Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 3 cited by

Duality Anomalies in Linearized Gravity

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Gravity and its dual are quantum-inequivalent in even dimensions

desk verdict The paper's central formula is vacuous under its own flatness assumption: every closed flat Riemannian manifold has zero Euler characteristic, so χ(M;T*M)=0 and the even-dimensional anomaly vanishes identically. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.15973 v3 pith:XO3QS7GF submitted 2025-04-22 hep-th gr-qcmath-phmath.MP

Leron Borsten , Michael J. Duff , Dimitri Kanakaris , Hyungrok Kim This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-thgr-qcmath-phmath.MP
keywords dualityanomalylinearizedgravitydualgravitonRay-SingertorsionReidemeisterCheeger-MüllertheoreminstantonprescriptionS-duality
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Classical linearized gravity has a dual description in which the graviton is replaced by a higher-rank tensor field, and this paper asks whether the two descriptions remain equivalent after quantization. Under a proposed rule for counting topologically nontrivial configurations (instantons), the answer is no in even spacetime dimensions: the ratio of the two partition functions is $(\kappa/\tilde\kappa)^{\frac{1}{2}\chi(M;T^*M)}$, so the mismatch is a pure invariant of the background manifold. In odd dimensions the twisted Euler characteristic vanishes, the Cheeger–Müller theorem cancels the torsion contributions, and the dual descriptions agree. In four dimensions with a gravitational $\theta$-term, the same mechanism turns the partition function into a modular form under $SL(2,\mathbb Z)$, a gravitational analogue of Abelian S-duality. The result matters because dual gravitons appear throughout quantum gravity and M-theory constructions, where an anomalous duality would constrain which formulations can be quantized consistently.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by the resolution of the symmetric graviton and its dual into vector-valued form fields: $h_{\mu\nu}$ together with a Kalb–Ramond-type field $B_{\mu\nu}$ becomes a $T^*M$-valued one-form $H_\mu$, and the dual graviton together with an extra $(d-2)$-form becomes a $T^*M$-valued $(d-3)$-form $\tilde H_\mu$, so each partition function factors into products of dual $E$-valued $p$-form electrodynamics partition functions. The machinery then uses the established result that positive-energy modes assemble into the Ray–Singer analytic torsion, combined with zero modes and instantons that assemble into the Reidemeister torsion; the Cheeger–Müller theorem identifies the two when $\mathrm{Tor}(H^k(M;E))=0$. The remaining input is prescription (25), which declares that instanton sums contribute a multiplicative factor of $H^n(M;TM)$ divided by $H^{n+1}(M)\oplus H^n(M)\oplus H^n(M)\oplus H^{n-1}(M)$; this prescription is what converts the purely topological torsion identity into the dimension-dependent anomaly (1).

What would settle it

On a closed flat spacetime with $\chi(M;T^*M)\neq 0$, compute the ratio $Z_{\mathrm{grav}}/\tilde Z_{\mathrm{grav}}$ with a regulator that does not import prescription (25); any deviation from $(\kappa/\tilde\kappa)^{\chi/2}$ shows that the proposed instanton sum, not the torsion identity, is responsible for the anomaly.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim, stated as equation (1), is that $Z_{\mathrm{grav}}/\tilde Z_{\mathrm{grav}}=(\kappa/\tilde\kappa)^{\frac{1}{2}\chi(M;T^*M)}$, where $\kappa$ and $\tilde\kappa=2\pi/\kappa$ are the linearized gravity couplings and $\chi(M;T^*M)$ is the Euler characteristic of the cohomology of $M$ twisted by the cotangent bundle, provided the instanton sectors are counted by prescription (25). The authors resolve the graviton and dual graviton, together with their full towers of Batalin–Vilkovisky ghosts, into vector-valued $p$-form electrodynamics valued in $T^*M$; the positive-energy modes of those factors combine into Ray–Singer analytic torsion, while zero modes and instantons combine into Reidemeister torsion. The Cheeger–Müller theorem then equates the two torsions when the torsion subgroups are absent, leaving only the coupling-power prefactor. Because $\chi(M;T^*M)$ vanishes in odd dimensions, the dual descriptions agree there; in even dimensions with nonzero twisted Euler characteristic, the two theories are quantum-inequivalent. In $d=4$, adding the gravitational $\theta$-term promotes the duality to a modular $SL(2,\mathbb Z)$ action on $\tau=\theta/2+i\,2\pi/\kappa^2$, with the partition function transforming as a modular form up to a phase fixed by the twisted Hirzebruch signature.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is the paper's rule for counting topologically nontrivial configurations (instantons) in linearized gravity; that rule is assumed rather than derived from the classical action, and a different rule could change the even/odd pattern and the value of the anomaly.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The ratio (1) means a quantum theory of linearized gravity must specify not just field content but which cohomology classes count as instantons; different prescriptions give different quantum theories.
  • In odd spacetime dimensions the twisted Euler characteristic vanishes, so the two descriptions coincide; in particular $d=11$ is anomaly-free, consistent with using duality-anomaly freedom to constrain M-theory and type IIA constructions.
  • In $d=4$ with a gravitational $\theta$-term, $\tau=\theta/2+i\,2\pi/\kappa^2$ and $Z(\tau)$ transforms as a modular form of weight determined by the twisted Hirzebruch signature, extending Abelian S-duality to linearized gravity.
  • Dimensional reduction of the $d=4$ dual gravitons yields dual graviphotons related by Abelian S-duality, so the gravitational result reduces to the Maxwell result in the appropriate limit.
  • If the anomaly persists in the full interacting theory, duality-invariant formulations of quantum gravity would be excluded in even dimensions unless new sectors cancel it; if interactions cancel it, the linearized computation remains the necessary baseline.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The instanton rule (25) is presented as natural rather than derived, so a direct test is to rederive the anomaly from a UV-regulated sum over metric topologies or from a nonlinear completion; the formula (1) would change only through that rule.
  • A numerical check of (1) on a specific closed flat manifold with $\chi(M;T^*M)\neq 0$, using a regulator independent of prescription (25), would separate the topological identity from the assumed instanton sum; the paper supplies no such example.
  • The same torsion technology should apply to exotic and mixed-symmetry dual gravitons, predicting an anomaly of the same twisted-Euler-characteristic form, which could be checked without introducing new instanton input beyond (25).
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes a prescription for the instanton sectors of linearized gravity and its dual, resolves both theories into vector-valued p-form electrodynamics using BV methods, and derives a formula for the ratio of the two partition functions. The advertised result is Z_grav/Z̃_grav = (κ/κ̃)^{1/2 χ(M;T*M)}: under the proposed instanton prescription the theories are claimed to be quantum inequivalent in even dimensions, while the anomaly vanishes in odd dimensions via the Cheeger–Müller theorem. In d=4 with a gravitational θ-term, the partition function is claimed to be a modular form under SL(2,Z), analogous to Abelian S-duality. The authors are explicit that the instanton prescription is a proposal and that the torsion computation requires a flat background metric T*M.

