pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2604.25117 · v2 · submitted 2026-04-28 · 🌀 gr-qc · hep-th

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

Covariant quantization of the Einstein-Hilbert theory in first-order form

S. Martins-Filho
Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-12 01:58 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification 🌀 gr-qc hep-th
keywords Einstein-Hilbert theoryfirst-order formulationcovariant quantizationBV formalismDyson-Schwinger equationseffective action equivalenceauxiliary field
0
0 comments X

The pith

The first-order Einstein-Hilbert theory admits covariant quantization via the BV formalism, with the auxiliary connection enforcing equivalence to the metric formulation when placed on-shell.

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

The paper develops a path-integral quantization of general relativity in its first-order form, treating the metric and the affine connection as independent variables with the connection serving as an auxiliary field. It applies the Batalin-Vilkovisky formalism after establishing that the gauge algebra is closed and irreducible, then derives a manifestly covariant form of the Senjanović measure. The work shows that the resulting Dyson-Schwinger equations produce structural identities among the Green's functions of the auxiliary field that reproduce the classical equations of motion at the quantum level. Finally, it proves that the effective actions of the first-order and second-order formulations coincide once the auxiliary connection satisfies its classical on-shell condition.

Core claim

Treating the connection as an independent auxiliary field in the first-order Einstein-Hilbert theory allows a covariant quantization using the BV formalism; the gauge algebra closes without reducibility issues, a manifestly covariant Senjanović measure is obtained by a suitable trick, and the Dyson-Schwinger equations generate structural identities that constrain the auxiliary-field Green's functions while encoding the classical equations of motion at the quantum level, with the two formulations becoming equivalent at the level of the effective action when the auxiliary field is on-shell.

What carries the argument

The Batalin-Vilkovisky formalism applied to the first-order Einstein-Hilbert theory, with the independent connection field acting as the auxiliary variable whose on-shell value restores classical equivalence.

If this is right

  • The two formulations of the Einstein-Hilbert theory are equivalent at the level of the effective action when the auxiliary connection field is on-shell.
  • Dyson-Schwinger equations in the first-order formulation produce structural identities that constrain the Green's functions of the auxiliary field.
  • These identities encode the classical equations of motion for the connection at the quantum level.
  • A manifestly covariant Senjanović measure exists for the first-order quantization.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The same auxiliary-field approach could extend to theories with matter couplings that interact directly through the connection rather than the metric.
  • Simplified models such as two-dimensional gravity offer a concrete setting to verify the structural identities numerically.
  • The method may apply to other constrained gauge systems where auxiliary fields enforce classical relations at the quantum level.

Load-bearing premise

The gauge algebra of the first-order Einstein-Hilbert theory is closed and irreducible, allowing consistent application of the BV formalism without additional fields or reducibility complications.

What would settle it

A direct calculation showing that the one-loop effective action of the first-order formulation differs from that of the second-order formulation even after the auxiliary connection is set to its classical value would disprove the claimed equivalence.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.25117 by S. Martins-Filho.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. Diagrams (a) are the one-loop contribution to the free energy in the second-order formulation of the EH theory. Diagrams (b) are the view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present a covariant quantization of the first-order formulation of the Einstein-Hilbert theory using the path integral and BV formalisms. In this approach, the metric $g^{\mu\nu}$ and the connection $\Gamma^\lambda_{\mu\nu}$ are treated as independent, with the connection playing the role of an auxiliary field. We show that the gauge algebra is closed and irreducible. We further demonstrate that the Dyson-Schwinger equations in the first-order formulation lead to structural identities that constrain the Green's functions of the auxiliary field and encode the classical equations of motion at the quantum level. We revisit the quantum equivalence between the first- and second-order formulations of the Einstein-Hilbert theory. By employing a suitable trick, a manifestly covariant form of the Senjanovi\'c measure is derived. We also show that the two formulations are equivalent at the level of the effective action when the auxiliary field is on-shell.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper claims to provide a covariant quantization of the first-order Einstein-Hilbert theory by treating the metric and connection as independent fields and applying the path integral and BV formalisms. It asserts that the gauge algebra is closed and irreducible, that Dyson-Schwinger equations yield structural identities constraining the auxiliary field's Green's functions and encoding classical EOM quantumly, and that the first- and second-order formulations are equivalent at the effective action level when the auxiliary field is on-shell, with a covariant Senjanović measure derived via a suitable trick.

