Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 121 references

Surg-InvNeRF: Invertible NeRF for 3D tracking and reconstruction in surgical vision

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Surg-InvNeRF claims that an invertible Neural Radiance Field parametrization of the test-time optimization objective delivers the best 2D surgical point tracking among TTO methods, the first TTO-based 3D surgical point tracker, and a deform

desk verdict The abstract describes a plausible first TTO 3D surgical tracker, but the supplied full text is a different paper, so nothing can be verified; referee only once the real manuscript is provided. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.09681 v1 pith:CKEM6YLY submitted 2025-08-13 cs.CV cs.AIcs.RO

Gerardo Loza , Junlei Hu , Dominic Jones , Sharib Ali , Pietro Valdastri This is my paper
classification cs.CVcs.AIcs.RO
keywords surgicalvisionpointtrackingtest-timeoptimizationneuralradiancefield3DdeformablescenereconstructionSTIRdatasetSCARE
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper proposes Surg-InvNeRF, a test-time optimization (TTO) approach that frames long-term point tracking as optimizing a function that aggregates correspondences from other specialized state-of-the-art methods. The new step is to parametrize that function with an invertible Neural Radiance Field, so the tracker is supervised by reprojecting pixel correspondences through a rendering-based model. The authors claim that on 2D surgical point tracking this surpasses prior TTO methods by nearly 50% in average precision, and that it is the first TTO approach to perform 3D point tracking, beating feed-forward methods while also producing a deformable NeRF reconstruction. Evaluations use STIR for point tracking and SCARE for testing integration of kinematic data. If correct, the work shows that a rendering-based, invertible scene representation can serve as the aggregation core for correspondence-based tracking.

What carries the argument

The central object is the invertible Neural Radiance Field (InvNeRF), a neural rendering network that maps 3D points and view directions to density and color and is invertible so that 2D pixel correspondences can be lifted to and refined in 3D. It is paired with a bidirectional deformable-canonical mapping, a defined workspace with ray-density guidance, multi-scale HexPlanes for fast inference, and a pixel-sampling and convergence algorithm. Together these components let the TTO objective aggregate noisy 2D correspondences and produce consistent 3D tracks and a reconstruction.

What would settle it

Take the same STIR evaluation and corrupt the upstream matcher outputs by randomly permuting a fraction of the suggested correspondences; if average precision does not drop sharply, the reported gain is not coming from the InvNeRF aggregation. Alternatively, run the 3D protocol with ground-truth tracks obtained from independently registered robot kinematics, not synchronized by the authors, and compare the reported 3D accuracy.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Surg-InvNeRF's central claim is that an invertible NeRF parametrization of the TTO objective jointly solves 2D and 3D long-term point tracking in surgical video. Rather than optimizing tracks directly, it optimizes a NeRF-based function that aggregates correspondence suggestions from specialized matchers, then supervises the reprojection of those correspondences through the invertible rendering model. A bidirectional deformable-canonical mapping handles tissue deformation, multi-scale HexPlanes accelerate inference, and a new pixel-sampling and convergence algorithm makes the optimization efficient. On STIR, the 2D results exceed prior TTO methods by roughly 50% in average precision; on SCAR

Load-bearing premise

The method's roughly 50% average-precision gain assumes that the off-the-shelf correspondence suggestions it aggregates contain enough correct signal on surgical video with smoke, blood, specularity, and tissue deformation; if those inputs are systematically wrong, the InvNeRF aggregation cannot manufacture accurate tracks.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • 2D surgical point tracking improves by roughly 50% in average precision over prior TTO methods on STIR, implying that rendering-based aggregation is a stronger core for correspondence refinement.
  • 3D surgical point tracking becomes possible with a TTO approach for the first time, establishing a new category of tracker that optimizes a scene representation rather than a tracker head.
  • A deformable NeRF reconstruction of the surgical workspace is obtained as a by-product of tracking, so tracking and reconstruction are produced in one pass.
  • Multi-scale HexPlanes and the new sampling and convergence scheme make test-time optimization practical on surgical video.
  • The SCARE experiments demonstrate how kinematic data can be injected into the pipeline, pointing toward instrument-aware tracking.
  • The supplied full text in the review package is a different paper (on quantum gravity amplitudes); the substance above is drawn from the title and abstract alone.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If upstream matchers fail on surgical-specific artifacts such as specular highlights, smoke, blood, or severe tissue deformation, the InvNeRF aggregation can only be as good as the correspondences it refines; feeding stronger or learned correspondence priors into the same framework is a direct testable extension.
  • Because the invertible rendering loss enforces geometric consistency through reprojection, the approach may transfer to other deformable-scene tracking tasks such as endoscopy, fetal ultrasound, or soft-tissue robotics with minimal changes.
  • The emitted NeRF representation could be reused for downstream applications such as augmented-reality overlays, tissue deformation estimation, or motion-compensated surgical robotics.
  • The 3D evaluation protocol is defined by the authors on a new TTO setting; independent benchmarks with externally registered kinematics would be needed to confirm the reported margin over feed-forward methods.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript under review, arXiv:2508.09681, claims a test-time optimization (TTO) method for long-term 2D and 3D point tracking in surgical video, built around a new invertible Neural Radiance Field architecture (InvNeRF) with multi-scale HexPlanes, a bidirectional deformable-canonical mapping, and specialized ray-density guidance, sampling, and convergence strategies. It reports evaluations on the STIR and SCARE datasets and claims that in 2D point tracking it surpasses TTO state-of-the-art methods by nearly 50% in average precision, while in 3D point tracking it is the first TTO approach and surpasses feed-forward methods. However, the full text supplied with the review package is arXiv:2508.09679v1, a quantum-gravity paper by Theofilis and Wieland; it contains no surgical-vision content, no derivation of InvNeRF, no experimental tables, and no baselines. The only verifiable content in the package is the abstract, so the central architectural and quantitative claims cannot be checked from the available material.

