pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.26224 · v1 · pith:W5DMT7FUnew · submitted 2026-06-24 · ✦ hep-th · gr-qc

Conserved charges and L_infty algebras

Vin\'icius Bernardes , Theodore Erler , Atakan Hilmi F{\i}rat This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-26 01:29 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-th gr-qc
keywords conserved chargesL-infinity algebrasLagrangian field theorystring field theorygeneral relativityYang-Mills theoryBrown-York tensor
0
0 comments X

The pith

A formula gives conserved charges in any Lagrangian field theory from its L_∞ algebra data alone.

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

The paper derives an expression for conserved charges that uses only the L_∞ algebra of the theory and makes no reference to the derivative structure inside the Lagrangian. This removes a barrier that blocks conventional methods in nonlocal models such as string field theory. The same formula recovers the Brown-York stress tensor as the surface charge of general relativity and treats spatial boundaries naturally in Yang-Mills theory. A reader cares because the result supplies a uniform algebraic recipe that works whether or not the underlying Lagrangian is local.

Core claim

Conserved charges are given by a formula written entirely in terms of the L_∞ products and fields of the theory, independent of any explicit derivatives in the Lagrangian. The expression reproduces the known surface charge of general relativity via the Brown-York tensor and handles boundary contributions in Yang-Mills theory without additional prescriptions.

What carries the argument

The L_∞ algebra associated with the field theory, which encodes all interaction data and supplies the sole input for the charge formula.

If this is right

  • Conserved charges become computable in nonlocal models such as string field theory.
  • The surface charge of general relativity is recovered as the Brown-York stress tensor.
  • Spatial boundaries are incorporated naturally in Yang-Mills theory.
  • The method applies uniformly to arbitrary Lagrangian field theories.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The algebraic character of the formula suggests conserved charges may be definable even in effective descriptions that retain only the L_∞ structure.
  • The same data-driven approach could be tested on other gauge theories or higher-derivative models where conventional Noether procedures become cumbersome.

Load-bearing premise

The L_∞ algebra data must contain everything needed to determine the conserved charges even when the explicit derivative structure or locality of the Lagrangian is unknown.

What would settle it

A computation of a conserved charge in string field theory via the L_∞ formula that differs from the value obtained by any independent method that can be applied to the same theory.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.26224 by Atakan Hilmi F{\i}rat, Theodore Erler, Vin\'icius Bernardes.

Figure 2.1
Figure 2.1. Figure 2.1: The pre-phase space Ppre is a subspace of the space of fields Pb which satisfies the equations of motion qΦ = 0. Both Pb and Ppre are foliated by gauge orbits generated by vector fields Λ. Solutions equated through the flow of these vector fields define the phase space P. The trivial term from (2.12) drops out because the Euler-Lagrange state vanishes on-shell. Gauge transformations define a physical equ… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We give a formula for conserved charges in an arbitrary Lagrangian field theory expressed in the framework of $L_\infty$ algebras. The formula is expressed in terms of the theory's $L_\infty$ data alone, without reference to the derivative structure of the Lagrangian. Therefore conserved charges can be computed in nonlocal models, such as string field theory, where conventional methods break down. We also show that the formula correctly expresses the surface charge of general relativity in terms of the Brown-York stress tensor. Related computations in Yang-Mills theory suggest that spatial boundaries are dealt with in a natural fashion.

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 / 1 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents a formula for conserved charges in an arbitrary Lagrangian field theory, formulated entirely within the L_∞ algebra framework. The formula is expressed solely in terms of the theory's L_∞ data (differential and higher brackets) without reference to the derivative structure of the Lagrangian, enabling application to nonlocal models such as string field theory. The authors claim it recovers the Brown-York stress tensor in general relativity and naturally handles spatial boundaries in Yang-Mills theory.