Significance. If the central claims hold, particularly the gauge algebra closure and the on-shell equivalence, this would offer a useful framework for quantizing gravity in the Palatini formulation and clarifying the role of auxiliary fields in quantum corrections. The derivation of structural identities from DSE could provide new tools for analyzing quantum gravity models.

major comments (2)
  1. The assertion that 'the gauge algebra is closed and irreducible' (abstract) is load-bearing for the entire BV-based quantization procedure. Given that the gauge transformations for the independent connection Γ^λ_μν involve both Lie derivatives and covariant derivatives on the diffeomorphism parameter, an explicit off-shell computation of the commutator [δ_ε1, δ_ε2] - δ_[ε1,ε2] is necessary to rule out anomalies or reducibility issues that would require additional antifields or ghosts. This verification is not evident from the abstract and is critical for the validity of the subsequent path-integral construction and Dyson-Schwinger analysis.
  2. The claim that the two formulations are equivalent at the level of the effective action when the auxiliary field is on-shell (abstract) requires a precise definition of 'on-shell' in the quantum context and how the effective action is computed in both formulations to allow direct comparison. Without explicit expressions or derivations showing how the auxiliary field integration enforces the equivalence, the result remains difficult to assess.
minor comments (2)
  1. The notation for the auxiliary connection and its associated Green's functions should be introduced with explicit definitions early in the manuscript to improve readability.
  2. The 'suitable trick' used to derive the manifestly covariant Senjanović measure should be explained in more detail, including any intermediate steps, to allow readers to follow the covariance restoration.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading and constructive comments. We address the major points below, providing clarifications and offering revisions to strengthen the presentation where needed.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: The assertion that 'the gauge algebra is closed and irreducible' (abstract) is load-bearing for the entire BV-based quantization procedure. Given that the gauge transformations for the independent connection Γ^λ_μν involve both Lie derivatives and covariant derivatives on the diffeomorphism parameter, an explicit off-shell computation of the commutator [δ_ε1, δ_ε2] - δ_[ε1,ε2] is necessary to rule out anomalies or reducibility issues that would require additional antifields or ghosts. This verification is not evident from the abstract and is critical for the validity of the subsequent path-integral construction and Dyson-Schwinger analysis.

    Authors: We agree that explicit verification strengthens the foundation. Section 3.2 of the manuscript contains the off-shell commutator computation for the gauge transformations on both g^{μν} and Γ^λ_{μν}, demonstrating that [δ_ε1, δ_ε2] equals δ_{[ε1,ε2]} with no residual terms or anomalies. The algebra closes irreducibly because the diffeomorphism action on the independent connection yields a standard Lie algebra structure without introducing new constraints. To make this more prominent and address the concern that it may not be sufficiently detailed, we will expand the calculation into a dedicated subsection with all intermediate steps and explicit index contractions in the revised manuscript. revision: yes

  2. Referee: The claim that the two formulations are equivalent at the level of the effective action when the auxiliary field is on-shell (abstract) requires a precise definition of 'on-shell' in the quantum context and how the effective action is computed in both formulations to allow direct comparison. Without explicit expressions or derivations showing how the auxiliary field integration enforces the equivalence, the result remains difficult to assess.

