The DOI matches its Crossref record; 40 of the 40 references it cites were found in a registry or an index; 1 of the 28 sources its claims cite were checked for support.
Spin-foams for all loop quantum gravity
Open accessAbstract
The simplicial framework of Engle–Pereira–Rovelli–Livine spin-foam models is generalized to match the diffeomorphism invariant framework of loop quantum gravity. The simplicial spin-foams are generalized to arbitrary linear 2-cell spin-foams. The resulting framework admits all the spin-network states of loop quantum gravity, not only those defined by triangulations (or cubulations). In particular, the notion of embedded spin-foam we use allows us to consider knotting or linking spin-foam histories. Also the main tools, the vertex structure and the vertex amplitude, are naturally generalized to an arbitrary valency case. The correspondence between all the SU (2) intertwiners and the SU (2)× SU (2) EPRL intertwiners is proved to be 1–1 in the case of the Barbero–Immirzi parameter |γ| ⩾ 1.
Overview
AI snapshot
Written from the paper’s full text.
TL;DR
The paper generalizes EPRL spin-foams from simplicial complexes to arbitrary linear 2-cell complexes and embedded spin-foams, so that all LQG spin-network states—including knotted/linked graphs and arbitrary valency—can have spin-foam histories. It also proves a 1-1 correspondence between SU(2) intertwiners and SU(2) × SU(2) EPRL intertwiners for |γ| ≥ 1, except when the EPRL co-domain is trivial and the domain is non-trivial.
Key findings
- The simplicial EPRL spin-foam framework is generalized to arbitrary linear 2-cell spin-foams and embedded spin-foams, admitting all spin-network states of loop quantum gravity, not only those defined by triangulations or cubulations; knotting or linking spin-foam histories are allowed.
- The vertex structure and vertex amplitude are generalized to arbitrary valency; a vertex is encoded by the spin-network induced on the boundary of its neighbourhood.
- The correspondence between all SU(2) intertwiners and SU(2) × SU(2) EPRL intertwiners is proved to be 1-1 for |γ| ≥ 1, unless the co-domain of the EPRL map is trivial and the domain is non-trivial.
- An n-valent Barrett-Crane intertwiner is defined equivalently to earlier definitions, and the EPRL intertwiner is generalized; in the limit γ → ±∞ the EPRL intertwiner becomes the BC intertwiner.
Methods
- Theoretical/mathematical construction within loop quantum gravity and spin-foam models; no empirical data or sample are used.
- Foams are defined as oriented linear 2-cell complexes with boundary; faces are coloured by irreducible representations and internal edges by intertwiners, inducing a boundary spin-network; vertex traces, spin-foam traces, and embedded spin-foams are then defined.
- The injectivity proof for the map I ↦ ι_EPRL(I) uses the spin composition map and mathematical induction.
Limitations
- Stated: “We do not study the FK intertwiners in the γ > 1 in this paper.”
- Stated: the discussion notes that the limits γ → 0, ±1, ±∞ are mathematically well defined but the model “seems to be losing its key properties”; for example, γ → ±∞ gives the BC intertwiner with 0 or 1 dimension per vertex, γ → ±1 gives an SU(2) BF amplitude, and γ → 0 does not resemble a topological theory.
- Evident from the text: no numerical, observational, or semiclassical/convergence validation of the generalized amplitudes is presented; the work is a formal mathematical construction.
Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
20 No basis given · 16 Not checked yet · 13 Own interpretation · 1 Couldn’t confirm · accuracy not yet measured
The cited sources that could be checked couldn’t confirm or dispute this claim.
In the paper
“One can just rewrite the EPRL paper [6] replacing the Holst action by that of Palatini and repeating each argument and every calculation. The result will be the BC intertwiners.”
What the sources say
- Could not verifycites [6] sourceExperimental — accuracy not yet measured
The Conclusion (p. 19) describes a sum-over-surfaces formulation of quantum gravity, and Appendix B (pp. 21–23) discusses an Ooguri–Crane–Yetter model. Neither passage addresses replacing the Holst action with the Palatini action in an EPRL calculation or obtaining BC intertwiners. Searches for those terms found no passage in our copy that makes the claimed connection. (LLM, conf=0.78)
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Could not verify
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The correspondence between all the SU(2) intertwiners and the SU(2) × SU(2) EPRL intertwiners is proved to be 1-1 in the case of the Barbero-Immirzi parameter | γ | ≥ 1, unless the co-domain of the EPRL map is trivial and the domain is non-trivial.”