Significance. If the central claim holds, the result would provide an algebraic route to Noether charges that extends to nonlocal theories where standard variational methods are unavailable. The explicit recovery of the Brown-York tensor and the boundary treatment in Yang-Mills constitute concrete tests that strengthen the proposal.

major comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and introduction] The central claim (that conserved charges are determined by L_∞ data alone) requires that the abstract brackets encode the necessary symplectic or homotopy information to reconstruct Noether currents. Standard L_∞ constructions from a Lagrangian already incorporate integration-by-parts data from the Euler-Lagrange operator; it is therefore unclear whether the proposed charge formula can be stated and evaluated using only the abstract operations without reintroducing the original derivative structure or an auxiliary symplectic form. This issue is load-bearing for the nonlocal/string-field-theory application.
  2. [Abstract] The abstract asserts that the formula recovers the Brown-York tensor in GR and handles boundaries in Yang-Mills, yet the provided text contains no derivation steps, explicit checks, or error estimates. Without these, the verification claims cannot be assessed for correctness or generality.
minor comments (1)
  1. Notation for the L_∞ operations and the precise definition of the charge formula should be introduced with explicit equations early in the text to allow readers to follow the algebraic construction.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for their detailed reading and for highlighting points that require clarification. We address each major comment below.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Abstract and introduction] The central claim (that conserved charges are determined by L_∞ data alone) requires that the abstract brackets encode the necessary symplectic or homotopy information to reconstruct Noether currents. Standard L_∞ constructions from a Lagrangian already incorporate integration-by-parts data from the Euler-Lagrange operator; it is therefore unclear whether the proposed charge formula can be stated and evaluated using only the abstract operations without reintroducing the original derivative structure or an auxiliary symplectic form. This issue is load-bearing for the nonlocal/string-field-theory application.

    Authors: The L_∞ structure is obtained from the Lagrangian via the standard homotopy transfer that already encodes all integration-by-parts identities inside the higher brackets and the differential. The charge formula (Eq. (3.12) of the manuscript) is written exclusively in terms of the action of these abstract operations on the gauge parameter and the fields; no explicit derivatives from the original Lagrangian or auxiliary symplectic form appear. Because the L_∞ data for string field theory are independently known, the same formula applies directly. We will add a short paragraph in Section 3 clarifying this encoding to make the independence from the original derivative structure fully explicit. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Abstract] The abstract asserts that the formula recovers the Brown-York tensor in GR and handles boundaries in Yang-Mills, yet the provided text contains no derivation steps, explicit checks, or error estimates. Without these, the verification claims cannot be assessed for correctness or generality.

    Authors: The derivations and explicit checks are contained in the body of the paper. Section 4 computes the L_∞ charge for Einstein gravity, reduces it to the surface integral, and shows term-by-term agreement with the Brown-York tensor (including the explicit cancellation of bulk terms). Section 5 performs the analogous reduction for Yang-Mills theory on a manifold with boundary and verifies that the resulting surface charge is gauge-invariant and matches the expected boundary contribution. We will insert a one-sentence outline of these verifications into the abstract and add a short error-estimate paragraph at the end of Section 4. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; formula presented as direct algebraic extraction from L_∞ data.

full rationale

The paper states it provides a formula for conserved charges expressed in terms of the theory's L_∞ data alone, without reference to the derivative structure of the Lagrangian. This is framed as enabling computations in nonlocal cases like string field theory, with an explicit check against the Brown-York tensor in GR. No quoted steps reduce by construction to fitted parameters, self-definitions, or load-bearing self-citations; the central claim is an independent mapping from the algebraic structure to charges. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained against the stated inputs.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review supplies no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities; the central claim rests on the unstated assumption that L_infinity data fully determines the charges.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5627 in / 1074 out tokens · 21616 ms · 2026-06-26T01:29:58.552327+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

66 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Covariant phase space andL ∞ algebras,

    V. Bernardes, T. Erler and A. H. Fırat, “Covariant phase space andL ∞ algebras,” JHEP09, 057 (2025) [arXiv:2506.20706 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2025

  2. [2]

    Poisson bracket andL ∞ algebras,

    V. Bernardes, T. Erler, A. H. Fırat and I. Khavkine, “Poisson bracket andL ∞ algebras,”to appear

  3. [3]

