Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

The paper claims that cosmic-ray acceleration spectra can act as probes of quantum spacetime, predicting spectral index transitions, including a −2 to −3 steepening when energy-momentum composition is deformed but the dispersion relation is

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 · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 11:52 UTC pith:7L2MRSA5

load-bearing objection Interesting and mostly sound first-order framework, but the classical-basis headline result is unsupported as printed due to an antipode error. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2601.04961 v2 pith:7L2MRSA5 submitted 2026-01-08 gr-qc

Fermi Acceleration Mechanisms Beyond Lorentz Symmetry

Gilson A. Ferreira , Erick Aguiar , A. A. Ara\'ujo Filho , Edson Otoniel , Valdir B. Bezerra , Iarley P. Lobo This is my paper
classification gr-qc PACS 98.70.Sa11.30.Cp04.60.-m
keywords Fermi accelerationcosmic raysdeformed special relativityLorentz invariance violationkappa-Poincaré algebraspectral indexquantum gravity phenomenologydiffusive shock acceleration
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.

This paper tries to extend the classic Fermi acceleration mechanisms to physics beyond Lorentz symmetry. It builds a general prescription in which the ingredients of acceleration—frame transformations, dispersion relations, and momentum composition laws—can be deformed, and applies it to three representative scenarios: the bicrossproduct basis of the κ-Poincaré algebra (deformed dispersion and composition), an explicit Lorentz-violating model (deformed dispersion only), and the classical basis of κ-Poincaré (standard dispersion, deformed composition). The central result is that the particle spectrum and spectral index become energy-dependent, and in the classical-basis first-order mechanism the spectral index runs from −2 to −3 at high energies. Because the classical basis preserves the speed of light, this particular signature would come from deformed conservation laws alone and would evade bounds from time-of-flight and threshold experiments.

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper establishes that Fermi acceleration is sensitive to which sector of Lorentz symmetry is modified. In the first-order mechanism, analytically solvable spectra are derived: for the bicrossproduct basis the spectrum is N(x) ∝ csch⁴(x)[coth(x) ± 1] depending on the sign of the deformation parameter ℓ, and for the LIV case N(x) ∝ e^{2x}/(e^x−1)² or 1/(e^x−1)²; both deviate from the special-relativistic power law E^{−2}. In the classical basis, where the dispersion relation is unchanged, the first-order spectrum is N(x) ∝ (x+1)/[x²(x+2)²], giving a spectral index that transitions from −2 to −3. The second-order mechanism is treated numerically; its effects appear at ene

What carries the argument

The carrying mechanism is Bell's shock-acceleration argument turned into a diffusion-loss equation, with the escape probability now set by the energy-dependent speed of light c_ℓ(E). For the bicrossproduct basis, c_ℓ(E) = c e^{ℓE}; this enters the escape probability P_esc = (4/3)U/c_ℓ(E), making the spectral equation energy-dependent. For the classical basis, the key ingredient is the deformed antipode ⊖p = −p(ℓE + √(1+ℓ²c⁴m²)) that replaces ordinary momentum reversal in the elastic collision, while c_ℓ = c stays constant. The spectra then follow from solving the resulting first- or second-order differential equations for N(E).

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the escape probability in the shock argument is inversely proportional to the energy-dependent speed c_ℓ(E); if the escape probability is actually energy-independent (as in the standard argument), the predicted spectral transitions reduce to tiny corrections.

What would settle it

Measure the cosmic-ray spectral index in a clean Fermi-type accelerator (e.g., supernova remnant shocks) across a wide energy range: if the index remains a constant power law, or if a steepening appears in a scenario with a modified dispersion relation but no classical-basis transition, the central claim fails. More narrowly, the classical-basis prediction N(x) ∝ (x+1)/[x²(x+2)²] is rejected if the observed spectrum around the supposed transition energy is inconsistent with a smooth −2-to−3 run at any deformation scale.

