Cited by 71Noncommutative and Quantum Gravity TheoriesRelativity and Gravitational TheoryBlack Holes and Theoretical Physics

Lifting SU(2) spin networks to projected spin networks

Open access
Dupuis, Maïté, Livine, Etera R.·2010·Physical Review D

Abstract

Projected spin network states are the canonical basis of quantum states of geometry for the recent EPRL-FK spinfoam models for quantum gravity introduced by Engle-Pereira-Rovelli-Livine and Freidel-Krasnov. They are functionals of both the Lorentz connection and the time-normal field. We analyze in detail the map from these projected spin networks to the standard SU(2) spin networks of loop quantum gravity. We show that this map is not one to one and that the corresponding ambiguity is parameterized by the Immirzi parameter. We conclude with a comparison of the scalar products between projected spin networks and SU(2) spin network states.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1103/physrevd.82.064044

Cites

31 of 31 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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?

  • Special subclasses of projected spin networks appear naturally as boundary states of the new spin foams.

    “The fact that these special subclasses of projected spin networks appear naturally as boundary states of the new spin foams is shown in [158].”

    From The Spin-Foam Approach to Quantum Gravity (2013) · cites this paper as [158]

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 32 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Dupuis, M., & Livine, E. R.
Affiliations
École Normale Supérieure de Lyon (FR)
Venue
Physical Review D
Published
2010-09-30
Volume
82
Issue
6
ISSN
  • 0556-2821 (ISSN-L)
  • 1550-7998
  • 1550-2368
OpenAlex
W2111008219
Cited by
71
References
32
Citations by year
2025: 3 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 1 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 5 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 4 · 2018: 3 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 13
FWCI
6.58
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Physical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D. Particles and fields (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • HAL (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear 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
loop quantum gravity, Immirzi parameter, Lorentz connection, inner product

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.

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