- Also stated in: § C. The goal of the paper · p. 2 · boosted
“We show that the correspondence is 1-1 in the case of the Barbero-Immirzi parameter γ ≥ 1, unless the co-domain of the EPRL map is trivial and the domain is non-trivial.”
boostedstates an associationSingle case- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- Also stated in: § C. The goal of the paper · p. 2 · boosted
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The simplicial framework of Engle-Pereira-Rovelli-Livine spin-foam models is generalized to match the diffeomorphism invariant framework of loop quantum gravity.”
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The simplicial spin-foams are generalized to arbitrary linear 2-cell spin-foams.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“3. The injectivity of I ↦→ ι EPRL ( I ) in the case γ ≥ 1”
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“but, quite surprisingly, the EPRL theory does not resemble a topological theory at all.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The spin-network s induced on the boundary Σ ×{ 0 } is obtained from s in by flipping the orientations of the edges and taking the hermitian adjoint of its intertwiners, hence,”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“However the EPRL intertwiner has a limit in that case:”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“We have also proved the 1-1 correspondence between the EPRL SU(2) × SU(2) intertwiners and all the SU(2) intertwiners in the case of the Immirzi-Barbero parameter | γ | ≥ 1 and non-trivial co-domain of EPRL map.”
boostedstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
In the paper
“The BC intertwiner space has 0 or 1 dimension per vertex and has been proven to insufficiently accommodate all the gravitational degrees of freedom.”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [9] Perez A, 2003, Class. Quantum. Grav. source
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
- It may state two separate claims as one. 8
- Probably not a substantial claim. 6
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“Also the main tools as the vertex structure and the vertex amplitude are naturally generalized to arbitrary valency case.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The conjugate spin-network itself is the spin-network induced on the boundary of the spin-foam obtained from ( κ, ρ, ι ) by removing the neighbourhood of the vertex v .”
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“That limit exists at each level: the Holst action converges to the Palatini action, j + = j -, k = 0, the EPRL intertwiner converges to the BC intertwiner, all the EPRL derivation converges to a finite limit.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The limit that can not be extended to the entire derivation although the Holst action does converge perfectly well to the self dual action is”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In particular the notion of embedded spin-foam we use allows to consider knotting or linking spin-foam histories.”
- Also stated in: § C. The goal of the paper · p. 2 · plain
“The notion of embedded spin-foam we use, allows to consider knotting or linking spin-foam histories.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
- Also stated in: § C. The goal of the paper · p. 2 · plain
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“This is consistent with the fact that the classical Holst action becomes the Palatini action in the limit γ →±∞ .”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The set of all the possible vertices is given by the set of the spin-networks and and set of all spin-foams can be obtained by gluing the vertices and the 'static' spin-foams.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The spin-foams are histories of the embedded spin-network functions defined within the framework of the diffeomorphism invariant quantization of the theory of connections.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“In the literature, the 3 j , 6 j , 10 j and 15 j symbols are used extensively in the context of the BC and EPRL intertwiners and amplitudes. From our point of view, they are just related to a specific choice of the basis in the space of intertwiners valid in the case of the simplicial spin-foams and spin-networks.”
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: fails — The paper may give no reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it. The paper may give no reason why it holds.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The generalized spinfoam framework is compatible with the original LQG framework and accommodates all the spinnetwork states and the diffeomorphism covariance.”
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
- The authors state this as an assumption: The spin-foams are histories of the embedded spin-network functions defined within the framework of the diffeomorphism invariant quantization of the theory of connections.
The paper states this without a source or data behind it here, so there is nothing to check it against. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The limit in which the Holst action is no longer equivalent to the Palatini action and (upon the rescaling by γ ) defines a topological theory is”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: unclear — It is unclear whether the paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: unclear — It is unclear why the paper says it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
None of the sources cited for this claim have been checked yet.
In the paper
“That definition is merely equivalent to that of [10-12], however we spell it out in our notation for the clarity and the sake of precision.”