Significance. If the derivation were complete, the result would be a striking quantum duality anomaly for linearized gravity, with potential implications for M-theory dualities, generalized symmetries, and the interpretation of gravitational path integrals. The paper is clearly written and makes sophisticated use of the BV formalism and of Ray–Singer and Reidemeister torsion, and it is unusually transparent about its assumptions. However, the central claim is not established: the instanton prescription is assumed rather than derived, and the rigorous torsion computation is empty on the very flat backgrounds to which it applies, because χ(M;T*M)=0 there. The paper is best read as a well-motivated conjecture, not as a proof of an even-dimensional duality anomaly.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section IV (opening) and IV.C, Eq. (1)] The derivation of Eq. (1) requires T*M to be flat so that the Cheeger–Müller step is available. But every closed flat Riemannian manifold is finitely covered by a torus, hence χ(M)=0, and for a flat rank-d vector bundle E one has χ(M;E)=d·χ(M). Therefore χ(M;T*M)=0 on every background on which the theorem is invoked, and Eq. (1) reduces to Z_grav/Z̃_grav=1 in both even and odd dimensions. The statement in Section IV.C that flatness is "no loss" for establishing the existence of anomalies is not supported: the rigorous computation predicts no even-dimensional duality anomaly. A non-zero exponent would require a non-flat metric, but then the Levi-Civita connection on T*M is not flat, the T*M-valued de Rham differential need not square to zero, and the Cheeger–Müller step is unavailable. This is a load-bearing gap in the paper's main claim.
  2. [Section IV.D, Eq. (25)] The instanton sector prescription is not derived from the Fierz–Pauli action or from a nonlinear completion; it is an assumption. The authors write that reproducing the expected anomaly structure "requires the instanton sectors be given by (25)" and that duality anomaly freedom is used as a heuristic to identify the correct path integral. Since Eq. (1) depends directly on the multiplicative prescription (25), the final result is substantially built into the input. The "we show" language in the abstract and introduction overstates the status of Eq. (1); the paper should present it as a conjecture conditional on Eq. (25), with the instanton prescription flagged as a definition rather than a derived fact.
  3. [Section IV.C, d=4 modularity] The SL(2,Z) modular-form statement after Eq. (24) is not derived in detail. It relies on the same unproved instanton prescription and on Eq. (1); on the flat backgrounds for which the torsion computation is valid, χ(M;T*M)=0 and the modular anomaly is trivial. The paper should either provide the derivation of the modular property or explicitly label the modularity claim as conjectural. As written, the modular-form assertion inherits the same circularity and flatness problems as the main anomaly formula.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section IV.D, after Eq. (25)] The sentence "where n = 2 for the dual graviton and n = d−2 for the dual graviton" should read "n = 2 for the graviton and n = d−2 for the dual graviton"; as written, both cases refer to the dual graviton.
  2. [Section IV.D] "Turing this around" should be "Turning this around."
  3. [Footnote [68]] The notation "χ(M;T*M)=χ(M)d" is ambiguous; if d·χ(M) is intended, write it as d·χ(M) or dχ(M), not as an exponent.
  4. [Section IV.C] The sentence "In d=4 [87], one can add a gravitational θ-term, the linearization and resolution of θ∫ R∧R." is incomplete; specify the linearized θ-term action and its resolution.
  5. [Section III] The partition function "Zp = ∫ DA Dc expS" should be written with exp(S) or e^S for clarity.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

The claimed even/odd duality-anomaly structure is fed in through the instanton prescription (25), so Eq. (1) is substantially an input rather than a prediction.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section IV.D, Eq. (25) and Eq. (1)]
    "Extrinsically, one can always combine a massive Fierz–Pauli model with its dual to manifest a classical U(1) duality symmetry that should only be anomalous in even dimensions, since anomalies are given by certain characteristic classes of even degree. This requires the instanton sectors be given by (25). Turing this around, duality anomaly freedom (or modularity) can be used as a heuristic identifying the correct path integral, which cannot be inferred from the classical action alone."