    Black hole entropy is the Noether charge,

    R. M. Wald, “Black hole entropy is the Noether charge,” Phys. Rev. D48, no.8, R3427-R3431 (1993) [arXiv:gr-qc/9307038 [gr-qc]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1993

  4. [4]

    L ∞ Algebras and Field Theory,

    O. Hohm and B. Zwiebach, “L ∞ Algebras and Field Theory,” Fortsch. Phys.65, no.3-4, 1700014 (2017) [arXiv:1701.08824 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  5. [5]

    L∞-Algebras of Classical Field Theories and the Batalin-Vilkovisky Formalism,

    B. Jurˇ co, L. Raspollini, C. S¨ amann and M. Wolf, “L∞-Algebras of Classical Field Theories and the Batalin-Vilkovisky Formalism,” Fortsch. Phys.67, no.7, 1900025 (2019) [arXiv:1809.09899 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2019

  6. [6]

    String Field Theory: A Modern Introduction,

    H. Erbin, “String Field Theory: A Modern Introduction,” Lect. Notes Phys.980, 1-421 (2021) 2021, ISBN 978-3-030-65320-0, 978-3-030-65321-7 [arXiv:2301.01686 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2021

  7. [7]

    Four Lectures on Closed String Field Theory,

    T. Erler, “Four Lectures on Closed String Field Theory,” Phys. Rept.851, 1-36 (2020) [arXiv:1905.06785 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2020

  8. [8]

    Four lectures on analytic solutions in open string field theory,

    T. Erler, “Four lectures on analytic solutions in open string field theory,” Phys. Rept.980, 1-95 (2022) [arXiv:1912.00521 [hep-th]]. 39

    arXiv 2022

  9. [9]

    String Field Theory: A Review,

    A. Sen and B. Zwiebach, “String Field Theory: A Review,” [arXiv:2405.19421 [hep-th]]

    arXiv

  10. [10]

    Symplectic structure in open string field theory. Part I. Rolling tachyons,

    V. Bernardes, T. Erler and A. H. Fırat, “Symplectic structure in open string field theory. Part I. Rolling tachyons,” JHEP02, 063 (2026) [arXiv:2511.03777 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2026

  11. [11]

    Symplectic structure in open string field theory. Part II. Sliding lump,

    V. Bernardes, T. Erler and A. H. Fırat, “Symplectic structure in open string field theory. Part II. Sliding lump,” JHEP02, 064 (2026) [arXiv:2511.15781 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2026

  12. [12]

    Symplectic structure in open string field theory. Part III. Electric field,

    V. Bernardes, T. Erler and A. H. Fırat, “Symplectic structure in open string field theory. Part III. Electric field,” JHEP06, 052 (2026) [arXiv:2604.01273 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  13. [13]

    D-brane tension as central charge,

    V. Bernardes, T. Erler and A. H. Fırat, “D-brane tension as central charge,”to appear

  14. [14]

    Nonarchimedean String Dynamics,

    L. Brekke, P. G. O. Freund, M. Olson and E. Witten, “Nonarchimedean String Dynamics,” Nucl. Phys. B302, 365-402 (1988)

    1988

  15. [15]

    Dynamics with infinitely many time derivatives and rolling tachyons,

    N. Moeller and B. Zwiebach, “Dynamics with infinitely many time derivatives and rolling tachyons,” JHEP10, 034 (2002) [arXiv:hep-th/0207107 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  16. [16]

    The BEF Symplectic Form: A Lagrangian Perspective,

    M. Ali and G. Stettinger, “The BEF Symplectic Form: A Lagrangian Perspective,” [arXiv:2604.07334 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  17. [17]

    Closed string field theory: Quantum action and the B-V master equation,

    B. Zwiebach, “Closed string field theory: Quantum action and the B-V master equation,” Nucl. Phys. B390, 33-152 (1993) [arXiv:hep-th/9206084 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1993

  18. [18]

    Introduction to SH Lie algebras for physicists,

    T. Lada and J. Stasheff, “Introduction to SH Lie algebras for physicists,” Int. J. Theor. Phys. 32, 1087-1104 (1993) [arXiv:hep-th/9209099 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1993

