MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4406853737 · doi:10.1088/1361-6382/adaf02

Spikes and spines in 3D Lorentzian simplicial quantum gravity

2025· article· en· W4406853737 on OpenAlexafffund
Johanna N. Borissova, Bianca Dittrich, Dongxue Qu, Marc Schiffer

Bibliographic record

VenueClassical and Quantum Gravity · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldPhysics and Astronomy
TopicNoncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories
Canadian institutionsPerimeter InstituteUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsPhysicsQuantum gravityQuantumSpin foamTheoretical physicsSimplicial complexGravitationMathematical physicsClassical mechanicsAstrophysicsQuantum mechanicsLoop quantum gravityPure mathematics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract Simplicial approaches to quantum gravity such as Quantum Regge Calculus and Spin Foams include configurations where bulk edges can become arbitrarily large while keeping the lengths of the boundary edges small. Such configurations pose significant challenges in Euclidean Quantum Regge Calculus, as they lead to infinities for the partition function and length expectation values. Here we investigate such configurations in three-dimensional Lorentzian Quantum Regge Calculus, and find that the partition function and length expectation values remain finite. This shows that the Lorentzian approach can avoid a key issue of the Euclidean approach. We also find that the space of configurations, for which bulk edges can become very large, is much richer than in the Euclidean case. In particular, it includes configurations with irregular light-cone structures, which lead to imaginary terms in the Regge action and branch cuts along the Lorentzian path integral contour. Hence, to meaningfully define the Lorentzian Regge path integral, one needs to clarify how such configurations should be handled.

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 score0.031
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 studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.283
Teacher spread0.272 · 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

Citations5
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueClassical and Quantum GravitySame topicNoncommutative and Quantum Gravity TheoriesFrench-language works237,207