    The central formula (1) is produced by the zero-mode and instanton factors of the two partition functions, and those factors are entirely fixed by the instanton-sector prescription (25). The paper chooses (25) by demanding that the duality symmetry be anomalous in even dimensions and anomaly-free in odd dimensions ('should only be anomalous in even dimensions... This requires the instanton sectors be given by (25)'). Equation (1) is therefore the bookkeeping of that requirement: the odd-dimensional cancellation and the even-dimensional χ(M;T*M) exponent are built into the choice of which cohomology groups are summed and which are divided. Since the paper concedes the prescription 'cannot be inferred from the classical action alone', there is no independent input that breaks the circle.

  2. other [Introduction, paragraph after Eq. (1)]
    "The purely topological characterization of the anomaly and its absence in odd dimensions a posteriori justify our instanton prescription."

    Here the announced result (1) — absence of the anomaly in odd dimensions and its topological characterization — is used to justify the instanton prescription (25) that produced it. That is a circular validation: the derived formula is invoked as evidence for its own input. The word 'a posteriori' makes the retroactive nature explicit. This does not by itself invalidate the calculation, but it confirms that the parity structure in (1) is an imposed ansatz rather than an independent consequence of the Fierz–Pauli action.

full rationale

Sections II, III, and IV.A–IV.C do a substantial amount of genuine work: linearized gravity and its dual are resolved into vector-valued p-form electrodynamics, and the positive-mode contribution is correctly identified with Ray–Singer torsion while zero modes and instantons form Reidemeister-torsion-like factors. That part is not circular. The circularity enters in Section IV.D. The instanton prescription (25), a multiplicative quotient of H^n(M;TM) by a sum of untwisted cohomology groups, is not derived from the Fierz–Pauli action or from a nonlinear completion. Instead, it is selected so that the duality anomaly exists exactly in even dimensions and vanishes in odd dimensions, as the paper states: 'This requires the instanton sectors be given by (25)' and 'duality anomaly freedom (or modularity) can be used as a heuristic identifying the correct path integral, which cannot be inferred from the classical action alone.' Equation (1) is then nothing more than the evaluation of that chosen prescription. The paper's own sentence that the result 'a posteriori justify[ies]' the prescription makes the circular structure explicit. There is also an independent mathematical-scope problem, noted by the skeptic: the Cheeger–Müller step requires g to be flat, but on every closed flat Riemannian manifold χ(M)=0 (by finite cover by a torus), and for the flat rank-d bundle T*M one has χ(M;T*M)=d·χ(M)=0. Hence Eq. (1) reduces to Zgrav/Z̃grav=1 on every background on which the rigorous torsion equality applies, so the claimed possibility of even-dimensional inequivalence is vacuous within the stated assumptions. This is not itself a circularity, but it strengthens the concern that the advertised parity effect is an artifact of the chosen inputs rather than an independent discovery. The self-citations in the Discussion (e.g. [92]) are speculative applications and are not load-bearing for Eq. (1). Overall: the central claim is substantially built into the instanton-sector ansatz, so a score of 6 is appropriate.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the ad hoc instanton prescription (25), which is not derived and is justified partly by the desired even/odd anomaly behavior. The remaining ingredients, BV quantization, Cheeger-Müller, and torsion theory, are standard mathematics. There are no numeric free parameters fitted to data; the couplings κ and κ̃ are physical inputs.

assumptions (4)
  • ad hoc to paper The instanton sector of the (dual) graviton path integral is given by prescription (25): a multiplicative factor summing over H^n(M;TM) and inverse factors for H^{n+1}(M), H^n(M), H^n(M), H^{n-1}(M).
    Proposed in Section IV.D without derivation from the classical action; the final anomaly formula (1) depends on it.
  • standard math The Cheeger-Müller theorem equating Ray-Singer and Reidemeister torsion holds for the local system T*M, requiring T*M to be flat.
    Invoked in Sections II and IV; restricts the background to flat Riemannian manifolds, as the authors note in Section V.
  • domain assumption The BV partition function of a field with reversed statistics is the inverse of the ordinary partition function, used to obtain (14) and (23).
    Standard in BV quantization but an assumption about the path integral measure; used in the resolution of the graviton and dual graviton.
  • standard math The zero-mode and instanton contributions of p-form partition functions organize into the Reidemeister torsion as in [33], and this carries over to vector-bundle-valued p-forms.
    Generalization from the Abelian p-form case to T*M-valued forms, used when assembling (24).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Duality Anomalies in Linearized Gravity." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XO3QS7GF

@misc{pith2026250415973,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Duality Anomalies in Linearized Gravity},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XO3QS7GF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.15973}
}
abstract

Classical linearized gravity admits a dual formulation in terms of a higher-rank tensor field. Proposing a prescription for the instanton sectors of linearized gravity and its dual, we show that they may be quantum inequivalent in even dimensions. The duality anomaly is obtained by resolving the dual graviton theories into vector-valued $p$-form electrodynamics and is controlled by the Reidemeister torsion, Ray-Singer torsion and Euler characteristic of the cotangent bundle. Under the proposed instanton prescription the duality anomaly vanishes for an odd number of spacetime dimensions as a consequence of the celebrated Cheeger-M\"uller theorem. In the presence of a gravitational $\theta$-term, the partition function is a modular form in direct analogy to Abelian S-duality for Maxwell theory.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Discrete Approximations to $\operatorname{U}(1)$ Principal Bundles in Abelian Gauge Theory

    hep-th 2025-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A new discretized Abelian gauge theory T_k is constructed so that as k→∞ it recovers the monopoleless sector of Maxwell theory, unlike naive Z_k gauge theory, which becomes flat Maxwell theory.

