Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

A very particular set of free fields — 12 gauge fields, 48 Weyl fermions, and 36 four-derivative scalars — makes all gravitational couplings simultaneously stop running at a UV fixed point.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review

2026-08-04 19:17 UTC pith:V4AEQNQV

load-bearing objection Careful extension of Percacci's beta-function calculation to Fradkin-Tseytlin scalars gives a neat fixed-point condition, but the physical SM-like example hinges on an unresolved Lorentzian continuation issue. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2509.09346 v1 pith:V4AEQNQV submitted 2025-09-11 hep-th gr-qchep-ph

Fixed points of classical gravity coupled with a Standard-Model-like theory

Latham Boyle , Neil Turok , Vatsalya Vaibhav This is my paper
classification hep-th gr-qchep-ph MSC 81T1781T2083C47 PACS 04.62.+v11.10.Hi
keywords gravitational beta functionsUV fixed pointconformal couplingFradkin–Tseytlin scalarsstress tensorcosmological constantStandard Modelexact renormalization group
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

Coupling any quantum field theory to gravity usually makes the stress tensor — gravity's source — diverge in the ultraviolet, which would force spacetime to be wildly curved at short distances. This paper asks whether there are quantum field theories for which those divergences cancel. Working with free, conformally coupled fields on a classical curved background, it shows that all four gravitational beta functions vanish exactly when the matter content satisfies n_{1/2}=4n_1, n'_0=3n_1, and n_0=0: that is, four spinor degrees of freedom for every gauge field, three four-derivative scalars per gauge field, and no ordinary two-derivative scalars. Under that condition the stress tensor and all its correlators are ultraviolet finite, and a theory with the Standard Model's gauge and fermion content — plus 36 Fradkin–Tseytlin scalars — has a positive Newton constant and an arbitrarily small cosmological constant in the infrared. The paper argues this is a class of gravitational UV fixed points, in which gravity need not be quantized for the matter–gravity system to be well behaved.

Core claim

The central claim is that the gravitational renormalization group flow of free conformally coupled matter admits an ultraviolet fixed point, and that the condition for it is purely a counting condition on the field content. With n_1 gauge fields, n_{1/2} Weyl or Majorana fermions, n_0 two-derivative scalars, and n'_0 four-derivative Fradkin–Tseytlin scalars, the beta functions for the R^2, Gauss–Bonnet, Weyl-squared, and cosmological/Einstein–Hilbert terms vanish simultaneously when n_{1/2}=4n_1, n'_0=3n_1, and n_0=0. At such a point the coefficient of R^2 also stops running, and the dimensionless couplings λ, λ_1, λ_2, λ_3 sit at fixed values with λ=0. Because the divergences in the matter

What carries the argument

The engine of the calculation is the exact renormalization group equation (ERGE) for the gravitational effective action, evaluated with a heat-kernel expansion and an optimized momentum cutoff. The new ingredient is the Fradkin–Tseytlin–Paneitz operator Δ_4, the four-derivative conformally covariant scalar operator, whose Seeley–DeWitt coefficients supply the additional beta-function contributions needed to satisfy the vanishing conditions. The counting identity n_{1/2}=4n_1, n'_0=3n_1, n_0=0 is the mechanism: it sets to zero the coefficients of k^4, k^2, and ln k in the flow, thereby fixing the cosmological term, the Einstein–Hilbert term, and the curvature-squared terms all at once. A conf

Load-bearing premise

The whole cancellation rests on the 36 fourth-derivative Fradkin–Tseytlin scalars being physically sensible in Lorentzian signature; the paper states their Lorentzian continuation is a topic of lively debate and defers the resolution.

What would settle it

Compute the one-loop gravitational beta functions for the interacting Standard Model plus 36 FT scalars: if gauge or Yukawa interactions generate nonzero β_1, β_2, or β_{Λ/G}, the free-field fixed point is not exact. Alternatively, exhibit a Lorentzian formulation of the 36 FT scalars; if it violates unitarity or reality of the spectrum, the fixed point cannot describe gravity.

