Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 44 references

Tropical Branes

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The canonically quantized open tropical string has Hamiltonian $H = 2\pi \sum_{n\geq 1} n^2 X_n^2 + \frac{\pi}{2}\left(\frac{\Delta x}{\pi}\right)^2$, a diagonal tower of commuting modes, so its spectrum is an infinite tower of…

desk verdict The paper's central Dirichlet Hamiltonian is missing a mode-coupling cross-term; the claimed tower of free particles doesn't follow from the authors' own equations. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.12337 v3 pith:GWDG7PUQ submitted 2024-12-16 hep-th

Emil Albrychiewicz , Andrés Franco Valiente , Vi Hong This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-th
keywords tropicalgeometrytropologicalsigmamodelsopenstringsD-branescanonicalquantizationnon-relativisticbranesasymptoticstringstatesnonequilibriumtheory
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

This paper asks what happens when the worldsheet has boundaries in the recently proposed tropological $\sigma$ model, the tropical limit of the topological A-model, and the open string solutions are canonically quantized. After analytically continuing the tropical action to real time, the paper derives a Hamiltonian that is diagonal in the modes: $H = 2\pi \sum_{n\geq 1} n^2 X_n^2 + \frac{\pi}{2}\left(\frac{\Delta x}{\pi}\right)^2$, with the modes $X_n$ commuting and no zero-point energy. The authors take this as evidence that tropical open strings describe an infinite tower of increasingly massive asymptotic string states, matching the expectation that tropicalized worldsheets model the long-tube, on-shell regime of string perturbation theory. If correct, the tropical limit offers a simpler description of the asymptotic behavior of string amplitudes and their nonequilibrium extensions.

What carries the argument

The central objects are the tropical branes, defined as the boundary conditions on the strip $\mathbb{R}\times[0,\pi]$: Dirichlet conditions fix both $X$ and $\Theta$ at the endpoints, while the Neumann-type conditions fix only $X$. The mechanism that carries the argument is the analytically continued tropological $\sigma$-model action, $$S = \int dt\,dr \left[\tfrac{1}{2}(\partial_t\Theta)^2 - \tfrac{1}{2}(\partial_r X)^2 + (\$\beta$ - \partial_r\Theta)\partial_t X\right],$$ obtained from the tropical limit of the A-model action by $\theta \to it$ and $\beta' = iB$. The field $\beta$ acts as a Lagrange multiplier enforcing $\partial_t X = 0$; after constraint quantization it forms a second-class pair with its momentum and is removed, leaving $X$ and $\Theta$ with conjugate momenta $P = -\partial_r\Theta$ and $\Pi = \partial_t\Theta$. The interplay of the equation of motion $\partial_t X = 0$ with this conjugate pairing is what turns the Hamiltonian into a diagonal, commuting tower of modes rather than coupled oscillators.

What would settle it

Compute the Euclidean correlation functions of the continued action on the strip and check reflection positivity; a single negative-norm two-point function would contradict unitarity and invalidate the reading of Eq. (6.6) as a tower of free asymptotic states.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central result is that the canonically quantized open tropical string does not reproduce the relativistic string spectrum of infinitely many coupled harmonic oscillators. With tropical Dirichlet boundary conditions on both $X$ and $\Theta$, the equations of motion force $X$ to be independent of $t$ and $\Theta$ to grow at most linearly in $t$, with the slope fixed by $\partial_r X$. Canonical quantization gives $[X_n, X_m]=0$ and $[X_n,\Theta_m]=\frac{i}{\pi}\delta_{n,m}$, so the $\Theta_n$ act as conjugate momenta for the commuting $X_n$, and the Hamiltonian (6.6) is a sum of squares with no cross terms and no oscillation-energy shift. The paper argues this is the worldsheet footprint of strings that have gone on-shell: an infinite tower of freely propagating, increasingly massive states. The same diagonal structure survives the Neumann-type boundary conditions, where the zero-mode constant is shifted by boundary gauge-field data, and wrapping $X$ on a circle shifts the zero-point energy by a winding-number-dependent term while leaving the tower structure intact.