  2. Symmetries Beget Symmetries: Ghostly Higher-Form Symmetries and the Descent Equation

    hep-th 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Using the BV formalism, the authors show that descent equations turn ordinary higher-form symmetries into families of 'ghostly' symmetries generated by currents of nonzero ghost number.

  3. Sandwich Construction of Symmetry TFTs for the Centre Symmetries of Chern-Simons, Yang-Mills, and Einstein Gravity

    hep-th 2025-09 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Constructs AKSZ sandwich SymTFTs with stacky target spaces that encode the center symmetries of Chern-Simons, Yang-Mills, and MacDowell-Mansouri gravity.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

112 extracted references · 43 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    C. K. Montonen and D. I. Olive, Magnetic monopoles as gauge particles?, Physics Letters B72, 117 (1977)

    1977

  2. [2]

    Witten and D

    E. Witten and D. I. Olive, Supersymmetry algebras that include topological charges, Physics Letters B 78, 97 (1978)

    1978

  3. [3]

    Osborn, Topological charges forN = 4 supersym- metric gauge theories and monopoles of spin1, Physics Letters B83, 321 (1979)

    H. Osborn, Topological charges forN = 4 supersym- metric gauge theories and monopoles of spin1, Physics Letters B83, 321 (1979)

    1979

  4. [4]

    M. J. Duff, Strong/weak coupling duality from the dual string, Nuclear Physics B 442, 47 (1995), arXiv:hep- th/9501030

    work page arXiv 1995

  5. [5]

    Indeed, the S-duality of the Thirring and sine-Gordon models is the direct field theory analogy; the sine- Gordon model is the S-dual bosonization of the Thirring model [96]

    Bosonization can be viewed as an instance of S-duality. Indeed, the S-duality of the Thirring and sine-Gordon models is the direct field theory analogy; the sine- Gordon model is the S-dual bosonization of the Thirring model [96]

  6. [6]

    J. M. Luttinger, An exactly soluble model of a many- fermion system, Journal of Mathematical Physics 4, 1154 (1963)

    1963

  7. [7]

    D. C. Mattis and E. H. Lieb, Exact solution of a many- fermion system and its associated boson field, Journal of Mathematical Physics6, 304 (1965)

    1965

  8. [8]

    Fidkowski, R

    Ł. Fidkowski, R. M. Lutchyn, C. Nayak, and M. P. A. Fisher, Majorana zero modes in one-dimensional quan- tum wires without long-ranged superconducting order, Physical Review B84, 195436 (2011), arXiv:1106.2598 [cond-mat.str-el]

    arXiv 2011

Show all 112 references
  1. [9]

    H. A. Kramers and G. H. Wannier, Statistics of the two- dimensional ferromagnet. Part II, Physical Review60, 263 (1941)

    1941

  2. [10]

    A. D. Shapere and F. A. Wilczek, Self-dual models with theta terms, Nuclear Physics B320, 669 (1989)

    1989

  3. [11]

    M.P.A.FisherandD.-H.Lee( 李東海),Correspondence between two-dimensional bosons and a bulk supercon- ductor in a magnetic field, Physical Review B39, 2756 (1989)

    1989

  4. [12]

    Rey (李洙宗) and A

    S.-J. Rey (李洙宗) and A. Zee (徐一鴻), Self-duality of three-dimensional Chern–Simons theory, Nuclear Physics B352, 897 (1991)

    1991

  5. [13]

    Lee (李東海) and M

    D.-H. Lee (李東海) and M. P. A. Fisher, Anyon super- conductivity and charge-vortex duality, International Journal of Modern Physics B5, 2675 (1991)

    1991

  6. [14]

    C. P. Burgess and B. P. Dolan, Particle-vortex duality and the modular group: Applications to the quantum Hall effect and other two-dimensional systems, Physical Review B63, 155309 (2001), arXiv:hep-th/0010246

    2001 arXiv

  7. [15]

    M. A. Metlitski, S-duality of u(1) gauge theory with θ = π on non-orientable manifolds: Applications to topological insulators and superconductors (2015), arXiv:1510.05663 [hep-th]

    2015 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Cremmer and B

    E. Cremmer and B. Julia, TheN = 8 supergravity the- ory. I. The Lagrangian, Physics Letters B80, 48 (1978)

    1978

  9. [17]

    Cremmer and B

    E. Cremmer and B. Julia, TheSO(8) supergravity, Nu- clear Physics B159, 141 (1979)

    1979

  10. [18]

    B. Julia, Infinite Lie algebras in physics, inProceedings of the Johns Hopkins Workshop on Current Problems in Particle Theory 5: Unified Field Theories and Beyond, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, 1981 (May 25– 7

    1981

  11. [19]

    Cremmer, B

    E. Cremmer, B. Julia, H. Lü (吕宏), and C. N. Pope, Dualization of dualities, Nuclear Physics B 523, 73 (1998), arXiv:hep-th/9710119

    1998 arXiv

  12. [20]

    C. M. Hull and P. K. Townsend, Unity of superstring dualities, Nuclear Physics B438, 109 (1995), arXiv:hep- th/9410167

    1995

  13. [21]

    These duality insights have been to numerous to do jus- tice to here, but to convey the broad scope let us men- tion just two seemingly disparate examples: Kramers– Wannier duality in locating the critical point in the two- dimensional Ising model [9] and U-duality in the micr...