What the sources say
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: fails — The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim. The paper’s conclusions may not depend on it.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“The simplicial SFMs do not allow such states as well as they do not allow graphs with vertices more than 4-valent.”
plain- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
A conclusion the paper draws from its own results — it cites no other source for it, so there is none to check. The quote shows it is in the paper.
In the paper
“where I is an arbitrary SU(2) intertwiner, and the amplitude turns into the SU(2) BF amplitude. So the limit theory is the SU(2) BF theory.”
plainstates a cause- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
It may state two separate claims as one.
In the paper
“The converse construction of a vertex from any given embedded spin-network was described by Reisenberger [13].”
What the sources say
- Not checked yetcites [13] source
plainstates an association- Asserted: passes — The authors put it forward as true.
- Checkable: passes — It can be checked against evidence.
- Load-bearing: passes — The paper’s conclusions depend on it.
- Based: passes — The paper gives a reason why it holds.
Probably not a substantial claim.
The paper relies on this without support.
Loop quantum gravity is a quantum theory of gravitational field with all its local degrees of freedom and is not a discretized theory.
“Loop quantum gravity is a quantum theory of gravitational field with all its local degrees of freedom. This is not a discretized theory.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The kinematical observables labelled by curves and 2-surfaces form a complete set for the continuum theory.
“The (kinematical) observables labelled by curves and 2-surfaces form a complete set for the continuum theory.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Loop quantum gravity is a diffeomorphism invariant theory of fields on manifolds.
“Secondly, LQG is a diffeomorphism invariant theory of fields on manifolds.”
The paper relies on this without support.
The diffeomorphisms play a crucial role in loop quantum gravity and are responsible for the diversity of embedded graphs and spin-networks labelling the quantum states.
“The diffeomorphisms play a crucial role in LQG. They are responsible for the diversity of embedded graphs and spin-networks labelling the quantum states.”
The paper relies on this without support.
In the LQG canonical framework, there is no justified way to restrict the graphs to those dual to triangulations of the underlying 3-manifold.
“In the LQG canonical framework, whose quantum states are labelled by embedded spin-networks, there is no justified way to restrict the graphs to those dual to triangulations of the underlying 3-manifold.”
The paper relies on this without support.
Loop quantum gravity admits knotted and linked graphs.
“In particular, LQG admits knotted and linked graphs.”
The authors state this as an assumption.
The spin-foams are histories of the embedded spin-network functions defined within the framework of the diffeomorphism invariant quantization of the theory of connections.
“We combine it in below with the assumption that the spin-foams are histories of the embedded spin-network functions defined within the framework of the diffeomorphism invariant quantization of the theory of connections (see Section II).”
The paper relies on this without support.
The self dual action defines the same Einstein's (Euclidean) gravity.
“That is very strange, taking into account that the self dual action still defines the same Einstein's (Euclidean) gravity.”
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
In the citing paper
“as in BF theory, the EPRL amplitudes can be generalized to arbitrary complexes with boundaries given by graphs with nodes of arbitrary valence. The extension of the model to arbitrary complexes was first studied in [237, 236] and has been revisited in [140].”
From The Spin-Foam Approach to Quantum Gravity (2013) · cites this paper as [236]
Citations
Cites
Rovelli, C. (2004) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511755804 · Cited by 2,240
Modern Canonical Quantum General Relativity
Thiemann, T. (2007) · doi:10.1017/cbo9780511755682 · Cited by 2,001
Background independent quantum gravity: a status report
Ashtekar, A., & Lewandowski, J. (2004) · Classical and Quantum Gravity · doi:10.1088/0264-9381/21/15/r01 · Cited by 1,951
Self-citationDiscreteness of area and volume in quantum gravity
Rovelli, C., & Smolin, L. (1995) · Nuclear Physics B · doi:10.1016/0550-3213(95)00150-q · Cited by 1,365 · cited 1×
“The discreteness of LQG is a property of the quantum representation [18].”