Watch this falsifier. Get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

Share X LinkedIn Reddit HN

If this is right

  • If the counting condition (17) is met, the gravitational beta functions vanish, so the stress tensor and all its correlators are ultraviolet finite — no cutoff is needed for the matter sector's coupling to gravity.
  • For the minimal Standard Model without right-handed neutrinos, Newton's constant does not run in the UV but develops a pole at the Planck scale, so that theory fails to couple consistently to gravity.
  • Adding right-handed neutrinos (so n_{1/2}=48) and 36 Fradkin–Tseytlin scalars, while removing fundamental KG scalars, satisfies (17); then G ~ k^{-2} in the deep UV and the action at the fixed point is scale invariant.
  • In the infrared, Newton's constant is positive (under the paper's conformal Wick rotation) and the cosmological constant can be arbitrarily small, set by observations rather than by divergences.
  • The fixed point is achieved without quantizing gravity itself — gravity remains a classical background — which the paper offers as a route to a consistent semiclassical coupling.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A reader might test whether the fixed point survives interactions: the paper computes only free fields, but Standard Model couplings are weak at high energies; if interacting beta functions shift the fixed point, condition (17) becomes a leading-order result rather than exact.
  • The 1:4:6 ratio of gauge, spinor, and scalar degrees of freedom matches N=4 supersymmetry counting without supersymmetry; this may point to an underlying symmetry or to a coincidence in the counting.
  • If Fradkin–Tseytlin scalars cannot be continued to Lorentzian signature, the fixed point is a Euclidean construction and not a theory of physical gravity — a concern the paper itself acknowledges and defers.
  • The requirement n_0=0 implies the Higgs cannot be fundamental; a concrete consequence is that the weak scale would have to emerge dynamically, connecting the fixed point to the hierarchy problem.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies the ERGE flow of the local gravitational effective action induced by free conformally coupled matter: n1 gauge fields, n1/2 Weyl/Majorana fermions, n0 Klein-Gordon scalars, and n0' Fradkin-Tseytlin (four-derivative) scalars on a classical Euclidean background. Using the optimized cutoff and heat-kernel expansion, it obtains the beta functions in Eq. (12), and shows that the conformal-coupling and field-count conditions of Eq. (17), namely n1/2 = 4n1, n0' = 3n1, and n0 = 0, make the coefficients of R, Lambda, C^2, E, and R^2 non-running. The paper argues, via Osborn-Petkou, that the matter stress tensor and all its correlators are then UV finite. It identifies an SM-like matter content (n1 = 12, n1/2 = 48 including right-handed neutrinos, n0' = 36, n0 = 0) and claims a UV fixed point with, after a 'conformal' Wick rotation, a positive Newton constant and an arbitrarily small cosmological constant in the IR.

Significance. If the formal result holds, the paper provides a simple, explicit class of free QFTs whose stress tensor couples to classical gravity with no UV divergences, and it connects the fixed-point condition to a striking SM-like spectrum with equal bosonic and fermionic degrees of freedom and a 1:4:6 ratio of vector, spinor, and scalar counts. The derivation is a useful extension of earlier ERGE work by including FT scalars and reduces the fixed-point condition to a clean constraint on field content, Eq. (17). The formal calculation is internally coherent and the stress-tensor finiteness argument is a standard one. However, the physical interpretation is conditional on two unresolved issues that the paper itself acknowledges: the Lorentzian continuation of FT scalars and the conformal Wick-rotation convention used to set the sign of G. These issues are load-bearing for the abstract's claims, not mere presentation details.

