Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

The one-loop effective action from the coherent state path integral of loop quantum gravity

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-08 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that the one-loop effective action of loop quantum gravity around flat spacetime is ultraviolet-finite, because the quantum equation of motion fixes the background area to a nonzero value.

desk verdict First one-loop effective action from the LQG coherent state path integral, but the advertised dynamical selection of the UV cutoff works only in the long-wavelength approximation. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.07696 v1 pith:KAWFD6UP submitted 2025-02-11 gr-qc hep-th

Renata Ferrero , Muxin Han , Hongguang Liu This is my paper · ORCID
classification gr-qchep-th MSC 83C4581S40 PACS 04.60.Pp04.60.-m
keywords loopquantumgravitycoherentstatepathintegralone-loopeffectiveactionUVfinitenessareaequationofmotionpropagatorlattice
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 tries to establish that the one-loop effective action of loop quantum gravity, computed with a coherent-state path integral around a flat background, is ultraviolet-finite rather than divergent like the one-loop effective action of perturbative Einstein gravity. The reason is that the quantum area of the lattice, called j0, is not a free cutoff but a dynamical expectation value, and the one-loop quantum equation of motion fixes it to a nonzero value. If true, this means loop quantum gravity supplies its own physical ultraviolet cutoff and needs no counterterms at one loop. The paper also derives the propagator, identifies the dynamical modes, and obtains the quantum equation of motion that selects the preferred boundary coherent states.

What carries the argument

The central object is the coherent-state path integral of loop quantum gravity on a finite cubic lattice, whose transition amplitude is written as a discrete integral over SL(2,C) coherent-state labels with action S[g,h]. The one-loop computation reduces to evaluating the determinant of the 18×18 Hessian matrix MVV(k0,k⃗) of the quadratic action for flux and holonomy perturbations, which factorizes as DM(k0,m⃗) with a product formula involving six complex functions αi. The one-loop effective action is −log det(H), and the quantum equation of motion is its variation with respect to the background area p. The paper also uses the first-order quantum correction H1 to the Hamiltonian expectation value to complete the effective action at the same order in the semiclassicality parameter t.

What would settle it

Compute the next-order correction in the coherent-state expansion of Eq. (3.27) and recompute the one-loop determinant as a function of p: if the p-dependence changes so that the quantum equation of motion admits p* = 0, or if including the k0 = 0 zero mode turns the logarithmic term back into a divergence, the UV-finiteness claim fails.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the effective action Γ0(p) computed from the coherent-state path integral takes the form Γ0(p) = $N^{3}$ T a^(-1) weff(p), where weff contains a 1/√p term from the one-loop determinant plus a next-to-leading-order Hamiltonian correction. Varying this effective action gives the quantum equation of motion ∂Γ/∂p = 0, whose solutions for β = 1 are p* ≈ 0.08393 and 288.90315, so p = 0 is not a solution. Because p* > 0, the expansion parameter 1/j0 is finite and the effective potential Veff(p) is finite. The paper stresses that j0 is a dynamical quantity determined by the quantum state, not a hand-inserted cutoff, which is why the one-loop divergence structure disappears. In the long-wavelength approximation the one-loop effective action is S1L(j0) = i $N^{3}$ T √(j0ℓP)/χ1 − $2N^{3}$ log(j0), with only a logarithmic dependence on j0, and the numerical computation beyond that approximation gives the same structural form.

Load-bearing premise

The computation assumes that the ratio of coherent-state Hamiltonian matrix elements equals the classical lattice Hamiltonian plus an O(t) correction, so that the path integral becomes a Gaussian integral whose determinant is the entire one-loop answer; if higher-order terms or the exact measure change how that determinant depends on the background area, the computed effective action and the nonzero p* would change.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The one-loop effective action around flat spacetime is divergence-free, with only a logarithmic dependence on the quantum area j0, so no counterterms are needed at one loop.
  • The quantum equation of motion selects a nonzero background area p* ≈ 0.08393 or 288.90315 for β = 1, fixing the boundary coherent states that admit an on-shell solution.
  • The propagator contains tensor, vector, and scalar modes; only the tensor modes propagate as gravitational degrees of freedom, while the vector and scalar modes are conserved and related to the Gauss constraint and the dust reference frame.
  • The long-wavelength and full numerical computations give the same structural form for the one-loop effective action, with coefficients that converge as the lattice size N increases.
  • No external cutoff or renormalization condition is introduced; the lattice discreteness and the dynamical area gap play that role.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Inference: if the computation survives closer scrutiny of the measure, it suggests loop quantum gravity's effective description is intrinsically UV-finite at one loop, in contrast to perturbative Einstein gravity, without invoking a separate UV completion mechanism.
  • Inference: the dynamical selection of a nonzero area j0 generalizes the role of the area gap: discreteness is not imposed but emerges from the quantum equation of motion, which could connect to area-metric effective actions and large-spin expansions of discrete gravity amplitudes.
  • Inference: applying the same coherent-state path integral to a cosmological background with flat spatial slices could yield one-loop corrections to the primordial power spectrum; the long-wavelength result here provides a concrete template for that computation.
  • Inference: the complex critical point found beyond the long-wavelength approximation warrants attention, since it may signal a genuine instability of the flat vacuum or merely the need for a contour deformation in the Lorentzian path integral.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The paper computes the one-loop effective action for loop quantum gravity (LQG) starting from the coherent state path integral formulation on a cubic lattice with a flat Minkowski background. The authors expand holonomy and flux perturbations around the background, derive the Hessian determinant, and evaluate it both analytically in a long-wavelength approximation and numerically beyond that approximation. They further derive the propagator, identify tensor/vector/scalar modes, and obtain a quantum equation of motion that, in the long-wavelength approximation, selects a nonzero background area p*. The central advertised result is that the one-loop effective action is divergence-free because the LQG area j0 is dynamically determined to be nonzero.