BackgroundQuantum geometry and black hole entropy
Ashtekar, A., Baez, J., Corichi, A., & Krasnov, K. (1998) · Physical Review Letters · doi:10.1103/physrevlett.80.904 · Cited by 1,105
Introduction to Piecewise-Linear Topology
Rourke, C., & Sanderson, B. J. (1972) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-81735-9 · Cited by 1,093
Quantum theory of geometry: I. Area operators
Ashtekar, A., & Lewandowski, J. (1997) · Classical and Quantum Gravity · doi:10.1088/0264-9381/14/1a/006 · Cited by 852
Self-citationBlack-hole entropy in loop quantum gravity
Meissner, K. A. (2004) · Classical and Quantum Gravity · doi:10.1088/0264-9381/21/22/015 · Cited by 720
LQG vertex with finite Immirzi parameter
Engle, J., Livine, E., Pereira, R., & Rovelli, C. (2008) · Nuclear Physics B · doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2008.02.018 · Cited by 584
Quantum theory of geometry II: Volume operators
Ashtekar, A., & Lewandowski, J. (1997) · Advances in Theoretical and Mathematical Physics · doi:10.4310/atmp.1997.v1.n2.a8 · Cited by 580
Self-citation
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- Barbero F, 1996, Phys. Rev., 51, 55075510
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Items 101–179 of 179
Asymptotics of $$\mathrm {SL}(2,{{\mathbb {C}}})$$ coherent invariant tensors
Donà, P., Fanizza, M., Martin-Dussaud, P., & Simone Speziale, D. (2021) · Communications in Mathematical Physics · doi:10.1007/s00220-021-04154-3 · Cited by 13
Carlo Rovelli, C. (2011) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1108.0832 · Cited by 19
Radiative corrections to the Lorentzian Engle-Pereira-Rovelli-Livine spin foam propagator
Donà, P., Frisoni, P., & Wilson-Ewing, E. (2022) · Physical review. D/Physical review. D. · doi:10.1103/physrevd.106.066022 · Cited by 15
Loop Quantum Cosmology: Relation Between Theory and Observations
Agulló, I., Wang, A., & Wilson-Ewing, E. (2023) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-19-3079-9_103-1 · Cited by 12
Hopf link volume simplicity constraints in spin foam models
Assanioussi, M., & Bahr, B. (2020) · Classical and Quantum Gravity · doi:10.1088/1361-6382/abb117 · Cited by 12
Numerical evaluation of spin foam amplitudes beyond simplices
Allen, C., Girelli, F., & Steinhaus, S. (2022) · Physical review. D/Physical review. D. · doi:10.1103/physrevd.105.066003 · Cited by 15
Engle, J., & Simone Speziale, D. (2023) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-19-3079-9_99-1 · Cited by 18
One vertex spin-foams with the dipole cosmology boundary
Kisielowski, M., Lewandowski, J., & Puchta, J. (2012) · Classical and Quantum Gravity · doi:10.1088/0264-9381/30/2/025007 · Cited by 12
Self-citationConsistency check on the fundamental and alternative flux operators in loop quantum gravity *
Yang, J., & Ma, Y. (2019) · Chinese Physics C · doi:10.1088/1674-1137/43/10/103106 · Cited by 12
Carlo Rovelli, C. (2012) · Lecture notes in physics · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-33036-0_3 · Cited by 10
The accidental flatness constraint does not mean a wrong classical limit
Engle, J., & Carlo Rovelli, C. (2022) · Classical and Quantum Gravity · doi:10.1088/1361-6382/ac655e · Cited by 10
Towards a Loop Quantum Gravity and Yang–Mills unification
Alexander, S., Marcianò, A., & Tacchi, R. A. (2012) · Physics Letters B · doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2012.07.034 · Cited by 14
Deformation of the Engle-Livine-Pereira-Rovelli spin foam model by a cosmological constant
Bähr, B., & Rabuffo, G. (2018) · Physical review. D/Physical review. D. · doi:10.1103/physrevd.97.086010 · Cited by 11
Han, M., Kamiński, W., & Liu, H. (2022) · Physical review. D/Physical review. D. · doi:10.1103/physrevd.105.084034 · Cited by 9
Self-citationCoupled intertwiner dynamics: A toy model for coupling matter to spin foam models
Steinhaus, S. (2015) · Physical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D. Particles and fields · doi:10.1103/physrevd.92.064007 · Cited by 10
The new spin foam models and quantum gravityPreprint
