Aspects of the quantization of non-linear electrodynamics in an uniform magnetic background

M. J. Neves

REVIEW 3 major objections 2 minor 59 references

Aspects of the quantization of non-linear electrodynamics in an uniform magnetic background

T0 review · 3 major / 2 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Any non-linear electrodynamics linearized by a uniform magnetic background can be quantized canonically and via path integrals, yielding a renormalized one-loop effective potential for a coupled scalar; for ModMax the result restricts…

desk verdict The main result is defeated by a false angular integral in Appendix A; the rest is a mix of useful scaffolding and unresolved canonical quantization issues. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.00758 v2 pith:GOFRYT5Q submitted 2026-08-01 hep-th hep-ph

M. J. Neves This is my paper · ORCID

classification hep-thhep-ph

keywords non-linearelectrodynamicscanonicalquantizationpathintegraleffectivepotentialModMaxmagneticbackgroundPauli-Jordanfunctionmicrocausality

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

The paper sets up the quantization of a general non-linear electrodynamics in a uniform, constant magnetic background by expanding the Lagrangian to second order in the propagating fluctuations, producing a linearized theory controlled by two background coefficients, $d_B$ and $d_E$. It then constructs the canonical commutation relations, the ground-state energy, and the Pauli-Jordan function, and builds the path-integral generating functional in Coulomb gauge, obtaining a Green function with three distinct poles. As the main application, it computes the one-loop effective potential for a complex scalar coupled to the linearized gauge field, renormalizes it, and writes a closed finite result. All formulas are applied to ModMax electrodynamics, where the magnetic field drops out of the effective potential and the parameter is constrained to $0<\gamma<0.34$. A sympathetic reader would care because the result makes any NLED in a magnetic background look like a standard perturbative QFT, opening the way to loop computations and phenomenological predictions such as a modified scalar vacuum structure.

What carries the argument

The machinery is the background-field expansion: a general Lagrangian $L_{nl}(F_0,G_0)$ is expanded around a uniform magnetic background up to quadratic order in the fluctuation $f^{\mu\nu}$, giving the linearized Lagrangian with two scalar coefficients $d_B$ and $d_E$ built from second derivatives of $L_{nl}$ evaluated on the background. The Green-function inversion relies on a projector algebra whose multiplication table is summarized; the poles of the inverse produce the three dispersion branches. The one-loop effective potential is carried by the angular integral over the background-dependent combination $u^2=d_B(B\times k)^2$ and $w^2=-d_E(B\cdot k)^2$, which integrates to the factor $[(1+d_B B^2)(1-d_E B^2)]^{(D-1)/2}$ that multiplies the $g^4$ term.

What would settle it

Take the two dispersion branches $\omega_2(k)$ and $\omega_3(k)$ from Eq. (14), insert them separately into the field expansion, and compute the time derivative of the Hamiltonian expectation in the ground state; if $d\langle 0|\hat{H}(t)|0\rangle/dt \neq 0$ for any direction of $\mathbf{k}$ relative to $\mathbf{B}$, the single-frequency ansatz is inconsistent. Alternatively, evaluate the Pauli-Jordan function with $\omega=\omega_3(k)$ numerically over all angles; any nonzero value for a spacelike interval $(x-x')^2<0$ would falsify microcausality for that branch.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the classical background-fluctuation split of any NLED, truncated at quadratic order in the propagating field, yields a linearized gauge theory that is quantizable by ordinary canonical and path-integral methods. In Coulomb gauge the inverse of the quadratic operator is exhibited in closed form in terms of a projector algebra, and its poles reproduce the dispersion branches. The one-loop renormalized effective potential for the coupled complex scalar is $V_{\mathrm{eff}}(\phi_c) = \frac{1}{2}\mu^2 \phi_c^2 + \frac{\lambda}{24}\phi_c^4 + \frac{5\lambda^2 \phi_c^4}{1152\pi^2}(\ln(\phi_c^2/M^2)-25/6) + \frac{g^4 \phi_c^4}{64\pi^2}\left(1 + \frac{1}{2}[(1+d_B B^2)(1-d_E B^2)]^{3/2}\right)(\ln(\phi_c^2/M^2)-25/6)$, which reduces to the Coleman-Weinberg result when the background vanishes. For ModMax, $d_B=0$ and $d_E B^2 = 2e^{\gamma}\sinh\gamma$, so the magnetic field drops out and the potential becomes $\frac{1}{2}\mu^2 \phi_c^2 + \frac{\lambda}{24}\phi_c^4 + \frac{5\lambda^2 \phi_c^4}{1152\pi^2}(\ln(\phi_c^2/M^2)-25/6) + \frac{g^4 \phi_c^4}{64\pi^2}\left[1+\frac{1}{2}(2-e^{2\gamma})^{3/2}\right](\ln(\phi_c^2/M^2)-25/6)$, with the range $0<\gamma<0.34$.