Significance. If the central claim held in full, this would be a significant step: it would connect LQG coherent-state path integrals to standard QFT effective-action techniques, give an explicit determinant computation with no fitted parameters beyond the Barbero-Immirzi parameter and the length unit, provide a detailed propagator analysis, and supply a concrete mechanism by which the quantum dynamics selects a nonzero area and thereby removes UV divergences. The paper also makes its numerical code publicly available and is candid about several mathematical gaps. However, as detailed below, the advertised dynamical selection of a real nonzero area is established only inside the long-wavelength approximation; the full numerical computation yields a complex critical point. The weaker statement that the determinant is finite for fixed nonzero P0 survives, but the abstract's mechanism does not, as currently presented.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 7, Eq. (7.17), Fig. 7] The full numerical determinant gives S1L = c' N^3 4πiT/(μ√P0) − y N^3 log(P0) with arg(c') converging to a value slightly below π/2. Consequently the quantum equation of motion ∂Γ/∂P0 = 0 admits no real positive solution; the text itself states that this leads to a complex critical point. Since the abstract's central claim—'Due to the one-loop dynamics of the LQG area, we find a divergence-free effective action'—relies on a real nonzero p* selected by this equation, that claim is not established beyond the long-wavelength approximation. The paper should either restrict the claim to the long-wavelength regime or provide an additional argument for why the complex critical point is physically admissible, for example by showing that a real effective area emerges from a more complete treatment.
  2. [Section 6.1, Eq. (4.29)] The analytic evaluation of the determinant uses the long-wavelength approximation DM ≃ (2π k0/T)^18 (μ/a)^36 β^−18 [1 − |k|^2 P0/(2π k0/T)^2]^2, which is valid for μ|k| ≪ 1, but this expression is then applied to all momenta in the lattice sum leading to Eqs. (6.2)–(6.11). The long-wavelength regime is the infrared regime, whereas the UV-finiteness claim concerns momenta of order |k| ∼ π/μ. Section 7 shows that corrections outside this regime are not small: the coefficient c' acquires a large imaginary part. Therefore the analytic result (6.10) and the resulting nonzero p* in Eq. (6.18) do not justify the UV-finiteness mechanism; the argument needs either a controlled treatment of short-wavelength modes or a revised claim that the mechanism is demonstrated only in the long-wavelength sector.
  3. [Section 3.2, Eq. (3.27)] The entire Gaussian reduction rests on the approximation ⟨ψ_{g_{i+1}}|Ĥ|ψ_{g_i}⟩/⟨ψ_{g_{i+1}}|ψ_{g_i}⟩ ≃ H[g_i] + O(t), which the paper explicitly states 'lacks mathematical rigor.' This approximation is the premise for the quadratic action and hence for the determinant's dependence on P0; without control of the higher-order terms or of the measure ν[g], the effective action and the quantum equation of motion are conditional. The paper acknowledges this gap, but the conclusion should present the central finiteness claim as conditional on this approximation rather than as an unconditional result.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 5, first paragraph] The phrase 'the inversus of (4.25)' should read 'the inverse of (4.25)'.
  2. [Section 7, Eq. (7.15)] The notation '8πic′' appearing in Eq. (7.15) is slightly confusing because c′ is introduced through this combination; please define c′ directly as the coefficient in Eq. (7.17) and state its relation to the sum in Eq. (7.16) more explicitly.
  3. [Figure 7 and Section 7, Eq. (7.17)] The text says the argument of c′ converges to a value slightly below π/2, and also that its real part is small compared to its imaginary part; the caption could state the limiting value and its error more precisely, since this is the key quantity controlling the complex critical point.
  4. [Section 4.3, Eq. (4.27)] The parentheses in Eq. (4.27) appear unbalanced; please check the displayed formula and its surrounding sentence.
  5. [Appendix A] The derivation of the Euler–Maclaurin estimate for f(N) is clear, but the sentence 'Note that this will result in a scaling as N^4, which is consistent with the results found in [85, 86]' would benefit from a brief explanation of why the O(N^3) correction is subleading for the final effective action.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circular reduction found: the one-loop effective action is computed as a function of the background area and the nonzero j0 is obtained by solving the resulting quantum equation of motion. The main caveats are admitted limitations, not circularity.