Load-bearing premise

All of the quantization is carried out in the analytically continued action (3.8), and the claim that this continuation is unitary with energy bounded below is asserted without proof; if that unitarity fails, the spectrum in (6.6) and the asymptotic-string interpretation do not follow.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The open tropical string spectrum contains no zero-point energy and no mode coupling, so no infinite regulator needs to be subtracted from the Hamiltonian.
  • Tropical D-branes come in two classes: Dirichlet-type branes fixing both target coordinates at the endpoints, and Neumann-type branes fixing only $X$; the two classes differ in the zero-mode contribution to the energy.
  • Winding $X$ on a circle of radius $R$ shifts the zero-point energy by $(\Delta x/\pi + 2mR)^2$, producing a tower labeled by winding number $m$.
  • Standard T-duality is absent: the Hamiltonian has no term inversely proportional to $R$, so a dual description of the wrapped theory would have to take a different form.
  • The boundary conformal algebra on the strip retains a single central charge, in contrast to the boundary-less algebra with two central charges, which changes how Virasoro-like generators act at the endpoints.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The paper asserts unitarity of the continued action but does not prove it; a concrete check left open is to compute Euclidean two-point functions and test reflection positivity, which would settle whether the tower-of-states spectrum is physical.
  • The quantization order is likely essential: tropicalizing the A-model action before quantizing yields the diagonal Hamiltonian, whereas quantizing the relativistic string and then taking the tropical limit may not commute; testing this ordering could delimit the regime of validity of tropical branes.
  • Because the Neumann-type boundary conditions leave $\Theta$ free at the endpoints, tropical branes may be better understood as foliation data on the worldsheet than as submanifolds of the target space; the paper does not develop this geometric reading.
  • The absence of standard T-duality suggests that any mirror-like symmetry surviving the tropical limit must be sought in the tropicalization of the B-model, which the paper explicitly leaves open; comparing the two tropical path integrals would test whether mirror symmetry degenerates to an identity.
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 / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies open-string solutions of the analytically continued tropological sigma model on a strip, derives boundary conditions and a boundary conformal algebra, and canonically quantizes the resulting mode expansions. The central claim is that the open tropical string Hamiltonian is diagonal in the mode operators X_n, given by H = 2π Σ n² X_n² + (π/2)(Δx/π)², so that the spectrum is an infinite tower of free (rather than coupled oscillator) states. The paper also discusses the absence of T-duality and outlines connections to brane quantization.

Significance. If the central calculation were correct, the paper would provide an explicit worldsheet realization of the anisotropic 'wedge region' of the Schwinger-Keldysh string contour, with a strikingly simple spectrum. The Dirac-Bergmann analysis in Appendix A is transparent and checkable, and the boundary algebra section is a useful contribution. However, the main Hamiltonian result contains an algebraic error that invalidates the paper's principal claim; the claimed decoupled tower structure is not a consequence of the stated action and mode expansions.

