Complex actions and causality violations: applications to Lorentzian quantum cosmology
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract For the construction of the Lorentzian path integral for gravity one faces two main questions: firstly, what configurations to include, in particular whether to allow Lorentzian metrics that violate causality conditions. And secondly, how to evaluate a highly oscillatory path integral over unbounded domains. Relying on Picard–Lefschetz theory to address the second question for discrete Regge gravity, we will illustrate that it can also answer the first question. To this end we will define the Regge action for complexified variables and study its analytical continuation. Although there have been previously two different versions defined for the Lorentzian Regge action, we will show that the complex action is unique. More precisely, starting from the different definitions for the action one arrives at equivalent analytical extensions. The difference between the two Lorentzian versions is only realized along branch cuts which arise for a certain class of causality violating configurations. As an application we discuss the path integral describing a finite evolution step of the discretized de Sitter Universe. We will in particular consider an evolution from vanishing to finite scale factor, for which the path integral defines the no-boundary wave function.
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 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.006 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 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".