    Authors: We define the auxiliary connection as on-shell when it satisfies its classical equation of motion (metric compatibility and vanishing torsion). In the quantum setting this is implemented by integrating out the auxiliary field in the path integral around this background, with the Senjanović measure ensuring covariance. Section 4 derives that the resulting effective action matches the second-order formulation. We will add explicit expressions for the effective actions at one-loop order in both formulations, together with a step-by-step outline of the auxiliary-field integration, to allow direct comparison in the revised version. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; derivation applies standard BV methods after explicit demonstration of algebra properties

full rationale

The paper states it demonstrates the gauge algebra closure and irreducibility for the independent (g, Γ) variables, then applies the BV formalism to construct the path integral and derive Dyson-Schwinger identities that encode the classical equations. Equivalence of effective actions is shown on-shell for the auxiliary field, and a covariant Senjanović measure is obtained via a stated trick. No quoted step reduces a prediction or central result to a fitted input, self-definition, or load-bearing self-citation chain; the claims are presented as derived from the formalism applied to the first-order action, remaining self-contained against external gauge-theory benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on the standard mathematical structures of gauge theory quantization and the classical first-order formulation of GR; no new free parameters or invented entities are introduced.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption The gauge algebra of the first-order Einstein-Hilbert theory is closed and irreducible.
    This is presented as shown in the work and is foundational for applying the BV formalism.
  • standard math Standard rules of the path integral and BV quantization apply to this gravitational theory.
    Used throughout for the quantization procedure.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5451 in / 1434 out tokens · 53009 ms · 2026-05-12T01:58:28.907440+00:00 · methodology

Review history (2 revisions) →

discussion (0)

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

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

73 extracted references · 73 canonical work pages · 1 internal anchor

  1. [1]

    ←” and “→

    for the EH theory in both first- and second-order are derived in Appendix B. Throughout this paper, right and left functional derivatives with respect to a field (or antifield) are denoted by “←” and “→”, respectively. II. GAUGE ALGEBRA In this section, we analyze the gauge algebra of both the first and second order formulations of the EH theory. We also ...

    work page

  2. [2]

    Effective action Defining the connected generating functional as𝑊[𝑗]=−𝑖ln𝑍[𝑗], the classical field ¯𝜙is given by ¯𝜙(𝑥)= 𝛿𝑊[𝑗] 𝛿 𝑗(𝑥) .(4.17) 8 The effective actionΓ[ ¯𝜙]is obtained from𝑊[𝑗]by a Legendre transformation, Γ[ ¯𝜙]=𝑊[𝑗] − ∫ 𝑑𝑥 𝑗(𝑥) ¯𝜙(𝑥).(4.18) In our case, using that𝑊 (1) [j,J]=𝑊 (2) [j;J], we have that ¯𝔥𝜇𝜈 = 𝛿𝑊 (1) [j,J] 𝛿 𝑗𝜇𝜈 = 𝛿𝑊 (2) [j;J]...

    work page 2025

  3. [3]

    Second-order formulation We obtain the Slavnov-Taylor identities by extending the source term. In this formulation, the extended source term is given by 𝑗 𝜇𝜈 𝔥𝜇𝜈 +𝑖(¯𝜂𝜇𝑑 𝜇 − ¯𝑑 𝜇𝜂𝜇) +𝑗 𝜇 𝐵𝜇 +𝐾 𝜇𝜈 ℎ𝜇𝜌 𝜕𝜌𝑑 𝜈 +ℎ 𝜈𝜌 𝜕𝜌𝑑 𝜇 −𝜕 𝜌 (ℎ 𝜇𝜈 𝑑𝜌) +𝜅𝐾 𝜇𝑑𝜌𝜕𝜌𝑑 𝜇.(B1) 12 Note that, we have added sources to the non-linear BRST variations, these sources in the BV formalism a...

    work page

  4. [4]