major comments (3)
  1. [§6, Eq. (6.6)] The Hamiltonian quoted in Eq. (6.6) is not the result of substituting the mode expansions (6.1)-(6.2) into the Hamiltonian density (3.15)-(3.16). Direct computation gives: ∫(∂tΘ)² dr = π(Σ_{n≥1} 2n X_n)² + 2π Σ n² X_n², and ∫(∂rX)² dr = 2π Σ n² X_n² + π(Δx/π)². Therefore H = 2π Σ n² X_n² + (π/2)(Δx/π)² + (π/2)(Σ 2n X_n)². The last positive term is absent from (6.6). For a single mode with Δx=0, the correct energy is 4π X_1², not 2π X_1². The omitted term couples all modes, so the Hamiltonian does not describe an infinite tower of decoupled free particles. This undermines the claim in the abstract and in §7 that the spectrum consists of increasingly massive asymptotic string states.
  2. [§3, after Eq. (3.8)] The assertion that the analytically continued action (3.8) is 'unitary with the energy being bounded from below' is not proved. After the continuations θ→it and β'=iB, the Lagrangian contains the complex term iB ∂tX, so standard reality and reflection-positivity arguments do not apply. The Hamiltonian (3.15) is obtained only after gauge fixing β=0 and removing the pair (β,π) via Dirac brackets; a proof that this describes a positive, self-adjoint quantum theory is needed. Since all subsequent mode expansions and quantization in §6 and Appendix A rest on this assumption, this is a load-bearing gap.
  3. [§6, Eqs. (6.1)-(6.2)] The mode expansion is not the most general solution of the equations of motion (3.9)-(3.11) with the stated Dirichlet boundary conditions. The boundary condition that Θ be time-independent at both ends forces X'(0)=X'(π). This condition admits odd sine harmonics, for example X(r) = sin r − (1/3) sin 3r, which satisfies X(0)=X(π)=0 and X'(0)=X'(π)=0. The restriction to sin(2nr) in (6.1) is not justified by the equations of motion or boundary conditions and omits an infinite family of classical solutions. Consequently the canonical quantization in §6 is performed on an incomplete configuration space, which independently affects the validity of the derived spectrum.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract] The phrase 'This results supports' should read 'This result supports.'
  2. [§6, Eq. (6.11)] The statement that the wrapping shift changes the zero point by (Δx/π + 2mR)² omits the overall factor π/2 that appears in the Hamiltonian (6.6); the shift should be relative to the un-wrapped zero-point energy.
  3. [§2, Eq. (2.12)] The localization equations list ∂θX = 0 twice (in E^X_r and E^Θ_θ); one of the entries is redundant.
  4. [§5, Eq. (5.2)] The boundary condition (5.2) is called a combination of Neumann and Dirichlet conditions; since this terminology is non-standard, a brief explanation of why it is a 'tropical' mixing would improve readability.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

The mode-expansion Hamiltonian calculation is the paper's own algebra and is not circular, but the advertised physical conclusion—the infinite tower of asymptotic string states—is imported from the authors' prior tropological-sigma-model paper [1] and then presented as supporting evidence for that same prior claim.

  1. self citation load bearing [Section 6, after Eq. (6.6); cf. Introduction and Abstract]
    "This outcome aligns with the original physical motivation behind the analytically continued tropological sigma models. These models describe the asymptotic behavior of the moduli space of punctured Riemann surfaces, where it is well known that strings become on-shell and propagate through a tower of increasingly massive physical states [1]."

    The headline conclusion (Abstract: "the Hamiltonian for tropical branes describes an infinite tower of increasingly massive asymptotic string states") is reached by attaching to the mode computation a physical interpretation borrowed from the authors' own prior work [1] (Albrychiewicz–Ellers–Franco Valiente–Hořava). The Introduction states the same expectation before deriving anything: "we expect their analytic continuations to describe ... an infinite tower of free particles. We find supporting evidence for this statement in this paper." Thus the interpretive half of the "prediction" is the motivating premise of the authors' research program, anchored by a self-citation, then restated as a conclusion.

full rationale

The mode expansion and the claimed Hamiltonian (6.6) are internal computations from the analytically continued action (3.8), not fits to external data, so there is no fitted-input or definitional circularity. The main circular element is interpretive: the "infinite tower of increasingly massive asymptotic string states" is presented as a finding that "supports" the tropological-string program, but the standard for reading the commuting-mode Hamiltonian as an on-shell string tower is taken from the authors' own preceding paper [1], and the Introduction announces the tower before deriving it. This is a genuine self-citation that is load-bearing for the advertised conclusion, warranting a moderate score rather than 0. Separately, the paper asserts without proof after Eq. (3.8) that the continued action "preserves full conformal invariance" and "is unitary with the energy being bounded from below"; this is a missing-support issue rather than a circular reduction, and it bears on correctness risk. In addition, an independent algebraic check of the paper's own substitution indicates that Eq. (6.6) omits the positive cross-term (π/2)(Σ_n 2n X_n)^2 coming from ∫(∂_tΘ)^2; that would be a calculational error in the central Hamiltonian, not a circularity, and would affect the interpretation of the spectrum. Because these non-circular concerns do not change the circularity finding, the score reflects only the self-citation load-bearing structure.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on the prior tropological sigma model construction [1] and on an asserted analytic-continuation unitarity. There are no numerically fitted parameters; the only undetermined constant is the boundary central charge cJ. The paper introduces one new named object (tropical branes) without independent evidence outside the framework.