full rationale

The derivation chain is genuinely compositional. Starting from the coherent-state path integral of [74] and the O(t) approximation in Eq. (3.27), the paper expands around a flat background, constructs the 18x18 Hessian, computes the functional determinant as a function of the background area P0, and then solves the one-loop quantum equation of motion for p*. The target statement 'j0>0 implies UV finiteness' is not fed into the computation: p* is obtained as the solution of Eq. (6.17), and p=0 is reported as not being a solution. The constants c, c', and y are numerical outputs of lattice sums and determinants, not parameters fitted to the desired finiteness. The paper does rely on self-cited prior work, notably the coherent-state path integral of [74] and the first-order Hamiltonian correction H1 of [101]. These are genuine inputs to the calculation, and the central determinant computation is new and independent of them in content. The paper itself flags the two main limitations: Eq. (3.27) is an approximation that 'lacks mathematical rigor', and Section 7 states that beyond the long-wavelength approximation the coefficient c' has argument slightly below pi/2, 'leading to a complex critical point'. These passages undermine the advertised real-positive j0 in the full theory, but they are correctness and robustness concerns rather than circular reductions: no equation is defined in terms of the result it is supposed to predict, and no fitted quantity is renamed as a prediction. Accordingly, no specific circular step can be exhibited with a quotation and a formal reduction, so the appropriate finding is 'no significant circularity'.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The computation rests on the coherent state path integral formula and the semiclassical approximation from prior LQG work, on the flat-background boundary data, and on two explicit regularizations: dropping the k0=0 zero mode and using the long-wavelength approximation for the analytic determinant. The only free parameters are the length unit a, which sets the physical scale of the area j0, and the Barbero-Immirzi parameter beta, set to 1 in numerics. No new entities are postulated.

free parameters (2)
  • Length unit a in coherent state definition = not fixed (example: a = 1 mm gives j0 ~ 3.2e62 and 1.1e66)
    The dimensionless semiclassicality parameter t = l_P^2/a^2 and the relation p* = j0 l_P^2/a^2 mean the numerical value of the quantum area j0 depends on the arbitrary choice of length unit a. The paper does not provide a physical determination of a.
  • Barbero-Immirzi parameter beta = set to 1 in numerical solutions
    beta is a free parameter of LQG; numerical solutions for p* are given for beta = 1, and the effective potential depends on beta. The paper does not constrain beta.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption The coherent state path integral formula (3.22) with measure (3.23) from Ref. [74] correctly represents the LQG transition amplitude generated by the dust-deparametrized physical Hamiltonian.
    The entire computation starts from this formula; the paper does not rederive it, and it is not machine-checked or independently benchmarked in this work.
  • domain assumption The semiclassical replacement (3.27): ratio of coherent state Hamiltonian matrix elements is approximately the classical Hamiltonian H[g] plus O(t) corrections, with the O(t) term H1 taken from Ref. [101].
    This reduces the path integral to a Gaussian integral whose determinant is the one-loop effective action. The paper concedes this step 'lacks mathematical rigor' (end of Section 3.2).
  • domain assumption The flat Minkowski background is represented by the boundary coherent states (4.1)-(4.3) with constant area p>0 and trivial holonomies.
    The perturbation theory and the Fourier transform rely on this background; it selects the sector of the theory being studied.
  • ad hoc to paper The zero mode k0=0 is excluded from the path integral as an IR regularization.
    Section 4.3 states the zero mode is not integrated because it produces an IR divergence in the one-loop effective action. The claimed finiteness is conditional on this exclusion.
  • ad hoc to paper The long-wavelength approximation (4.29) is used for the determinant over all momenta in Section 6.1, beyond its strict validity mu|k|<<1.
    The analytic result (6.10) is obtained by applying this approximation globally; the authors assert the full numerical computation gives the same formal structure but do not provide a quantitative error bound.
  • standard math The i-epsilon regularization and the large-T expansion of cotangent (6.7) are used to evaluate the sum over k0 and remove poles of the determinant.
    Standard QFT prescription for making the product over discrete frequencies convergent; used in both the analytic and numerical sections.
  • domain assumption The Hamiltonian in the path integral is the physical Hamiltonian of gravity coupled to dust (Brown-Kuchar model), inherited from the reduced phase space LQG program.
    The whole framework is deparametrized by dust as a time reference; this is a foundational assumption of the path integral formula from Ref. [74].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The one-loop effective action from the coherent state path integral of loop quantum gravity." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KAWFD6UP

@misc{pith2026250207696,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The one-loop effective action from the coherent state path integral of loop quantum gravity},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KAWFD6UP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.07696}
}
read the original abstract

We adopt a novel approach to combine path integral methods with Loop Quantum Gravity (LQG). Our approach builds upon the recently developed coherent state path integral formulation of LQG to compute the one-loop effective action. We compare this methodology with the conventional Quantum Field Theory (QFT) prescription for path integrals and extend the formalism to account for the dependence on boundary (coherent) states. This work aims to explore two aspects: to compare our results with the divergences observed in one-loop calculations of Einstein gravity testing UV-finiteness and to initiate an exploration of the IR effective properties of LQG. We compute the effective action around flat spacetime obtaining analytical and numerical results in the long and short wavelength approximations, respectively. Due to the one-loop dynamics of the LQG area, we find a divergence-free effective action. We study the propagator and the dynamical modes and derive the quantum equation of motion at one loop. We ensure consistency with the semiclassical approximation in the long wavelength limit and, beyond this approximation, analyze numerical scaling as the lattice size increases.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Renormalization group flows in area-metric gravity

    gr-qc 2025-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    The first renormalization group analysis of area-metric gravity shows shape-mismatching masses grow toward the infrared, parity is not emergent, and the Immirzi parameter flow has fixed points at γ=0 and γ=∞.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

119 extracted references · 21 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    LIGO Scientific, Virgo Collaboration, B. P. Abbott et al., Tests of general relativity with GW150914, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (2016), no. 22 221101, [ arXiv:1602.03841]. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 121, 129902 (2018)]

    arXiv 2016

  2. [2]