  14. [22]

    Kapustin and E

    A. Kapustin and E. Witten, Electric-magnetic duality andthegeometricLanglandsprogram,Communications in Number Theory and Physics1, 1 (2007), arXiv:hep- th/0604151

    2007

  15. [23]

    P. A. M. Dirac, The theory of magnetic poles, Physical Review 74, 817 (1948)

    1948

  16. [24]

    Teitelboim Weitzman, Gauge invariance for extended objects, Physics Letters B167, 63 (1986)

    C. Teitelboim Weitzman, Gauge invariance for extended objects, Physics Letters B167, 63 (1986)

    1986

  17. [25]

    instantons

    in which thep-form gauge potentialA is dualized to a (d−2−p)-form potential ˜A via the relationdA =⋆d ˜A, where⋆ is the Hodge dual. Such electric–magnetic dual- ity is a pervasive phenomenon in classical gauge theory, at least for free theories, cf. [26–28]. However, a classi-...

    2025 arXiv

  18. [26]

    de Medeiros and C

    P. de Medeiros and C. M. Hull, Exotic tensor gauge theory and duality, Communications in Mathematical Physics 235, 255 (2003), arXiv:hep-th/0208155

    2003 arXiv

  19. [27]

    (The Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, Mary- land, United States of America, 1981) pp. 23–41

    1981

  20. [28]

    Henneaux and C

    M. Henneaux and C. Teitelboim Weitzman,p-form flec- trodynamics, Foundations of Physics16, 593 (1986)

    1986

  21. [29]

    M.J.DuffandP.vanNieuwenhuizen,Quantuminequiv- alence of different field representations, Physics Letters B 94, 179 (1980)

    1980

  22. [30]

    Bansal, O

    S. Bansal, O. Evnin, and K. Mkrtchyan, Polyno- mial duality-symmetric lagrangians for free p-forms, The European Physics Journal C 81, 257 (2021), arXiv:2101.02350 [hep-th]

    2021 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Avetisyan, O

    Z. Avetisyan, O. Evnin, and K. Mkrtchyan, Democratic Lagrangians for nonlinear electrodynamics, Physical Review Letters 127, 271601 (2021), arXiv:2108.01103 [hep-th]

    2021 arXiv

  24. [32]

    D. I. Olive and M. Alvarez, Spin and Abelian electro- magnetic duality on four-manifolds, Communications in Mathematical Physics 217, 331 (2001), arXiv:hep- th/0003155

    2001

  25. [33]

    A. S. Schwarz and Yu. S. Tyupkin, Quantization of an- tisymmetric tensors and Ray–Singer torsion, Nuclear Physics B242, 436 (1984)

    1984

  26. [34]

    E.Witten,On S-dualityinabeliangaugetheory,Selecta Mathematica 1, 383 (1995), arXiv:hep-th/9505186

    1995 arXiv

  27. [35]

    T. L. Curtright, Generalized gauge fields, Physics Let- ters B165, 304 (1985)

    1985

  28. [36]

    Donnelly, B

    W. Donnelly, B. Michel, and A. Wall, Electromagnetic duality and entanglement anomalies, Physical Review D 96, 045008 (2017), arXiv:1611.05920 [hep-th]

    2017 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Again, there are too many instances to catalog, and we merely mention three examples indicating the diverse applications: constraining the bound state spectrum of confining gauge theories via ’t Hooft anomaly matching conditions [98]; critical dimensions [99] and Einstein’s eq...

  30. [38]

    P. C. West,E11 and M theory, Classical and Quantum Gravity 18, 4443 (2001), arXiv:hep-th/0104081

    2001 arXiv

  31. [39]

    C. M. Hull, Strongly coupled gravity and duality, Nu- clear Physics B583, 237 (2000), arXiv:hep-th/0004195

    2000 arXiv

  32. [40]

    C. M. Hull, Symmetries and compactifications of (4,0) conformal gravity, JHEP 12, 007, arXiv:hep- th/0011215

  33. [41]

    C. M. Hull, U. G. Lindström, and M. L. Velásquez Co- tini Hutt, Gauge-invariant charges of the dual gravi- ton, Journal of High Energy Physics 02, 198 (2025), arXiv:2412.10503 [hep-th]

    2025 arXiv

  34. [42]

    C. M. Hull, Duality in gravity and higher spin gauge fields, JHEP09, 027, arXiv:hep-th/0107149

    arXiv

  35. [43]

    C. M. Hull, Magnetic charges for the graviton, Journal of High Energy Physics 05, 257 (2024), arXiv:2310.18441 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  36. [44]

    C. M. Hull, Conformal non-gemetric gravity in six di- mensions and M-theory above the Planck energy, Clas- sical and Quantum Gravity18, 3233 (2001), arXiv:hep- th/0011171

    2001

  37. [45]

    double-dual

    There also exists a “double-dual” graviton, where one dualizes both indices rather than a single index; in four dimensions, this is however a mere algebraic relabeling [105]

  38. [46]

    These are evaded in [38] by the fact that the local dual graviton equation of motion includes the graviton itself

    There are obstructions to going beyond the linear case [106, 107]. These are evaded in [38] by the fact that the local dual graviton equation of motion includes the graviton itself. In this case the dual graviton appears as an auxiliary field, which may be eliminated to recove...