Significance. If the claims are correct, the contribution is significant: an invertible-NeRF parametrization of TTO tracking would be the first TTO method for 3D surgical point tracking, would produce a deformable NeRF reconstruction as a by-product, and would report a large gain over prior TTO methods in 2D tracking. The abstract's design choices—aggregating correspondences from specialized upstream methods, supervising reprojections, and evaluating on the external STIR and SCARE benchmarks—are plausible and would be a useful addition to the surgical-vision tracking literature. That said, the significance cannot be assessed quantitatively or even qualitatively beyond the abstract because the supplied full text is a different paper. There are no tables, error bars, protocol descriptions, or architecture equations to inspect, and no code or reproducibility artifacts are provided. The claimed gains are therefore unverified.

major comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] The headline claim—'surpasses the precision and accuracy of the TTO state-of-the-art methods by nearly 50% on average precision'—is load-bearing for the paper's contribution, but the supplied full text is arXiv:2508.09679v1, a quantum-gravity paper. No tables, baseline definitions, metric definitions, error bars, dataset splits, or evaluation code are present in the available material. Without these, the central quantitative claim cannot be checked, and this is not a presentation issue: it blocks verification of the paper's main result.
  2. [Full text (unavailable)] The 3D tracking claim—'this is the first TTO approach, surpassing feed-forward methods'—depends on the evaluation protocol for STIR/SCARE, including how kinematic data are synchronized with video, how ground-truth 3D tracks are defined, how visibility and occlusion are handled, and how points are initialized. The available material contains no description of this protocol. Because the authors define the protocol for a claimed first-of-kind 3D TTO comparison, these choices are load-bearing for the comparison and must be specified in full.
  3. [Full text (unavailable)] The architectural novelty of InvNeRF cannot be evaluated. The abstract announces 'a new invertible Neural Radiance Field architecture' and 'multi-scale HexPlanes', but the supplied material contains no equations, layer definitions, invertibility construction, or comparison with prior work sharing the InvNeRF name. A formal definition of the invertible mapping and a related-work discussion are necessary to substantiate the novelty claim and to allow replication; both are absent from the available evidence.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Abstract] The phrase 'by nearly 50% on average precision' is ambiguous: it could mean a relative improvement of ~50% or an absolute gain of ~50 percentage points. The intended quantity should be stated explicitly.
  2. [Abstract] Minor language issues: 'We proposed' should be 'We propose'; 'the state-of-the-art on TTO' should be 'the state-of-the-art TTO methods'; 'parametrising' is acceptable in British English but should be consistent.
  3. [Abstract] The abstract does not state the computational cost of the test-time optimization, the number of optimization steps, or the inference time. Given the emphasis on 'fast inference' via multi-scale HexPlanes, at least a runtime comparison with feed-forward baselines is needed.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity identifiable from the available abstract; reported full text is a different paper and cannot support a circularity finding.

full rationale

The only text belonging to the target paper (arXiv:2508.09681) is the abstract. Its derivation chain is: TTO optimizes a function that aggregates correspondences from other specialized methods; the function is parametrized by a new InvNeRF architecture; 2D/3D tracking is supervised by reprojecting pixel correspondences; evaluation is performed on external benchmarks STIR and SCARE. None of these steps, as stated, makes a predicted quantity definitionally equal to an input, and no parameter is fitted to the evaluation labels. The 50% AP claim is a comparison against TTO baselines, which may or may not include the upstream correspondence providers, but the abstract does not say the baselines generate the optimized tracks, so no reduction can be quoted. The supplied 'Full Text' is a quantum-gravity manuscript (arXiv:2508.09679) unrelated to the surgical-tracking paper; while this prevents auditing the actual equations, ablations, and protocol details, the mismatch is a verification gap rather than evidence of circularity. No load-bearing self-citation, uniqueness import, or ansatz smuggling is visible. Under the hard rule that circularity must be exhibited with a quoted reduction, no circular step can be identified.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 2 invented entities

Only the abstract was available (the supplied full text belongs to a different paper), so the ledger lists premises named in the abstract; numerical values of all learning hyperparameters, loss weights, workspace bounds, and evaluation thresholds are unknown.

free parameters (3)
  • Defined workspace bounds = not stated
    Abstract: the method uses rendering strategies to 'efficiently handle a defined workspace'. The bounding volume in which rays are cast is a per-sequence geometric choice that limits where the canonical field is optimized.
  • HexPlane scale count and resolutions = not stated
    Multi-scale HexPlanes are introduced 'for fast inference'; the number of scales and their resolutions are architecture hyperparameters not specified in the abstract.
  • Sampling budget and convergence thresholds = not stated
    The paper claims 'a new algorithm for efficient pixel sampling and convergence criteria'; the sample counts and stopping thresholds are free choices that trade runtime against accuracy and could affect the reported gains.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption A surgical video can be explained by a bidirectional deformable-canonical implicit scene
    The method uses a 'bidirectional deformable-canonical mapping' (abstract). This presupposes every frame maps into one shared canonical field, which is violated by topological changes like cutting, cauterization, or instrument insertion/removal.
  • domain assumption Correspondences from upstream specialized methods are noisy but unbiased supervision
    Abstract: TTO 'aggregates correspondences from other specialised state-of-the-art methods'. If upstream matchers are biased on surgical imagery, the aggregated tracks inherit the bias regardless of the architecture.
  • domain assumption Test-time per-video NeRF optimization can converge quickly enough to be usable
    The convergence-criteria and sampling contributions target speed (abstract), but the premise that per-sequence optimization is feasible in practice underlies all experiments.
  • standard math Standard differentiable volume rendering and reprojection losses behave well under optimization
    The rendering-based supervision ('supervising the reprojection of pixel correspondences', abstract) relies on standard NeRF-style differentiable rendering and photometric/feature losses.
invented entities (2)
  • InvNeRF architecture (invertible NeRF for TTO tracking)
    purpose: Parametrizes the test-time objective that aggregates correspondences and produces 2D/3D tracks
    Claimed as new in the abstract; its only support is the paper's own experiments. The name collides with the earlier InvNeRF (invertible neural radiance fields for human body reconstruction), so novelty cannot be confirmed from the abstract.
  • Multi-scale HexPlanes
    purpose: Accelerates inference in the TTO optimization
    Architectural component claimed 'for fast inference'; evidence is internal to the paper and unverifiable from the abstract.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Surg-InvNeRF: Invertible NeRF for 3D tracking and reconstruction in surgical vision." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/CKEM6YLY