    Carney, P

    D. Carney, P. C. E. Stamp, and J. M. Taylor, Tabletop experiments for quantum gravity: a user’s manual, Class. Quant. Grav. 36 (2019), no. 3 034001, [ arXiv:1807.11494]

    arXiv 2019

  3. [3]

    Navas et al., Review of particle physics , Phys

    Particle Data Group Collaboration, S. Navas et al., Review of particle physics , Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024), no. 3 030001

    2024

  4. [4]

    Percacci, An Introduction to Covariant Quantum Gravity and Asymptotic Safety , vol

    R. Percacci, An Introduction to Covariant Quantum Gravity and Asymptotic Safety , vol. 3 of 100 Years of General Relativity. World Scientific, 2017

    2017

  5. [5]

    Reuter and F

    M. Reuter and F. Saueressig, Quantum Gravity and the Functional Renormalization Group: The Road towards Asymptotic Safety . Cambridge University Press, 1, 2019

    2019

  6. [6]

    Bonanno, A

    A. Bonanno, A. Eichhorn, H. Gies, J. M. Pawlowski, R. Percacci, M. Reuter, F. Saueressig, and G. P. Vacca, Critical reflections on asymptotically safe gravity , Front. in Phys. 8 (2020) 269, [arXiv:2004.06810]

    arXiv 2020

  7. [7]

    Saueressig, The Functional Renormalization Group in Quantum Gravity

    F. Saueressig, The Functional Renormalization Group in Quantum Gravity . 2023. arXiv:2302.14152. – 32 –

    arXiv 2023

  8. [8]

    Ambjorn, A

    J. Ambjorn, A. Goerlich, J. Jurkiewicz, and R. Loll, Nonperturbative Quantum Gravity, Phys. Rept. 519 (2012) 127–210, [ arXiv:1203.3591]

    arXiv 2012

Show all 119 references
  1. [9]

    Loll, Quantum Gravity from Causal Dynamical Triangulations: A Review , Class

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

    2020 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Ambjorn, J

    J. Ambjorn, J. Gizbert-Studnicki, A. Gorlich, and D. Nemeth, Is lattice quantum gravity asymptotically safe? Making contact between causal dynamical triangulations and the functional renormalization group, Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024), no. 12 126006, [ arXiv:2408.07808]

    2024

  3. [11]

    Ambjorn, J

    J. Ambjorn, J. Gizbert-Studnicki, A. Goerlich, and D. Nemeth, IR and UV limits of CDT and their relations to FRG , 11, 2024. arXiv:2411.02330

    2024

  4. [12]

    Rovelli, Quantum gravity

    C. Rovelli, Quantum gravity. Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics. Univ. Pr., Cambridge, UK, 2004

    2004

  5. [13]

    Thiemann, Modern Canonical Quantum General Relativity

    T. Thiemann, Modern Canonical Quantum General Relativity . Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics. Cambridge University Press, 2007

    2007

  6. [14]

    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, 2014

    2014

  7. [15]

    Thiemann and K

    T. Thiemann and K. Giesel, Hamiltonian Theory: Dynamics . 2023. arXiv:2303.18172

    2023 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Ashtekar and E

    A. Ashtekar and E. Bianchi, A short review of loop quantum gravity , Rept. Prog. Phys. 84 (2021), no. 4 042001, [arXiv:2104.04394]

    2021 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Oriti, Space-time geometry from algebra: Spin foam models for nonperturbative quantum gravity , Rept

    D. Oriti, Space-time geometry from algebra: Spin foam models for nonperturbative quantum gravity , Rept. Prog. Phys. 64 (2001) 1703–1756, [ gr-qc/0106091]

    2001 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Perez, Spin foam models for quantum gravity , Class

    A. Perez, Spin foam models for quantum gravity , Class. Quant. Grav. 20 (2003) R43, [ gr-qc/0301113]

    2003 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Engle and S

    J. Engle and S. Speziale, Spin Foams: Foundations . 2023. arXiv:2310.20147

    2023 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Han, Four-dimensional spinfoam quantum gravity with a cosmological constant: Finiteness and semiclassical limit, Phys

    M. Han, Four-dimensional spinfoam quantum gravity with a cosmological constant: Finiteness and semiclassical limit, Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021), no. 10 104035, [ arXiv:2109.00034]

    2021 arXiv

  13. [21]

    M. Han, Z. Huang, H. Liu, and D. Qu, Complex critical points and curved geometries in four-dimensional Lorentzian spinfoam quantum gravity , Phys. Rev. D 106 (2022), no. 4 044005, [arXiv:2110.10670]

    2022 arXiv

  14. [22]

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

    2020 arXiv

  15. [23]

    S. K. Asante, B. Dittrich, and S. Steinhaus, Spin Foams, Refinement Limit, and Renormalization

  16. [24]

    J. N. Borissova and B. Dittrich, Towards effective actions for the continuum limit of spin foams , Class. Quant. Grav. 40 (2023), no. 10 105006, [ arXiv:2207.03307]

    2023 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Borissova, B

    J. Borissova, B. Dittrich, D. Qu, and M. Schiffer, Spikes and spines in 4D Lorentzian simplicial quantum gravity, JHEP 10 (2024) 150, [ arXiv:2407.13601]

    2024 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Freidel, Group field theory: An Overview , Int

    L. Freidel, Group field theory: An Overview , Int. J. Theor. Phys. 44 (2005) 1769–1783, [hep-th/0505016]

    2005 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Oriti, Group field theory as the 2nd quantization of Loop Quantum Gravity , Class