  39. [47]

    A. G. Tumanov and P. C. West, E11 and the non- linear dual graviton, Physics Letters B779, 479 (2018), arXiv:1710.11031 [hep-th]

    2018 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Henneaux, V

    M. Henneaux, V. Lekeu, and A. Léonard, Chiral ten- sors of mixed Young symmetry, Physical Review D95, 084040 (2017), arXiv:1612.02772 [hep-th]

    2017 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Hohm and H

    O. Hohm and H. Samtleben, The dual graviton in duality covariant theories, Fortschritte der Physik67, 1900021 (2019), arXiv:1807.07150 [hep-th]

    2019 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Boulanger, P

    N. Boulanger, P. P. Cook, J. A. O’Connor, and P. C. West, Unfolding E11, SciPost Physics (2025), arXiv:2410.21206 [hep-th]

    2025 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Glennon and P

    K. Glennon and P. C. West, The non-linear dual gravity equationofmotioninelevendimensions,PhysicsLetters B 809, 135714 (2020), arXiv:2006.02383 [hep-th]

    2020 arXiv

  44. [52]

    C. M. Hull, Gravity, duality and conformal symme- try, Proceedings of the Royal Society A478, 20220459 (2022), arXiv:2209.11716 [hep-th]

    2022 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Benedetti, P

    V. Benedetti, P. Bueno Gómez, and J. Martínez Magán, Generalized symmetries for generalized gravi- tons, Physical Review Letters 131, 111603 (2023), arXiv:2305.13361 [hep-th]

    2023 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Hinterbichler, D

    K. Hinterbichler, D. M. Hofman, A. Joyce, and G. Mathys, Gravity as a gapless phase and biform sym- metries, Journal of High Energy Physics02, 151 (2023), arXiv:2205.12272 [hep-th]

    2023 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Benedetti, H

    V. Benedetti, H. G. Casini, and J. Martínez Magán, Generalized symmetries of the graviton, Journal of High Energy Physics05, 045 (2022), arXiv:2111.12089 [hep- th]

    2022 arXiv

  48. [56]

    C. M. Hull, M. L. Velásquez Cotini Hutt, and U. G. Lindström, Generalised symmetries in linear grav- ity, Journal of High Energy Physics 04, 046 (2025), arXiv:2409.00178 [hep-th]

    2025 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Benedetti, H

    V. Benedetti, H. G. Casini, and J. Martínez Magán, Generalized symmetries and Noether’s theorem in QFT, Journal of High Energy Physics08, 304 (2022), arXiv:2205.03412 [hep-th]. 8

    2022 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Gómez-Fayrén de las Heras, P

    C. Gómez-Fayrén de las Heras, P. Meessen, and T. Or- tín Miguel, Covariant generalized conserved charges of General Relativity, Journal of High Energy Physics09, 174 (2023), arXiv:2307.04041 [gr-qc]

    2023 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Cheeger, Analytic torsion and the heat equation, An- nals of Mathematics109, 259 (1979)

    J. Cheeger, Analytic torsion and the heat equation, An- nals of Mathematics109, 259 (1979)

    1979

  52. [60]

    C. M. Hull, M. L. Velásquez Cotini Hutt, and U. G. Lindström, Gauging generalised symmetries in linear gravity, Journal of High Energy Physics01, 145 (2025), arXiv:2410.08720 [hep-th]

    2025 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Cheeger, Analytic torsion and Reidemeister torsion, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America74, 2651 (1977)

    J. Cheeger, Analytic torsion and Reidemeister torsion, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America74, 2651 (1977)

    1977

  54. [62]

    I. A. Batalin and G. A. Vilkovisky, RelativisticS-matrix of dynamical systems with boson and fermion con- straints, Physics Letters B69, 309 (1977)

    1977

  55. [63]

    Müller, Analytic torsion and R-torsion of Rie- mannian manifolds, Advances in Mathematics28, 233 (1978)

    W. Müller, Analytic torsion and R-torsion of Rie- mannian manifolds, Advances in Mathematics28, 233 (1978)

    1978

  56. [64]

    Müller,Analytische Torsion Riemannscher Mannig- faltigkeiten, Ph.D

    W. Müller,Analytische Torsion Riemannscher Mannig- faltigkeiten, Ph.D. thesis, Humboldt-Universität zu Ber- lin, Berlin, Germany (1977)

    1977

  57. [65]

    I. A. Batalin and G. A. Vilkovisky, Closure of the gauge algebra, generalized Lie equations and Feynman rules, Nuclear Physics B234, 106 (1984)

    1984

  58. [66]

    I. A. Batalin and G. A. Vilkovisky, Gauge algebra and quantization, Physics Letters B102, 27 (1981)

    1981

  59. [67]

    I. A. Batalin and G. A. Vilkovisky, Quantization of gauge theories with linearly dependent generators, Physical Review D28, 2567 (1983)

    1983

  60. [68]

    In particular, when M is parallelizable, then χ(M ; T∗M ) = χ(M )d

  61. [69]

