Yang-Mills analogues of the Immirzi ambiguity

J. Pullin; O. Obregon; R. Gambini

RECORD

Yang-Mills analogues of the Immirzi ambiguity

R. Gambini, O. Obregon, J. Pullin

General Relativity and Quantum Cosmology · Submitted 15 Jan 1998

abstract compiled · 2026-09-23 · no language-model review

The authors' main claim We draw parallels between the recently introduced ``Immirzi ambiguity'' of the Ashtekar-like formulation of canonical quantum gravity and other ambiguities that appear in Yang-Mills theories, like the $\theta$ ambiguity.

how it is stated · asserted 1.00 read the record →

Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗

Cite ▾

Claim paper

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Open the compiled record

Compiled by classifier-1.13-20260917 via OpenRouter, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 2,283 input tokens, $0.0001 reported.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.04 · states limitation 0.07 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.03 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.03 · compares with prior results 0.51 · mentions code or data availability 0.01.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v1. Results and the main claim are underlined; show every role.

We draw parallels between the recently introduced ``Immirzi ambiguity'' of the Ashtekar-like formulation of canonical quantum gravity and other ambiguities that appear in Yang-Mills theories, like the $\theta$ ambiguity. We also discuss ambiguities in the Maxwell case, and implication for the loop quantization of these theories.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#	sentence	role	the authors' own work	states the main conclusion	strength
s0	We draw parallels between the recently introduced ``Immirzi ambiguity'' of the Ashtekar-like formulation of canonical quantum gravity and other ambiguities that appear in Yang-Mills theories, like the $\theta$ ambiguity.	contribution 0.99	0.83	0.33	asserted 1.00
s1	We also discuss ambiguities in the Maxwell case, and implication for the loop quantization of these theories.	contribution 0.92	0.70	0.14	asserted 0.76

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: position or commentary 0.81 · evidence from argument 0.93.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read

arXiv listing abstract v1

not examined

full text
figures and tables
references and citing sentences
relations to other papers

levels run

P abstract

not run

S sections
T body sentences
C citations
R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

The paper

Original abstract

We draw parallels between the recently introduced ``Immirzi ambiguity'' of the Ashtekar-like formulation of canonical quantum gravity and other ambiguities that appear in Yang-Mills theories, like the $\theta$ ambiguity. We also discuss ambiguities in the Maxwell case, and implication for the loop quantization of these theories.

Human review

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

References

How the literature uses it

5 arXiv papers cite this in 6 sentences

Each citing sentence is taken from the citing paper's LaTeX source and typed by Pith's classifier. A label appears at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), a contest at 0.7 or more; the quoted words are the citing authors'. How each label was checked · JSON

Papers citing it · 4 sentences without a confident label

Compares with it 1 paper

The similarities between these two cases are more salient here than the conventional formulation [ref] .

Yang-Mills Interactions and Gravity in Terms of Clifford Algebra · The Curvature and Gauge Action · 0.82

Cites it as background 1 paper

Many authors have contributed to clarify the physical origin of the BI parameter [ref] and suggestions have come from studying the interaction of gravity with fermions [ref] .

Barbero-Immirzi field in canonical formalism of pure gravity · Introduction · 0.94

Discussion

Know something about this paper? Leave a comment, or highlight any passage above to comment on it.