    D. Oriti, Group field theory as the 2nd quantization of Loop Quantum Gravity , Class. Quant. Grav. 33 (2016), no. 8 085005, [ arXiv:1310.7786]

    2016 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Marchetti and E

    L. Marchetti and E. Wilson-Ewing, Relational Observables in Group Field Theory , arXiv:2412.14622. – 33 –

    arXiv

  21. [29]

    Marchetti, H

    L. Marchetti, H. Mehmood, and V. Husain, An Exactly Soluble Group Field Theory , arXiv:2412.09851

    arXiv

  22. [30]

    Ashtekar and J

    A. Ashtekar and J. Lewandowski, Background independent quantum gravity: A Status report , Class. Quant. Grav. 21 (2004) R53, [ gr-qc/0404018]

    2004 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Ashtekar, M

    A. Ashtekar, M. Reuter, and C. Rovelli, From General Relativity to Quantum Gravity , arXiv:1408.4336

    arXiv

  24. [32]

    Thiemann, Asymptotically safe — canonical quantum gravity junction , JHEP 10 (2024) 013, [arXiv:2404.18220]

    T. Thiemann, Asymptotically safe — canonical quantum gravity junction , JHEP 10 (2024) 013, [arXiv:2404.18220]

    2024 arXiv

  25. [33]

    M. H. Goroff and A. Sagnotti, Quantum gravity at two loops , Phys. Lett. B 160 (1985) 81–86

    1985

  26. [34]

    M. H. Goroff and A. Sagnotti, The Ultraviolet Behavior of Einstein Gravity , Nucl. Phys. B 266 (1986) 709–736

    1986

  27. [35]

    M. E. Peskin and D. V. Schroeder, An Introduction to quantum field theory . Addison-Wesley, Reading, USA, 1995

    1995

  28. [36]

    Weinberg, The quantum theory of fields

    S. Weinberg, The quantum theory of fields. Vol. 2: Modern applications . Cambridge University Press, 8, 2013

    2013

  29. [37]

    D. J. Toms, The Schwinger Action Principle and Effective Action . Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics. Cambridge University Press, 8, 2012

    2012

  30. [38]

    M. D. Schwartz, Quantum Field Theory and the Standard Model . Cambridge University Press, 3, 2014

    2014

  31. [39]

    Eichhorn, A

    A. Eichhorn, A. Hebecker, J. M. Pawlowski, and J. Walcher, The Absolute Swampland , arXiv:2405.20386

    arXiv

  32. [40]

    Weinberg, Ultraviolet divergences in quantum theories of gravitation , pp

    S. Weinberg, Ultraviolet divergences in quantum theories of gravitation , pp. 790–831. 1980

    1980

  33. [41]

    N. D. Birrell and P. C. W. Davies, Quantum Fields in Curved Space . Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1982

    1982

  34. [42]

    L. E. Parker and D. Toms, Quantum Field Theory in Curved Spacetime: Quantized Field and Gravity . Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics. Cambridge University Press, 8, 2009

    2009

  35. [43]

    A. E. M. van de Ven, Two loop quantum gravity , Nucl. Phys. B 378 (1992) 309–366

    1992

  36. [44]

    K. G. Wilson and J. B. Kogut, The Renormalization group and the epsilon expansion , Phys. Rept. 12 (1974) 75–199

    1974

  37. [45]

    L. P. Kadanoff, Statistical physics: Statics, dynamics and renormalization . 2000

    2000

  38. [46]

    Reuter, Nonperturbative evolution equation for quantum gravity , Phys

    M. Reuter, Nonperturbative evolution equation for quantum gravity , Phys. Rev. D 57 (1998) 971–985, [hep-th/9605030]

    1998 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Niedermaier, Gravitational fixed points and asymptotic safety from perturbation theory , Nucl

    M. Niedermaier, Gravitational fixed points and asymptotic safety from perturbation theory , Nucl. Phys. B 833 (2010) 226–270

    2010

  40. [48]

    Martini, A

    R. Martini, A. Ugolotti, F. Del Porro, and O. Zanusso, Gravity in d = 2 + ϵ dimensions and realizations of the diffeomorphisms group , Eur. Phys. J. C 81 (2021), no. 10 916, [ arXiv:2103.12421]

    2021 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Kluth, Fixed Points of Quantum Gravity from Dimensional Regularisation , arXiv:2409.09252

    Y. Kluth, Fixed Points of Quantum Gravity from Dimensional Regularisation , arXiv:2409.09252

    arXiv

  42. [50]

    Falls and R

    K. Falls and R. Ferrero, Asymptotic Safety within on-shell perturbation theory , arXiv:2411.00938

    arXiv

  43. [51]

    B. S. DeWitt, Dynamical theory of groups and fields , Conf. Proc. C 630701 (1964) 585–820

    1964

  44. [52]

    B. S. DeWitt, Quantum Field Theory in Curved Space-Time , Phys. Rept. 19 (1975) 295–357. – 34 –

    1975

  45. [53]

    Thiemann, Nonperturbative quantum gravity in Fock representations , Phys

    T. Thiemann, Nonperturbative quantum gravity in Fock representations , Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024), no. 12 124023, [ arXiv:2405.01212]

    2024 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Banerjee and M

    R. Banerjee and M. Niedermaier, The spatial Functional Renormalization Group and Hadamard states on cosmological spacetimes, Nucl. Phys. B 980 (2022) 115814, [ arXiv:2201.02575]