free parameters (1)
  • cJ (boundary central charge), Eq. (4.8)
    The single surviving central charge in the boundary algebra is left undetermined; the paper does not compute it from the mode structure. It does not enter the Hamiltonian (6.6), but it is a free parameter in the boundary conformal algebra.
assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The tropological sigma model framework of [1], including the tropicalization procedure, Jordan structures, gauge fixing B_X^α = 0, and the action (2.24), is correct and well-defined.
    The entire paper proceeds from this prior construction; no independent derivation is given here. Any flaw in [1] would invalidate the open-string results.
  • ad hoc to paper The analytic continuation θ → it, β' = iB yields a unitary theory with energy bounded from below (Eq. (3.8)).
    Asserted in Section 3 without proof. The Hamiltonian (6.6) and the physical interpretation depend on this continuation being valid.
  • domain assumption The target space is a smooth real 2-dimensional manifold with an almost complex structure, so complex coordinates (Z, Z̄) exist locally.
    Stated near Eq. (2.3). The tropicalization construction is adapted to 2D target space; extensions to higher dimensions are mentioned only as future work.
  • standard math Canonical quantization promotes the classical Poisson brackets to commutators as in (6.4).
    Standard quantization rule; no justification needed beyond the Dirac-Bergmann analysis in Appendix A.
invented entities (1)
  • tropical branes
    purpose: Boundary conditions in the analytically continued tropological sigma model, introduced as the non-relativistic counterpart of D-branes (Section 5, Section 7).
    No independent falsifiable handle outside the model is provided; they are defined by the boundary conditions (5.2) and (5.3). Their physical reality depends entirely on the tropological sigma model framework.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Tropical Branes." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GWDG7PUQ

@misc{pith2026241212337,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Tropical Branes},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GWDG7PUQ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.12337}
}
read the original abstract

We investigate canonically quantized open string solutions associated to the analytically continued action for the recently proposed tropical limit of topological A-type models, tropological sigma models, with various boundary conditions. These solutions naturally give rise to a non-relativistic counterpart of branes, which we name tropical branes. We provide a preliminary worldsheet description of these tropical branes, laying the groundwork for an upcoming paper that will explore the role of tropical branes in the context of brane quantization.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 19 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Albrychiewicz, K.-I

    E. Albrychiewicz, K.-I. Ellers, A. Franco Valiente and P. Hoˇ rava,Tropological sigma models, JHEP 06 (2024) 135 [ 2311.00745]. – 15 –

    arXiv 2024

  2. [2]

    Maclagan and B

    D. Maclagan and B. Sturmfels, Introduction to tropical geometry, Graduate Studies in Mathematics, vol. 161. American Mathematical Society, 2015

    work page 2015

  3. [3]

    Rau, A first expedition to tropical geometry, https://www.math.uni-tuebingen.de/user/jora/downloads/firstexpedition.pdf, 2017

    J. Rau, A first expedition to tropical geometry, https://www.math.uni-tuebingen.de/user/jora/downloads/firstexpedition.pdf, 2017

    work page 2017

  4. [4]

    Mikhalkin and J

    G. Mikhalkin and J. Rau, Tropical geometry, https://www.math.uni-tuebingen.de/user/jora/downloads/main.pdf, 2018

    work page 2018

  5. [5]

    G. L. Litvinov, The Maslov dequantization, idempotent and tropical mathematics: A brief introduction, arXiv:math/0507014

    arXiv

  6. [6]

    Witten, Topological sigma models, Commun

    E. Witten, Topological sigma models, Commun. Math. Phys. 118 (1988) 411

    work page 1988

  7. [7]