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

If this is right

  • If the first-order Fermi spectrum is observed to steepen from index −2 to −3 at high energies without any accompanying time-of-flight or threshold anomalies, that would point specifically to a deformed momentum composition law rather than a modified dispersion.
  • The energy dependence of the spectral index provides a new observable for cosmic ray observatories: the transition energy would directly encode the deformation scale ℓ^{−1}.
  • In the bicrossproduct and LIV scenarios, superluminal vs subluminal signatures are distinguishable: LIV superluminal stabilizes the index to 0 at high energies, while DSR subluminal drops below −2.
  • The second-order mechanism shows deviations starting around 10^{−3}ℓ^{−1}, extending the probe to lower energies relative to the Planck scale.
  • Since the classical basis evades the usual photon time-of-flight and threshold bounds, the deformation scale could be below the Planck scale and still have escaped detection—making cosmic ray spectra a unique probe for this sector.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The energy dependence of the predicted spectra is largely carried by the assumption that the escape probability scales as 1/c_ℓ(E) in Bell's argument; if that prescription is modified, the same deformed kinematics would produce much weaker signatures. Testing this modeling choice against a more complete transport treatment would sharpen the predictions.
  • A direct statistical fit of the classical-basis spectrum to the Pierre Auger energy spectrum could place a lower bound on ℓ^{−1}; the paper demonstrates the spectral shapes but does not perform such inference.
  • The framework could be transferred to other shock environments, such as supernova remnants with different compression ratios, and to other deformed-relativity settings; the same diffusion equation would translate those into new spectral predictions.
  • If second-order effects indeed appear at 10^{−3}ℓ^{−1}, then for ℓ^{−1} near 10^{15} eV the deviation would occur around 10^{12} eV, which is within reach of current balloon and space-borne cosmic-ray experiments—an opportunity the paper only gestures at.

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

2 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper constructs a general framework for first- and second-order Fermi acceleration in which frame transformations, energy-momentum conservation laws, and dispersion relations can be deformed. It is applied to the κ-Poincaré algebra in the bicrossproduct basis, to a Lorentz-violating limit with only a modified dispersion relation, and to the classical basis with an undeformed dispersion relation but a deformed composition law. The central analytic result is the first-order spectral index in the classical basis, which runs from -2 at low energy to -3 at high energy (Eqs. 75-76). The bicrossproduct and LIV cases produce energy-dependent escape probabilities and modified spectra, solved analytically in first order and numerically in second order.

Significance. If the derivation is correct, the paper offers a new phenomenological window: Fermi acceleration spectra could become a quantum-gravity probe, particularly via the classical basis, which avoids the strong bounds on modified dispersion relations. The first-order equations are solved in closed form, and the predictions are parameterized by the deformation scale ℓ rather than fitted to data. However, the printed derivation contains a central algebraic inconsistency that must be fixed before the results can be used.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. V.B, Eqs. (59), (71)] The antipode for the classical basis is printed as ⊖p′ = -p(ℓE + sqrt(1+ℓ^2 c^4 m^2)), which for massless particles gives ⊖p′ = -p(1+ℓE). Substituting this into Eq. (7) with the standard Lorentz transformation does not yield the energy gain Eq. (71); instead one obtains a term proportional to -ℓE times the SR gain, which would not produce the -2→-3 transition. Solving p⊕q = 0 using the composition law (56)-(57) gives q_E = -E/(1+ℓE), q_i = -p_i/(1+ℓE) for massless on-shell particles, which does reproduce Eq. (71). Thus Eq. (59) is internally inconsistent with the stated composition law and with the subsequent derivation. This is load-bearing because the central claim in Sec. V.B rests on Eq. (71). The authors must correct Eq. (59) or explicitly derive the antipode they actually use.
  2. [Abstract and Sec. VII] The abstract states: 'We compare our results with Pierre Auger data.' However, no quantitative comparison with Auger data appears anywhere in the manuscript. Section VII explicitly says 'We do not aim in this paper to explain transitions in cosmic ray spectra,' and the only related figure (Fig. 4) shows theoretical curves for different ℓ without data points. Either the claimed comparison should be added, or the abstract should be revised to describe the actual content.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Eq. (62)] In the LIV average energy gain, ⟨ΔE⟩_LIV, the factor (1 - e^{ℓE}) appears; the subsequent ODE (64) and solution (67) are consistent with (1 - e^{-ℓE}). Please correct the sign/argument typo, including in Eq. (63) if it propagates.
  2. [Notation throughout, esp. Eqs. (15), (17), (52), (60)-(62)] The symbol 'cℓ' is used both for the energy-dependent speed c_ℓ(E) (e.g., Eq. (15)) and for the product cℓ (c times the deformation scale, e.g., Eq. (60)). This ambiguity makes the derivation difficult to follow and may have caused the inconsistencies noted in the major comments. Use distinct notation, e.g., c_ℓ(E) for the speed and cℓ for the product.
  3. [Eq. (27) and Eq. (82)] The collision probability P(θ) is written as P(θ) ∝ 1 + U/c_ℓ cosθ in Eq. (27), but in the second-order bicrossproduct derivation the same symbol P(θ) appears with an e^{-ℓE} factor. This is consistent with c_ℓ = c e^{ℓE}, but the two expressions should be connected explicitly to avoid confusion.
  4. [Sec. II.B.2] The substitution of the differential flux for the integral flux in the escape probability is a modeling choice. It would be helpful to state more explicitly that this is an assumption, since the standard Bell argument uses the integral flux and the difference can affect the bicrossproduct spectra.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity (score 0); central classical-basis transition is internally consistent with the composition law, but Eq. (59) as printed is inconsistent with Eq. (71).