@misc{pith2026250809681,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Surg-InvNeRF: Invertible NeRF for 3D tracking and reconstruction in surgical vision},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/CKEM6YLY}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.09681}
}
read the original abstract

We proposed a novel test-time optimisation (TTO) approach framed by a NeRF-based architecture for long-term 3D point tracking. Most current methods in point tracking struggle to obtain consistent motion or are limited to 2D motion. TTO approaches frame the solution for long-term tracking as optimising a function that aggregates correspondences from other specialised state-of-the-art methods. Unlike the state-of-the-art on TTO, we propose parametrising such a function with our new invertible Neural Radiance Field (InvNeRF) architecture to perform both 2D and 3D tracking in surgical scenarios. Our approach allows us to exploit the advantages of a rendering-based approach by supervising the reprojection of pixel correspondences. It adapts strategies from recent rendering-based methods to obtain a bidirectional deformable-canonical mapping, to efficiently handle a defined workspace, and to guide the rays' density. It also presents our multi-scale HexPlanes for fast inference and a new algorithm for efficient pixel sampling and convergence criteria. We present results in the STIR and SCARE datasets, for evaluating point tracking and testing the integration of kinematic data in our pipeline, respectively. In 2D point tracking, our approach surpasses the precision and accuracy of the TTO state-of-the-art methods by nearly 50% on average precision, while competing with other approaches. In 3D point tracking, this is the first TTO approach, surpassing feed-forward methods while incorporating the benefits of a deformable NeRF-based reconstruction.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

121 extracted references · 16 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Quantum Theory of Gravity. I. The Canonical Theory,

    B. S. DeWitt, “Quantum Theory of Gravity. I. The Canonical Theory,”Phys. Rev. 160 (Aug, 1967) 1113–1148

    1967

  2. [2]

    Ashtekar,Lectures on Non-Pertubative Canonical Gravity

    A. Ashtekar,Lectures on Non-Pertubative Canonical Gravity. World Scientific, 1991

    1991

  3. [3]

    Kiefer,Quantum Gravity

    C. Kiefer,Quantum Gravity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2005

    2005

  4. [4]

    Thiemann,Introduction to Modern Canonical Quantum General Relativity

    C. Thiemann,Introduction to Modern Canonical Quantum General Relativity. Cambridge University Press, 2007

    2007

  5. [5]

    Rovelli,Quantum Gravity

    C. Rovelli,Quantum Gravity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2008

    2008

  6. [6]

    Partial and complete observables for Hamiltonian constrained systems,

    B. Dittrich, “Partial and complete observables for Hamiltonian constrained systems,” Gen. Rel. Grav.39 (2007) 1891–1927, arXiv:gr-qc/0411013

    arXiv 2007

  7. [7]

    The symplectic 2-form for gravity in terms of free null initial data,

    M. P. Reisenberger, “The symplectic 2-form for gravity in terms of free null initial data,” Class. Quant. Grav.30 (2013) 155022, arXiv:1211.3880

    arXiv 2013

  8. [8]

    Integrable structures and the quantization of free null initial data for gravity,

    A. Fuchs and M. P. Reisenberger, “Integrable structures and the quantization of free null initial data for gravity,”Class. Quant. Grav.34 (2017), no. 18, 185003, arXiv:1704.06992

    arXiv 2017

Show all 121 references
  1. [9]

    The Poisson brackets of free null initial data for vacuum general relativity,

    M. P. Reisenberger, “The Poisson brackets of free null initial data for vacuum general relativity,”Class. Quant. Grav.35 (2018), no. 18, 185012, arXiv:1804.10284

    2018 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Fock representation of gravitational boundary modes and the discreteness of the area spectrum,

    W. Wieland, “Fock representation of gravitational boundary modes and the discreteness of the area spectrum,”Ann. Henri Poincaré18 (2017) 3695–3717, arXiv:1706.00479

    2017 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Quantum Geometry of the Light Cone: Fock Representation and Spectrum of Radiated Power,

    W. Wieland, “Quantum Geometry of the Light Cone: Fock Representation and Spectrum of Radiated Power,”arXiv:2504.10802. 18

    arXiv

  4. [12]

    New boundary variables for classical and quantum gravity on a null surface,

    W. Wieland, “New boundary variables for classical and quantum gravity on a null surface,” Class. Quantum Grav.34 (2017) 215008, arXiv:1704.07391

    2017 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Causal diamonds in (2+1)-dimensional quantum gravity,

    R. Andrade e Silva and T. Jacobson, “Causal diamonds in (2+1)-dimensional quantum gravity,”Phys. Rev. D107 (2023), no. 2, 024033,arXiv:2203.10084

    2023 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Entropy of causal diamond ensembles,

    T. Jacobson and M. R. Visser, “Entropy of causal diamond ensembles,”SciPost Phys. 15 (2023), no. 1, 023,arXiv:2212.10608

    2023 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Quantum Mechanics of a Spherically Symmetric Causal Diamond in Minkowski Spacetime,

