S-charge decomposition. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.08865 v3 pith:XTOWW2VS submitted 2024-11-13 hep-th gr-qc

Pietro Antonio Grassi , Massimo Porrati This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-thgr-qc PACS 11.15.-q04.60.-m
keywords BRSTchargeintertwinerchargedoperatorslocaloperatoralgebragaugetheoryperturbativequantumgravityislandslinedressing
topics Quantum Gravity
open problems Quantum Gravity
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Local operator algebras are standard tools in quantum field theory, but local operators cannot create physical charged states in gauge theory or nonzero-energy states in perturbative quantum gravity, and the standard line-dressing destroys locality and must be repeated operator by operator. This paper proposes a single formally unitary operator $\Omega$, called an intertwiner, that maps the exact BRST charge (the nilpotent charge encoding gauge invariance) to its quadratic part and thereby defines an automorphism $O \to \Omega^\dagger O \Omega$ from a local algebra into a physical, nonlocal algebra of charged operators. Because the map is an automorphism, it preserves algebraic relations and space-like commutativity, so results developed for local operator algebras—algebraic type, affiliated operators, modular structure, entropies—transfer to physical operators. The construction is carried out for QED, non-Abelian gauge theories, and perturbative quantum gravity on flat and maximally symmetric backgrounds, with applications to counting gauge-invariant operators and to subregion (island) algebras. The authors state clearly that the construction is formal: Section 6.3 lists the existence of $\Omega$, the definition of a norm for the constructed states, and the finiteness of their energy as open problems.

What carries the argument

The central object is the intertwiner $\Omega(0)$, built from the evolution equation $\frac{d}{dt}\Omega(t)=i\Omega(t)[Q_I(t),R]_+$ with $Q_I(t)=\sum_{0<n<N} e^{-nt}Q_n$, where the exact BRST charge decomposes as $Q_B=Q_0+\sum_{0<n<N}Q_n$ and the interaction terms carry positive charge under a counting operator $S$ defined by $[Q_0,R]_+=iS$. The operator $R$, of ghost number $-1$, is constructed from the free linear BRST theory and is universal; its anticommutator with $Q_0$ produces the grading $S$ with respect to which $[S,Q_n]=nQ_n$. Nilpotency of $Q_B$ makes $\Omega(t)Q(t)\Omega^{-1}(t)$ independent of $t$, so the limit $t\to\infty$ gives $\Omega(0)$ and the identity $Q_0-\Omega(0)Q_B\Omega^{-1}(0)=0$. The paper also discusses a regularized version in which a finite-volume operator $\Omega_V$ is used and the limit in eq. (6.9) is taken on operators rather than on $\Omega$ itself.