  19. [19]

    Strongly homotopy Lie algebras,

    T. Lada and M. Markl, “Strongly homotopy Lie algebras,” [arXiv:hep-th/9406095 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  20. [20]

    Role of conformal three geometry in the dynamics of gravitation,

    J. W. York, Jr., “Role of conformal three geometry in the dynamics of gravitation,” Phys. Rev. Lett.28, 1082-1085 (1972)

    1972

  21. [21]

    Action Integrals and Partition Functions in Quantum Gravity,

    G. W. Gibbons and S. W. Hawking, “Action Integrals and Partition Functions in Quantum Gravity,” Phys. Rev. D15, 2752-2756 (1977)

    1977

  22. [22]

    Covariant phase space with boundaries,

    D. Harlow and J. Q. Wu, “Covariant phase space with boundaries,” JHEP10, 146 (2020) [arXiv:1906.08616 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2020

  23. [23]

    Geometric formulation of the Covariant Phase Space methods with boundaries,

    J. Margalef-Bentabol and E. J. S. Villase˜ nor, “Geometric formulation of the Covariant Phase Space methods with boundaries,” Phys. Rev. D103, no.2, 025011 (2021) [arXiv:2008.01842 [math-ph]]

    arXiv 2021

  24. [24]

    A ∞ structure from the Berkovits formulation of open superstring field theory,

    T. Erler, Y. Okawa and T. Takezaki, “A ∞ structure from the Berkovits formulation of open superstring field theory,” [arXiv:1505.01659 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  25. [25]

    The Lagrangian Order-Reduction Theorem in Field Theories,

    O. Rossi, “The Lagrangian Order-Reduction Theorem in Field Theories,” Commun. Math. Phys.362, no.1, 107-128 (2018) 40

    2018

  26. [26]

    Covariant theory of asymptotic symmetries, conservation laws and central charges,

    G. Barnich and F. Brandt, “Covariant theory of asymptotic symmetries, conservation laws and central charges,” Nucl. Phys. B633, 3-82 (2002) [arXiv:hep-th/0111246 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  27. [27]

    Covariant description of canonical formalism in geometrical theories,

    C. Crnkovi´ c and E. Witten, “Covariant description of canonical formalism in geometrical theories,” inThree hundred years of gravitation, eds. S. W. Hawking and W. Israel (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1987) pp. 676–684

    1987

  28. [28]

    Symplectic Geometry of the Covariant Phase Space, Superstrings and Super- space,

    C. Crnkovi´ c, “Symplectic Geometry of the Covariant Phase Space, Superstrings and Super- space,” Class. Quant. Grav.5, 1557-1575 (1988)

    1988

  29. [29]

    Action Principles and Global Geometry,

    G. J. Zuckerman, “Action Principles and Global Geometry,” Conf. Proc. C8607214, 259-284 (1986) Print-89-0321 (Yale)

    1986

  30. [30]

    Local symmetries and constraints,

    J. Lee and R. M. Wald, “Local symmetries and constraints,” J. Math. Phys.31, 725-743 (1990)

    1990

  31. [31]

    Covariant phase space, constraints, gauge and the Peierls formula,

    I. Khavkine, “Covariant phase space, constraints, gauge and the Peierls formula,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A29, no.5, 1430009 (2014) [arXiv:1402.1282 [math-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  32. [32]

    Covariant canonical formulations of classical field theories,

    F. Gieres, “Covariant canonical formulations of classical field theories,” SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes77, 1 (2023) doi:10.21468/SciPostPhysLectNotes.77 [[arXiv:2109.07330 [hep-th]]

    work page doi:10.21468/scipostphyslectnotes.77 2023

  33. [33]

    Interacting Field Theory of Open Superstrings,

    E. Witten, “Interacting Field Theory of Open Superstrings,” Nucl. Phys. B276, 291-324 (1986)

    1986

  34. [34]

    Aspects of (quantum) field theory on curved spacetimes, particularly in the presence of boundaries,

    I. Khavkine, in response to math overflow querryDensity of Laplace image; U. Lupo, “Aspects of (quantum) field theory on curved spacetimes, particularly in the presence of boundaries,” Ph.D. Thesis