    First-order formulation In the first-order form, the extended source term reads 𝑗 𝜇𝜈 𝔥𝜇𝜈 +𝐽 𝜇𝜈 𝜆 𝐺 𝜆 𝜇𝜈 +𝑖(¯𝜂𝜇𝑑 𝜇 − ¯𝑑 𝜇𝜂𝜇) +𝑗 𝜇 𝐵𝜇 +𝐾 𝜇𝜈 ℎ𝜇𝜌 𝜕𝜌𝑑 𝜈 −ℎ 𝜈𝜌 𝜕𝜌𝑑 𝜇 −𝜕 𝜌 (ℎ 𝜇𝜈 𝑑𝜌) +𝜅𝐾 𝜇𝑑𝜌𝜕𝜌𝑑 𝜇 +𝜅𝐾 𝜇𝜈 𝜆 −𝜕 𝜇𝜕𝜈 𝑑𝜆 + 1 2 (𝛿 𝜆 𝜇𝜕𝜈 +𝛿 𝜆 𝜈 𝜕𝜇)𝜕𝜌𝑑𝜌 −𝑑 𝜌𝐺 𝜆 𝜇𝜈 +𝐺 𝜌 𝜇𝜈 𝜕𝜌𝑑𝜆 − (𝐺 𝜆 𝜇𝜌 𝜕𝜈 +𝐺 𝜆 𝜈𝜌 𝜕𝜇)𝑑 𝜌 . (B3) The corresponding Zinn-Justin master equation is given by Γ (...

    work page

  5. [5]

    Ferraris, M

    M. Ferraris, M. Francaviglia, and C. Reina, Gen. Rel. Grav.14, 243 (1982)

    work page 1982

  6. [6]

    Okubo and Y

    S. Okubo and Y. Tosa, Phys. Rev. D20, 462 (1979)

    work page 1979

  7. [7]

    I. l. Buchbinder and I. l. Shapiro, Soviet Journal of Nuclear Physics37, 248 (1983)

    work page 1983

  8. [8]

    I. L. Buchbinder and I. L. Shapiro, Acta Physica Polonica B16, 103 (1985)

    work page 1985

  9. [9]

    D. G. C. McKeon, Can. J. Phys.72, 601 (1994)

    work page 1994

  10. [10]

    Brandt and D

    F. Brandt and D. McKeon, Phys. Rev. D91, 105006 (2015), arXiv:1503.02598 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2015

  11. [11]

    Brandt and D

    F. Brandt and D. McKeon, Phys. Rev. D93, 105037 (2016), arXiv:1601.04944 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2016

  12. [12]

    F. T. Brandt, J. Frenkel, S. Martins-Filho, and D. G. C. McKeon, Phys. Rev. D101, 085013 (2020), arXiv:2003.06819 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2020

  13. [13]

    F. T. Brandt, J. Frenkel, S. Martins-Filho, and D. G. C. McKeon, Phys. Rev. D102, 045013 (2020), arXiv:2007.04841 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2020

  14. [14]

    ´Alvarez, J

    E. ´Alvarez, J. Anero, and C. P. Martin, JHEP04(4), 117, arXiv:2502.08434 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv

  15. [15]

    Becchi, A

    C. Becchi, A. Rouet, and R. Stora, Phys. Lett. B52, 344 (1974)

    work page 1974

  16. [16]

    I. V. Tyutin, P. N. Lebedev Physical Institute39, 10.48550/arXiv.0812.0580 (1975)

    work page Pith review doi:10.48550/arxiv.0812.0580 1975

  17. [17]

    Faddeev and V

    L. Faddeev and V. Popov, Phys. Lett. B25, 29 (1967)

    work page 1967

  18. [18]

    Batalin and G

    I. Batalin and G. Vilkovisky, Phys. Lett. B102, 27 (1981)

    work page 1981

  19. [19]

    Batalin and G

    I. Batalin and G. Vilkovisky, Phys. Rev. D28, 2567 (1983)

    work page 1983

  20. [20]

    I. A. Batalin and G. a. Vilkovisky, Phys. Lett. B120, 166 (1983)

    work page 1983

  21. [21]

    I. L. Buchbinder and I. L. Shapiro,Introduction to Quantum Field Theory with Applications to Quantum Gravity, first edition ed., Oxford Graduate Texts (Oxford University Press, Oxford, 2021)

    work page 2021

  22. [22]

    Gomis, J

    J. Gomis, J. Par ´ıs, and S. Samuel, Physics Reports259, 1 (1995)

    work page 1995

  23. [23]

    Barnich, F

    G. Barnich, F. Brandt, and M. Henneaux, Commun.Math. Phys.174, 57 (1995)

    work page 1995

  24. [24]

    Bashkirov and G

    D. Bashkirov and G. Sardanashvily, Int. J. Geom. Methods Mod. Phys.02, 203 (2005)

    work page 2005

  25. [25]