major comments (3)
  1. [VII; Eq. (17)] The SM-like fixed point requires n0' = 3n1 = 36 FT scalars, and the paper states that the Lorentzian continuation of such fourth-order scalar theories is a topic of lively debate, deferred to a forthcoming publication. The action (1) for an FT scalar is fourth order, so the standard Ostrogradsky/ghost concern applies. The paper does not establish reflection positivity, unitarity, or a ghost-free canonical quantization for these fields. Consequently the fixed point and the IR claims (positive G, arbitrarily small Lambda) are demonstrated only for the Euclidean path integral, not for a Lorentzian gravitational theory. This is not a matter of disagreeing with a consensus; it is a missing step in the argument from Eq. (17) to the abstract. The authors should either supply a continuation argument or explicitly state that the SM-like fixed point is Euclidean.
  2. [III (conformal Wick rotation)] The positivity of G in the IR depends on the 'conformal' Wick rotation of Refs. [27,28], which gives a +1/(16pi G) coefficient in the Euclidean Einstein-Hilbert term, whereas the ordinary flat-space Wick rotation gives -1/(16pi G). This choice is not derived here and is cited to the authors' own previous work. Since the sign of G is a central output, the paper should either provide an independent derivation of the conformal continuation in the present setting or explain why the sign is not a convention. As written, a reader using the standard flat-space continuation would reach the opposite conclusion about the sign of G in the Euclidean action.
  3. [Eq. (12) and Sec. VI] Under the fixed-point condition (17), the beta function for lambda4 is not zero: beta4 = (n0 + 3 n1/2 - 18 n1 + 12 n0') / ((4pi)^2 180) = 30 n1 / ((4pi)^2 180), which is nonzero for any n1 > 0. The paper says 'we ignore lambda4 since Box R is an irrelevant total derivative term,' but the abstract and Sec. I claim that all beta functions vanish. Box R is a dimension-four total derivative, and lambda4 runs logarithmically, so the full gravitational effective action does not stop running at the fixed point. The paper should remove the total-derivative coupling from the outset or explicitly define the fixed point modulo total-derivative terms.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Eq. (4)] The notation n_D_{1/2} = (1/2) n_{1/2} is confusing. Since the trace is over Dirac spinors, the relation between n_{1/2} in Eq. (17) and the number used in Eq. (4) should be stated explicitly to avoid a factor-of-two ambiguity.
  2. [Sec. V] The phrase 'a theory like the Standard Model' glosses over the fact that the fixed-point condition requires n0 = 0, so the SM Higgs is not a fundamental KG scalar. The paper should make clear that the proposed matter content is not the SM but a modified theory with a composite or absent Higgs.
  3. [Fig. 1] Fig. 1 is referenced in Sec. VI but is not included in the text. Please ensure the figure is present and add axis labels and a quantitative caption describing the normalization of k and the couplings.
  4. [Sec. IV] The heat-kernel coefficients B_i for the fourth-order FT operator are cited to Ref. [33] but not displayed. Since these coefficients generate the new n0' terms in Eq. (12), please state the relevant B_i values explicitly in an appendix or in a supplementary note.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the beta-function derivation is self-contained; minor self-citations and an unresolved Lorentzian continuation affect interpretation but do not make the derivation circular.

full rationale

The paper's central calculation (Sec. IV) computes gravitational beta functions from the ERGE (Eq. 3) with the optimized cutoff and heat-kernel trace formulas (Eqs. 5–10), using standard external references [23,31,32,33,34] for the ERGE, cutoff, and Seeley–DeWitt coefficients. The fixed-point condition (17) is obtained by solving the resulting beta-function equations (12)–(14), not by fitting to the target result. The claim that Eq. (17) makes all stress-tensor correlators UV finite is an application of the independent Osborn–Petkou relations [13] linking the beta functions β_Λ/G, β_1, β_2, β_3 to correlator divergences. Thus the derivation chain does not reduce to its own inputs. Two caveats, flagged in the paper itself, prevent a score of 0: (i) the positive-sign statement for G in the abstract relies on the conformal Wick rotation imported from the authors' own Refs. [27,28] (Sec. III), which is a convention/assumption rather than an equation derived here; and (ii) the SM-like example requires 36 Fradkin–Tseytlin scalars, and Sec. VII explicitly states their Lorentzian continuation is 'a topic of lively debate' deferred to a forthcoming publication [51]. These are limitations and self-citations, not circular reductions: the beta-function algebra and the classification (17) stand independently of how the Euclidean FT-scalar theory is continued.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

4 free parameters · 6 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central result rests on the ERGE trace formula with a specific optimized cutoff, the heat kernel expansion for a fourth-order operator, and several physical assumptions (classical gravity, conformal Wick rotation, free-field SM, Lorentzian FT scalars). The field content is chosen to satisfy Eq. (17).