full rationale

No circular reduction is present. The deformation scale ℓ is scanned (Fig. 4) rather than fitted to Pierre Auger data, and the spectra are obtained by solving the diffusion equation (20) from stated inputs (frame transformations, composition law/antipode, dispersion relation, escape probability). The energy-dependent escape probability in the bicrossproduct case is an explicit modeling step (Eqs. (15)-(18)), not a hidden reuse of the output. Self-citations ([46],[47]) support standard κ-Poincaré technical facts that are also in external references ([22],[23],[45]) and are not load-bearing uniqueness claims. There is, however, a serious non-circular defect: as printed, Eq. (59) with m=0 gives ⊖p = -p(1+ℓE); substituted into Eq. (7) this yields ΔE ∝ (U/c)E cosθ(2+ℓE), whose diffusion equation gives N ∝ E^{-2}, not the claimed transition. Eq. (71) follows instead from the inverse antipode ⊖p = -p/(1+ℓE), which is the antipode implied by the classical-basis composition law (56)-(57). So Eq. (59) appears to be a typesetting error (division instead of multiplication); the -2 to -3 result is internally consistent with the composition law and is not a circular construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 8 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on: (i) κ-Poincaré kinematics (bicrossproduct and classical bases) imported from the cited literature; (ii) a generalized Bell argument whose novelty is the energy-dependent escape probability P_esc = (4/3)U/c_ℓ(E); (iii) modeling elastic collisions as p′ → ⊖p′ with the single-particle antipode and no backreaction; (iv) standard astro inputs (non-relativistic shock thermodynamics, steady-state diffusion). The deformation scale ℓ is a free parameter scanned in Fig. 4; ε selects DSR vs LIV. c_ℓ(E) is derived from the MDR, not postulated; no new particles, forces, or dimensions are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • ℓ (κ-Poincaré deformation scale, ℓ = κ⁻¹) = not fitted; scanned (e.g., 10¹⁵–10¹⁹ eV in Fig. 4)
    The energy where spectral effects appear is set by ℓ⁻¹; all spectra and spectral indices are functions of x = ℓE. No independent constraint is imposed in the bicrossproduct sections; the classical basis is designed to evade MDR bounds.
  • ε (DSR/LIV selector) = fixed at 0 or 1
    Interpolates the deformation in boosts and composition law: ε=1 is full κ-Poincaré bicrossproduct DSR, ε=0 is LIV (MDR only). Chosen by hand, not fitted.
  • τ_esc = α⁻¹ normalization (second order) = τ_esc = α⁻¹
    Convention (Eq. 32) adopted to force the SR second-order spectral index to -2; it sets the comparison baseline for all second-order spectra.
axioms (8)
  • domain assumption κ-Poincaré bicrossproduct Poisson algebra, mass Casimir, boosts, and antipode (Eqs. 34–45, 53–55), from Majid–Ruegg [22] and Gubitosi–Mercati [45]
    The entire deformed kinematics of the bicrossproduct sections is imported from prior literature without re-derivation.
  • domain assumption Classical-basis composition law and antipode (Eqs. 56–59), from Borowiec–Pachol [23], Pachol [25], Carmona et al. [26]
    The classical-basis results rest on this imported deformed composition rule.
  • ad hoc to paper Elastic collision maps p′ → ⊖p′ using the single-particle antipode; boost-parameter backreaction is omitted
    Footnote 1 (p. 9) omits backreaction as 'unnecessary for our purposes', but this collision rule is a load-bearing input distinguishing DSR from LIV.
  • ad hoc to paper Escape probability from differential-flux ratio with energy-dependent speed: P_esc = (4/3)U/c_ℓ(E)
    Eqs. (15)–(18): replaces the constant speed c in Bell's argument with the deformed c_ℓ(E); this choice drives the spectral-index running. Asserted, not derived.
  • domain assumption Non-relativistic monatomic shock thermodynamics: U = 3v_s/4, downstream speed v_s/4
    Sec. II.A, from Longair [41] and Spurio [42]; standard astrophysics input.
  • domain assumption Steady-state diffusion-loss equation with D∇²N = Q = 0 (Bell's argument)
    Eqs. (11)–(12): standard steady-state treatment; sources and spatial diffusion neglected.
  • domain assumption Encounter probability P(θ) ∝ 1 + (U/c_ℓ)cos θ
    Eq. (27): standard relativistic collision-rate weighting, generalized with c_ℓ.
  • domain assumption Ultrarelativistic limit m ≈ 0 used throughout
    Sec. II.B: momentum expressed as a function of energy and angle for massless particles; all spectra computed in this limit.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 19226 in / 43272 out tokens · 389336 ms · 2026-08-03T11:52:49.691536+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We construct models for first- and second-order Fermi acceleration of particles, incorporating generic frame transformations, dispersion relations, and conservation laws. Within this framework, we study deformations of Lorentz symmetry via the $\kappa$-Poincar\'e algebra in the bicrossproduct and classical bases, which respectively deform and preserve the relativistic dispersion relation. We also examine explicit Lorentz symmetry violation and compare the results with deformed relativity and special relativity. The energy spectra present different shapes when one considers deformation or violation of Lorentz symmetry in superluminal or subluminal scenarios. One of the possible outcomes is an intense decay of the spectrum for higher energies. We compare our results with Pierre Auger data.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2601.04961 by A. A. Ara\'ujo Filho, Edson Otoniel, Erick Aguiar, Gilson A. Ferreira, Iarley P. Lobo, Valdir B. Bezerra.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: First-order Fermi mechanism in the superluminal scenario considering Lorentz preservation, violation, and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: First-order Fermi mechanism in the subluminal scenario considering Lorentz preservation, violation, and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: First-order Fermi mechanism considering Lorentz preservation and deformation in the classical basis of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Differential spectrum, derived from Fermi 1st order mechanism, multiplied by [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Second-order Fermi mechanism in the superluminal scenario considering Lorentz preservation, violation, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Second-order Fermi mechanism in the subluminal scenario considering Lorentz preservation, violation, and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Second-order Fermi mechanism considering Lorentz preservation and deformation in the classical basis of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_7.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. Bicovariant Codifferential Calculi