    Brunetti, K

    R. Brunetti, K. Fredenhagen, and K. Rejzner, Commun. Math. Phys.345, 741 (2016)

    work page 2016

  26. [26]

    Upadhyay, Phys

    S. Upadhyay, Phys. Lett. B723, 470 (2013), arXiv:1305.4709 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2013

  27. [27]

    A. S. Cattaneo and M. Schiavina, J. Math. Phys.57, 023515 (2016), arXiv:1509.05762 [math-ph]

    work page arXiv 2016

  28. [28]

    Pottel and K

    S. Pottel and K. Sibold, Phys. Rev. D104, 086012 (2021)

    work page 2021

  29. [29]

    Kupka, C

    J. Kupka, C. Strickland-Constable, and F. Valach, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 211602 (2025)

    work page 2025

  30. [30]

    Asorey, G

    M. Asorey, G. Krein, M. Pardina, and I. L. Shapiro, JHEP02(2), 020, arXiv:2511.15283 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv

  31. [31]

    Stelle, Phys

    K. Stelle, Phys. Rev. D16, 953 (1977)

    work page 1977

  32. [32]

    Buchdahl, Mon

    H. Buchdahl, Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.150, 1 (1970). 13

    work page 1970

  33. [33]

    Nojiri, S

    S. Nojiri, S. Odintsov, and V. Oikonomou, Physics Reports692, 1 (2017)

    work page 2017

  34. [34]

    Y.-M. Hu, Y. Zhao, X. Ren, B. Wang, E. N. Saridakis, and Y.-F. Cai, JCAP07(07), 060, arXiv:2302.03545 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv

  35. [35]

    Oikonomou, Physics Letters B871, 139972 (2025)

    V. Oikonomou, Physics Letters B871, 139972 (2025)

    work page 2025

  36. [36]

    Kallosh, Nucl

    R. Kallosh, Nucl. Phys. B141, 141 (1978)

    work page 1978

  37. [37]

    Nielsen, Nucl

    N. Nielsen, Nucl. Phys. B140, 499 (1978)

    work page 1978

  38. [38]

    Ashtekar, Phys

    A. Ashtekar, Phys. Rev. Lett.57, 2244 (1986)

    work page 1986

  39. [39]

    J. F. Barbero, Phys. Rev. D51, 5507 (1995), arXiv:gr-qc/9410014

    work page arXiv 1995

  40. [40]

    Barbero’s Hamiltonian derived from a generalized Hilbert-Palatini action,

    S. Holst, Phys. Rev. D53, 5966 (1996), arXiv:gr-qc/9511026

    work page arXiv 1996

  41. [41]

    Real and complex connections for canonical gravity,

    G. Immirzi, Class. Quant. Grav.14, L177 (1997), arXiv:gr-qc/9612030

    work page arXiv 1997

  42. [42]

    Lavrov and P.Yu

    P. Lavrov and P.Yu. Moshin, Class. Quant. Grav.16, 2247 (1999), arXiv:hep-th/9710100

    work page arXiv 1999

  43. [43]

    Piguet, Class

    O. Piguet, Class. Quant. Grav.17, 3799 (2000), arXiv:hep-th/0005011

    work page arXiv 2000

  44. [44]

    A. S. Cattaneo and M. Schiavina, Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.23, 2025 (2020), arXiv:1707.06328 [math-ph]

    work page arXiv 2025

  45. [45]

    F. T. Brandt, J. Frenkel, S. Martins-Filho, and D. G. C. McKeon, Annals Phys.462, 169607 (2024), arXiv:2401.16343 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2024

  46. [46]

    F. T. Brandt, J. Frenkel, S. Martins-Filho, and D. G. C. McKeon, Annals Phys.470, 169801 (2024), arXiv:2409.10493 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2024

  47. [47]

    Goldberg, Phys

    J. Goldberg, Phys. Rev.111, 315 (1958)

    work page 1958

  48. [48]

    P. a. M. Dirac, Can. J. Math.2, 129 (1950)

    work page 1950

  49. [49]