free parameters (4)
  • IR value of Lambda/G
    The cosmological constant over Newton's constant at a reference scale is not determined; the paper only shows it is RG-stable, not predicts its smallness.
  • IR Newton constant G0
    Input from observations; the paper shows G approaches G0 in the IR.
  • R^2 couplings lambda1, lambda2, lambda3, lambda4 at a reference scale
    Integration constants of the higher-derivative gravitational terms; not predicted by the fixed point.
  • Field content (n1, n1/2, n'_0, n0) = n1=12, n1/2=48, n'_0=36, n0=0
    The Standard-Model-like numbers are chosen to satisfy the fixed-point condition (17); they are not derived from deeper principles.
axioms (6)
  • domain assumption Gravity is treated as a classical background; only matter is quantized
    The ERGE integrates out matter fields only, so the fixed point is not a full quantum gravity fixed point (Secs I, IV).
  • domain assumption The conformal Wick rotation gives a positive coefficient +1/(16pi G) for the Euclidean Einstein-Hilbert term
    Sec III; cited to self-authored Refs. [27,28]; non-standard and load-bearing for the positive-G claim.
  • domain assumption The optimized cutoff R_k(z) = (k^p - z) Theta(k^p - z) with p=2,4 gives the exact beta functions for this truncation
    Sec IV; the trace formula Eq. (10) relies on this cutoff; scheme dependence is not discussed.
  • standard math The Seeley-DeWitt coefficients for the Paneitz (FT) operator from Gusynin [33], Eqs (28,29), are correctly transcribed into Eq. (12)
    The beta functions for FT scalars are taken from the cited heat kernel literature, not derived in the Letter.
  • domain assumption The free-field approximation is valid for the Standard Model up to the Planck scale
    Sec V; SM couplings are claimed to be small and perturbative, but interactions will modify the beta functions; the fixed point is only established for free fields.
  • domain assumption Fradkin-Tseytlin scalars admit a sensible Lorentzian continuation without ghosts
    Sec VII; the paper acknowledges this is unresolved ('lively debate') and defers to Ref. [51].
invented entities (1)
  • 36 Fradkin-Tseytlin (four-derivative) scalars no independent evidence
    purpose: Eliminate all gravitational beta functions and stress tensor divergences for the Standard-Model-like content
    No independent experimental handle; the Lorentzian interpretation is unresolved, and their presence is motivated by the fixed-point condition rather than by external data.

reviewed 2026-08-04 · how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Fixed points of classical gravity coupled with a Standard-Model-like theory." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/V4AEQNQV

@misc{pith2026250909346,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Fixed points of classical gravity coupled with a Standard-Model-like theory},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/V4AEQNQV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2509.09346}
}
Share X LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

Coupling quantum field theory (QFT) \!-\! even free QFT \!-\! to gravity leads to well-known problems. In particular, the stress tensor $T_{\mu\nu}$ (gravity's source) and its correlators typically diverge in the UV, creating a conflict between the wildly inhomogeneous spacetime we expect quantum mechanically and the weakly-curved, macroscopic spacetime we observe. Are there QFTs for which these divergences cancel? Here, for simplicity, we consider free quantum fields on a classical curved background. The aforementioned divergences are related to the running of the gravitational couplings. We calculate the corresponding beta functions, identifying a special class of QFTs with UV fixed points at which $\langle T_{\mu\nu}\rangle$ and all its correlators $\langle T\ldots T\rangle$ are UV finite. An intriguing example is a theory like the Standard Model (including right-handed neutrinos) with $12$ gauge fields, $3$ generations of $16$ Weyl fermions and $36$ four-derivative (Fradkin-Tseytlin) scalars. In the infrared, this theory has a positive Newton's constant $G$ and an arbitrarily small cosmological constant $\Lambda$.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2509.09346 by Latham Boyle, Neil Turok, Vatsalya Vaibhav.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Running of Newton’s gravitational constant [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_1.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Escape from Ostrogradsky via Hidden Ghost Parity

    hep-th 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 7.0

    A four-derivative UV-complete QFT is shown to have consistent perturbative scattering by quantizing on a Krein space with an embedded two-field O(1,1) theory that enforces ghost parity and positive probabilities.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

76 extracted references · 33 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    k4 16π , 1 G(k) = 1 G(0) + (n1/2 −4n 1 +n ′

  2. [2]

    tension” (energy per 3-volume), causing it to be highly negatively curved on short distances. However, the Lorentzian continuation of a “cosmological constant

    k2 12π , λi(k) =λ i(k0) +β iln(k/k0), i= 1, . . . ,4 (13) withk 0 an arbitrary scale. V. ST ANDARD MODEL IMPLICA TIONS We have found the running of all terms in the gravitational action by integrating out conformally coupled free fields:n 0 KG andn 0′ FT scalars,n 1/2 Weyl or Majorana fermions andn 1 gauge bosons. What does this imply for the SM? The SM i...