    math.QA 2026-02 unverdicted novelty 6.0

    Bicovariant codifferential calculi on Hopf algebras reduce to classifying Yetter-Drinfeld submodules, providing a dual to existing differential calculi constructions.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references · 35 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Momentum as a function of velocity and the speed of light 9

  2. [2]

    The escape probability 5

  3. [3]

    Second order F ermi acceleration mechanism6 IV

    The spectral index 6 III. Second order F ermi acceleration mechanism6 IV. Deformation and Violation of Lorentz Symmetry8 A. Bicrossproduct basis 8

  4. [4]

    Classical basis 10 V

    Modeling Lorentz Violation 10 B. Classical basis 10 V. First order F ermi Mechanism beyond Lorentz symmetry10 A. The bicrossproduct basis ofκ-Poincaré algebra and LIV scenarios 11

  5. [5]

    Classical basis 13 VI

    Particle spectrum (super and subluminal cases) 11 B. Classical basis 13 VI. Second order F ermi Mechanism beyond Lorentz symmetry14 A. The bicrossproduct basis ofκ-Poincaré algebra and LIV scenarios 14

  6. [6]

    diffusive shock acceleration

    Particle spectrum (super and subluminal cases) 16 B. Classical basis 17 VII. Discussion 18 Acknowledgments 19 References 19 ∗Electronic address: erick.leite@academico.ufpb.br †Electronic address: dilto@fisica.ufc.br ‡Electronic address: valdir@fisica.ufpb.br §Electronic address: gilson.alves@estudante.ufcg.edu.br ¶Electronic address: lobofisica@gmail.com,...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2026

  7. [7]

    the infinitesimal transformationsf0 and ⃗fthat act on energy and momentum from (3) and (4),

  8. [8]

    the opposite momentum⊖⃗ pfrom (5),

  9. [9]

    Any of these ingredients can produce a deformed energy gain and modify the acceleration process

    the deformed velocity of particlesvi from (8). Any of these ingredients can produce a deformed energy gain and modify the acceleration process. 5

  10. [10]

    Particle spectrum From Bell’s argument [39, 40], we can derive the particle spectrum using a diffusion-loss equation. The number of particlesNat a given timetwithin an energy range(E, E+dE)is given by: dN dt =D∇ 2N+Q− N τesc + ∂(b·N) ∂E ,(11) whereDis a diffusion coefficient,Qis the rate of particle injection per unit volume,bis the energy loss rate, andτ...