What would settle it

Compute the infrared-regulated intertwiner $\Omega_V$ for QED and test whether the limit in (6.9) exists as an automorphism on space-like separated charged fields; if the limiting commutator fails to vanish, or if the norm $(\Omega\Psi,\Omega\Phi)_0$ is infinite for a finite-norm pair $\Psi,\Phi$, the central claim collapses, as it would if a state $\Omega^\dagger\Psi_0$ in gravity had infinite energy.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the obstruction to defining physical charged operators can be moved into a single algebraic object rather than solved operator by operator. The paper constructs, in the BRST formalism, an operator $\Omega$ satisfying $Q_0 - \Omega(0) Q_B \Omega^{-1}(0)=0$, where $Q_0$ is the quadratic, free-theory BRST charge and $Q_B$ is the exact interacting charge. Since $\Omega$ is formally unitary, conjugation $O \to \Omega^\dagger O \Omega$ is an automorphism of the operator algebra: it preserves products, commutators, anticommutators, and the algebraic type of the algebra, and it maps operators that commute at space-like separation into operators that still commute. The paper therefore claims that the entire apparatus of local operator algebras, including entanglement and modular data for subregions, extends to the physical, nonlocal algebra of charged operators in gauge theory and perturbative quantum gravity. It also claims that the same charge grading that makes the intertwiner work exists in Abelian and non-Abelian gauge theories and in perturbative gravity around flat and maximally symmetric backgrounds, and it uses the intertwiner to organize a counting of gauge-invariant operators.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the operator $\Omega$ defined by the differential equation (5.4) exists as a well-defined operator and that the regularized limit (6.9) produces a genuine automorphism; the paper itself lists this existence, alongside undefined state norms and possible infinite energies, as open problems.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the automorphism exists, all algebraic properties of the local algebra—products, star structure, algebraic type, affiliated operators—automatically hold for the physical charged algebra, with no case-by-case dressing.
  • Entanglement entropies and modular quantities computed in the local algebra of a subregion (island) transfer directly to the exact physical algebra $\Omega^\dagger A \Omega$, providing a route around the island inconsistency of [10] that does not require massive gravity.
  • The same construction applies uniformly to QED, non-Abelian gauge theories, and perturbative quantum gravity on flat and maximally symmetric backgrounds, and does not require a spontaneously broken phase.
  • The single-particle BRST cohomology partition function $P(t)$ in eq. (5.7) satisfies the duality $P(1/t)=-P(t)$, and its plethystic expansion counts multi-particle gauge-invariant operators in QED.
  • On closed Cauchy surfaces the intertwiner only works on states obeying $\int_{M^3}\star j^0\,\Psi=0$ (or $H\Psi=0$ in gravity), so physical-state results restrict to the zero-charge or zero-energy sector.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A testable extension is to build $\Omega_V$ explicitly in a toy QED model and check whether the regularized limit (6.9) exists as an automorphism even when $\Omega$ itself fails to be a unitary Fock-space operator; if it does, the algebra-level statement is more robust than the state-level statement.
  • The charge grading $S$ may serve as a practical bookkeeping device for perturbative anomaly checks, since the intertwiner's existence requires nilpotency of $Q_B$; verifying the duality $P(1/t)=-P(t)$ order by order in a chiral gauge theory would test this connection.
  • Comparing $\Omega^\dagger O\Omega$ with explicit dressings described in §6.1 on the BRST cohomology could reveal whether the automorphism reproduces known dressed operators; where they agree, the intertwiner would supply a closed formula for dressing without introducing new fields.
  • For closed Cauchy surfaces, the paper's zero-charge and zero-energy condition implies that any island calculation in a spatially closed gravity background must be restricted to the sector of vanishing Hamiltonian; if that restriction is dropped, operator independence across islands would fail.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a formal construction of physical (BRST-invariant) operators in gauge theories and perturbative quantum gravity. Instead of dressing each charged local operator by a Wilson line, the authors define an operator Ω that intertwines the exact BRST charge QB with its quadratic part Q0, Q0Ω = ΩQB, and maps a local operator algebra A to Ω†AΩ. Sections 2 and 3 construct the auxiliary operators R and the counting operator S for QED and non-Abelian gauge theories, verifying that the interacting part of QB carries positive integer S-charge. Section 4 extends the construction to perturbative gravity on Minkowski and AdS backgrounds. Section 5 derives the intertwiner from a differential equation and applies it to island algebras and to counting BRST cohomology. Section 6 discusses alternatives and lists open problems concerning unitarity of Ω, the norm of physical states, and finite-energy conditions.