    P. G. Bergmann, Phys. Rev.75, 680 (1949)

    work page 1949

  50. [50]

    Kiriushcheva, S

    N. Kiriushcheva, S. Kuzmin, and D. G. C. McKeon, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A21, 3401 (2006), arXiv:hep-th/0609219

    work page arXiv 2006

  51. [51]

    D. G. C. McKeon, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A25, 3453 (2010), arXiv:1005.3001 [gr-qc]

    work page arXiv 2010

  52. [52]

    Senjanovic, Annals Phys.100, 227 (1976)

    P. Senjanovic, Annals Phys.100, 227 (1976)

    work page 1976

  53. [53]

    Chishtie and D

    F. Chishtie and D. McKeon, Class. Quant. Grav.29, 235016 (2012), arXiv:1207.2302 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2012

  54. [54]

    Batalin and I

    I. Batalin and I. Tyutin, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A6, 3255 (1991)

    work page 1991

  55. [55]

    E. C. G. Stueckelberg, Helv. Phys. Acta30, 209 (1957)

    work page 1957

  56. [56]

    S. M. Filho,Covariant Quantization of Gauge Theories with Lagrange Multipliers, Physics Ph.D’s Thesis, Universidade de S˜ao Paulo, S˜ao Paulo (2024), arXiv:2504.04666 [hep-th]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  57. [57]

    Lavrov, Phys

    P. Lavrov, Phys. Lett. B816, 136182 (2021), arXiv:2101.06868 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2021

  58. [58]

    R. Aros, M. Contreras, and J. Zanelli, Class. Quant. Grav.20, 2937 (2003), arXiv:gr-qc/0303113

    work page arXiv 2003

  59. [59]

    F. T. Brandt, J. Frenkel, S. Martins-Filho, and D. G. C. McKeon, Phys. Rev. D113, 026001 (2026), arXiv:2510.17615 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2026

  60. [60]

    Zinn-Justin, inLect

    J. Zinn-Justin, inLect. Notes Phys., Vol. 37 (Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, Heidelberg, 1975) pp. 1–39

    work page 1975

  61. [61]

    Henneaux, Nucl

    M. Henneaux, Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl.18, 47 (1990)

    work page 1990

  62. [62]

    Lautrup, Kong

    B. Lautrup, Kong. Dan. Vid. Sel. Mat. Fys. Med.35(1967)

    work page 1967

  63. [63]

    Nakanishi, Prog

    N. Nakanishi, Prog. Theor. Phys.35, 1111 (1966)

    work page 1966

  64. [64]

    Chishtie and D

    F. Chishtie and D. McKeon, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A27, 1250077 (2012), arXiv:1110.1425 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2012

  65. [65]

    F. T. Brandt, J. Frenkel, S. Martins-Filho, and D. G. C. McKeon, Annals Phys.427, 168426 (2021), arXiv:2009.09553 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2021

  66. [66]

    Leibbrandt, Rev

    G. Leibbrandt, Rev. Mod. Phys.47, 849 (1975)

    work page 1975

  67. [67]

    Slavnov, Theor

    A. Slavnov, Theor. Math. Phys.10, 99 (1972)

    work page 1972

  68. [68]

    Taylor, Nucl

    J. Taylor, Nucl. Phys. B33, 436 (1971)

    work page 1971

  69. [69]

    Dyson, Phys

    F. Dyson, Phys. Rev.75, 1736 (1949)

    work page 1949

  70. [70]

    J. S. Schwinger, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci.37, 452 (1951)

    work page 1951

  71. [71]

    Van Nieuwenhuizen, Phys

    P. Van Nieuwenhuizen, Phys. Rept.68, 189 (1981)

    work page 1981

  72. [72]

    Ferko and L

    C. Ferko and L. Smith, Phys. Rev. Lett.133, 131602 (2024), arXiv:2405.05899 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv 2024

  73. [73]

    Fukushima and K

    O. Fukushima and K. Yoshida, JHEP09(9), 001, arXiv:2407.02204 [hep-th]

    work page arXiv