    Gomis and Z

    J. Gomis and Z. Yan, Worldsheet formalism for decoupling limits in string theory , JHEP 07 (2024) 102 [ 2311.10565]

    arXiv 2024

  8. [8]

    C. D. A. Blair, J. Lahnsteiner, N. A. Obers and Z. Yan, Unification of Decoupling Limits in String and M Theory , Phys. Rev. Lett. 132 (2024) 161603 [ 2311.10564]

    arXiv 2024

Show all 44 references
  1. [9]

    Hoˇ rava and C

    P. Hoˇ rava and C. J. Mogni,Large-N expansion and string theory out of equilibrium , Phys. Rev. D106 (2022) 106013 [ arXiv:2008.11685]

    2022 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Hoˇ rava and C

    P. Hoˇ rava and C. J. Mogni,String perturbation theory on the Schwinger-Keldysh time contour , Phys. Rev. Lett. 125 (2020) 261602 [ arXiv:2009.03940]

    2020 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Hoˇ rava and C

    P. Hoˇ rava and C. J. Mogni,Keldysh rotation in the large- N expansion and string theory out of equilibrium, Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022) 106014 [ arXiv:2010.10671]

    2022 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Horava, Strings on World Sheet Orbifolds , Nucl

    P. Horava, Strings on World Sheet Orbifolds , Nucl. Phys. B 327 (1989) 461

    1989

  5. [13]

    Horava, Equivariant topological sigma models , Nucl

    P. Horava, Equivariant topological sigma models , Nucl. Phys. B 418 (1994) 571 [hep-th/9309124]

    1994 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Witten, Chern-Simons gauge theory as a string theory , Prog

    E. Witten, Chern-Simons gauge theory as a string theory , Prog. Math. 133 (1995) 637 [hep-th/9207094]

    1995 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Bergshoeff, J

    E. Bergshoeff, J. M. Izquierdo and L. Romano, Carroll versus Galilei from a Brane Perspective , JHEP 10 (2020) 066 [ 2003.03062]

    2020 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Kluson, Note about D-branes in Carrollian background , JHEP 08 (2022) 203 [ 2203.16824]

    J. Kluson, Note about D-branes in Carrollian background , JHEP 08 (2022) 203 [ 2203.16824]

    2022 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Bergshoeff, J

    E. Bergshoeff, J. Figueroa-O’Farrill, K. van Helden, J. Rosseel, I. Rotko and T. ter Veldhuis, p-brane Galilean and Carrollian geometries and gravities , J. Phys. A 57 (2024) 245205 [2308.12852]

    2024 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Witten, Mirror manifolds and topological field theory , AMS/IP Stud

    E. Witten, Mirror manifolds and topological field theory , AMS/IP Stud. Adv. Math. 9 (1998) 121 [arXiv:hep-th/9112056]

    1998 arXiv

  11. [19]

    O. Y. Viro, On basic concepts of tropical geometry , Proceedings of the Steklov Institute of Mathematics 273 (2011) 252

    2011

  12. [20]

    Viro, Hyperfields for tropical geometry I

    O. Viro, Hyperfields for tropical geometry I. Hyperfields and dequantization , arXiv:1006.3034

    arXiv

  13. [21]

    Witten, Introduction to cohomological field theories , Int

    E. Witten, Introduction to cohomological field theories , Int. J. Mod. Phys. A6 (1991) 2775

    1991

  14. [22]

    Duval, G

    C. Duval, G. W. Gibbons, P. A. Horvathy and P. M. Zhang, Carroll versus Newton and Galilei: two dual non-Einsteinian concepts of time , Class. Quant. Grav. 31 (2014) 085016 [ 1402.0657]. – 16 –

    2014 arXiv

  15. [23]

    de Boer, J

    J. de Boer, J. Hartong, N. A. Obers, W. Sybesma and S. Vandoren, Carroll stories , JHEP 09 (2023) 148 [ 2307.06827]

    2023 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Henneaux and C

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

    1992

  17. [25]