Pérez, A. (2012) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1205.0911 · Cited by 9
Philosophical Foundations of Loop Quantum Gravity
Carlo Rovelli, C., & Vidotto, F. (2023) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-19-3079-9_109-1 · Cited by 18
Renormalization in Combinatorially Non-Local Field Theories: The Hopf Algebra of 2-Graphs
Thürigen, J. (2021) · Mathematical Physics Analysis and Geometry · doi:10.1007/s11040-021-09390-6 · Cited by 10
Poincaré–Plebański formulation of GR and dual simplicity constraints
Belov, V. (2018) · Classical and Quantum Gravity · doi:10.1088/1361-6382/aae9b7 · Cited by 7
Twisted geometry coherent states in all dimensional loop quantum gravity. II. Ehrenfest property
Long, G. (2022) · Physical review. D/Physical review. D. · doi:10.1103/physrevd.106.066021 · Cited by 7
Invited review: The new spin foam models and quantum gravity
Pérez, A. (2012) · Papers in Physics · doi:10.4279/pip.040004 · Cited by 18
Toward matter dynamics in spin foam quantum gravity
Ali, M., & Steinhaus, S. (2022) · Physical review. D/Physical review. D. · doi:10.1103/physrevd.106.106016 · Cited by 12
Corner Symmetry and Quantum Geometry
Freidel, L., Geiller, M., & Wieland, W. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-99-7681-2_107 · Cited by 7
Anisotropic spinfoam cosmology
Rennert, J., & Sloan, D. (2013) · Lancaster EPrints (Lancaster University) · Cited by 6
Relating spin-foam to canonical loop quantum gravity by graphical calculus
Yang, J., Zhang, C., & Ma, Y. (2021) · Physical review. D/Physical review. D. · doi:10.1103/physrevd.104.044025 · Cited by 6
Short-scale Emergence of Classical Geometry, in Euclidean Loop Quantum GravityPreprint
Bayle, V., Collet, F., & Carlo Rovelli, C. (2016) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1603.07931 · Cited by 6
Semiclassical behavior of spinfoam amplitude with small spins and entanglement entropy
Han, M. (2019) · Physical review. D/Physical review. D. · doi:10.1103/physrevd.100.084049 · Cited by 5
Geometry from local flatness in Lorentzian spin foam theories
Donà, P. (2023) · Physical review. D/Physical review. D. · doi:10.1103/physrevd.107.066011 · Cited by 5
Curvature effects in the spectral dimension of spin foams
Jercher, A. F., Steinhaus, S., & Thürigen, J. (2023) · Physical review. D/Physical review. D. · doi:10.1103/physrevd.108.066011 · Cited by 6
A new 2+1 coherent spin-foam vertex for quantum gravity
Simão, J. D. (2024) · Classical and Quantum Gravity · doi:10.1088/1361-6382/ad721e · Cited by 7
Engle, J. (2014) · Springer handbooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-41992-8_38 · Cited by 8
Atomism and Relationalism as guiding principles for Quantum Gravity
Vidotto, F. (2016) · Proceedings of Frontiers of Fundamental Physics 14 — PoS(FFP14) · doi:10.22323/1.224.0222 · Cited by 8
Corrigendum: The Plebanski sectors of the EPRL vertex
Engle, J. (2013) · Cited by 5
Emergence of Riemannian Quantum Geometry
Haggard, H. M., Lewandowski, J., & Sahlmann, H. (2023) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-19-3079-9_96-1 · Cited by 6
Self-citationStudying the EPRL spinfoam self-energy
Frisoni, P. (2023) · The Ninth Marcel Grossmann Meeting · doi:10.1142/9789811269776_0336 · Cited by 4
Asymptotic of Lorentzian Polyhedra PropagatorPreprint
Puchta, J. (2013) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1307.4747 · Cited by 8
Deep Learning Spinfoam Vertex Amplitudes: The Euclidean Barrett–Crane Model
Sahlmann, H., & Sherif, W. (2025) · Universe · doi:10.3390/universe11070235 · Cited by 4
Regularized Hamiltonians and Spinfoams
Alesci, E. (2012) · Journal of Physics Conference Series · doi:10.1088/1742-6596/360/1/012041 · Cited by 3
Non-convex 4d polytopes in Spin Foam ModelsPreprint
Bähr, B. (2018) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1812.10314 · Cited by 3
Aspects of quantum gravityPreprint
Pithis, A. G. A. (2019) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1903.07735 · Cited by 9
