MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2992340975 · doi:10.1139/cjp-2019-0037

On restricting to one-loop order the radiative effects in quantum gravity

2019· article· en· W2992340975 on OpenAlexaffvenue

Bibliographic record

VenueCanadian Journal of Physics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNoncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories
Canadian institutionsAlgoma UniversityWestern University
FundersUniversidade de São PauloConselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico
KeywordsRenormalizationCovariant transformationScalar field theoryScalar fieldScalar (mathematics)Quantum field theoryLagrange multiplierEffective actionAction (physics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The dimensionful nature of the coupling in the Einstein–Hilbert action in four dimensions implies that the theory is non-renormalizable; explicit calculation shows that beginning at two loop order, divergences arise that cannot be removed by renormalization without introducing new terms in the classical action. It has been shown that, by use of a Lagrange multiplier field to ensure that the classical equation of motion is satisfied in the path integral, radiative effects can be restricted to one-loop order. We show that by use of such Lagrange multiplier fields, the Einstein–Hilbert action can be quantized without the occurrence of non-renormalizable divergences. We then apply this mechanism to a model in which there is in addition to the Einstein–Hilbert action, a fully covariant action for a self-interacting scalar field coupled to the metric. It proves possible to restrict loop diagrams involving internal lines involving the metric to one-loop order; diagrams in which the scalar field propagates occur at arbitrary high order in the loop expansion. This model also can be shown to be renormalizable. Incorporating spinor and vector fields in the same way as scalar fields is feasible, and so a fully covariant Standard Model with a dynamical metric field can also be shown to be renormalizable.

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Theoretical or conceptual · Consensus signal: Theoretical or conceptual
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.045
Threshold uncertainty score0.946

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.012
GPT teacher head0.251
Teacher spread0.240 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designTheoretical or conceptual
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueCanadian Journal of PhysicsSame topicNoncommutative and Quantum Gravity TheoriesFrench-language works237,207