Load-bearing premise

The canonical quantization assumes that a single frequency $\omega(k)$ can be assigned to both polarizations in the plane-wave expansion, so the mode sum solves the linearized equations and diagonalizes the Hamiltonian; if the two dispersion branches are genuinely different, this assumption fails.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Every NLED with a stable uniform magnetic background acquires a standard Feynman-propagator formulation in Coulomb gauge, so loop computations can be done with the usual perturbative rules.
The vacuum (ground-state) energy of the linearized photon field depends on the angle between the wave vector and the magnetic field, and reduces to the free-field value when the coefficients satisfy $d_E=d_B$.
If a NLED has $d_B=d_E$, the magnetic background has no effect on the ground-state energy at leading order.
For ModMax, the one-loop scalar potential is independent of the magnetic field strength and its minimum moves downward as $\gamma$ grows, so stronger ModMax nonlinearity favors a smaller stable VEV.
The restriction $0<\gamma<0.34$ is necessary for the retarded Green function to be causal in the ModMax case.

Reading between the lines

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

The single-frequency plane-wave expansion used in the canonical quantization is the paper's most fragile step: if the two physical polarization modes obey different dispersion relations, the mode sum does not diagonalize the Hamiltonian, and the ground-state energy would need to be recomputed with a two-branch expansion.
The same effective-potential calculation could be repeated with an electric background by the substitutions $B\to E$, $d_B\leftrightarrow d_E$, which the Green-function section already spells out; the factor would become $[(1+d_E E^2)(1-d_B E^2)]^{3/2}$.
Because the ModMax potential depends only on the combination $e^{2\gamma}$, it provides a clean target for a future direct two-loop check or a numerical evaluation in a magnetic background.
The paper's microcausality check is done only at order $\gamma$; a non-perturbative evaluation of the Pauli-Jordan function for $\omega_3(k)$ would test whether the bound $0<\gamma<0.34$ is sufficient.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Colleague, you asked about 2608.00758. The paper is a serious attempt to quantize a generic NLED linearized around a magnetic background, but the main advertised result — the one-loop effective potential with the ModMax factor — rests on a false angular integral. I checked the appendix: for ModMax (dB=0, D=4), the angular integral left after the k0 and k integrations is (1/2)∫_0^π sinθ dθ (1 - dE B^2 cos^2θ)^{3/2} = ∫_0^1 du (1 - x u^2)^{3/2} = 1 - x/2 + O(x^2), whereas the paper claims [(1-x)]^{3/2} = 1 - 3x/2 + O(x^2). So Eq. (A15) is wrong by a factor of 3 at first order, and numerically very wrong for x=0.5. Since Eq. (A15) feeds Eq. (53) and the renormalized potential (59), the ModMax result (72) and Fig. 1 are unsupported.

The paper does have some worthwhile scaffolding. The background expansion to quadratic order, the projector algebra for the Green function inversion, and the idea of applying the Coleman-Weinberg machinery to a linearized NLED are all sensible. The canonical quantization section, however, uses a single frequency ω(k) for both polarizations even though Eq. (14) lists three dispersion branches; the resulting Hamiltonian is time-dependent, as the author notices, which means the mode expansion does not diagonalize the theory. The pole computation in Eq. (37) also inverts the correct result: the pole of k^2 - dE B^2 k0^2 = 0 is at k0 = ±|k|/sqrt(1-dE B^2), not ±|k| sqrt(1-dE B^2). The appendix explicitly punts the angular integral to Gradshteyn-Ryzhik, which is not a derivation.