  11. [11]

    detector

    The escape probability In this section, we follow the discussion by Spurio (see section 6.5.1 of [42]). The flux is the same in either direction of particle passage, meaning that at each pass, the particle gains energy. In the downstream region, due to the random velocity of the particles, described by the isotropic nature of the velocity distribution in ...

  12. [12]

    magnetic mirrors,

    The spectral index Since the velocity of the shock front is given byv s = 4U/3, whereUis the velocity of the perturbed gas in the downstream region in the rest frame of the unperturbed gas in the upstream region, we derive that the escape probability is related to the residence probabilityPas: 1−P=P esc = 4 3 U cℓ .(18) Using these expressions in (12), we...

    1949

  13. [13]

    Momentum as a function of velocity and the speed of light To conclude the brief review of the main results of the bicrossproduct basis of theκ-Poincaré algebra, we also derive the speed of particles from the modified dispersion relation defined by the mass Casimir. From (38), we can find the energy and its first derivative: E=ℓ −1 log 2 2 +c 4m2ℓ2 −cℓ p c...

  14. [14]

    Without any of these ingredients, we are in a Lorentz-violating scenario

    Modeling Lorentz Violation The set of conditions that describe a deformed relativistic scenario is given by the deformed algebra of generators (which defines the mass shell) and the composition law. Without any of these ingredients, we are in a Lorentz-violating scenario. The quantum gravity community usually assumes such a scenario as one produced by a m...

  15. [15]

    In Special Relativity, we havecℓ =cand⟨∆E⟩= 4U/3c, which gives: E dNSR dE + 2NSR = 0⇒N SR(E)∝E −2,(65) with a spectral index of−2

    Particle spectrum (super and subluminal cases) In the case ofκ-Poincaré and LIV, we use (20) to find: N (1) κ,b ′(E) +ℓ e2ℓE + 3 e2ℓE −1 N (1) κ,b (E) = 0, N (1) LIV ′(E) + 2ℓ eℓE −1 N (1) LIV (E) = 0,(64) where prime ′ denotes differentiation with respect to energy, and we use the superscript(1)to denote the first-order mechanism. In Special Relativity, ...

  16. [16]

    Particle spectrum (super and subluminal cases) As in the first-order mechanism, we can define a dimensionless quantityx=ℓEto describe the spectrumN(x)and the spectral index, given by (22), in a simpler form: (ex −1) 2 (ex + 1)2 N (2) b,κ,+ ′′(x) + 6ex + 7e2x + 1 N (2) b,κ,+ ′(x) + 2 −8ex −e 2x −8e 3x + 6e4x −1 N (2) b,κ,+(x) = 0(87) and (ex −1) 2 −N (2) L...

  17. [17]

    0.0010 0.0015 0.0020 0.0025 0.0030 - 3.2 - 3.0 - 2.8 - 2.6 - 2.4 - 2.2 - 2.0 (b) Spectral indexes of Fermi second-order mechanism for DSR (blue) and SR (red) cases

    × 10-4 0.001 0.005 0.010 (a) Spectra of Fermi second-order mechanism for DSR (blue) and SR (red) cases. 0.0010 0.0015 0.0020 0.0025 0.0030 - 3.2 - 3.0 - 2.8 - 2.6 - 2.4 - 2.2 - 2.0 (b) Spectral indexes of Fermi second-order mechanism for DSR (blue) and SR (red) cases. Figure 7: Second-order Fermi mechanism considering Lorentz preservation and deformation ...

    2023

  18. [18]

    Polchinski,String Theory

    J. Polchinski,String Theory. Vol. 1: An Introduction to the Bosonic String. Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics. Cambridge University Press, 1998

    1998

  19. [19]

    Lorentz Invariance Violation from String Theory,

    N. E. Mavromatos, “Lorentz Invariance Violation from String Theory,”PoSQG-PH(2007) 027,arXiv:0708.2250 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  20. [20]

    A Short Review of Loop Quantum Gravity,

    A. Ashtekar and E. Bianchi, “A Short Review of Loop Quantum Gravity,”Rept. Prog. Phys.84(2021) no. 4, 042001, arXiv:2104.04394 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  21. [21]