Significance. The construction is an original and potentially useful alternative to case-by-case dressing: if Ω exists as an automorphism, many algebraic QFT results for local algebras would transfer to physical charged operators while preserving space-like commutativity. The QED and Yang-Mills parts are explicit, self-contained, and internally consistent, and the use of a fixed Q0 and a derived S is parameter-free. The gravity part, however, relies on an unproved and possibly false charge-grading assumption, and the paper itself acknowledges in §6.3 that Ω may not exist as a unitary operator, that the proposed norm of physical states is undefined, and that finite-energy conditions may fail. The paper is honest about these limitations, but as written the central claim for perturbative quantum gravity is conditional rather than established.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4.1, eqs. (4.20)–(4.22); §5.1, eq. (5.1)] The finite S-charge decomposition (5.1) is not established for gravity. The text states after (4.22) that the nonlinear parts of the constraints have positive charges, citing Ref. [25], but positivity and boundedness are different issues. Since γ_TT and π_TT have zero SGR charge according to (4.21), the ghost vertices c(γ_TT)^k lie in Q1 for every k, so the sum over n in (5.1) is not finite. In addition, before solving the constraints, the Hamiltonian constraint contains terms such as π_Lπ_L with S-charge −2; multiplied by the ghost c (charge +1) this gives a term of S-charge −1, which would invalidate the decomposition. The derivation of (5.3) explicitly uses a finite sum 0<n<N, and no argument is given for the infinite-sum case. Therefore eq. (5.6) is not established for perturbative quantum gravity, independently of the open problem of whether Ω exists as a unitary operator.
  2. [§4.1, eq. (4.18)] The gravity construction relies on an 'educated guess' for Φ and does not display the computation of the anticommutator [Q0,R]+ that leads to eq. (4.20). Since the counting operator SGR is defined by this commutator, and since the entire grading of QB depends on it, the reader cannot verify the key step. The derivation should be shown explicitly or the reference should contain the full computation.
  3. [§6.3, items 1–3] The paper's main claim, as stated in the abstract, is that the automorphism O → Ω†OΩ maps a local algebra into a physical algebra. However, §6.3 explicitly lists as open problems that Ω may not exist as a unitary operator, that the norm (Ψ,Φ) ≡ (Ψ,Φ)0 is defined only if Ω is a Fock-space operator, and that finite-energy conditions may fail. These are not peripheral caveats: they concern the existence of the very object on which the central claim rests. The main theorem should therefore be stated as a conditional statement with the existence of Ω as an explicit assumption, or the existence should be proved in a suitable dense domain.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Author affiliations] The affiliation list contains two entries labeled (c); the NYU affiliation should be labeled (d).
  2. [Throughout] The abstract and introduction use 'BRS' while the rest of the paper uses 'BRST'; the notation should be unified.
  3. [§4.1, eq. (4.18)] The symbol Γ^0_ij is used before the extrinsic curvature K_ij is defined; please define K_ij first and then identify Γ^0_ij with it.
  4. [§5.3, eq. (5.13)] The plethystic formula for multi-particle cohomology is stated without derivation; since this is an application rather than the main result, a brief derivation or a more precise reference to the plethystic program would improve readability.
  5. [§6.2] The modification of the construction on closed Cauchy surfaces is worked out for QED, but the analogous statement for gravity on de Sitter space is asserted without a corresponding derivation; a sketch of the gravity case would be helpful.
  6. [§3, eq. (3.21)] The notation Q^0_1, Q^1_1, Q^2_1 is easy to misread as powers; using subscripts such as Q_{(0),1}, Q_{(1),1}, Q_{(2),1} would avoid confusion.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the intertwiner is derived from Q0, QB, R, and the S-charge grading; the unproved gravity grading is a rigor gap, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular. The input data are the free/quadratic BRST charge Q0, the exact nilpotent charge QB, an operator R satisfying [Q0,R]+ = iS, and the S-charge grading QB = Q0 + sum_{0<n<N} Qn with [S,Qn] = nQn. From these, the paper defines Q(t) = Q0 + sum e^{-nt}Qn and defines Omega(t) by the first-order equation d/dt Omega = i Omega [QI(t),R]+. It then proves d/dt(Omega Q Omega^{-1}) = 0 using (5.3), and integrates to obtain the intertwining relation Q0 - Omega(0) QB Omega^{-1}(0) = 0. The final relation is a consequence of the definitions, not an input: Omega is not defined by (5.6), and the intertwining property is derived rather than assumed. The only load-bearing step that is asserted rather than fully proved is the finite nonnegative S-charge grading (5.1) for perturbative gravity in Section 4, where the constraint decomposition is supported by the external reference [25] and by explicit checks for QED, Yang-Mills, and the linearized/quadratic gravity terms. If that grading fails, the construction is not established, but that is a validity gap, not a circular reduction: the conclusion is conditional on the grading, not identical to it. No parameter is fitted to a subset of data and then renamed a prediction; the partition-function counting in Section 5.3 uses standard free BRST cohomology, and the island-algebra application transfers properties by the automorphism property, with the paper explicitly marking the transfer 'by construction.' The self-citations that occur ([29], [30], [35]) are peripheral and not load-bearing: they support the AdS smooth-mass limit, the flat-space strong-coupling scale, and a BV partition-function remark, none of which carries the intertwiner construction. Finally, Section 6.3 candidly lists the existence of Omega, the definition of a norm, and finite-energy requirements as open problems, which is inconsistent with a hidden circular assumption of the conclusion. Therefore the paper's central claim does not reduce by construction to its own inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 3 invented entities