There is also a microcausality issue in the ModMax section: the retarded Green function (65) propagates on a cone with speed 1/sqrt(2-e^{2γ}) > 1 for γ>0, so the claim that 0<γ<0.34 restores causality doesn't hold; the condition just keeps 2-e^{2γ} positive. The conclusion that the PJ function vanishes for spacelike intervals is likely a small-γ artifact.

Who is this for? A specialist in NLED who wants to see how one might set up a quantization program could find the first two sections useful, but the central numeric claims should not be cited. If it comes to you for review, send it to a referee with instructions to verify Appendix A; my own check says reject, but the program is worth a rewrite.

Referee Report

3 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper proposes canonical and path-integral quantizations for a general non-linear electrodynamics (NLED) linearized to quadratic order around a uniform, constant magnetic background. It derives the dispersion relations, a Coulomb-gauge Green function, the ground-state energy, and the Pauli-Jordan function, and then computes a one-loop effective potential for a complex scalar field coupled to the linearized gauge field. The results are specialized to ModMax electrodynamics, where the advertised effective potential is Eq. (72) and the paper claims a ModMax-parameter-dependent shift of the scalar VEV (Fig. 1). The central new quantitative results are the renormalized effective potentials in Eqs. (59) and (72).

Significance. If correct, the effective-potential formulas would give a concrete, model-dependent prediction for how nonlinear electrodynamics and particularly ModMax modify the vacuum stability and the scalar VEV in a magnetic background. The paper is clearly organized, makes explicit the way the background enters through the coefficients d_B and d_E, and contains a self-contained derivation of the Green function. However, the main quantitative claim is undermined by a specific error in the angular integration in Appendix A, and there are additional structural problems in the canonical quantization and in the pole analysis of the Green function. These issues affect exactly the advertised new results, so the paper in its present form cannot be considered sound.

major comments (3)

[Appendix A, Eq. (A15)] Equation (A15) is incorrect. For ModMax (d_B=0) in D=4, after the k0 and radial integrations the remaining angular integral in Eq. (A14) is proportional to ∫_0^π dθ sinθ (1 − x cos²θ)^{3/2} = 2∫_0^1 du (1 − x u²)^{3/2}, with x = d_E B². Expanding gives 2[1 − x/2 + O(x²)], whereas Eq. (A15) replaces this by [(1+d_B B²)(1−d_E B²)]^{3/2} = (1−x)^{3/2} = 1 − 3x/2 + O(x²). The first-order coefficients differ by a factor of 3; numerically, at x=0.5 the exact integral is about 0.77 after dividing by 2, while the claimed factor is 0.354. This is not a normalization subtlety. The sentence after Eq. (A15), referring to ref. [58] for the integral and product in Eq. (A14), does not provide the missing derivation. Since Eq. (A15) enters Eq. (53), then Eqs. (54), (59), (72), and Fig. 1, the central quantitative claims of the paper are unsupported.
[Section IV, Eq. (37)] The pole condition for the denominator k² − d_E B² k0² is stated incorrectly. Since k² = k0² − |k|², the equation k² − d_E B² k0² = 0 is equivalently (1 − d_E B²) k0² − |k|² = 0, whose zeros are k0 = ±|k|/√(1 − d_E B²), not ±|k|√(1 − d_E B²) as written in Eq. (37). The inconsistency is visible in the ModMax application: the text before Eq. (65) correctly uses ω_E(k) = |k|/√(2 − e^{2γ}), which is the reciprocal form. Because these poles are used to identify the propagating modes of the Green function and to set the causal iϵ prescription, this error is load-bearing for the Green-function analysis and the subsequent causality discussion.
[Section III, Eqs. (16) and (19)] The canonical quantization is built on the plane-wave expansion (16), which assigns a single frequency ω(k) to both polarizations even though Eq. (14) lists three distinct dispersion branches. The time-dependent terms e^{±2iω(k)t} in Eq. (19), which the paper itself notes, show that this expansion does not diagonalize the Hamiltonian for d_E ≠ 0 or d_B ≠ 0. Consequently the ground-state energy in Eq. (20), the commutation relations derived from Eq. (16), and the Pauli-Jordan function in Eq. (24) are not well-defined as the standard canonical quantities. The paper needs either a mode expansion with separate frequencies for each physical branch or an explicit demonstration that a single-frequency expansion is justified in the sector considered.