    Spacetime-noncommutativity regime of Loop Quantum Gravity,

    G. Amelino-Camelia, M. M. da Silva, M. Ronco, L. Cesarini, and O. M. Lecian, “Spacetime-noncommutativity regime of Loop Quantum Gravity,”Phys. Rev. D95(2017) no. 2, 024028,arXiv:1605.00497 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  22. [22]

    Quantum Gravity from Causal Dynamical Triangulations: A Review,

    R. Loll, “Quantum Gravity from Causal Dynamical Triangulations: A Review,”Class. Quant. Grav.37(2020) no. 1, 013002,arXiv:1905.08669 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  23. [23]

    Spectral Dimension of the Universe in Quantum Gravity at a Lifshitz Point,

    P. Horava, “Spectral Dimension of the Universe in Quantum Gravity at a Lifshitz Point,”Phys. Rev. Lett.102(2009) 161301,arXiv:0902.3657 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  24. [24]

    3D Quantum Gravity and Effective Noncommutative Quantum Field Theory,

    L. Freidel and E. R. Livine, “3D Quantum Gravity and Effective Noncommutative Quantum Field Theory,”Phys. Rev. Lett.96(2006) 221301,arXiv:hep-th/0512113

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  25. [25]

    Modern tests of Lorentz invariance,

    D. Mattingly, “Modern tests of Lorentz invariance,”Living Rev. Rel.8(2005) 5,arXiv:gr-qc/0502097

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  26. [26]

    Relativity in space-times with short distance structure governed by an observer independent (Planckian) length scale,

    G. Amelino-Camelia, “Relativity in space-times with short distance structure governed by an observer independent (Planckian) length scale,”Int. J. Mod. Phys. D11(2002) 35–60,arXiv:gr-qc/0012051

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  27. [27]

    Lorentz invariance with an invariant energy scale,

    J. Magueijo and L. Smolin, “Lorentz invariance with an invariant energy scale,”Phys. Rev. Lett.88(2002) 190403, arXiv:hep-th/0112090

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  28. [28]

    Planck-scale modified dispersion relations and Finsler geometry,

    F. Girelli, S. Liberati, and L. Sindoni, “Planck-scale modified dispersion relations and Finsler geometry,”Phys. Rev. D 75(2007) 064015,arXiv:gr-qc/0611024

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  29. [29]

    Realization of doubly special relativistic symmetries in Finsler geometries,

    G. Amelino-Camelia, L. Barcaroli, G. Gubitosi, S. Liberati, and N. Loret, “Realization of doubly special relativistic symmetries in Finsler geometries,”Phys. Rev. D90(2014) no. 12, 125030,arXiv:1407.8143 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  30. [30]

    Investigation of Finsler geometry as a generalization to curved spacetime of Planck-scale-deformed relativity in the de Sitter case,

    I. P. Lobo, N. Loret, and F. Nettel, “Investigation of Finsler geometry as a generalization to curved spacetime of Planck-scale-deformed relativity in the de Sitter case,”Phys. Rev. D95(2017) no. 4, 046015,arXiv:1611.04995 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  31. [31]

    Finsler spacetime geometry in Physics,

    C. Pfeifer, “Finsler spacetime geometry in Physics,”Int. J. Geom. Meth. Mod. Phys.16(2019) no. supp02, 1941004, arXiv:1903.10185 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  32. [32]

    Reaching the Planck scale with muon lifetime measurements,

    I. P. Lobo and C. Pfeifer, “Reaching the Planck scale with muon lifetime measurements,”Phys. Rev. D103(2021) no. 10, 106025,arXiv:2011.10069 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  33. [33]

    DSR-relativistic spacetime picture and the phenomenology of Planck-scale-modified time dilation,

    G. Amelino-Camelia, G. Gubitosi, P. Pellecchia, M. Refuto, and G. Rosati, “DSR-relativistic spacetime picture and the phenomenology of Planck-scale-modified time dilation,”arXiv:2506.08111 [gr-qc]. 20

    arXiv

  34. [34]

    Hamilton geometry: Phase space geometry from modified dispersion relations,

    L. Barcaroli, L. K. Brunkhorst, G. Gubitosi, N. Loret, and C. Pfeifer, “Hamilton geometry: Phase space geometry from modified dispersion relations,”Phys. Rev. D92(2015) no. 8, 084053,arXiv:1507.00922 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  35. [35]