    M. W. Bub, T. He, P. Mitra, Y. Zhang, and K. M. Zurek, “Quantum Mechanics of a Spherically Symmetric Causal Diamond in Minkowski Spacetime,”Phys. Rev. Lett. 134 (2025), no. 12, 121501,arXiv:2408.11094

    2025 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Corner symmetry and quantum geometry,

    L. Freidel, M. Geiller, and W. Wieland, “Corner symmetry and quantum geometry,” inHandbook of Quantum Gravity, L. M. Cosimo Bambi and I. Shapiro, eds. Springer, 2023.arXiv:2302.12799

    2023 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Quantum geometry of the null cone,

    W. Wieland, “Quantum geometry of the null cone,”arXiv:2401.17491

    arXiv

  10. [18]

    Evidence for Planck luminosity bound in quantum gravity,

    W. Wieland, “Evidence for Planck luminosity bound in quantum gravity,”Class. Quant. Grav. 42 (2025), no. 6, 06LT01

    2025

  11. [19]

    Quantum null geometry and gravity,

    L. Ciambelli, L. Freidel, and R. G. Leigh, “Quantum null geometry and gravity,” JHEP 12 (2024) 028, arXiv:2407.11132

    2024 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Null infinity as an open Hamiltonian system,

    W. Wieland, “Null infinity as an open Hamiltonian system,”JHEP 04 (2021) 095, arXiv:2012.01889

    2021 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Carrollian-holographic Derivation of BMS Flux-balance Laws,

    A. Fiorucci, S. Pekar, P. Marios Petropoulos, and M. Vilatte, “Carrollian-holographic Derivation of BMS Flux-balance Laws,” arXiv:2505.00077

  14. [22]

    Carrollian Perspective on Celestial Holography,

    L. Donnay, A. Fiorucci, Y. Herfray, and R. Ruzziconi, “Carrollian Perspective on Celestial Holography,”Phys. Rev. Lett.129 (2022), no. 7, 071602, arXiv:2202.04702

    2022 arXiv

  15. [23]

    The Problem of Time and its Quantum Resolution,

    M. S. Klinger and R. G. Leigh, “The Problem of Time and its Quantum Resolution,” arXiv:2504.00152

    arXiv

  16. [24]

    Quasilocal mass in general relativity,

    M.-T. Wang and S.-T. Yau, “Quasilocal mass in general relativity,”Phys. Rev. Lett. 102 (2009) 021101, arXiv:0804.1174

    2009 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Quasi-Local Energy-Momentum and Angular Momentum in GR: A Review Article,

    L. B. Szabados, “Quasi-Local Energy-Momentum and Angular Momentum in GR: A Review Article,”Living Rev. Rel.7 (2004) 4

    2004

  18. [27]

    Gravitational dressing, soft charges, and perturbative gravitational splitting,

    S. B. Giddings, “Gravitational dressing, soft charges, and perturbative gravitational splitting,”Phys. Rev. D100 (2019), no. 12, 126001, arXiv:1903.06160

    2019 arXiv

  19. [28]

    Edge modes as dynamical frames: charges from post-selection in generally covariant theories,

    S. Carrozza, S. Eccles, and P. A. Hoehn, “Edge modes as dynamical frames: charges from post-selection in generally covariant theories,”arXiv:2205.00913

    arXiv

  20. [29]

    Crossed products and quantum reference frames: on the observer-dependence of gravitational entropy,

    J. De Vuyst, S. Eccles, P. A. Hoehn, and J. Kirklin, “Crossed products and quantum reference frames: on the observer-dependence of gravitational entropy,” JHEP 07 (2025) 063, arXiv:2412.15502. 19

    2025 arXiv

  21. [30]

    Metriplectic geometry for gravitational subsystems,

    V. Kabel and W. Wieland, “Metriplectic geometry for gravitational subsystems,” Phys. Rev. D106 (2022), no. 6, 064053,arXiv:2206.00029

    2022 arXiv

  22. [31]

    Wave Function of the Universe,

    J. Hartle and S. Hawking, “Wave Function of the Universe,”Phys.Rev. D28 (1983) 2960–2975

    1983

  23. [32]

    Consistent histories and the interpretation of quantum mechanics,

    R. B. Griffiths, “Consistent histories and the interpretation of quantum mechanics,” Journal of Statistical Physics36 (1984), no. 1, 219–272

    1984

  24. [33]

    Schlick,Gesetz, Kausalität und Wahrscheinlichkeit

    M. Schlick,Gesetz, Kausalität und Wahrscheinlichkeit. Gerold & Co, Vienna, 1948

    1948

  25. [34]

    The Cauchy problem on a characteristic cone for the Einstein equations in arbitrary dimensions,

    Y. Choquet-Bruhat, P. T. Chrusciel, and J. M. Martin-Garcia, “The Cauchy problem on a characteristic cone for the Einstein equations in arbitrary dimensions,” Annales Henri Poincare12 (2011) 419–482, arXiv:1006.4467

    2011 arXiv

  26. [35]

    The Many ways of the characteristic Cauchy problem,

    P. T. Chrusciel and T.-T. Paetz, “The Many ways of the characteristic Cauchy problem,” Class. Quant. Grav.29 (2012) 145006, arXiv:1203.4534

    2012 arXiv

  27. [36]

    Characteristic gluing withΛ: 1. Linearised Einstein equations on four-dimensional spacetimes,

    P. T. Chruściel and W. Cong, “Characteristic gluing withΛ: 1. Linearised Einstein equations on four-dimensional spacetimes,”Beijing J. Pure Appl. Math. 1 (2024), no. 2, 689–796,arXiv:2212.10052

    2024 arXiv

  28. [37]

    The characteristic gluing problem for the Einstein equations and applications,

    S. Aretakis, S. Czimek, and I. Rodnianski, “The characteristic gluing problem for the Einstein equations and applications,”Duke Math. J.174 (2025), no. 2, 355–402, arXiv:2107.02441

    2025 arXiv

  29. [38]