minor comments (2)

[Section VII, text after Eq. (69)] The cross-reference to 'the PJ function (69)' is incorrect; the Pauli-Jordan function is defined in Eqs. (23) and (24), while Eq. (69) is the later integral for the ModMax case.
[Throughout] There are numerous language and typographical issues, including 'EDNLs', 'an uniform', and 'proprieties'; a careful proofread is needed before resubmission.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No constructional circularity found; the advertised effective potential is computed from input Lagrangian derivatives, and the Appendix A defect is a correctness gap, not a circular reduction.

full rationale

The derivation chain is not circular in the sense of this review. The coefficients d_B and d_E are defined in Eq. (4) as derivatives of the NLED Lagrangian evaluated at the background, and the ModMax parameter gamma is an input of the model in Eq. (60); none of these quantities is fitted to the effective potential in Eq. (59) or Eq. (72). The background-dependent factor [(1+d_B B^2)(1-d_E B^2)]^{3/2} is carried through the one-loop functional determinant, and for ModMax it reduces algebraically, via d_E = 2 e^gamma sinh(gamma)/B^2 in Eq. (61), to (2 - e^{2 gamma})^{3/2} in Eq. (72). The paper does cite the author's earlier work [25] for the linearized Lagrangian, the dispersion relations (14), and the conserved energy (18), but those are prior derivations with stated inputs, not uniqueness theorems, and they do not assume the target effective potential; therefore the self-citations are not circular. The genuinely fragile point is Appendix A: Eq. (A15) is asserted after an angular integration, with the text 'For more details on the integral and the product in (A14), see the ref. [58]' supplying no derivation, and the claimed closed form appears incorrect already at first order in d_E B^2. That is a missing-support and correctness defect in the main quantitative claim, but it is not a circular reduction: the claimed factor is not identical to its input by construction. In the limit d_B = d_E = 0, Eq. (59) reduces to the Coleman-Weinberg potential, which anchors the calculation against an external benchmark. No step has been exhibited in which a prediction is equal to an input by definition or in which a fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on the uniformity of the background, the restriction to CP-invariant NLEDs, the small-fluctuation expansion, standard quantization rules, and an unproven dimensional and angular integral identity. The ModMax parameter gamma is an input parameter, not fitted, and no new particles, forces, or dimensions are introduced.

free parameters (1)

ModMax parameter gamma = not fitted; used as 0.06 and 0.31 in Fig. 1
The ModMax lagrangian contains gamma >= 0, and the one-loop effective potential, the ground-state energy, and the claimed bound 0 < gamma < 0.34 all depend on it. It is an input parameter of the model, not derived in this paper.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption The EM background field is uniform and constant, partial_alpha F_B mu nu = 0, allowing all expansion coefficients c1, d1, d2 to be constant and discarding the surface term in Eq. (2).
Invoked in Section II after Eq. (4); the entire quantization relies on a translation-invariant background.
domain assumption For CP-invariant NLEDs with a pure magnetic background, c2 = d3 = 0, reducing the quadratic Lagrangian to Eq. (5).
Section II; stated as true in all known NLED examples, but it restricts the class of theories covered.
domain assumption The expansion of the NLED Lagrangian to second order in propagating fluctuations is valid for small fluctuations.
Section II, Eq. (2); the linearized theory is an approximation whose regime of validity is not quantified.
domain assumption The equal-time canonical commutation relations (15) with the background-dependent momentum (11) define the quantum theory.
Section III; standard Dirac quantization is applied without discussing subtleties of the modified symplectic structure.
ad hoc to paper The dimensionally regulated integral identity integral d^D k / (k^2)^alpha = 0 and the angular integral formula leading to Eq. (A15) are correct.
Appendix A, Eqs. (A13)-(A15); the angular integral is not demonstrated and is load-bearing for the one-loop effective potential.
standard math Dimensional regularization and the renormalization condition d^4 V_eff / d phi_c^4 at phi_c = M equal to lambda define the finite effective potential.
Section VI, Eq. (57); a standard QFT renormalization scheme.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Aspects of the quantization of non-linear electrodynamics in an uniform magnetic background." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GOFRYT5Q