    I. A. Batalin and G. A. Vilkovisky, Existence theorem for gauge algebra, Journal of Mathematical Physics26, 172 (1985)

    1985

  62. [70]

    linearized instanton moduli space

    This is analogous to recovering the “linearized instanton moduli space” H2(M ; Z)⊗ g from the moduli space of g-valued Yang–Mills instantons on a spacetimeM

  63. [71]

    D. B. Ray and I. M. Singer, Analytic torsion, inPartial Differential Equations,ProceedingsofSymposiainPure Mathematics, Vol. 23, edited by D. C. Spencer (Amer- ican Mathematical Society, Providence, Rhode Island, United States of America, 1973) pp. 167–181

    1973

  64. [72]

    D. B. Ray and I. M. Singer,R-torsion and the Laplacian on Riemannian manifolds, Advances in Mathematics7, 145 (1971)

    1971

  65. [73]

    D. B. Ray and I. M. Singer, Analytic torsion for complex manifolds, Annals of Mathematics. Second Series 98, 154 (1973)

    1973

  66. [74]

    Franz, Über die Torsion einer Überdeckung, Journal für die Reine und Angewandte Mathematik173, 245 (1935)

    W. Franz, Über die Torsion einer Überdeckung, Journal für die Reine und Angewandte Mathematik173, 245 (1935)

    1935

  67. [75]

    Here,⌣is the cup product between cohomology classes, and⌢ is the cap product between homology and coho- mology classes [108]

  68. [76]

    K. W. F. Reidemeister, Homotopieringe und Linsenräu- me, Abhandlungen aus dem Mathematischen Seminar der Universität Hamburg11, 102 (1935)

    1935

  69. [77]

    Siegel, Hidden ghosts, Physics Letters B 93, 170 (1980)

    W. Siegel, Hidden ghosts, Physics Letters B 93, 170 (1980)

    1980

  70. [78]

    de Rham, Sur les nouveaux invariants topologiques de M

    G. de Rham, Sur les nouveaux invariants topologiques de M. Reidemeister,Математический Сборник 43, 737 (1936)

    1936

  71. [79]

    Borsten, M

    L. Borsten, M. Jalali Farahani, B. Jurčo, H. Kim (金炯 錄), J. Nárožný, D. Rist, C. Saemann, and M. Wolf, Higher gauge theory, in Encyclopedia of Mathemat- ical Physics , Vol. 4, edited by R. J. Szabo and M. Bojowald (Academic Press, Boston, Massachusetts, United States of Americ...

    2024 arXiv

  72. [80]

    S. M. Christensen and M. J. Duff, Quantizing gravity with a cosmological constant, Nuclear Physics B170, 480 (1980)

    1980

  73. [81]

    Jurčo, L

    B. Jurčo, L. Raspollini, C. Sämann, and M. Wolf, L∞-algebras of classical field theories and the Batalin- Vilkovisky formalism, Fortschritte der Physik 67, 1900025 (2019), arXiv:1809.09899 [hep-th]

    2019 arXiv

  74. [82]

    Alfonsi, Higher geometry in physics, inEncyclope- dia of Mathematical Physics, Vol

    L. Alfonsi, Higher geometry in physics, inEncyclope- dia of Mathematical Physics, Vol. 4, edited by R. J. Szabo and M. Bojowald (Academic Press, Boston, Mas- sachusetts, United States of America, 2024) 2nd ed., pp. 39–61, arXiv:2312.07308 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  75. [83]

    linearization

    so that SFP,gf = 1 κ2 ST∗M 1 −S2 + ¯S1−S0 (12) where ST∗M 1 = Z 1 2Hµ∧⋆∆Hµ + ¯Xµ∧⋆∆Xµ (13a) SM×R 2 = Z 1 2B∧⋆∆B + 0X i=−1 ¯c (i,i−1) ∧⋆∆c (i) + 1 2 ¯c (−1,0) ∧⋆∆¯c (−1,0) (13b) ¯SM×R 1 = Z ¯c (0,−1) ∧⋆∆c (0) + ¯c (−1,−2) ∧⋆∆c (−1) + 1 2 ¯c (−1,0) ∧⋆∆¯c (−1,0) + 1 2ϕ∧⋆∆ϕ (13c) ...

  76. [84]

    G. R. Cavalcanti and M. Gualtieri, Generalized com- plex geometry and T-duality, inA Celebration of the Mathematical Legacy of Raoul Bott, CRM Proceedings and Lecture Notes, Vol. 50, edited by P. R. Kotiuga (American Mathematical Society, Providence, Rhode Island, United State...