    Curved spacetimes with localκ-Poincaré dispersion relation,

    L. Barcaroli, L. K. Brunkhorst, G. Gubitosi, N. Loret, and C. Pfeifer, “Curved spacetimes with localκ-Poincaré dispersion relation,”Phys. Rev. D96(2017) no. 8, 084010,arXiv:1703.02058 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  36. [36]

    Quantum Configuration and Phase Spaces: Finsler and Hamilton Geometries,

    S. Albuquerque, V. B. Bezerra, I. P. Lobo, G. Macedo, P. H. Morais, E. Rodrigues, L. C. N. Santos, and G. Varão, “Quantum Configuration and Phase Spaces: Finsler and Hamilton Geometries,”Physics5(2023) 90–115, arXiv:2301.09448 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  37. [37]

    Q deformation of Poincare algebra,

    J. Lukierski, H. Ruegg, A. Nowicki, and V. N. Tolstoi, “Q deformation of Poincare algebra,”Phys. Lett. B264(1991) 331–338

    1991

  38. [38]

    Quantum kappa Poincare in any dimension,

    J. Lukierski and H. Ruegg, “Quantum kappa Poincare in any dimension,”Phys. Lett. B329(1994) 189–194, arXiv:hep-th/9310117

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  39. [39]

    Bicrossproduct structure of kappa Poincare group and noncommutative geometry,

    S. Majid and H. Ruegg, “Bicrossproduct structure of kappa Poincare group and noncommutative geometry,”Phys. Lett. B334(1994) 348–354,arXiv:hep-th/9405107

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1994

  40. [40]

    Classical basis for kappa-Poincare algebra and doubly special relativity theories,

    A. Borowiec and A. Pachol, “Classical basis for kappa-Poincare algebra and doubly special relativity theories,”J. Phys. A 43(2010) 045203,arXiv:0903.5251 [hep-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  41. [41]

    Arzano and J

    M. Arzano and J. Kowalski-Glikman,Deformations of Spacetime Symmetries: Gravity, Group-Valued Momenta, and Non-Commutative Fields, vol. 986 ofLecture Notes in Physics. 6, 2021

    2021

  42. [42]

    Pachol,κ-Minkowski spacetime: Mathematical formalism and applications in Planck scale physics

    A. Pachol,κ-Minkowski spacetime: Mathematical formalism and applications in Planck scale physics. PhD thesis, Wroclaw U., 2011.arXiv:1112.5366 [math-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  43. [43]

    Photon absorption in a doubly special relativity model with undeformed free propagation and total momentum conservation,

    J. M. Carmona, J. L. Cortés, F. Rescic, M. A. Reyes, and T. Terzić, “Photon absorption in a doubly special relativity model with undeformed free propagation and total momentum conservation,”JCAP07(2025) 066,arXiv:2503.15203 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  44. [44]

    Quantum gravity phenomenology at the dawn of the multi-messenger era—A review,

    A. Addaziet al., “Quantum gravity phenomenology at the dawn of the multi-messenger era—A review,”Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.125(2022) 103948,arXiv:2111.05659 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  45. [45]

    White paper and roadmap for quantum gravity phenomenology in the multi-messenger era,

    R. Alves Batistaet al., “White paper and roadmap for quantum gravity phenomenology in the multi-messenger era,” Class. Quant. Grav.42(2025) no. 3, 032001,arXiv:2312.00409 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  46. [46]

    Quantum-Spacetime Phenomenology,

    G. Amelino-Camelia, “Quantum-Spacetime Phenomenology,”Living Rev. Rel.16(2013) 5,arXiv:0806.0339 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  47. [47]

    Space-time quantum solves three experimental paradoxes,

    G. Amelino-Camelia, “Space-time quantum solves three experimental paradoxes,”Phys. Lett. B528(2002) 181–187, arXiv:gr-qc/0107086. [31]Pierre AugerCollaboration, A. Aabet al., “Combined fit of spectrum and composition data as measured by the Pierre Auger Observatory,”JCAP04(2017) 038,arXiv:1612.07155 [astro-ph.HE]. [Erratum: JCAP 03, E02 (2018)]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  48. [48]

    Ultra-high-energy cosmic-ray bounds on nonbirefringent modified-Maxwell theory,

    F. R. Klinkhamer and M. Risse, “Ultra-high-energy cosmic-ray bounds on nonbirefringent modified-Maxwell theory,” Phys. Rev. D77(2008) 016002,arXiv:0709.2502 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  49. [49]

    Threshold effects and Planck scale Lorentz violation: Combined constraints from high-energy astrophysics,