@misc{pith2026260800758,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Aspects of the quantization of non-linear electrodynamics in an uniform magnetic background},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GOFRYT5Q}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.00758}
}

read the original abstract

The canonical and path integral quantization for non-linear electrodynamics in the presence of an external electromagnetic (EM) field are proposed in this work. The EM background field is introduced expanding a general lagrangian of a generic non-linear electrodynamics around the background for small fluctuations of the propagating fields, where we consider up to the quadratic terms in the propagating fields. As consequence, we obtain an electrodynamics linearized by the presence of the external EM field. Thereby, we study the canonical quantization calculating the energy for the ground state of the linearized EM field in terms of an external magnetic field. The microcausality of the model also is discussed through the Pauli-Jordan function. We also define a generating functional for the linearized EM field, in which, in the Coulomb gauge, the Green function of the model is obtained, and we can construct the perturbative formalism like in standard quantum field theory (QFT). As application of the perturbation theory, the effective potential at one loop is calculated for the linearized EM field coupled to a complex scalar field. We apply the results in the case of the Modified Maxwell ED.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.00758 by the authors.

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 57 canonical work pages

[58]

Peskin and Daniel V

Michael E. Peskin and Daniel V. Schroeder,An Introduction to Quantum Field Theory, West- Aspects of the quantization of NLEDs in an uniform magnetic background28 view Press (1995)

work page 1995
[1]

M. Born, L. Infeld,Foundations of the new field theory, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. A144, 425 (1934)

work page 1934
[2]

Fermi,Sopra l’Elettrodinamica Quantistica, Rend

E. Fermi,Sopra l’Elettrodinamica Quantistica, Rend. Accad. Lincei9(1929) 881

work page 1929
[3]

P. A. M. Dirac, V. A. Fock and B. Podolsky,On quantum Electrodynamics, Physikalische Zeitschrift der Sowjetunion, Band 2, Heft 6 (1932)

work page 1932
[4]

Fermi,Quantum theory of radiation, Rev

E. Fermi,Quantum theory of radiation, Rev. Mod. Phys.4(1932) 87

work page 1932
[5]

P. A. M. Dirac,On quantum electrodynamics, Physikalische Zeitschrift der Sowietunion 2 (1933) 468

work page 1933
[6]

Euler and W

H. Euler and W. Heisenberg,Consequences of Dirac Theory of the Positron, Z. Phys.98, 714 (1936) [arXiv:physics/0605038]

arXiv 1936
[7]

Adler,Photon splitting and photon dispersion in a strong magnetic field, Ann

S.L. Adler,Photon splitting and photon dispersion in a strong magnetic field, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.)67, 599 (1971)

work page 1971

Show all 59 references

[8]

Constantini, B

V. Constantini, B. De Tollis, G. Pistoni,Nonlinear effects in quantum electrodynamics, Nuovo Cimento A2, 733 (1971)

1971
[9]

Ruffini, G

R. Ruffini, G. Vereshchagin and S-S. Xue,Electron-positron pairs in physics and astrophysics: from heavy nuclei to black holes, Phys. Rept.487, 1 (2010)

2010
[10]

G. V. Dunne,The Euler-Heisenberg effective action: 75 years on, Int. J. Mod. Phys. conf. Ser.14, 42 (2012)

2012
[11]

Battesti and C

R. Battesti and C. Rizzo,Magnetic and electric properties of quantum vaccum, Rept. Prog. in Phys.76, 016401 (2013)

2013
[12]

Sarazinet al,Refraction of light by light in vacuum, Eur

X. Sarazinet al,Refraction of light by light in vacuum, Eur. Phys. J. D70, 13 (2016)

2016
[13]

Russo and P

J. Russo and P. K. Townsend,Nonlinear Electrodynamics without birefringence, JHEP2023 39 (2023). ArXiv : 2211.10689 [hep-th]

2023 arXiv
[14]

Bamberet al,Studies of nonlinear QED in collisions of 46.6 GeV electrons with intense laser pulses, Phys

C. Bamberet al,Studies of nonlinear QED in collisions of 46.6 GeV electrons with intense laser pulses, Phys. Rev. D60, 092004 (1999)

1999
[15]