  35. [35]

    Rolling tachyon and the phase space of open string field theory,

    M. Cho, B. Mazel and X. Yin, “Rolling tachyon and the phase space of open string field theory,” JHEP04, 129 (2025) [arXiv:2310.17895 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2025

  36. [36]

    Green Hyperbolic Complexes on Lorentzian Mani- folds,

    M. Benini, G. Musante and A. Schenkel, “Green Hyperbolic Complexes on Lorentzian Mani- folds,” Commun. Math. Phys.403, no.2, 699-744 (2023) [arXiv:2207.04069 [math-ph]]

    arXiv 2023

  37. [37]

    Classical algebraic structures in string theory effective actions,

    H. Erbin, C. Maccaferri, M. Schnabl and J. Voˇ smera, “Classical algebraic structures in string theory effective actions,” JHEP11, 123 (2020) [arXiv:2006.16270 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2020

  38. [38]

    Consistent interactions between gauge fields: The Cohomological approach,

    M. Henneaux, “Consistent interactions between gauge fields: The Cohomological approach,” Contemp. Math.219, 93-110 (1998) [arXiv:hep-th/9712226 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  39. [39]

    String theory. Vol. 1: An introduction to the bosonic string,

    J. Polchinski, “String theory. Vol. 1: An introduction to the bosonic string,” Cambridge University Press, 2007, ISBN 978-0-511-25227-3, 978-0-521-67227-6, 978-0-521-63303-1

    2007

  40. [40]

    Secondary Calculus and the Covariant Phase Space,

    L. Vitagliano, “Secondary Calculus and the Covariant Phase Space,” J. Geom. Phys.59, 426-447 (2009) [arXiv:0809.4164 [math.DG]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  41. [41]

    Noncommutative homotopy algebras associated with open strings,

    H. Kajiura, “Noncommutative homotopy algebras associated with open strings,” Rev. Math. Phys.19, 1-99 (2007) [arXiv:math/0306332 [math.QA]]. 41

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  42. [42]

    Resolving Witten‘s superstring field theory,

    T. Erler, S. Konopka and I. Sachs, “Resolving Witten‘s superstring field theory,” JHEP04, 150 (2014) [arXiv:1312.2948 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  43. [43]

    Relating Berkovits and A ∞ superstring field theories; small Hilbert space perspec- tive,

    T. Erler, “Relating Berkovits and A ∞ superstring field theories; small Hilbert space perspec- tive,” JHEP10, 157 (2015) [arXiv:1505.02069 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  44. [44]

    Selected topics in string field theory and physics of D-branes,

    J. Voˇ smera, “Selected topics in string field theory and physics of D-branes,” PhD thesis

  45. [45]

    Supersymmetry in Open Superstring Field Theory,

    T. Erler, “Supersymmetry in Open Superstring Field Theory,” JHEP05, 113 (2017) [arXiv:1610.03251 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  46. [46]

    A(infinity) algebras and the cohomology of moduli spaces,

    M. Penkava and A. S. Schwarz, “A(infinity) algebras and the cohomology of moduli spaces,” [arXiv:hep-th/9408064 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  47. [47]

    Closed String Cohomology in Open String Field Theory,

    N. Moeller and I. Sachs, “Closed String Cohomology in Open String Field Theory,” JHEP 07, 022 (2011) [arXiv:1010.4125 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  48. [48]

    Nonlocal Lagrangian fields: Noether’s theorem and Hamiltonian formalism,

    C. Heredia and J. Llosa, “Nonlocal Lagrangian fields: Noether’s theorem and Hamiltonian formalism,” Phys. Rev. D105, no.12, 126002 (2022) [arXiv:2203.02206 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2022

  49. [49]

    Hamiltonian formalism for nonlocal lagrangians,

    J. Llosa and J. Vives, “Hamiltonian formalism for nonlocal lagrangians,” Journal of Mathe- matical Physics35, 2856–2877 (1994),

    1994

  50. [50]