The central construction rests on the standard BRST canonical quantization framework, on the existence of Green functions for the 3d Laplacian on the Cauchy surface, and on the unproven existence of the intertwiner Ω. The last assumption is openly acknowledged by the authors in section 6.3. No free parameters are fitted; the auxiliary operators R and S are introduced as devices with no independent physical evidence.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Canonical (anti)commutation relations for fields, ghosts and conjugate momenta hold as in eqs (2.6), (2.19), (3.18), (4.8), (4.9).
    All computations of the charges and of R rely on these standard equal-time relations; they are stated but not derived.
  • domain assumption The exact BRST charge is nilpotent, Q_B^2=0.
    Required for eq (5.3) and the construction of Ω; the paper notes this holds only in non-anomalous theories (§5.1).
  • domain assumption The BRST charge decomposes as Q_B=Q_0+Σ_{0<n<N}Q_n with [S,Q_n]=nQ_n.
    Verified for QED (§2), Yang-Mills (§3) and gravity (§4) using the TT-L decompositions; for gravity the key anticommutator computation is only summarized (eqs 4.18-4.20).
  • domain assumption The 3d Green function β solving Δβ=-δ exists on the Cauchy surface.
    Used to define Φ and R in eqs (2.21), (2.24); needs an open manifold or the modified equation (2.26) on closed manifolds with extra constraints (§6.2).
  • ad hoc to paper The operator Ω defined by eq (5.4) exists as a unitary operator on the relevant Hilbert space, or as a valid algebraic transformation in the regularized limit.
    This is the load-bearing existence assumption; section 6.3 explicitly leaves it open, so the central claim is conditional.
invented entities (3)
  • Intertwiner Ω
    purpose: Formally unitary operator satisfying Q0Ω=ΩQB; induces the algebra automorphism O→Ω†OΩ giving physical charged operators.
    Stated to be the central construction; its existence is the main open problem (section 6.3), so there is no independent falsifiable evidence.
  • Auxiliary operator R
    purpose: Ghost-number -1 operator with [Q0,R]_+=iS; enters the flow equation (5.4) defining Ω.
    Constructed explicitly in each theory but is a bookkeeping device with no independent observable content.
  • Counting operator S
    purpose: Graded counting charge under which Q_B has non-negative charge; organizes the construction and separates contributions.
    Defined as the anticommutator (iS=[Q0,R]_+); it is an algebraic bookkeeping device, not a new physical conserved charge.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Local Operator Algebras of Charged States in Gauge Theory and Gravity." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XTOWW2VS

@misc{pith2026241108865,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Local Operator Algebras of Charged States in Gauge Theory and Gravity},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XTOWW2VS}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.08865}
}
read the original abstract