D. L. Burkeet al,Positron Production in Multiphoton Light-by-Light Scattering, Phys. Rev. Lett.79, 1626 (1997)

1997
[16]

Tommasini, A

D. Tommasini, A. Ferrando, H. Michinel and M. Seco,Precision tests of QED and non- Aspects of the quantization of NLEDs in an uniform magnetic background25 standard models by searching photon-photon scattering in vacuum with high power lasers, J. High Energy Phys.0911, 043 (2009)

2009
[17]

Ejlli, F

A. Ejlli, F. Della Valle, U. Gastaldi, G. Messineo, R. Pengo, G. Ruoso and G. Zavattini,The PVLAS experiment: A 25 year effort to measure vacuum magnetic birefringence, Phys. Rept. 871, 1 (2020)

2020
[18]

E. S. Fradkin and A.A. Tseytlin,Non-linear electrodynamics from quantized strings, Phys. Lett.163B, 12 (1985)

1985
[19]

Bergshoeff, E

E. Bergshoeff, E. Sezgin, C. N. Pope, and P.K. Townsend,The Born-Infeld action from con- formal invariance of the open superstring, Phys. Lett. B188, 70 (1987)

1987
[20]

Banerjee and D

R. Banerjee and D. Roychowdhury,Critical behavior of Born-Infeld AdS black holes in higher dimensions, Phys. Rev. D85, 104043 (2012)

2012
[21]

Gunasekaran, D

S. Gunasekaran, D. Kubiznak, and R. B. Mann,Extended phase space thermodynamics for charged and rotating black holes and Born-Infeld vacuum polarization, JHEP11(2012) 110

2012
[22]

Barrientos, A

J. Barrientos, A. Cisterna, D. Kubiznak and J. Oliva,Accelerated black holes beyond Maxwell’s electrodynamics, Phys. Lett. B834(2022) 137447

2022
[23]

Phys.437 (2022) 168726

Askar Ali and Khalid Saifullah,Charged black holes in 4D Einstein-Gauss-Bonnet gravity coupled to nonlinear electrodynamics with maximum allowable symmetries, Ann. Phys.437 (2022) 168726

2022
[24]

Ay´ on-Beato and A

E. Ay´ on-Beato and A. Garc ´ ıa,The Bardeen model as a nonlinear magnetic monopole, Phys. Lett. B493, 149 (2000)

2000
[25]

: ω1(k) =|k|, ω 2(k) =|k| q 1−d B (ˆk×B) 2 , ω3(k) =|k| s 1− dE (ˆk×B) 2 1 +d E B2 .(14) The canonical quantization approach promotesa i andπ i to the operators ˆai and ˆπi that satisfy the commutation relations : ˆai(x, t),ˆaj(x′, t) = ˆπi(x, t),ˆπj(x′, t) = 0,(15a) ˆai(x, t)...
[26]

M. J. Neves, Jorge B. de Oliveira, L. P. R. Ospedal and J. A. Helay¨ el-Neto,Dispersion Relations in Non-Linear Electrodynamics and the Kinematics of the Compton Effect in a Magnetic Background, Phys. Rev. D104, 015006 (2021)

2021
[27]

J. M. A. Paix˜ ao, L. P. R. Ospedal, M. J. Neves and J. A. Helay¨ el-Neto ,The axion-photon mixing in non-linear electrodynamic scenarios, JHEP10(2022) 160

2022
[28]

J. M. A. Paix˜ ao, L. P. R. Ospedal, M. J. Neves and J. A. Helay¨ el-Neto ,Probing the interference between non-linear, axionic and space-time-anisotropy effects in the QED vacuum, JHEP05 (2024) 029

2024
[29]

Keser, Yuli Lyanda-Geller and Oleg P

Aydin C. Keser, Yuli Lyanda-Geller and Oleg P. Sushkov,Nonlinear Quantum Electrodynamics in Dirac materials, Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 066402 (2022)

2022
[30]

M. J. Neves, Patricio Gaete, L. P. R. Ospedal and J. A. Helay¨ el-Neto,A Dirac-material- Aspects of the quantization of NLEDs in an uniform magnetic background26 inspired non-linear electrodynamic model, J. Phys. A56(2023) 415701

2023
[31]

Mavromatos and Tevong You,Light-by-Light Scattering Constraint on Born-Infeld Theory, Phys

