REVIEW 1 cited by
Constraints on a Massive Double-Copy and Applications to Massive Gravity
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
read the original abstract
We propose and study a BCJ double-copy of massive particles, showing that it is equivalent to a KLT formula with a kernel given by the inverse of a matrix of massive bi-adjoint scalar amplitudes. For models with a uniform non-zero mass spectrum we demonstrate that the resulting double-copy factors on physical poles and that up to at least 5-particle scattering, color-kinematics satisfying numerators always exist. For the scattering of 5 or more particles, the procedure generically introduces spurious singularities that must be cancelled by imposing additional constraints. When massive particles are present, color-kinematics duality is not enough to guarantee a physical double-copy. As an example, we apply the formalism to massive Yang-Mills and show that up to 4-particle scattering the double-copy construction generates physical amplitudes of a model of dRGT massive gravity coupled to a dilaton and a two-form with dilaton parity violating couplings. We show that the spurious singularities in the 5-particle double-copy do not cancel in this example, and the construction fails to generate physically sensible amplitudes. We conjecture sufficient constraints on the mass spectrum, which in addition to massive BCJ relations, guarantee the absence of spurious singularities.
Forward citations
Cited by 1 Pith paper
-
Gleaning gravitational amplitudes -- a double copy for canceling dilatons
An asymmetric double copy with a ghost-like sqrt-dilaton cancels dilaton contaminations in tree-level GR amplitudes with massive scalars up to six points, leaving a residual bubble ambiguity at one loop.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.