    Krasnov,Formulations of General Relativity: Gravity, Spinors and Differential Forms

    K. Krasnov,Formulations of General Relativity: Gravity, Spinors and Differential Forms. Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics. Cambridge University Press, 2020

    2020

  30. [39]

    Henneaux and C

    M. Henneaux and C. Teitelboim,Quantization of Gauge Systems. Princeton University Press, Princeton, 1992

    1992

  31. [40]

    First order gravity on the light front,

    S. Alexandrov and S. Speziale, “First order gravity on the light front,”Phys. Rev. D 91 (Mar, 2015) 064043

    2015

  32. [41]

    Hypersurface-deformation algebroids and effective spacetime models,

    M. Bojowald, S. Brahma, U. Buyukcam, and F. D’Ambrosio, “Hypersurface-deformation algebroids and effective spacetime models,”Phys. Rev. D 94 (2016), no. 10, 104032,arXiv:1610.08355

    2016 arXiv

  33. [42]

    How commutators of constraints reflect the spacetime structure,

    C. Teitelboim, “How commutators of constraints reflect the spacetime structure,” Annals of Physics79 (1973), no. 2, 542–557

    1973

  34. [43]

    Arnowitt, S

    R. Arnowitt, S. Deser, and C. Misner,The dynamics of general relativity, ch. 7, pp. 227–264. Wiley, New York, 1962.arXiv:gr-qc/0405109v1

    1962 arXiv

  35. [44]

    Geometrodynamics regained,

    S. A. Hojman, K. Kuchař, and C. Teitelboim, “Geometrodynamics regained,” Annals of Physics96 (1976), no. 1, 88–135

    1976

  36. [45]

    Isenberg,The Initial Value Problem in General Relativity, pp

    J. Isenberg,The Initial Value Problem in General Relativity, pp. 303–321. 2014. arXiv:1304.1960

    2014 arXiv

  37. [46]

    Gravitational SL(2,R) algebra on the light cone,

    W. Wieland, “Gravitational SL(2,R) algebra on the light cone,”JHEP 07 (2021) 057, arXiv:2104.05803

    2021 arXiv

  38. [47]

    Null Raychaudhuri: Canonical Structure and the Dressing Time,

    L. Ciambelli, L. Freidel, and R. G. Leigh, “Null Raychaudhuri: Canonical Structure and the Dressing Time,”arXiv:2309.03932. 20

    arXiv

  39. [48]

    Discreteness of area and volume in quantum gravity,

    C. Rovelli and L. Smolin, “Discreteness of area and volume in quantum gravity,” Nuclear Physics B442 (1995), no. 3, 593–619,arXiv:gr-qc/9411005

    1995 arXiv

  40. [49]

    Emergence of Riemannian Quantum Geometry,

    H. M. Haggard, J. Lewandowski, and H. Sahlmann, “Emergence of Riemannian Quantum Geometry,” inHandbook of Quantum Gravity, C. Bambi, L. Modesto, and I. Shapiro, eds. Springer, 2023.arXiv:2302.02840

    2023 arXiv

  41. [50]

    Quantum theory of geometry I.: Area operators,

    A. Ashtekar and J. Lewandowski, “Quantum theory of geometry I.: Area operators,” Class. Quant. Grav.14 (1997) A55–A82, arXiv:gr-qc/9602046

    1997 arXiv

  42. [51]

    Flux-area operator and black hole entropy,

    G. J. Fernando Barbero, J. Lewandowski, and E. J. S. Villasenor, “Flux-area operator and black hole entropy,”Phys. Rev. D80 (2009) 044016, arXiv:0905.3465

    2009 arXiv

  43. [52]

    Evolution without evolution: Dynamics described by stationary observables,

    D. N. Page and W. K. Wootters, “Evolution without evolution: Dynamics described by stationary observables,”Phys. Rev. D27 (Jun, 1983) 2885–2892

    1983

  44. [53]

    Quantum mechanics without time: A model,

    C. Rovelli, “Quantum mechanics without time: A model,”Phys. Rev. D42 (Oct,

  45. [54]

    Forget time,

    C. Rovelli, “Forget time,”Found. Phys. 41 (2011) 1475–1490, arXiv:0903.3832

    2011 arXiv

  46. [55]

    Topological quantum field theories,

    M. Atiyah, “Topological quantum field theories,”Inst. Hautes Etudes Sci. Publ. Math. 68 (1989) 175–186

    1989

  47. [56]

    (2+1)-Dimensional Gravity as an Exactly Soluble System,

    E. Witten, “(2+1)-Dimensional Gravity as an Exactly Soluble System,”Nucl. Phys. B 311 (1988) 46

    1988

  48. [57]

    Carlip,Quantum gravity in 2+1 dimensions

    S. Carlip,Quantum gravity in 2+1 dimensions. Cambridge University Press, 2003

    2003

  49. [58]

    Quantum gravity as topological quantum field theory,

    J. W. Barrett, “Quantum gravity as topological quantum field theory,”J. Math. Phys. 36 (1995) 6161–6179, arXiv:gr-qc/9506070

    1995 arXiv

  50. [59]

    A ’General boundary’ formulation for quantum mechanics and quantum gravity,

    R. Oeckl, “A ’General boundary’ formulation for quantum mechanics and quantum gravity,”Phys. Lett. B575 (2003) 318–324, arXiv:hep-th/0306025

    2003 arXiv

  51. [60]

    General boundary quantum field theory: Foundations and probability interpretation,

    R. Oeckl, “General boundary quantum field theory: Foundations and probability interpretation,” Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.12 (2008), no. 2, 319–352, arXiv:hep-th/0509122

    2008 arXiv

  52. [61]

    A positive formalism for quantum theory in the general boundary formulation,

    R. Oeckl, “A positive formalism for quantum theory in the general boundary formulation,” Found. Phys. 43 (2013) 1206–1232, arXiv:1212.5571