    T. Jacobson, S. Liberati, and D. Mattingly, “Threshold effects and Planck scale Lorentz violation: Combined constraints from high-energy astrophysics,”Phys. Rev. D67(2003) 124011,arXiv:hep-ph/0209264

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  50. [50]

    Future prospects of testing Lorentz invariance with UHECRs,

    D. Boncioli, A. di Matteo, F. Salamida, R. Aloisio, P. Blasi, P. L. Ghia, A. Grillo, S. Petrera, and T. Pierog, “Future prospects of testing Lorentz invariance with UHECRs,”PoSICRC2015(2016) 521,arXiv:1509.01046 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  51. [51]

    Changes in extensive air showers from isotropic Lorentz violation in the photon sector,

    J. S. Diaz, F. R. Klinkhamer, and M. Risse, “Changes in extensive air showers from isotropic Lorentz violation in the photon sector,”Phys. Rev. D94(2016) no. 8, 085025,arXiv:1607.02099 [hep-ph]. [36]Pierre AugerCollaboration, P. Abreuet al., “Constraining Lorentz Invariance Violation using the muon content of extensive air showers measured at the Pierre A...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  52. [52]

    Lorentz Invariance Violation Tests in Astroparticle Physics,

    H. Martínez-Huerta, R. G. Lang, and V. de Souza, “Lorentz Invariance Violation Tests in Astroparticle Physics,” Symmetry12(2020) no. 8, 1232

    2020

  53. [53]

    On the Origin of the Cosmic Radiation,

    E. Fermi, “On the Origin of the Cosmic Radiation,”Phys. Rev.75(1949) 1169–1174

    1949

  54. [54]

    The Acceleration of cosmic rays in shock fronts. I,

    A. R. Bell, “The Acceleration of cosmic rays in shock fronts. I,”Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.182(1978) 147–156

    1978

  55. [55]

    The acceleration of cosmic rays in shock fronts. II.,

    A. R. Bell, “The acceleration of cosmic rays in shock fronts. II.,”Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc.182(1978) 443–455

    1978

  56. [56]

    Longair,High Energy Astrophysics

    M. Longair,High Energy Astrophysics. Cambridge University Press, 2011

    2011

  57. [57]

    Spurio,Probes of Multimessenger Astrophysics

    M. Spurio,Probes of Multimessenger Astrophysics. Charged cosmic rays, neutrinos,γ-rays and gravitational waves. Astronomy and Astrophysics Library. Springer, 2018

    2018

  58. [58]

    Fermi acceleration under Lorentz invariance violation,

    M. Duarte and V. de Souza, “Fermi acceleration under Lorentz invariance violation,”JCAP10(2024) 029, arXiv:2407.17254 [astro-ph.HE]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  59. [59]

    Effects of Lorentz invariance violation on charged particles and photon production in astrophysical sources,

    M. Duarte and V. de Souza, “Effects of Lorentz invariance violation on charged particles and photon production in astrophysical sources,”arXiv:2507.06766 [astro-ph.HE]

    arXiv

  60. [60]

    Relative Locality inκ-Poincaré,

    G. Gubitosi and F. Mercati, “Relative Locality inκ-Poincaré,”Class. Quant. Grav.30(2013) 145002,arXiv:1106.5710 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  61. [61]

    Two-body decays in deformed relativity,

    I. P. Lobo, C. Pfeifer, P. H. Morais, R. A. Batista, and V. B. Bezerra, “Two-body decays in deformed relativity,”JHEP 09(2022) 003,arXiv:2112.12172 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  62. [62]

    Anti-de Sitter momentum space in 3D and 4D quantum gravity,

    G. Amelino-Camelia, I. P. Lobo, and G. Palmisano, “Anti-de Sitter momentum space in 3D and 4D quantum gravity,” Class. Quant. Grav.41(2024) no. 8, 085006,arXiv:2403.16721 [gr-qc]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  63. [63]

    Constraints on Lorentz Invariance Violation from Fermi-Large Area Telescope Observations of Gamma-Ray Bursts,

    V. Vasileiou, A. Jacholkowska, F. Piron, J. Bolmont, C. Couturier, J. Granot, F. W. Stecker, J. Cohen-Tanugi, and F. Longo, “Constraints on Lorentz Invariance Violation from Fermi-Large Area Telescope Observations of Gamma-Ray Bursts,”Phys. Rev. D87(2013) no. 12, 122001,arXiv:1305.3463 [astro-ph.HE]. [49]LHAASOCollaboration, Z. Caoet al., “Stringent Tests...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013