The degrees of freedom of area Regge calculus: dynamics, non-metricity, and broken diffeomorphisms
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Discretization of general relativity is a promising route towards quantum gravity. Discrete geometries have a finite number of degrees of freedom and can mimic aspects of quantum geometry. However, selection of the correct discrete freedoms and description of their dynamics has remained a challenging problem. We explore classical area Regge calculus, an alternative to standard Regge calculus where instead of lengths, the areas of a simplicial discretization are fundamental. There are a number of surprises: though the equations of motion impose flatness we show that diffeomorphism symmetry is broken for a large class of area Regge geometries. This is due to degrees of freedom not available in the length calculus. In particular, an area discretization only imposes that the areas of glued simplicial faces agrees; their shapes need not be the same. We enumerate and characterize these non-metric, or ‘twisted’, degrees of freedom and provide tools for understanding their dynamics. The non-metric degrees of freedom also lead to fewer invariances of the area Regge action—in comparison to the length action—under local changes of the triangulation (Pachner moves). This means that invariance properties can be used to classify the dynamics of spin foam models. Our results lay a promising foundation for understanding the dynamics of the non-metric degrees of freedom in loop quantum gravity and spin foams.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".