    2013 arXiv

  53. [62]

    A local and operational framework for the foundations of physics,

    R. Oeckl, “A local and operational framework for the foundations of physics,” Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.23 (2019), no. 2, 437–592,arXiv:1610.09052

    2019 arXiv

  54. [63]

    Functional Schrodinger equation for scalar QED,

    C. Kiefer, “Functional Schrodinger equation for scalar QED,”Phys. Rev. D45 (1992) 2044–2056

    1992

  55. [64]

    Schrödinger-Feynman quantization and composition of observables in general boundary quantum field theory,

    R. Oeckl, “Schrödinger-Feynman quantization and composition of observables in general boundary quantum field theory,”Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.19 (2015) 451–506, arXiv:1201.1877

    2015 arXiv

  56. [65]

    Quantization of systems with temporally varying discretization I: Evolving Hilbert spaces,

    P. A. Höhn, “Quantization of systems with temporally varying discretization I: Evolving Hilbert spaces,”J. Math. Phys.55 (2014) 083508, arXiv:1401.6062

    2014 arXiv

  57. [67]

    Quantum correlations with no causal order,

    O. Oreshkov, F. Costa, and Č. Brukner, “Quantum correlations with no causal order,” Nature Communications3 (2012), no. 1, 1092

    2012

  58. [68]

    Witnessing causal nonseparability,

    M. Araújo, C. Branciard, F. Costa, A. Feix, C. Giarmatzi, and v. Brukner, “Witnessing causal nonseparability,”New J. Phys.17 (2015), no. 10, 102001, arXiv:1506.03776

    2015 arXiv

  59. [69]

    The operator tensor formulation of quantum theory,

    L. Hardy, “The operator tensor formulation of quantum theory,”Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 370 (2012), no. 1971, 3385–3417,arXiv:1201.4390

    2012 arXiv

  60. [70]

    The Covariant Phase Space Of Asymptotically Flat Gravitational Fields,

    A. Ashtekar, L. Bombelli, and O. Reula, “The Covariant Phase Space Of Asymptotically Flat Gravitational Fields,” inMechanics, Analysis and Geometry: 200 Years after Lagrange, M. Francaviglia and D. Holm, eds. North Holland, Amsterdam, 1990

    1990

  61. [71]

    A General definition of ‘conserved quantities’ in general relativity and other theories of gravity,

    R. M. Wald and A. Zoupas, “A General definition of ‘conserved quantities’ in general relativity and other theories of gravity,”Phys. Rev. D61 (2000) 084027, arXiv:gr-qc/9911095

    2000 arXiv

  62. [72]

    Covariant phase space with boundaries,

    D. Harlow and J.-q. Wu, “Covariant phase space with boundaries,”Journal of High Energy Physics2020 (2020), no. 10, 146

    2020

  63. [73]

    Boundary effects in General Relativity with tetrad variables,

    R. Oliveri and S. Speziale, “Boundary effects in General Relativity with tetrad variables,” arXiv:1912.01016

    1912 arXiv

  64. [74]

    4d Lorentzian Holst action with topological terms,

    D. J. Rezende and A. Perez, “4d Lorentzian Holst action with topological terms,” Phys. Rev. D79 (2009) 064026, arXiv:0902.3416

    2009 arXiv

  65. [75]

    Edge states in gravity and black hole physics,

    A. P. Balachandran, L. Chandar, and A. Momen, “Edge states in gravity and black hole physics,”Nucl. Phys. B461 (1996) 581–596, arXiv:gr-qc/9412019

    1996 arXiv

  66. [76]

    Statistical mechanics of the (2+1)-dimensional black hole,

    S. Carlip, “Statistical mechanics of the (2+1)-dimensional black hole,”Phys. Rev. D 51 (Jan, 1995) 632–637

    1995

  67. [77]

    Local subsystems in gauge theory and gravity,

    W. Donnelly and L. Freidel, “Local subsystems in gauge theory and gravity,” arXiv:1601.04744

    arXiv

  68. [78]

    Observables, gravitational dressing, and obstructions to locality and subsystems,

    W. Donnelly and S. B. Giddings, “Observables, gravitational dressing, and obstructions to locality and subsystems,”Phys. Rev. D94 (2016), no. 10, 104038, arXiv:1607.01025

    2016 arXiv

  69. [79]

    The observer’s ghost: notes on a field space connection,

    H. Gomes and A. Riello, “The observer’s ghost: notes on a field space connection,” JHEP 05 (2017) 017, arXiv:1608.08226

    2017 arXiv

  70. [80]

    Local phase space and edge modes for diffeomorphism-invariant theories,

    A. J. Speranza, “Local phase space and edge modes for diffeomorphism-invariant theories,” JHEP 02 (2018) 021, arXiv:1706.05061

    2018 arXiv

  71. [81]

    Edge modes and corner ambiguities in 3d Chern-Simons theory and gravity,

    M. Geiller, “Edge modes and corner ambiguities in 3d Chern-Simons theory and gravity,” Nucl. Phys. B924 (2017) 312–365, arXiv:1703.04748

    2017 arXiv

  72. [82]

    Gravity Edges Modes and Hayward Term,

    T. Takayanagi and K. Tamaoka, “Gravity Edges Modes and Hayward Term,” JHEP 02 (2020) 167, arXiv:1912.01636

    2020 arXiv

  73. [83]

    Bundle geometry of the connection space, covariant Hamiltonian formalism, the problem of boundaries in gauge theories, and the dressing field method,

    J. François, “Bundle geometry of the connection space, covariant Hamiltonian formalism, the problem of boundaries in gauge theories, and the dressing field method,” Journal of High Energy Physics2021 (2021), no. 3, 225, arXiv:2010.01597. 22

    2021 arXiv

  74. [84]