John Ellis, Nick E. Mavromatos and Tevong You,Light-by-Light Scattering Constraint on Born-Infeld Theory, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 261802 (2017)

2017
[32]

Gaete, J

P. Gaete, J. A. Helay¨ el-Neto and L. P. R. Ospedal,Remarks on an anomalous triple gauge boson couplings, Adv. High Energy Phys.2021, 6621975 (2021)

2021
[33]

M. J. Neves, L. P. R. Ospedal, J. A. Helay¨ el-Neto and P. Gaete,Considerations on anomalous photon and Z-boson self-couplings from the Born-Infeld weak hypercharge action, Eur. Phys. J. C82, 327 (2022)

2022
[34]

Gaete and J

P. Gaete and J. Helay¨ el-Neto,Remarks on nonlinear Electrodynamics, Eur. Phys. J. C74, 3182 (2014)

2014
[35]

Gaete and J

P. Gaete and J. Helay¨ el-Neto,Finite Field-Energy and Interparticle Potential in Logarithmic Electrodynamics, Eur. Phys. J. C74, 2816 (2014)

2014
[36]

Plebanski,Lectures on nonlinear Electrodynamics, Lectures given at the Niels Bohr Institute and NORDITA, October 1968

J. Plebanski,Lectures on nonlinear Electrodynamics, Lectures given at the Niels Bohr Institute and NORDITA, October 1968

1968
[37]

Bialynicka-Birula and I

Z. Bialynicka-Birula and I. Bialynicki-Birula,Non-linear effects in Quantum Electrodynamics. Photon propagation and photon splitting in an external field, Phys. Rev. D2(1970) 2341

1970
[38]

Boillat,Nonlinear Electrodynamics: Lagrangians and equations of motion, J

G. Boillat,Nonlinear Electrodynamics: Lagrangians and equations of motion, J. Math. Phys. 11(1970) 941

1970
[39]

Boillat,Exact plane-wave solution of Born-Infeld Electrodynamics, Lett

G. Boillat,Exact plane-wave solution of Born-Infeld Electrodynamics, Lett. Nuovo Cim.4 (1972) 274

1972
[40]

Bialynicki,Nonlinear Electrodynamics: variations on a theme by Born and Infeld In Quan- tum Theory of Particles and Fields, Birthday Volume dedicated to Jan Lopuszanski Ed

I. Bialynicki,Nonlinear Electrodynamics: variations on a theme by Born and Infeld In Quan- tum Theory of Particles and Fields, Birthday Volume dedicated to Jan Lopuszanski Ed. by B. Jancewicz and J. Lukierski, World Scientific, 1983

1983
[41]

J. M. A. Paix˜ ao, L. P. R. Ospedal, M. J. Neves and J. A. Helay¨ el-Neto,Nonlinear Electro- dynamics: exploiting new physics from Maxwell equations, Revista Brasileira de Ensino de F ´ ısica48(2026) e20250458

2026
[42]

Bandos, K

I. Bandos, K. Lechner, D. Sorokin and P. T. Townsend,A non-linear duality-invariant con- formal extension of Maxwell’s equations, Phys. Rev. D102, 121703(R) (2020)

2020
[43]

Sorokin,Introductory Notes on Non-linear Electrodynamics and its Applications, Fortsch

D. Sorokin,Introductory Notes on Non-linear Electrodynamics and its Applications, Fortsch. Phys.70, 2200092 (2022)

2022
[44]

Lechner, P

K. Lechner, P. Marchetti, A. Sainaghi and D. Sorokin,Maximally symmetric nonlinear exten- Aspects of the quantization of NLEDs in an uniform magnetic background27 sion of electrodynamics and charged particles, Phys. Rev. D106, 016009 (2022)

2022
[45]

Flores-Alfonso, B

D. Flores-Alfonso, B. A. Gonz´ alez-Morales, R. Linares, M. Maceda,Black holes and gravita- tional waves sourced by non-linear duality rotation-invariant conformal electromagnetic mat- ter, Phys. Lett. B812(2021) 136011

2021
[46]

A. B. Bordo, D. Kubiznak and T. R. Perche,Taub-NUT solutions in conformal electrodynam- ics, Phys. Lett. B817(2021) 136312