    2022 arXiv

  47. [55]

    D’Angelo, N

    E. D’Angelo, N. Drago, N. Pinamonti, and K. Rejzner, An Algebraic QFT Approach to the Wetterich Equation on Lorentzian Manifolds , Annales Henri Poincare 25 (2024), no. 4 2295–2352, [arXiv:2202.07580]

    2024 arXiv

  48. [56]

    D’Angelo, Asymptotic safety in Lorentzian quantum gravity , Phys

    E. D’Angelo, Asymptotic safety in Lorentzian quantum gravity , Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024), no. 6 066012, [arXiv:2310.20603]

    2024 arXiv

  49. [57]

    D’Angelo, R

    E. D’Angelo, R. Ferrero, and M. B. Fr¨ ob,De Sitter quantum gravity within the covariant Lorentzian approach to asymptotic safety , arXiv:2502.05135

    arXiv

  50. [58]

    Thiemann, Reduced phase space quantization and Dirac observables , Class

    T. Thiemann, Reduced phase space quantization and Dirac observables , Class. Quant. Grav. 23 (2006) 1163–1180, [gr-qc/0411031]

    2006 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Giesel and T

    K. Giesel and T. Thiemann, Algebraic quantum gravity (AQG). IV. Reduced phase space quantisation of loop quantum gravity , Class. Quant. Grav. 27 (2010) 175009, [ arXiv:0711.0119]

    2010 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Han and T

    M. Han and T. Thiemann, On the Relation between Operator Constraint –, Master Constraint –, Reduced Phase Space –, and Path Integral Quantisation , Class. Quant. Grav. 27 (2010) 225019, [arXiv:0911.3428]

    2010 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Giesel and T

    K. Giesel and T. Thiemann, Scalar Material Reference Systems and Loop Quantum Gravity , Class. Quant. Grav. 32 (2015) 135015, [ arXiv:1206.3807]

    2015 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Dittrich, Partial and complete observables for Hamiltonian constrained systems , Gen

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

    2007 arXiv

  55. [63]

    J. D. Brown and K. V. Kuchar, Dust as a standard of space and time in canonical quantum gravity , Phys. Rev. D51 (1995) 5600–5629, [ gr-qc/9409001]

    1995 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Giesel, S

    K. Giesel, S. Hofmann, T. Thiemann, and O. Winkler, Manifestly Gauge-Invariant General Relativistic Perturbation Theory. I. Foundations , Class. Quant. Grav. 27 (2010) 055005, [ arXiv:0711.0115]

    2010 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Giesel, S

    K. Giesel, S. Hofmann, T. Thiemann, and O. Winkler, Manifestly Gauge-invariant general relativistic perturbation theory. II. FR W background and first order, Class. Quant. Grav. 27 (2010) 055006, [arXiv:0711.0117]

    2010 arXiv

  58. [66]

    Giesel, B.-F

    K. Giesel, B.-F. Li, and P. Singh, Towards a reduced phase space quantization in loop quantum cosmology with an inflationary potential , Phys. Rev. D 102 (2020), no. 12 126024, [ arXiv:2007.06597]

    2020 arXiv

  59. [67]

    M. Han, H. Li, and H. Liu, Manifestly gauge-invariant cosmological perturbation theory from full loop quantum gravity, Phys. Rev. D 102 (2020), no. 12 124002, [ arXiv:2005.00883]

    2020 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Han and H

    M. Han and H. Liu, Improved µ-scheme effective dynamics of full loop quantum gravity , Phys. Rev. D 102 (2020), no. 6 064061, [ arXiv:1912.08668]

    2020 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Han and H

    M. Han and H. Liu, Loop quantum gravity on dynamical lattice and improved cosmological effective dynamics with inflaton , Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021), no. 2 024011, [ arXiv:2101.07659]

    2021 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Giesel, M

    K. Giesel, M. Han, B.-F. Li, H. Liu, and P. Singh, Spherical symmetric gravitational collapse of a dust cloud: Polymerized dynamics in reduced phase space , Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023), no. 4 044047, [arXiv:2212.01930]

    2023 arXiv

  63. [71]

    Thiemann, Quantum Field Theory of Black Hole Perturbations with Backreaction: I General Framework, Universe 10 (2024), no

    T. Thiemann, Quantum Field Theory of Black Hole Perturbations with Backreaction: I General Framework, Universe 10 (2024), no. 9 372, [ arXiv:2404.18956]. – 35 –

    2024 arXiv

  64. [72]

    Neuser and T

    J. Neuser and T. Thiemann, Quantum Field Theory of black hole perturbations with backreaction. Part II. Spherically symmetric 2nd order Einstein sector , JCAP 01 (2025) 001, [ arXiv:2404.18958]

    2025 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Ferrero and T

    R. Ferrero and T. Thiemann, Relational Lorentzian Asymptotically Safe Quantum Gravity: Showcase Model, Universe 10 (2024), no. 11 410, [ arXiv:2404.18224]

    2024 arXiv

  66. [74]

    Han and H

    M. Han and H. Liu, Effective Dynamics from Coherent State Path Integral of Full Loop Quantum Gravity, Phys. Rev. D101 (2020), no. 4 046003, [ arXiv:1910.03763]

    2020 arXiv

  67. [75]

    Thiemann, Gauge field theory coherent states (GCS): 1

    T. Thiemann, Gauge field theory coherent states (GCS): 1. General properties , Class. Quant. Grav. 18 (2001) 2025–2064, [ hep-th/0005233]