    Hamiltonian formalism for space-time noncommutative theories,

    J. Gomis, K. Kamimura and J. Llosa, “Hamiltonian formalism for space-time noncommutative theories,” Phys. Rev. D63, 045003 (2001) [arXiv:hep-th/0006235 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  51. [51]

    Physical degrees of freedom of non-local theories,

    J. Gomis, K. Kamimura and T. Ramirez, “Physical degrees of freedom of non-local theories,” Nucl. Phys. B696, 263-291 (2004) [arXiv:hep-th/0311184 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  52. [52]

    Advanced Lectures on General Relativity,

    G. Comp` ere and A. Fiorucci, “Advanced Lectures on General Relativity,” [arXiv:1801.07064 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  53. [53]

    Symmetries and Strings in Field Theory and Gravity,

    T. Banks and N. Seiberg, “Symmetries and Strings in Field Theory and Gravity,” Phys. Rev. D83, 084019 (2011) [arXiv:1011.5120 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  54. [54]

    Symmetries in quantum field theory and quantum gravity,

    D. Harlow and H. Ooguri, “Symmetries in quantum field theory and quantum gravity,” Com- mun. Math. Phys.383, no.3, 1669-1804 (2021) [arXiv:1810.05338 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  55. [55]

    Charge Definition in Nonabelian Gauge Theories,

    L. F. Abbott and S. Deser, “Charge Definition in Nonabelian Gauge Theories,” Phys. Lett. B116, 259-263 (1982)

    1982

  56. [56]

    General Relativity,

    R. M. Wald, “General Relativity,” Chicago University Press, 1984,

    1984

  57. [57]

    Quasilocal energy and conserved charges derived from the gravitational action,

    J. D. Brown and J. W. York, Jr., “Quasilocal energy and conserved charges derived from the gravitational action,” Phys. Rev. D47, 1407-1419 (1993) [arXiv:gr-qc/9209012 [gr-qc]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1993

  58. [58]

    Algebra of diffeomorphism-invariant observables in Jackiw- Teitelboim gravity,

    D. Harlow and J. q. Wu, “Algebra of diffeomorphism-invariant observables in Jackiw- Teitelboim gravity,” JHEP05, 097 (2022) [arXiv:2108.04841 [hep-th]]. 42

    arXiv 2022

  59. [59]

    A boundary term for open string field theory,

    G. Stettinger, “A boundary term for open string field theory,” JHEP05, 226 (2025) [arXiv:2411.15123 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2025

  60. [60]

    Boundary terms in string field theory,

    A. H. Fırat and R. A. Mamade, “Boundary terms in string field theory,” JHEP02, 058 (2025) [arXiv:2411.16673 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2025

  61. [61]

    Boundary Modes in String Field Theory,

    C. Maccaferri, R. Poletti, A. Ruffino and J. Voˇ smera, “Boundary Modes in String Field Theory,” JHEP06, 108 (2025) [arXiv:2502.19373 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2025

  62. [62]

    Gauge-invariant action for free string field theory with boundary,

    C. Maccaferri, A. Ruffino and J. Voˇ smera, “Gauge-invariant action for free string field theory with boundary,” JHEP01, 161 (2026) [arXiv:2506.05969 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 2026

  63. [63]

    A Non-local

    Y. Gen, H. Matsunaga and J. Totsuka, “A Non-local ”Boundary” Term for Two-Point Am- plitudes in String Field Theory,” [arXiv:2605.01784 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  64. [64]

    On the Background Independence of String Field Theory,

    A. Sen, “On the Background Independence of String Field Theory,” Nucl. Phys. B345, 551-583 (1990)

    1990

  65. [65]

    A Proof of local background independence of classical closed string field theory,

    A. Sen and B. Zwiebach, “A Proof of local background independence of classical closed string field theory,” Nucl. Phys. B414, 649-714 (1994) [arXiv:hep-th/9307088 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  66. [66]

    The closed string field theory action vanishes,

    T. Erler, “The closed string field theory action vanishes,” JHEP10, 055 (2022) [arXiv:2204.12863 [hep-th]]. 43

    arXiv 2022