2021
[47]

Amirabi and S

Z. Amirabi and S. H Mazharimousavi,Black-hole solution in nonlinear electrodynamics with the maximum allowable symmetries, Eur. Phys. J. C81(2021) 207

2021
[48]

S. I. Kruglov,Magnetic black holes with generalized ModMax model of nonlinear electrody- namics, Int. J. Mod. Phys. D31(2022) 04, 2250025

2022
[49]

Babaei-Aghbolagh, K

H. Babaei-Aghbolagh, K. B. Velni, D. M. Yekta, H. Mohammadzadeh,MarginalT ¯T-like de- formation and modified Maxwell theories in two dimensions, Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 086022

2022
[50]

Babaei-Aghbolagh, K

H. Babaei-Aghbolagh, K. B. Velni, D. M. Yekta, and H. Mohammadzadeh,Emergence of non- linear electrodynamic theories fromT ¯T-like deformations, Phys. Lett. B829(2022) 137079

2022
[51]

Conti, J

R. Conti, J. Romano and R. Tateo,Metric approach to aT ¯T-like deformation in arbitrary dimensions, JHEP09(2022) 085

2022
[52]

Ferko, L

C. Ferko, L. Smith and G. Tartaglino-Mazzucchelli,On Current-Squared Flows and ModMax Theories, SciPost Phys.13(2022) 012

2022
[53]

Horatiu Nastase,Coupling the precursor of the most general theory of electromagnetism in- variant under duality and conformal invariance with scalars, and BIon-type solutions, Phys. Rev. D105(2022) 105024

2022
[54]

V. I. Denisov, E. E. Dolgaya, V. A. Sokolov and I. P. Denisova,Conformal invariant vacuum nonlinear Electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D96(2017) 036008

2017
[55]

Townsend,ModMax meets Susy, JHEP2021(2021) 31

Igor Bandos, Kurt Lechner, Dmitri Sorokin and Paul K. Townsend,ModMax meets Susy, JHEP2021(2021) 31

2021
[56]

M. J. Neves, P. Gaete, L. P. R. Ospedal, J. A. Helay¨ el-Neto,Considerations on the modified Maxwell electrodynamics in the presence of an electric and magnetic background, Phys. Rev. D107(2023) 7, 075019

2023
[57]

M. J. Neves and Pedro D. S. Silva,Kerr rotation signature of nonlinear Maxwell electrody- namics under a uniform electromagnetic background, Eur. Phys. J. Plus141(2026) 7, 863

2026
[59]

I. S. Gradshteyn and I. M. Ryzhik,Table of integrals, series and products, Seventh edition (2007)

2007

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [58]

Peskin and Daniel V

Michael E. Peskin and Daniel V. Schroeder,An Introduction to Quantum Field Theory, West- Aspects of the quantization of NLEDs in an uniform magnetic background28 view Press (1995)

work page 1995

[2] [1]

M. Born, L. Infeld,Foundations of the new field theory, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Ser. A144, 425 (1934)

work page 1934

[3] [2]

Fermi,Sopra l’Elettrodinamica Quantistica, Rend

E. Fermi,Sopra l’Elettrodinamica Quantistica, Rend. Accad. Lincei9(1929) 881

work page 1929

[4] [3]

P. A. M. Dirac, V. A. Fock and B. Podolsky,On quantum Electrodynamics, Physikalische Zeitschrift der Sowjetunion, Band 2, Heft 6 (1932)

work page 1932

[5] [4]

Fermi,Quantum theory of radiation, Rev

E. Fermi,Quantum theory of radiation, Rev. Mod. Phys.4(1932) 87

work page 1932

[6] [5]

P. A. M. Dirac,On quantum electrodynamics, Physikalische Zeitschrift der Sowietunion 2 (1933) 468

work page 1933

[7] [6]

Euler and W

H. Euler and W. Heisenberg,Consequences of Dirac Theory of the Positron, Z. Phys.98, 714 (1936) [arXiv:physics/0605038]

arXiv 1936

[8] [7]

Adler,Photon splitting and photon dispersion in a strong magnetic field, Ann

S.L. Adler,Photon splitting and photon dispersion in a strong magnetic field, Ann. Phys. (N.Y.)67, 599 (1971)

work page 1971