Powerful techniques have been developed in quantum field theory that employ algebras of local operators, yet local operators cannot create physical charged states in gauge theory or physical nonzero-energy states in perturbative quantum gravity. A common method to obtain physical operators out of local ones is to dress the latter using appropriate Wilson lines. This procedure destroys locality, it must be done case by case for each charged operator in the algebra, and it rapidly becomes cumbersome, particularly in perturbative quantum gravity. In this paper we present an alternative approach to the definition of physical charged operators: we define an automorphism that maps an algebra of local charged operators into a (non-local) algebra of physical charged operators. The automorphism is described by a formally unitary intertwiner mapping the exact BRS operator associated to the gauge symmetry into its quadratic part. The existence of an automorphism between local operators and the physical ones, describing charged states, allows to retain many of the results derived in local operator algebras and extend them to the physical-but-nonlocal algebra of charged operators as we discuss in some simple applications of our construction. We also discuss a formal construction of physical states and possible obstructions to it.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.08865 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The dressing W of a local operator O inside an island I must “jump out” of it to reach space-like infinity, so it may cross some operators O′ living outside the island. Another problem with nonlocal operators is that many fundamental results obtained in the algebraic approach to quantum field theory use locality in an essential way. When locality is lost it becomes unclear if all or some or any of the properties usu… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Quantum Rods and Clock in a Gravitational Universe

    hep-th 2024-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    The paper shows, to leading order in perturbation theory, that matter distribution fluctuations can serve as a Goldstone vector field, allowing diffeomorphism-invariant local operators through O_Phys(x) = O(x - δϕ).

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

50 extracted references · 22 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [25]

    Covariant Decomposition and the Gravitational Cauchy Problem,

    S. Deser, “Covariant Decomposition and the Gravitational Cauchy Problem,” Ann. Inst. H. Poincare Phys. Theor. 7 (1967), 149-188

    work page 1967

  2. [1]

    Gauge invariant formulation of quantum electrodynamics,

    P. A. M. Dirac, “Gauge invariant formulation of quantum electrodynamics,” Can. J. Phys. 33 (1955), 650

    work page 1955

  3. [2]

    Renormalization of Gauge Theories,

    C. Becchi, A. Rouet and R. Stora, “Renormalization of Gauge Theories,” Annals Phys. 98 (1976), 287-321

    work page 1976

  4. [3]

    The Theory of gravitation in Hamiltonian form,

    P. A. M. Dirac, “The Theory of gravitation in Hamiltonian form,” Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 246 (1958), 333-343. 30

    work page 1958

  5. [4]

    Dynamical Structure and Definition of Energy in General Relativity,

    R. L. Arnowitt, S. Deser and C. W. Misner, “Dynamical Structure and Definition of Energy in General Relativity,” Phys. Rev. 116 (1959), 1322-1330

    work page 1959

  6. [5]

    The Dynamics of general relativity,

    R. L. Arnowitt, S. Deser and C. W. Misner, “The Dynamics of general relativity,” Gen. Rel. Grav. 40 (2008), 1997-2027 [arXiv:gr-qc/0405109 [gr-qc]]

    arXiv 2008

  7. [6]

    Diffeomorphism-invariant observables and their nonlocal algebra,

    W. Donnelly and S. B. Giddings, “Diffeomorphism-invariant observables and their nonlocal algebra,” Phys. Rev. D 93 (2016) no.2, 024030 [erratum: Phys. Rev. D 94 (2016) no.2, 029903] [arXiv:1507.07921 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2016

  8. [7]

    Gauge-invariant observables in gravity and electromag- netism: black hole backgrounds and null dressings,

    S. Giddings and S. Weinberg, “Gauge-invariant observables in gravity and electromag- netism: black hole backgrounds and null dressings,” Phys. Rev. D 102 (2020) no.2, 026010 [arXiv:1911.09115 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2020

Show all 50 references
  1. [8]