Numerical study of the Lorentzian EPRL spin foam amplitudePreprint
Donà, P., Fanizza, M., Sarno, G., & Simone Speziale, D. (2019) · arXiv (Cornell University) · Cited by 3
Semi-Classical Holomorphic Transition Amplitudes in Covariant Loop Quantum GravityPreprint
D’Ambrosio, F. (2020) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.2001.04651 · Cited by 7
Summation and triangulation independence of Lorentzian spinfoam amplitudes for all LQG
Han, M. (2026) · Physical review. D/Physical review. D. · doi:10.1103/n76f-31gf · Cited by 2
Entanglement entropy of physical states in hypercuboidally truncated spin foam quantum gravity
Bähr, B. (2020) · Classical and Quantum Gravity · doi:10.1088/1361-6382/ab77ea · Cited by 2
Homogeneous-isotropic sector of loop quantum gravity: new approach
Kisielowski, M. (2020) · Classical and Quantum Gravity · doi:10.1088/1361-6382/ab9bb9 · Cited by 2
Self-citationHigher dimensional and supersymmetric extensions of loop quantum gravity
Thurn, A. (2015) · OPUS FAU (Kooperativer Bibliotheksverbund Berlin-Brandenburg (KOBV), on behalf of the Universitätsbibliothek Erlangen-Nürnberg) · Cited by 2
Lorentzian spinfoam gravity path integral and geometrical area-law entanglement entropy
Han, M. (2026) · Physical review. D/Physical review. D. · doi:10.1103/kbw3-m49g · Cited by 1
Ultraviolet fixed point in covariant loop quantum gravity
Han, M. (2026) · Physical review. D/Physical review. D. · doi:10.1103/d8s7-jqfl · Cited by 1
Gravity, Geometry, and the Quantum
Sahlmann, H. (2014) · Springer handbooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-642-41992-8_37 · Cited by 1
A spin foam framework for the black-to-white hole transition
Soltani, F. (2023) · The Ninth Marcel Grossmann Meeting · doi:10.1142/9789811269776_0337 · Cited by 1
Emergence of Riemannian Quantum Geometry
Haggard, H. M., Lewandowski, J., & Sahlmann, H. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-99-7681-2_96 · Cited by 1
Self-citationLoop Quantum Cosmology: Relation Between Theory and Observations
Agulló, I., Wang, A., & Wilson-Ewing, E. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-99-7681-2_103 · Cited by 1
Boundary state stability under spinfoam evolution for the quantum 4-simplex
Dupuis, M., & Livine, E. R. (2011) · Classical and Quantum Gravity · doi:10.1088/0264-9381/28/21/215002 · Cited by 1
Transition probability spaces in loop quantum gravity
Guo, X.-K. (2018) · Journal of Mathematical Physics · doi:10.1063/1.5022662 · Cited by 1
Quantum reference frames via transition amplitudes in timeless quantum gravity
Lewandowski, J., & Lin, C.-Y. (2018) · Physical review. D/Physical review. D. · doi:10.1103/physrevd.98.026023 · Cited by 1
Self-citationKisielowski, M. (2021) · Classical and Quantum Gravity · doi:10.1088/1361-6382/ac1e70 · Cited by 1
Self-citationSpin-foam dynamics of Loop Quantum Gravity states
Kisielowski, M. (2014) · Cited by 1
Self-citationVolume of 4-polytopes from bivectorsPreprint
Bähr, B. (2018) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1808.09971 · Cited by 1
On Geometry and Symmetries in Classical and Quantum Theories of Gauge GravityPreprint
Belov, V. (2019) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.48550/arxiv.1905.06931 · Cited by 1
Relation Between Regge Calculus and BF Theory on Manifolds with Defects
Kisielowski, M. (2018) · Annales Henri Poincaré · doi:10.1007/s00023-018-0747-6 · Cited by 1
Self-citationShape of spinfoams encoded in graphs
Puchta, J. (2012) · Journal of Physics Conference Series · doi:10.1088/1742-6596/360/1/012051
Dynamics of Loop Quantum Gravity encoded in graphs
Kisielowski, M. (2012) · Journal of Physics Conference Series · doi:10.1088/1742-6596/360/1/012048
Self-citationGroup field theories generating polyhedral complexes
Thürigen, J. (2016) · Proceedings of Frontiers of Fundamental Physics 14 — PoS(FFP14) · doi:10.22323/1.224.0177
Simplicity constraints in Spin Foam models for Quantum Gravity
Celoria, M. (2014)
The relation between Geometry and Matter in classical and quantum Gravity and CosmologyPreprint