    Gravitational edge modes: from Kac–Moody charges to Poincaré networks,

    L. Freidel, E. R. Livine, and D. Pranzetti, “Gravitational edge modes: from Kac–Moody charges to Poincaré networks,”Class. Quant. Grav.36 (2019), no. 19, 195014,arXiv:1906.07876

    2019 arXiv

  75. [85]

    Edge modes of gravity. Part I. Corner potentials and charges,

    L. Freidel, M. Geiller, and D. Pranzetti, “Edge modes of gravity. Part I. Corner potentials and charges,”JHEP 11 (2020) 026, arXiv:2006.12527

    2020 arXiv

  76. [86]

    Embeddings and Integrable Charges for Extended Corner Symmetry,

    L. Ciambelli, R. G. Leigh, and P.-C. Pai, “Embeddings and Integrable Charges for Extended Corner Symmetry,”Phys. Rev. Lett.128 (Apr, 2022) 171302, arXiv:2111.13181

    2022 arXiv

  77. [87]

    Extended corner symmetry, charge bracket and Einstein’s equations,

    L. Freidel, R. Oliveri, D. Pranzetti, and S. Speziale, “Extended corner symmetry, charge bracket and Einstein’s equations,”JHEP 09 (2021) 083, arXiv:2104.12881

    2021 arXiv

  78. [88]

    Gravitational edge modes, coadjoint orbits, and hydrodynamics,

    W. Donnelly, L. Freidel, S. F. Moosavian, and A. J. Speranza, “Gravitational edge modes, coadjoint orbits, and hydrodynamics,”JHEP 09 (2021) 008, arXiv:2012.10367

    2021 arXiv

  79. [89]

    Diffeomorphism-invariant observables and dynamical frames in gravity: reconciling bulk locality with general covariance,

    C. Goeller, P. A. Hoehn, and J. Kirklin, “Diffeomorphism-invariant observables and dynamical frames in gravity: reconciling bulk locality with general covariance,” arXiv:2206.01193

    arXiv

  80. [90]

    Linking Edge Modes and Geometrical Clocks in Linearized Gravity,

    K. Giesel, V. Kabel, and W. Wieland, “Linking Edge Modes and Geometrical Clocks in Linearized Gravity,”arXiv:2410.17339

  81. [91]

    Symmetry, Reference Frames, and Relational Quantities in Quantum Mechanics,

    L. Loveridge, T. Miyadera, and P. Busch, “Symmetry, Reference Frames, and Relational Quantities in Quantum Mechanics,”Foundations of Physics48 (2018), no. 2, 135–198

    2018

  82. [92]

    Quantum mechanics and the covariance of physical laws in quantum reference frames,

    F. Giacomini, E. Castro-Ruiz, and Č. Brukner, “Quantum mechanics and the covariance of physical laws in quantum reference frames,”Nature Commun. 10 (2019), no. 1, 494,arXiv:1712.07207

    2019 arXiv

  83. [93]

    Relativistic Quantum Reference Frames: The Operational Meaning of Spin,

    F. Giacomini, E. Castro-Ruiz, and Č. Brukner, “Relativistic Quantum Reference Frames: The Operational Meaning of Spin,”Phys. Rev. Lett.123 (2019), no. 9, 090404, arXiv:1811.08228

    2019 arXiv

  84. [94]

    A change of perspective: switching quantum reference frames via a perspective-neutral framework,

    A. Vanrietvelde, P. A. Hoehn, F. Giacomini, and E. Castro-Ruiz, “A change of perspective: switching quantum reference frames via a perspective-neutral framework,” Quantum 4 (2020) 225, arXiv:1809.00556

    2020 arXiv

  85. [95]

    The Trinity of Relational Quantum Dynamics,

    P. A. Höhn, A. R. Smith, and M. P. Lock, “The Trinity of Relational Quantum Dynamics,” arXiv:1912.00033

    1912 arXiv

  86. [96]

    Relative subsystems and quantum reference frame transformations,

    E. Castro-Ruiz and O. Oreshkov, “Relative subsystems and quantum reference frame transformations,” arXiv:2110.13199

    arXiv

  87. [97]

    Asymptotic higher spin symmetries I: covariant wedge algebra in gravity,

    N. Cresto and L. Freidel, “Asymptotic higher spin symmetries I: covariant wedge algebra in gravity,”Lett. Math. Phys.115 (2025), no. 2, 39,arXiv:2409.12178

    2025 arXiv

  88. [98]

    Asymptotic Higher Spin Symmetries II: Noether Realization in Gravity,

    N. Cresto and L. Freidel, “Asymptotic Higher Spin Symmetries II: Noether Realization in Gravity,”arXiv:2410.15219

  89. [99]

    CarrollianL w1+∞ representation from twistor space,

    L. Donnay, L. Freidel, and Y. Herfray, “CarrollianL w1+∞ representation from twistor space,”SciPost Phys. 17 (2024), no. 4, 118,arXiv:2402.00688

    2024 arXiv

  90. [100]

    Orbit method for Quantum Corner Symmetries,

    G. Neri and L. Varrin, “Orbit method for Quantum Corner Symmetries,” 23 arXiv:2507.10683

    arXiv

  91. [101]

    Zakopane lectures on loop gravity,

    C. Rovelli, “Zakopane lectures on loop gravity,”PoS QGQGS2011 (2011) 003, arXiv:1102.3660

    2011 arXiv

  92. [102]

    The Spin-Foam Approach to Quantum Gravity,

    A. Perez, “The Spin-Foam Approach to Quantum Gravity,”Living Rev. Rel.16 (2013), no. 3,arXiv:1205.2019

    2013 arXiv

  93. [103]

    The strange equation of quantum gravity,

    C. Rovelli, “The strange equation of quantum gravity,”Class. Quant. Grav.32 (2015), no. 12, 124005,arXiv:1506.00927

    2015 arXiv

  94. [104]