    Information in black hole radiation,

    D. N. Page, “Information in black hole radiation,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 71 (1993), 3743-3746 [arXiv:hep-th/9306083 [hep-th]]

    1993 arXiv

  2. [9]

    Replica Worm- holes and the Entropy of Hawking Radiation,

    A. Almheiri, T. Hartman, J. Maldacena, E. Shaghoulian and A. Tajdini, “Replica Worm- holes and the Entropy of Hawking Radiation,” JHEP 05 (2020), 013 [arXiv:1911.12333 [hep-th]]

    2020 arXiv

  3. [10]

    Inconsistency of islands in theories with long-range gravity,

    H. Geng, A. Karch, C. Perez-Pardavila, S. Raju, L. Randall, M. Riojas and S. Shashi, “Inconsistency of islands in theories with long-range gravity,” JHEP 01 (2022), 182 [arXiv:2107.03390 [hep-th]]

    2022 arXiv

  4. [11]

    Local Covariant Operator Formalism of Nonabelian Gauge Theo- ries and Quark Confinement Problem,

    T. Kugo and I. Ojima, “Local Covariant Operator Formalism of Nonabelian Gauge Theo- ries and Quark Confinement Problem,” Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl. 66 (1979), 1-130

    1979

  5. [12]

    On quantum field theories,

    R. Haag, “On quantum field theories,” Kong. Dan. Vid. Sel. Mat. Fys. Med.29N12 (1955), 1-37 CERN-55-08

    1955

  6. [13]

    Methods of Mathematical Physics. vol. 3: scattering theory

    M. Reed and B. Simon, “Methods of Mathematical Physics. vol. 3: scattering theory.”

  7. [14]

    Field Operators as C∞ Functions In Spacelike Directions,

    H. J. Borchers, “Field Operators as C∞ Functions In Spacelike Directions,” Il Nuovo Cimento 33 (1964) 1

    1964

  8. [15]

    Algebras, regions, and observers,

    E. Witten, “Algebras, regions, and observers,” Proc. Symp. Pure Math. 107 (2024), 247- 276 [arXiv:2303.02837 [hep-th]]

    2024 arXiv

  9. [16]

    The Physical State Space of Quantum Electrodynamics,

    D. Buchholz, “The Physical State Space of Quantum Electrodynamics,” Commun. Math. Phys. 85 (1982), 49-71 doi:10.1007/BF02029133 31

    1982 doi

  10. [17]

    Electrodynamics in curved spacetime: 3 + 1 formulation

    K. S. Thorne, D. MacDonald, “Electrodynamics in curved spacetime: 3 + 1 formulation”, Monthly Notices of the Royal Astronomical Society, Volume 198, Issue 2, February 1982, Pages 339–343,

    1982

  11. [18]

    Introduction to Hamiltonian formulation of general relativity and homogeneous cosmologies,

    R. Jha, “Introduction to Hamiltonian formulation of general relativity and homogeneous cosmologies,” SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes73 (2023), 1 doi:10.21468/SciPostPhysLectNotes.73 [arXiv:2204.03537 [gr-qc]]

    2023 arXiv

  12. [19]

    Symmetries in Constrained Hamiltonian Systems,

    L. Castellani, “Symmetries in Constrained Hamiltonian Systems,” Annals Phys. 143 (1982), 357 doi:10.1016/0003-4916(82)90031-8

    1982 doi

  13. [20]

    Ground state functional of the linearized gravitational field,

    K. Kuchar, “Ground state functional of the linearized gravitational field,” J. Math. Phys. 11 (1970), 3322-3334 doi:10.1063/1.1665133

    1970 doi

  14. [21]

    Holography from the Wheeler- DeWitt equation,

    C. Chowdhury, V. Godet, O. Papadoulaki and S. Raju, “Holography from the Wheeler- DeWitt equation,” JHEP 03 (2022), 019 doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2022)019 [arXiv:2107.14802 [hep-th]]