    Abouelsaood, C

    A. Abouelsaood, C. G. Callan, Jr., C. R. Nappi and S. A. Yost, Open strings in background gauge fields , Nucl. Phys. B 280 (1987) 599

    1987

  18. [26]

    Albrychiewicz, A

    E. Albrychiewicz, A. Franco Valiente and V. Hong, A Tropical Look at Coisotropic Branes and Quantization, 2502.19246

    arXiv

  19. [27]

    R. K. Sachs, Gravitational waves in general relativity. 6. The outgoing radiation condition , Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 264 (1961) 309

    1961

  20. [28]

    Bondi, M

    H. Bondi, M. G. J. van der Burg and A. W. K. Metzner, Gravitational waves in general relativity. VII. Waves from axisymmetric isolated systems , Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A269 (1962) 21

    1962

  21. [29]

    R. K. Sachs, Asymptotic symmetries in gravitational theory , Phys. Rev. 128 (1962) 2851

    1962

  22. [30]

    R. K. Sachs, Gravitational waves in general relativity. VIII. Waves in asymptotically flat space-times, Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A 270 (1962) 103

    1962

  23. [31]

    Ashtekar, J

    A. Ashtekar, J. Biˇ c´ ak and B. G. Schmidt,Asymptotic structure of symmetry reduced general relativity, Phys. Rev. D 55 (1997) 669 [ arXiv:gr-qc/9608042]

    1997 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Bagchi and R

    A. Bagchi and R. Gopakumar, Galilean Conformal Algebras and AdS/CFT , JHEP 07 (2009) 037 [arXiv:0902.1385]

    2009 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Bagchi, R

    A. Bagchi, R. Gopakumar, I. Mandal and A. Miwa, GCA in 2d , JHEP 08 (2010) 004 [arXiv:0912.1090]

    2010 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Bagchi and R

    A. Bagchi and R. Fareghbal, BMS/GCA Redux: Towards Flatspace Holography from Non-Relativistic Symmetries, JHEP 10 (2012) 092 [ arXiv:1203.5795]

    2012 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Bagchi, A

    A. Bagchi, A. Mehra and P. Nandi, Field Theories with Conformal Carrollian Symmetry , JHEP 05 (2019) 108 [ arXiv:1901.10147]

    2019 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Donnay, A

    L. Donnay, A. Fiorucci, Y. Herfray and R. Ruzziconi, Carrollian Perspective on Celestial Holography, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129 (2022) 071602 [ 2202.04702]

    2022 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Donnay, A

    L. Donnay, A. Fiorucci, Y. Herfray and R. Ruzziconi, Bridging Carrollian and celestial holography, Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023) 126027 [ 2212.12553]

    2023 arXiv

  30. [38]

    In¨ on¨ u and E

    E. In¨ on¨ u and E. P. Wigner,Representations of the galilei group , Il Nuovo Cimento (1943-1954) 9 (1952) 705

    1952

  31. [39]

    Gross, Tropical geometry and mirror symmetry , no

    M. Gross, Tropical geometry and mirror symmetry , no. 114. American Mathematical Soc., 2011

    2011

  32. [40]

    Kapustin and D

    A. Kapustin and D. Orlov, Remarks on A branes, mirror symmetry, and the Fukaya category , J. Geom. Phys. 48 (2003) 84 [ hep-th/0109098]

    2003 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Gukov and E

    S. Gukov and E. Witten, Branes and Quantization , Adv. Theor. Math. Phys. 13 (2009) 1445 [0809.0305]

    2009 arXiv

  34. [42]

    P. G. Bergmann, Non-Linear Field Theories , Phys. Rev. 75 (1949) 680

    1949

  35. [43]

    P. A. M. Dirac, Generalized Hamiltonian dynamics , Can. J. Math. 2 (1950) 129. – 17 –

    1950

  36. [44]

    J. L. Anderson and P. G. Bergmann, Constraints in covariant field theories , Phys. Rev. 83 (1951) 1018. – 18 –

    1951

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.