    2001 arXiv

  68. [76]

    Thiemann and O

    T. Thiemann and O. Winkler, Gauge field theory coherent states (GCS). 2. Peakedness properties , Class. Quant. Grav. 18 (2001) 2561–2636, [ hep-th/0005237]

    2001 arXiv

  69. [77]

    Thiemann and O

    T. Thiemann and O. Winkler, Gauge field theory coherent states (GCS): 3. Ehrenfest theorems , Class. Quant. Grav. 18 (2001) 4629–4682, [ hep-th/0005234]

    2001 arXiv

  70. [78]

    Agullo and P

    I. Agullo and P. Singh, Loop Quantum Cosmology, in Loop Quantum Gravity: The First 30 Years (A. Ashtekar and J. Pullin, eds.), pp. 183–240. WSP, 2017. arXiv:1612.01236

    2017 arXiv

  71. [79]

    J. W. Barrett, R. Dowdall, W. J. Fairbairn, F. Hellmann, and R. Pereira, Lorentzian spin foam amplitudes: Graphical calculus and asymptotics , Class.Quant.Grav. 27 (2010) 165009, [arXiv:0907.2440]

    2010 arXiv

  72. [80]

    Han and M

    M. Han and M. Zhang, Asymptotics of spinfoam amplitude on simplicial manifold: Lorentzian theory , Class.Quant.Grav. 30 (2013) 165012, [ arXiv:1109.0499]

    2013 arXiv

  73. [81]

    M. Han, Z. Huang, H. Liu, and D. Qu, Numerical computations of next-to-leading order corrections in spinfoam large-j asymptotics, Phys. Rev. D 102 (2020), no. 12 124010, [ arXiv:2007.01998]

    2020 arXiv

  74. [82]

    Dittrich and A

    B. Dittrich and A. Kogios, From spin foams to area metric dynamics to gravitons , Class. Quant. Grav. 40 (2023), no. 9 095011, [ arXiv:2203.02409]

    2023 arXiv

  75. [83]

    Weinberg, The Quantum theory of fields

    S. Weinberg, The Quantum theory of fields. Vol. 1: Foundations . Cambridge University Press, 6, 2005

    2005

  76. [84]

    Branchina, H

    V. Branchina, H. Faivre, and D. Zappala, Effective action and the quantum equation of motion , Eur. Phys. J. C 36 (2004) 271–281, [ hep-th/0306050]

    2004 arXiv

  77. [85]

    Becker and M

    M. Becker and M. Reuter, Background independent field quantization with sequences of gravity-coupled approximants. II. Metric fluctuations , Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021), no. 12 125008, [ arXiv:2109.09496]

    2021 arXiv

  78. [86]

    Ferrero and R

    R. Ferrero and R. Percacci, The cosmological constant problem and the effective potential of a gravity-coupled scalar, JHEP 09 (2024) 074, [ arXiv:2404.12357]

    2024 arXiv

  79. [87]

    J. F. Donoghue, The Ideas of gravitational effective field theory , in 27th International Conference on High-energy Physics, 7, 1994. hep-th/9409143

    1994 arXiv

  80. [88]

    J. F. Donoghue, General relativity as an effective field theory: The leading quantum corrections , Phys. Rev. D 50 (1994) 3874–3888, [ gr-qc/9405057]

    1994 arXiv

  81. [89]

    ’t Hooft and M

    G. ’t Hooft and M. J. G. Veltman, One loop divergencies in the theory of gravitation , Ann. Inst. H. Poincare A Phys. Theor. 20 (1974) 69–94

    1974

  82. [90]

    A. O. Barvinsky and G. A. Vilkovisky, The generalized Schwinger-de Witt technique and the unique effective action in quantum gravity , Phys. Lett. B 131 (1983) 313–318

    1983

  83. [91]

    S. M. Christensen and M. J. Duff, Quantizing Gravity with a Cosmological Constant , Nucl. Phys. B 170 (1980) 480–506

    1980

  84. [92]

    B. S. DeWitt, The global approach to quantum field theory. Vol. 1, 2 , vol. 114. 2003. – 36 –

    2003

  85. [93]

    Supernova Search T eamCollaboration, A. G. Riess et al., Observational evidence from supernovae for an accelerating universe and a cosmological constant , Astron. J. 116 (1998) 1009–1038, [astro-ph/9805201]

    1998 arXiv

  86. [94]

    Weinberg, The Cosmological Constant Problem , Rev

    S. Weinberg, The Cosmological Constant Problem , Rev. Mod. Phys. 61 (1989) 1–23

    1989

  87. [95]

    Zhang, Coherent states in field theory , hep-th/9908117

    W.-M. Zhang, Coherent states in field theory , hep-th/9908117

    arXiv

  88. [96]

    Berezhiani, G

    L. Berezhiani, G. Cintia, and M. Zantedeschi, Perturbative construction of coherent states , Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024), no. 8 085018, [ arXiv:2311.18650]

    2024 arXiv

  89. [97]

    Fukuda, M

    R. Fukuda, M. Komachiya, and M. Ukita, On-shell Expansion of the Effective Action: S Matrix and the Ambiguity - Free Stability Criterion , Phys. Rev. D 38 (1988) 3747–3754

    1988

  90. [98]

    Komachiya, M

    M. Komachiya, M. Ukita, and R. Fukuda, On-shell expansion of the effective action. 2: Coherent state and S matrix , Phys. Rev. D 42 (1990) 2792–2805