    2022 arXiv

  15. [22]

    A note on the canonical formalism for gravity,

    E. Witten, “A note on the canonical formalism for gravity,” Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 27 (2023) no.1, 311-380 doi:10.4310/ATMP.2023.v27.n1.a6 [arXiv:2212.08270 [hep-th]]

    2023 arXiv

  16. [23]

    Holographic quantization of gravity in a black hole background,

    I. Y. Park, “Holographic quantization of gravity in a black hole background,” J. Math. Phys. 57, no.2, 022305 (2016) [arXiv:1508.03874 [hep-th]]

    2016 arXiv

  17. [24]

    Role of conformal three geometry in the dynamics of gravitation,

    J. W. York, Jr., “Role of conformal three geometry in the dynamics of gravitation,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 28, 1082-1085 (1972)

    1972

  18. [26]

    Holography of information in de Sitter space,

    T. Chakraborty, J. Chakravarty, V. Godet, P. Paul and S. Raju, “Holography of information in de Sitter space,” JHEP 12 (2023), 120 doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2023)120 [arXiv:2303.16316 [hep-th]]

    2023 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Anomalous BRST Quantization,

    R. Marnelius, “Anomalous BRST Quantization,” Nucl. Phys. B 294, 685 (1987)

    1987

  20. [28]

    The Page curve of Hawking radia- tion from semiclassical geometry,

    A. Almheiri, R. Mahajan, J. Maldacena and Y. Zhao, “The Page curve of Hawking radia- tion from semiclassical geometry,” JHEP 03 (2020), 149 [arXiv:1908.10996 [hep-th]]

    2020 arXiv

  21. [29]

    No van Dam-Veltman-Zakharov discontinuity in AdS space,

    M. Porrati, “No van Dam-Veltman-Zakharov discontinuity in AdS space,” Phys. Lett. B 498 (2001), 92-96 [arXiv:hep-th/0011152 [hep-th]]

    2001 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Strong interactions and stability in the DGP model,

    M. A. Luty, M. Porrati and R. Rattazzi, “Strong interactions and stability in the DGP model,” JHEP 09 (2003), 029 [arXiv:hep-th/0303116 [hep-th]]. 32

    2003 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Forbidden Mass Range for Spin-2 Field Theory in De Sitter Space-time,

    A. Higuchi, “Forbidden Mass Range for Spin-2 Field Theory in De Sitter Space-time,” Nucl. Phys. B 282 (1987), 397-436

    1987

  24. [32]

    Entanglement Wedge Reconstruction and the Information Paradox,

    G. Penington, “Entanglement Wedge Reconstruction and the Information Paradox,” JHEP 09 (2020), 002 [arXiv:1905.08255 [hep-th]]

    2020 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Gauge Algebra and Quantization,

    I. A. Batalin and G. A. Vilkovisky, “Gauge Algebra and Quantization,” Phys. Lett. B 102 (1981), 27-31

    1981

  26. [34]

    The quantum theory of fields. Vol. 2: Modern applications,

    S. Weinberg, “The quantum theory of fields. Vol. 2: Modern applications,” Cambridge University Press, 2013, ISBN 978-1-139-63247-8, 978-0-521-67054-8, 978-0-521-55002-4

    2013

  27. [35]

    BV Formalism and Partition Functions,

    P. A. Grassi and O. Hulik, “BV Formalism and Partition Functions,” [arXiv:2410.18285 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  28. [36]

    Yang-Mills algebra,

    A. Connes and M. Dubois-Violette, “Yang-Mills algebra,” Lett. Math. Phys. 61 (2002), 149-158 doi:10.1023/A:1020733628744 [arXiv:math/0206205 [math.QA]]

    2002 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Yang-Mills and some related algebras,

    A. Connes and M. Dubois-Violette, “Yang-Mills and some related algebras,” Prog. Math. 251 (2007), 65-78 [arXiv:math-ph/0411062 [math-ph]]