  3. [3]

    (14) Next we can define the rescaled RG parameter: ˜k2 = k2 ˜G∗ = 1 G(k) ,(15) which should be interpreted as the cut-off mea- sured in units of running Planck mass [47, 48]. The gravitational action (2) then reads: Sgrav = Z d4x√g ˜k2 16π (R+ 2 ˜k2λ) +λ1C 2 +λ 2E+λ 3R2 +λ 4□R (16) 7If we don’t include RH neutrinos, things are even worse: in addition to t...

  4. [4]

    (17) (needed to make the beta func- tionsβ Λ/G,β 1,β 2, andβ 3 all vanish) also precisely implies that all stress tensor correlators⟨T

    Eq. (17) (needed to make the beta func- tionsβ Λ/G,β 1,β 2, andβ 3 all vanish) also precisely implies that all stress tensor correlators⟨T . . . T⟩ are free of UV divergences. This follows from the fact that the stress tensor is given by the metric variation of the matter action,i.e., the actionex- cludingthe Einstein-Hilbert term; and, similarly, the str...

  5. [5]

    softening

    This set of free fields leaves us with a) a finite cosmological constant and Newton’s constant of ar- bitrary magnitude (set by observations) in the IR, and b) a scale-invariant theory (16) at the UV fixed point with effective gravitational coupling (New- ton’s constantG) “softening” ask −2 with a break atk∼m P l(shown in Fig. 1)

  6. [6]

    The coefficient ofR,i.e., the inverse of New- ton’s constant, diverges in the UV. However, in situations where the matter is dominated by a con- formal radiation (with a traceless stress tensor) – e.g.at the Big Bang –Rvanishes by the equations of motion, hence the action remains finite

  7. [7]

    Finally, Eq. (17) is striking since, in the stan- dard model (n1 = 12), it requiresn 1/2 = 48, which is automatically satisfied by three generations of standard model fermions (including right-handed neutrinos)! The price of all these cancellations is twofold: wemustinclude 3n 1 = 36 FT scalars, and wemust notincludeanyfundamental KG scalars. We discuss t...

  8. [8]

    Symanzik, Small distance behavior in field the- ory and power counting, Commun

    K. Symanzik, Small distance behavior in field the- ory and power counting, Commun. Math. Phys. 18, 227 (1970)

    1970

  9. [9]

    B. S. DeWitt, Quantum Field Theory in Curved Space-Time, Phys. Rept.19, 295 (1975)

    1975

  10. [10]

    N. D. Birrell and P. C. W. Davies,Quantum Fields in Curved Space, Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1982)

    1982

  11. [11]

    Mukhanov and S

    V. Mukhanov and S. Winitzki,Introduction to quantum effects in gravity(Cambridge University Press, 2007)

    2007

  12. [12]

    E. C. G. Stueckelberg and A. Petermann, Normal- ization of constants in the quanta theory, Helv. Phys. Acta26, 499 (1953)

    1953

  13. [13]

    Gell-Mann and F

    M. Gell-Mann and F. E. Low, Quantum electro- dynamics at small distances, Phys. Rev.95, 1300 (1954)

    1954

  14. [14]

    L. P. Kadanoff, Scaling laws for Ising models near T(c), Physics Physique Fizika2, 263 (1966)

    1966

  15. [15]

    C. G. Callan, Jr., Broken scale invariance in scalar field theory, Phys. Rev. D2, 1541 (1970)

    1970

  16. [16]

    E. S. Fradkin and A. A. Tseytlin, One Loop Beta Function in Conformal Supergravities, Nucl. Phys. B203, 157 (1982)

    1982

  17. [17]

    K. G. Wilson and J. B. Kogut, The Renormaliza- tion group and the epsilon expansion, Phys. Rept. 12, 75 (1974)

    1974

  18. [18]

    R. M. Wald,Quantum field theory in curved space- time and black hole thermodynamics(University of Chicago press, 1994)

    1994

  19. [19]

    Hollands and R

    S. Hollands and R. M. Wald, On the renormaliza- tion group in curved space-time, Commun. Math. Phys.237, 123 (2003), arXiv:gr-qc/0209029

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  20. [20]

