MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3205546138 · doi:10.1088/1361-6382/ac4b04

Complex, Lorentzian, and Euclidean simplicial quantum gravity: numerical methods and physical prospects

2022· article· en· W3205546138 on OpenAlexaff
Ding Jia

Bibliographic record

VenueClassical and Quantum Gravity · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsSimplicial complexEuclidean quantum gravityPhysicsQuantum gravityHolomorphic functionSpin foamSimplicial manifoldGravitationTheoretical physicsClassical mechanicsMathematical analysisQuantumPure mathematicsLoop quantum gravityMathematicsQuantum mechanics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Evaluating gravitational path integrals in the Lorentzian has been a long-standing challenge due to the numerical sign problem. We show that this challenge can be overcome in simplicial quantum gravity. By deforming the integration contour into the complex, the sign fluctuations can be suppressed, for instance using the holomorphic gradient flow algorithm. Working through simple models, we show that this algorithm enables efficient Monte Carlo simulations for Lorentzian simplicial quantum gravity. In order to allow complex deformations of the integration contour, we provide a manifestly holomorphic formula for Lorentzian simplicial gravity. This leads to a complex version of simplicial gravity that generalizes the Euclidean and Lorentzian cases. Outside the context of numerical computation, complex simplicial gravity is also relevant to studies of singularity resolving processes with complex semi-classical solutions. Along the way, we prove a complex version of the Gauss–Bonnet theorem, which may be of independent interest.

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 categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.035
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0010.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
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 head0.022
GPT teacher head0.313
Teacher spread0.292 · 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.

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

Citations22
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClassical and Quantum GravitySame topicBlack Holes and Theoretical PhysicsFrench-language works237,207