    Strominger,Lectures on the Infrared Structure of Gravity and Gauge Theory

    A. Strominger,Lectures on the Infrared Structure of Gravity and Gauge Theory. Princeton University Press, Princeton, 2018.arXiv:1703.05448

    2018 arXiv

  95. [105]

    Sub-subleading soft gravitons: New symmetries of quantum gravity?,

    M. Campiglia and A. Laddha, “Sub-subleading soft gravitons: New symmetries of quantum gravity?,”Phys. Lett. B764 (2017) 218–221, arXiv:1605.09094

    2017 arXiv

  96. [106]

    Sub-subleading soft graviton theorem from asymptotic Einstein’s equations,

    L. Freidel, D. Pranzetti, and A.-M. Raclariu, “Sub-subleading soft graviton theorem from asymptotic Einstein’s equations,”JHEP 05 (2022) 186, arXiv:2111.15607

    2022 arXiv

  97. [107]

    Implementation of the Quantum Equivalence Principle,

    L. Hardy, “Implementation of the Quantum Equivalence Principle,” inProgress and Visions in Quantum Theory in View of Gravity, F. Finster, D. Giulini, J. Kleiner, and J. Tolksdorf, eds., pp. 189–220. Springer International Publishing, Cham, 2020

    2020

  98. [108]

    Quantum mechanics and the covariance of physical laws in quantum reference frames,

    F. Giacomini, E. Castro-Ruiz, and Č. Brukner, “Quantum mechanics and the covariance of physical laws in quantum reference frames,”Nature Communications 10 (2019), no. 1, 494

    2019

  99. [109]

    Partition functions and topology changing amplitudes in the 3-D lattice gravity of Ponzano and Regge,

    H. Ooguri, “Partition functions and topology changing amplitudes in the 3-D lattice gravity of Ponzano and Regge,”Nucl. Phys. B382 (1992) 276–304, arXiv:hep-th/9112072

    1992 arXiv

  100. [110]

    The Ponzano-Regge model,

    J. W. Barrett and I. Naish-Guzman, “The Ponzano-Regge model,”Class. Quant. Grav. 26 (2009) 155014, arXiv:0803.3319

    2009 arXiv

  101. [111]

    Spin foam models and the classical action principle,

    L. Freidel and K. Krasnov, “Spin foam models and the classical action principle,” Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.2 (1999) 1183–1247, arXiv:hep-th/9807092

    1999 arXiv

  102. [112]

    LQG vertex with finite Immirzi parameter,

    J. Engle, E. Livine, and C. Rovelli, “LQG vertex with finite Immirzi parameter,” Nucl. Phys. B799 (2008) 136–149, arXiv:0711.0146

    2008 arXiv

  103. [113]

    Flipped spinfoam vertex and loop gravity,

    J. Engle, R. Pereira, and C. Rovelli, “Flipped spinfoam vertex and loop gravity,” Nucl. Phys. B798 (2008) 251–290, arXiv:0708.1236v1

    2008 arXiv

  104. [114]

    Rovelli and F

    C. Rovelli and F. Vidotto,Covariant Loop Quantum Gravity: An Elementary Introduction to Quantum Gravity and Spinfoam Theory. Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics. Cambridge University Press, 11, 2014

    2014

  105. [115]

    The continuum limit of loop quantum gravity - a framework for solving the theory,

    B. Dittrich, “The continuum limit of loop quantum gravity - a framework for solving the theory,” inLoop Quantum Gravity, The First Thirty Years, A. Abhay and J. Pullin, eds., vol. 4. World Scientific, 2017.arXiv:1409.1450

    2017 arXiv

  106. [116]

    Coarse Graining Spin Foam Quantum Gravity—A Review,

    S. Steinhaus, “Coarse Graining Spin Foam Quantum Gravity—A Review,”Front. in Phys. 8 (2020) 295, arXiv:2007.01315

    2020 arXiv

  107. [117]

    Effective Spin Foam Models for 24 Four-Dimensional Quantum Gravity,

    S. K. Asante, B. Dittrich, and H. M. Haggard, “Effective Spin Foam Models for 24 Four-Dimensional Quantum Gravity,”Phys. Rev. Lett.125 (2020), no. 23, 231301, arXiv:2004.07013

    2020 arXiv

  108. [118]

    Spin foams, Refinement limit and Renormalization,

    S. K. Asante, B. Dittrich, and S. Steinhaus, “Spin foams, Refinement limit and Renormalization,” arXiv:2211.09578

    arXiv

  109. [119]

    Spinfoam Models for Quantum Gravity,

    E. R. Livine, “Spinfoam Models for Quantum Gravity,” inEncyclopedia of Mathematical Physics (Second Edition), R. Szabo and M. Bojowald, eds., pp. 507–519. Academic Press, Oxford, second edition ed., 2025

    2025

  110. [120]

    Discrete and continuum third quantization of Gravity,

    S. Gielen and D. Oriti, “Discrete and continuum third quantization of Gravity,” in Quantum Field Theory and Gravity: Conceptual and Mathematical Advances in the Search for a Unified Framework, pp. 41–64. 2012.arXiv:1102.2226

    2012 arXiv

  111. [121]

    Editorial for the Special Issue

    S. Carrozza, S. Gielen, and D. Oriti, “Editorial for the Special Issue ”Progress in Group Field Theory and Related Quantum Gravity Formalisms”,”Universe 6 (2020), no. 1, 19,arXiv:2001.08428

    2020 arXiv

  112. [122]

    Oriti,Group field theory and loop quantum gravity., pp

    D. Oriti,Group field theory and loop quantum gravity., pp. 125–151. World Scientific, 2017

    2017

  113. [123]

    The group field theory approach to quantum gravity,

    D. Oriti, “The group field theory approach to quantum gravity,” inApproaches to Quantum Gravity. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2009. 25

    2009

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.