    Percacci, Further evidence for a gravitational fixed point, Phys

    R. Percacci, Further evidence for a gravitational fixed point, Phys. Rev. D73, 041501 (2006), arXiv:hep-th/0511177

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  21. [21]

    Osborn and A

    H. Osborn and A. C. Petkou, Implications of conformal invariance in field theories for gen- eral dimensions, Annals Phys.231, 311 (1994), arXiv:hep-th/9307010

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  22. [22]

    Caron-Huot and Y.-Z

    S. Caron-Huot and Y.-Z. Li, Gravity and a uni- versal cutoff for field theory, JHEP02, 115, arXiv:2408.06440 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  23. [23]

    E. S. Fradkin and A. A. Tseytlin, Asymp- totic Freedom in Extended Conformal Supergrav- ities, Phys. Lett. B110, 117 (1982), [Erratum: Phys.Lett.B 126, (1983)]

    1982

  24. [24]

    J. F. Donoghue, Do Λ CC andGrun?, in64th Cra- cow School of Theoretical Physics From the Ul- traViolet to the InfraRed: A panorama of mod- ern gravitational physics(2024) arXiv:2412.08773 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  25. [25]

    S. M. Paneitzet al., A quartic conformally co- variant differential operator for arbitrary pseudo- riemannian manifolds (summary), SIGMA. Sym- metry, Integrability and Geometry: Methods and Applications4, 036 (2008 (preprint from 1983)). 6

    2008

  26. [26]

    Penrose, Conformal treatment of infinity, in Relativity, Groups and Topology, edited by C

    R. Penrose, Conformal treatment of infinity, in Relativity, Groups and Topology, edited by C. De- Witt and B. DeWitt (1964) pp. 565–586

    1964

  27. [27]

    C. G. Callan, Jr., S. R. Coleman, and R. Jackiw, A New improved energy - momentum tensor, Annals Phys.59, 42 (1970)

    1970

  28. [28]

    E. S. Fradkin and A. A. Tseytlin, Renormaliz- able asymptotically free quantum theory of grav- ity, Nucl. Phys. B201, 469 (1982)

    1982

  29. [29]

    Boyle and N

    L. Boyle and N. Turok, Cancelling the vac- uum energy and Weyl anomaly in the standard model with dimension-zero scalar fields (2021), arXiv:2110.06258 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  30. [30]

    Turok and L

    N. Turok and L. Boyle, A Minimal Explana- tion of the Primordial Cosmological Perturbations (2023), arXiv:2302.00344 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  31. [31]

    Wetterich, Exact evolution equation for the ef- fective potential, Physics Letters B301, 90 (1993)

    C. Wetterich, Exact evolution equation for the ef- fective potential, Physics Letters B301, 90 (1993)

    1993

  32. [32]

    D. V. Vassilevich, Heat kernel expansion: User’s manual, Phys. Rept.388, 279 (2003), arXiv:hep- th/0306138

    arXiv 2003

  33. [33]

    Codello and R

    A. Codello and R. Percacci, Fixed points of higher derivative gravity, Phys. Rev. Lett.97, 221301 (2006), arXiv:hep-th/0607128

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  34. [34]

    de Berredo-Peixoto and I

    G. de Berredo-Peixoto and I. L. Shapiro, Higher derivative quantum gravity with Gauss-Bonnet term, Phys. Rev. D71, 064005 (2005), arXiv:hep- th/0412249

    arXiv 2005

  35. [35]

    Turok and L

    N. Turok and L. Boyle, Gravitational entropy and the flatness, homogeneity and isotropy puzzles, Phys. Lett. B849, 138443 (2024), arXiv:2201.07279 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  36. [36]

    Boyle and N

    L. Boyle and N. Turok, Thermodynamic solution of the homogeneity, isotropy and flatness puzzles (and a clue to the cosmological constant), Phys. Lett. B849, 138442 (2024), arXiv:2210.01142 [gr- qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  37. [37]

    G. W. Gibbons, S. W. Hawking, and M. J. Perry, Path Integrals and the Indefiniteness of the Grav- itational Action, Nucl. Phys. B138, 141 (1978)

    1978

  38. [38]

    Percacci,An Introduction to Covariant Quan- tum Gravity and Asymptotic Safety, 100 Years of General Relativity, Vol

    R. Percacci,An Introduction to Covariant Quan- tum Gravity and Asymptotic Safety, 100 Years of General Relativity, Vol. 3 (World Scientific, 2017)