    2007 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Counting BPS Operators in Gauge Theories: Quivers, Syzygies and Plethystics,

    S. Benvenuti, B. Feng, A. Hanany and Y. H. He, “Counting BPS Operators in Gauge Theories: Quivers, Syzygies and Plethystics,” JHEP 11 (2007), 050 doi:10.1088/1126- 6708/2007/11/050 [arXiv:hep-th/0608050 [hep-th]]

    2007 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Counting gauge invariants: The Plethystic program,

    B. Feng, A. Hanany and Y. H. He, “Counting gauge invariants: The Plethystic program,” JHEP 03 (2007), 090 doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2007/03/090 [arXiv:hep-th/0701063 [hep-th]]

    2007 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Resummation of Massive Gravity,

    C. de Rham, G. Gabadadze and A. J. Tolley, “Resummation of Massive Gravity,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 106 (2011), 231101 [arXiv:1011.1232 [hep-th]]

    2011 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Construction of a Complete Set of Independent Observables in the General Theory of Relativity,

    A. Komar, “Construction of a Complete Set of Independent Observables in the General Theory of Relativity,” Phys. Rev. 111, no.4, 1182 (1958)

    1958

  34. [42]

    Effective field theory for massive gravi- tons and gravity in theory space,

    N. Arkani-Hamed, H. Georgi and M. D. Schwartz, “Effective field theory for massive gravi- tons and gravity in theory space,” Annals Phys. 305, 96-118 (2003) [arXiv:hep-th/0210184 [hep-th]]

    2003 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Graviton Mass and Entanglement Islands in Low Spacetime Dimensions,

    H. Geng, “Graviton Mass and Entanglement Islands in Low Spacetime Dimensions,” [arXiv:2312.13336 [hep-th]]; “Quantum Rods and Clock in a Gravitational Universe,” [arXiv:2412.03636 [hep-th]]

  36. [44]

    Geometric Relational Framework for General-Relativistic Gauge Field Theories,

    J. T. Fran¸ cois and L. Ravera, “Geometric Relational Framework for General-Relativistic Gauge Field Theories,” Fortschr. Phys. 2400149 (2024) [arXiv:2407.04043 [gr-qc]]. 33

    2024 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Finite Temperature Behavior of the Lattice Abelian Higgs Model,

    T. Banks and E. Rabinovici, “Finite Temperature Behavior of the Lattice Abelian Higgs Model,” Nucl. Phys. B 160, 349-379 (1979)

    1979

  38. [46]

    Implications of Dynamical Symmetry Breaking,

    S. Weinberg, “Implications of Dynamical Symmetry Breaking,” Phys. Rev. D 13, 974-996 (1976)

    1976

  39. [47]

    The Timelike Tube Theorem in Curved Spacetime,

    A. Strohmaier and E. Witten, “The Timelike Tube Theorem in Curved Spacetime,” Com- mun. Math. Phys. 405 (2024) no.7, 153 [arXiv:2303.16380 [hep-th]]

    2024 arXiv

  40. [48]

    An algebra of observables for de Sitter space,

    V. Chandrasekaran, R. Longo, G. Penington and E. Witten, “An algebra of observables for de Sitter space,” JHEP 02, 082 (2023) doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2023)082 [arXiv:2206.10780 [hep-th]]

    2023 arXiv

  41. [49]

    A clock is just a way to tell the time: gravitational algebras in cosmological spacetimes,

    C. H. Chen and G. Penington, “A clock is just a way to tell the time: gravitational algebras in cosmological spacetimes,” [arXiv:2406.02116 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  42. [50]

    Holography and localiza- tion of information in quantum gravity,

    E. Bahiru, A. Belin, K. Papadodimas, G. Sarosi and N. Vardian, “Holography and localiza- tion of information in quantum gravity,” JHEP 05 (2024), 261 [arXiv:2301.08753 [hep-th]]. 34

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.