    2010 arXiv

  77. [85]

    Zabzine, Lectures on generalized complex geometry and supersymmetry, Archivum Mathematicum42, 119 (2006), arXiv:hep-th/0605148

    M. Zabzine, Lectures on generalized complex geometry and supersymmetry, Archivum Mathematicum42, 119 (2006), arXiv:hep-th/0605148

    2006 arXiv

  78. [86]

    The addition symmetries and ghosts that arise here correspond, in this picture, to the local Lorentz ghosts

    Indeed, this is equivalent to starting from the frame- bundle picture and linearizing. The addition symmetries and ghosts that arise here correspond, in this picture, to the local Lorentz ghosts

  79. [87]

    C. S. Aulakh, I.-G. Koh (ᄀ ᅩᄋ ᅵᆫᄀ ᅲ), and S. Ouvry, Higher spin fields with mixed symmetry, Physics Letters B173, 284 (1986)

    1986

  80. [88]

    J. M. Fernández de Labastida y del Olmo and T. R. Morris, Massless mixed-symmetry bosonic free fields, Physics Letters B180, 101 (1986)

    1986

  81. [89]

    That is, as dualp-form and (d−p− 2)-form theories. On the other handB and ˜B, for example, should be regarded as dual fields once one recalls that the(d− 2)- form is a T∗M-valued (d− 3)-form with a symmetry constraint and, so, dual to aT∗M-valued 1-form with a symmetry constraint

  82. [90]

    More generally, we can consider anyd 2 = p + 1 for ar- bitrary T∗M-valued p-form and (d− 2−p)-form dual formulations of linearized gravity

  83. [91]

    The dual second Bianchi identities are rotated amongst themselves [26]

  84. [92]

    That is,M is a flat Riemannian manifold

  85. [93]

    The same observation was made forp-forms in [33]

  86. [94]

    J. N. Borissova, B. Dittrich, and K. Krasnov, Area- metric gravity revisited, Physical Review D109, 124035 (2024), arXiv:2312.13935 [gr-qc]

    2024 arXiv

  87. [95]

    Borsten, M

    L. Borsten, M. J. Duff, and S. Nagy, Odd dimensional analogue of the Euler characteristic, Journal of High Energy Physics12, 178 (2021), arXiv:2105.13268 [hep- th]

    2021 arXiv

  88. [96]

    The details will be given in [109]. 9

  89. [97]

    Witten, Geometric Langlands from six dimensions (2009), arXiv:0905.2720 [hep-th]

    E. Witten, Geometric Langlands from six dimensions (2009), arXiv:0905.2720 [hep-th]

    2009 arXiv

  90. [98]

    Borsten,D = 6,N = (2, 0) andN = (4, 0) theories, Physical Review D97, 066014 (2018), arXiv:1708.02573 [hep-th]

    L. Borsten,D = 6,N = (2, 0) andN = (4, 0) theories, Physical Review D97, 066014 (2018), arXiv:1708.02573 [hep-th]

    2018 arXiv

  91. [99]

    S. R. Coleman, The quantum sine-Gordon equation as themassiveThirringmodel,PhysicalReviewD 11,2088 (1975)

    1975

  92. [100]

    A. E. Strominger and C. Vafa, Microscopic origin of the Bekenstein-Hawking entropy, Physics Letters B379, 99 (1996), arXiv:hep-th/9601029

    1996 arXiv

  93. [101]

    ’t Hooft, Naturalness, chiral symmetry, and spon- taneous chiral symmetry breaking, in Recent Devel- opments in Gauge Theories, NATO Science Series B, Vol

    G. ’t Hooft, Naturalness, chiral symmetry, and spon- taneous chiral symmetry breaking, in Recent Devel- opments in Gauge Theories, NATO Science Series B, Vol. 59, edited by G. ’t Hooft, C. G. Itzykson, A. M. Jaffe, H. Lehmann, P. K. Mitter, I. M. Singer, and R. F. Stora (Sprin...

    1980

  94. [102]

    A. M. Polyakov, Quantum geometry of bosonic strings, Physics Letters B103, 207 (1981)

    1981

  95. [103]

    C. G. Callan, Jr., E. J. Martinec, M. J. Perry, and D. H. Friedan, Strings in background fields, Nuclear Physics B 262, 593 (1985)

    1985

  96. [104]

    E. S. Fradkin and A. A. Tseytlin, Effective field the- ory from quantized strings, Physics Letters B158, 316 (1985)

    1985

  97. [105]

    D. M. Capper and M. J. Duff, Trace anomalies in di- mensional regularization, Il Nuovo Cimento A23, 173 (1974)

    1974

  98. [106]

    M. J. Duff, Observations on conformal anomalies, Nu- clear Physics B125, 334 (1977)

    1977

  99. [107]

    M.B.GreenandJ.H.Schwarz,Anomalycancellationin supersymmetric D = 10 gauge theory and superstring theory, Physics Letters B149, 117 (1984)

    1984

  100. [108]

    Henneaux, V

    M. Henneaux, V. Lekeu, and A. Léonard, A note on the double dual graviton, Journal of Physics A53, 014002 (2020), arXiv:1909.12706 [hep-th]

    2020 arXiv

  101. [109]

    Bekaert, N

    X. Bekaert, N. Boulanger, and M. Henneaux, Consistent deformations of dual formulations of linearized gravity: A no-go result, Physical Review D67, 044010 (2003), arXiv:hep-th/0210278

    2003 arXiv

  102. [110]

    Monteiro, NoU(1) ‘electric-magnetic’ duality in Ein- stein gravity, Journal of High Energy Physics4, 093 (2024), arXiv:2312.02351 [hep-th]

    R. Monteiro, NoU(1) ‘electric-magnetic’ duality in Ein- stein gravity, Journal of High Energy Physics4, 093 (2024), arXiv:2312.02351 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  103. [111]

    A. E. Hatcher,Algebraic Topology(Cambridge Univer- sity Press, Cambridge, United Kingdom, 2001)

    2001

  104. [112]

    Borsten, M

    L. Borsten, M. J. Duff, D. Kanakaris, and H. Kim (金 炯錄), to appear (2025)

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.