    2017

  39. [39]

    D. F. Litim, Optimized renormalization group flows, Phys. Rev. D64, 105007 (2001), arXiv:hep- th/0103195

    arXiv 2001

  40. [40]

    Shaposhnikov, Sterile neutrinos as dark mat- ter, Nucl

    M. Shaposhnikov, Sterile neutrinos as dark mat- ter, Nucl. Phys. B1003, 116496 (2024)

    2024

  41. [41]

    V. P. Gusynin, New Algorithm for Computing the Coefficients in the Heat Kernel Expansion, Phys. Lett. B225, 233 (1989)

    1989

  42. [42]

    S. M. Christensen and M. J. Duff, New Gravita- tional Index Theorems and Supertheorems, Nucl. Phys. B154, 301 (1979)

    1979

  43. [43]

    Buttazzo, G

    D. Buttazzo, G. Degrassi, P. P. Giardino, G. F. Giudice, F. Sala, A. Salvio, and A. Strumia, In- vestigating the near-criticality of the Higgs boson, JHEP12, 089, arXiv:1307.3536 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  44. [44]

    Navaset al.(Particle Data Group), Review of particle physics, Phys

    S. Navaset al.(Particle Data Group), Review of particle physics, Phys. Rev. D110, 030001 (2024)

    2024

  45. [45]

    Canetti, M

    L. Canetti, M. Drewes, T. Frossard, and M. Sha- poshnikov, Dark Matter, Baryogenesis and Neu- trino Oscillations from Right Handed Neutrinos, Phys. Rev. D87, 093006 (2013), arXiv:1208.4607 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  46. [46]

    Boyle, K

    L. Boyle, K. Finn, and N. Turok, CPT-Symmetric Universe, Phys. Rev. Lett.121, 251301 (2018), arXiv:1803.08928 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  47. [47]

    Boyle, K

    L. Boyle, K. Finn, and N. Turok, The Big Bang, CPT, and neutrino dark matter, Annals Phys. 438, 168767 (2022), arXiv:1803.08930 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  48. [48]

    Codello, G

    A. Codello, G. D’Odorico, C. Pagani, and R. Per- cacci, The Renormalization Group and Weyl- invariance, Class. Quant. Grav.30, 115015 (2013), arXiv:1210.3284 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  49. [49]

    Buchmuller, P

    W. Buchmuller, P. Di Bari, and M. Plumacher, Leptogenesis for pedestrians, Annals Phys.315, 305 (2005), arXiv:hep-ph/0401240

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  50. [50]

    Davidson, E

    S. Davidson, E. Nardi, and Y. Nir, Leptogene- sis, Phys. Rept.466, 105 (2008), arXiv:0802.2962 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  51. [51]

    J. F. Koksma and T. Prokopec, The Cosmological Constant and Lorentz Invariance of the Vacuum State, (2011), arXiv:1105.6296 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  52. [52]

    Ferrero, V

    R. Ferrero, V. Naso, and R. Percacci, Quantum Fields and the Cosmological Constant, Universe 11, 173 (2025), arXiv:2503.17203 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  53. [53]

    Han and S

    T. Han and S. Willenbrock, Scale of quantum gravity, Phys. Lett. B616, 215 (2005), arXiv:hep- ph/0404182

    arXiv 2005

  54. [54]

    The question of how to analytically continue such FT scalar theories to Lorentziansignature is a topic of lively debate (see e.g.[21, 22, 49, 50, 55–68])

    have argued that such FT scalarsmustbe in- cluded, for anomaly-cancellation reasons, to make sense of certain interesting theories in 4D space- time that are dual to local holomorphic field theo- ries on twistor space [53, 54]. The question of how to analytically continue such FT scalar theories to Lorentziansignature is a topic of lively debate (see e.g....