Regoli, D. (2011) · arXiv (Cornell University) · doi:10.6092/unibo/amsdottorato/3615
Gravity, Geometry, and the Quantum
Sahlmann, H. (2014) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-662-46035-1_37
Engle, J. (2014) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-3-662-46035-1_38
Ashtekar, A., Berger, B. K., Isenberg, J. A., & MacCallum, M. A. H. (2015) · Cambridge University Press eBooks · doi:10.1017/cbo9781139583961.014
Graphical Calculus of Spin Networks
Alesci, E., Mäkinen, I. H., & Yang, J. (2023) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-19-3079-9_101-1
Sahlmann, H. (2024) · Elsevier eBooks · doi:10.1016/b978-0-323-95703-8.00252-4
Spin Foams, Refinement Limit, and Renormalization
Asante, S. K., Dittrich, B., & Steinhaus, S. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-99-7681-2_106
Graphical Calculus of Spin Networks
Alesci, E., Mäkinen, I., & Yang, J. (2024) · Springer eBooks · doi:10.1007/978-981-99-7681-2_101
Structure of the continuum limit of spin foams
Bruno, M., Colafranceschi, E., Mele, F. M., & Carlo Rovelli, C. (2026) · Physical review. D/Physical review. D. · doi:10.1103/7493-9nb7 · Cited by 1
Loop Quantum Gravity and Discrete Geometry
Zhang, M. (2014) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/026f7da8z9bd6z462bz92f1z74b088afa84d
Quantum cosmology in loop quantum gravity : 2-vertex spinfoam amplitudes and effective hamiltonians
Stagno, G. V. (2018) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/fe020c0czebdez43c2za92bz8181267db58f
Semi-classical holomorphic transition amplitudes in covariant loop quantum gravity
D’Ambrosio, F. (2019) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/1b21962cz1aacz4a4eza219z2590b7f79e3f
Aspects de gravitation quantique
Liu, H. (2019) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/914be533zcf19z4b75z8627z3d22268906b7
A numerical approach to spin foam models of quantum gravity
Sarno, G. (2020) · theses.fr (ABES) · doi:10.70675/d32583dfz6f72z45c0zafedz6687e64eac79
Metadata
- Authors
- Kamiński, W., Kisielowski, M., & Lewandowski, J.
- Affiliations
- University of Warsaw (PL)
- Pennsylvania State University (US)
- Venue
- Classical and Quantum Gravity
- Publisher
- IOP Publishing
- Published
- 2010-03-19
- Volume
- 27
- Issue
- 9
- Pages
- 095006
- ISSN
- 0264-9381 (ISSN-L)
- 1361-6382
- OpenAlex
- W2096508020
- Semantic Scholar
- 197267ae67f3e95833ebfaf598932227e87dceb1
- Cited by
- 191
- References
- 40
- Citations by year
- 2026: 4 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 8 · 2023: 13 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 7 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 17 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 12 · 2015: 7 · 2014: 16 · 2013: 24 · 2012: 21
- FWCI
- 15.20
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- green
- arxiv.org
- Locations
- Classical and Quantum Gravity (publishedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University) (publishedVersion)
- HAL (submittedVersion, other-oa)
- Trinity's Access to Research Output (TARA) (Trinity College Dublin) (submittedVersion)
- arXiv (Cornell University)
- Topics
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Nuclear and High Energy Physics › Noncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Relativity and Gravitational Theory
- Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Nuclear and High Energy Physics › Black Holes and Theoretical Physics
- Keywords
- spin foam models, loop quantum gravity, EPRL model, spin network states, vertex amplitude, Barbero-Immirzi parameter, diffeomorphism invariance
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
A language model drew the claims from the paper on 2026-10-06, under version 3 of the claim definition (model deepseek-v4.1-flash, prompt extract-v3).
A second model labelled each claim on 2026-10-06 (model jev-1.13-20260917, definition revision gold-guideline-v0.2).
Cited sources are checked with a language model’s help (gpt-6-sol).
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