    1990

  91. [99]

    Ashtekar and J

    A. Ashtekar and J. Lewandowski, Representation theory of analytic holonomy C* algebras , gr-qc/9311010

    arXiv

  92. [100]

    Ashtekar and J

    A. Ashtekar and J. Lewandowski, Projective techniques and functional integration for gauge theories , J. Math. Phys. 36 (1995) 2170–2191, [ gr-qc/9411046]

    1995 arXiv

  93. [101]

    Zhang, S

    C. Zhang, S. Song, and M. Han, First-Order Quantum Correction in Coherent State Expectation Value of Loop-Quantum-Gravity Hamiltonian, Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022) 064008, [ arXiv:2102.03591]

    2022 arXiv

  94. [102]

    J. R. Klauder, A Modern Approach to Functional Integration , pp. 133–160. Birkh¨ auser Boston, Boston, 2011

    2011

  95. [103]

    Ferrero, M

    R. Ferrero, M. Han, and H. Liu. https://github.com/lhg285/EffActionLQG, 2025

    2025

  96. [104]

    Giesel and T

    K. Giesel and T. Thiemann, Algebraic quantum gravity (AQG). III. Semiclassical perturbation theory , Class. Quant. Grav. 24 (2007) 2565–2588, [ gr-qc/0607101]

    2007 arXiv

  97. [105]

    Han and H

    M. Han and H. Liu, Semiclassical limit of new path integral formulation from reduced phase space loop quantum gravity, Phys. Rev. D 102 (2020), no. 2 024083, [ arXiv:2005.00988]

    2020 arXiv

  98. [106]

    Bojowald and G

    M. Bojowald and G. M. Paily, Deformed General Relativity and Effective Actions from Loop Quantum Gravity, Phys. Rev. D 86 (2012) 104018, [ arXiv:1112.1899]

    2012 arXiv

  99. [107]

    Zhang, Reduced phase space quantization of black holes: Path integrals and effective dynamics , Phys

    C. Zhang, Reduced phase space quantization of black holes: Path integrals and effective dynamics , Phys. Rev. D 104 (2021), no. 12 126003, [ arXiv:2106.08202]

    2021 arXiv

  100. [108]

    Zhang, J

    C. Zhang, J. Lewandowski, Y. Ma, and J. Yang, Black Holes and Covariance in Effective Quantum Gravity, arXiv:2407.10168

  101. [109]

    Han and H

    M. Han and H. Liu, Covariant µ¯-scheme effective dynamics, mimetic gravity, and nonsingular black holes: Applications to spherically symmetric quantum gravity , Phys. Rev. D 109 (2024), no. 8 084033, [arXiv:2212.04605]

    2024 arXiv

  102. [110]

    Dittrich, From the discrete to the continuous: Towards a cylindrically consistent dynamics , New J

    B. Dittrich, From the discrete to the continuous: Towards a cylindrically consistent dynamics , New J. Phys. 14 (2012) 123004, [ arXiv:1205.6127]

    2012 arXiv

  103. [111]

    Dittrich and S

    B. Dittrich and S. Steinhaus, Time evolution as refining, coarse graining and entangling , New J. Phys. 16 (2014) 123041, [ arXiv:1311.7565]

    2014 arXiv

  104. [112]

    Dittrich and M

    B. Dittrich and M. Geiller, A new vacuum for Loop Quantum Gravity , Class. Quant. Grav. 32 (2015), no. 11 112001, [ arXiv:1401.6441]

    2015 arXiv

  105. [113]

    S. K. Asante, B. Dittrich, and J. Padua-Arguelles, Effective spin foam models for Lorentzian quantum gravity, Class. Quant. Grav. 38 (2021), no. 19 195002, [ arXiv:2104.00485]. – 37 –

    2021 arXiv

  106. [114]

    Cheung, P

    C. Cheung, P. Creminelli, A. L. Fitzpatrick, J. Kaplan, and L. Senatore, The Effective Field Theory of Inflation, JHEP 03 (2008) 014, [ arXiv:0709.0293]

    2008 arXiv

  107. [115]

    Weinberg, Effective Field Theory for Inflation , Phys

    S. Weinberg, Effective Field Theory for Inflation , Phys. Rev. D 77 (2008) 123541, [ arXiv:0804.4291]

    2008 arXiv

  108. [116]

    Baumann, A

    D. Baumann, A. Nicolis, L. Senatore, and M. Zaldarriaga, Cosmological Non-Linearities as an Effective Fluid, JCAP 07 (2012) 051, [ arXiv:1004.2488]

    2012 arXiv

  109. [117]

    R. A. Battye and J. A. Pearson, Effective action approach to cosmological perturbations in dark energy and modified gravity, JCAP 07 (2012) 019, [ arXiv:1203.0398]

    2012 arXiv

  110. [118]

    Agullo and N

    I. Agullo and N. A. Morris, Detailed analysis of the predictions of loop quantum cosmology for the primordial power spectra, Phys. Rev. D 92 (2015), no. 12 124040, [ arXiv:1509.05693]

    2015 arXiv

  111. [119]

    L. C. Gomar, M. Mart ´ ın-Benito, and G. A. M. Marug´ an,Gauge-Invariant Perturbations in Hybrid Quantum Cosmology, JCAP 06 (2015) 045, [ arXiv:1503.03907]. – 38 –

    2015 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 8, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.