  55. [55]

    Weinberg, Ultraviolet divergences in quantum theories of gravitation, inGeneral Relativity: An Einstein Centenary Survey, ed

    S. Weinberg, Ultraviolet divergences in quantum theories of gravitation, inGeneral Relativity: An Einstein Centenary Survey, ed. S. W. Hawking and W. Israel, isbn = ”978-0-521-29928-2”, pub- lisher = ”Cambridge University Press”, address = ”Cambridge, UK”, pages=790–831, year=1979

    1979

  56. [56]

    Coleman,Aspects of Symmetry: Selected Erice Lectures(Cambridge University Press, Cam- bridge, U.K., 1985)

    S. Coleman,Aspects of Symmetry: Selected Erice Lectures(Cambridge University Press, Cam- bridge, U.K., 1985)

    1985

  57. [57]

    Holdom, Running couplings and unitarity in a 4-derivative scalar field theory, Phys

    B. Holdom, Running couplings and unitarity in a 4-derivative scalar field theory, Phys. Lett. B843, 138023 (2023), arXiv:2303.06723 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  58. [58]

    Holdom, UV-complete 4-derivative scalar field theory, Nucl

    B. Holdom, UV-complete 4-derivative scalar field theory, Nucl. Phys. B1000, 116472 (2024), arXiv:2402.09223 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  59. [59]

    Bateman and N

    S. Bateman and N. Turok, Asymptotically free Abelian Higgs model, in preparation (2025)

    2025

  60. [60]

    Romatschke, C.-W

    P. Romatschke, C.-W. Su, and R. Weller, Mass from Nothing (2024), arXiv:2405.00088 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  61. [61]

    K. J. Costello, Quantizing local holomorphic field theories on twistor space (2021), arXiv:2111.08879 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  62. [62]

    Bittleston, D

    R. Bittleston, D. Skinner, and A. Sharma, Quan- tizing the Non-linear Graviton, Commun. Math. Phys.403, 1543 (2023), arXiv:2208.12701 [hep- th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  63. [63]

    T. D. Lee and G. C. Wick, Negative Metric and the Unitarity of the S Matrix, Nucl. Phys. B9, 209 (1969)

    1969

  64. [64]

    T. D. Lee and G. C. Wick, Finite Theory of Quantum Electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D2, 1033 (1970)

    1970

  65. [65]

    N. N. Bogolubov, A. A. Logunov, A. I. Oksak, and I. T. Todorov, eds.,General Principles of Quan- tum Field Theory, Mathematical Physics and Ap- plied Mathematics, Vol. 10 (Springer, 1990)

    1990

  66. [66]

    S. W. Hawking and T. Hertog, Living with ghosts, Phys. Rev. D65, 103515 (2002), arXiv:hep- th/0107088

    arXiv 2002

  67. [67]

    V. O. Rivelles, Triviality of higher derivative the- ories, Phys. Lett. B577, 137 (2003), arXiv:hep- th/0304073. 7

    arXiv 2003

  68. [68]

    C. M. Bender and P. D. Mannheim, No-ghost theorem for the fourth-order derivative Pais- Uhlenbeck oscillator model, Phys. Rev. Lett.100, 110402 (2008), arXiv:0706.0207 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  69. [69]

    Salvio and A

    A. Salvio and A. Strumia, Quantum mechanics of 4-derivative theories, Eur. Phys. J. C76, 227 (2016), arXiv:1512.01237 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  70. [70]

    J. F. Donoghue, Quartic propagators, negative norms and the physical spectrum, Phys. Rev. D 96, 044007 (2017), arXiv:1704.01533 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  71. [71]

    J. F. Donoghue and G. Menezes, Unitarity, sta- bility and loops of unstable ghosts, Phys. Rev. D 100, 105006 (2019), arXiv:1908.02416 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  72. [72]

    J. F. Donoghue and G. Menezes, Arrow of Causal- ity and Quantum Gravity, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 171601 (2019), arXiv:1908.04170 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  73. [73]

    J. F. Donoghue and G. Menezes, Ostrograd- sky instability can be overcome by quantum physics, Phys. Rev. D104, 045010 (2021), arXiv:2105.00898 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  74. [74]

    J. F. Donoghue and G. Menezes, Causality and gravity, JHEP11, 010, arXiv:2106.05912 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  75. [75]

    A. A. Tseytlin, Comments on a 4-derivative scalar theory in 4 dimensions, Theor. Math. Phys.217, 1969 (2023), arXiv:2212.10599 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1969

  76. [76]

    Lehners and K

    J.-L. Lehners and K. S. Stelle, Higher-order grav- ity, finite action, and a safe beginning for the universe, Eur. Phys. J. Plus139, 380 (2024), arXiv:2312.14048 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

This paper was first reviewed by deepseek-v4-flash on August 4, 2026.