Paper detail

Corrigendum: The Plebanski sectors of the EPRL vertex

We correct what amounts to a sign error in the proof of part (i.) of theorem 3 in Class.Quant.Grav.28 225003 (arXiv:1107.0709). The Plebanski sectors isolated by the linear simplicity constraints do not change --- they are still the three sectors (deg), (II+), and (II-). What changes is the characterization of the continuum Plebanski two-form corresponding to the first two terms in the asymptotics of the EPRL vertex amplitude for Regge-like boundary data. These two terms do not correspond to Plebanski sectors (II+) and (II-), but rather to the two possible signs of the product of the sign of the sector --- +1 for (II+) and -1 for (II-) --- and the sign of the orientation $ε_{IJKL}B^{IJ} \wedge B^{KL}$ determined by $B^{IJ}$. This is consistent with what one would expect, as this is exactly the sign which classically relates the BF action, in Plebanski sectors (II+) and (II-), to the Einstein-Hilbert action, whose discretization is the Regge action appearing in the asymptotics.

preprint2013arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access1 author1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.