Conserved currents in the Cartan formulation of general

relativity

Glenn Barnicha, Pujian Maob and Romain Ruzziconia

a
arXiv:1611.01777v1 [gr-qc] 6 Nov 2016

Physique Théorique et Mathématique

Université Libre de Bruxelles and International Solvay Institutes
Campus Plaine C.P. 231, B-1050 Bruxelles, Belgium

b
Institute of High Energy Physics
and Theoretical Physics Center for Science Facilities
Chinese Academy of Sciences
19B Yuquan Road, Beijing 100049, P. R. China

A BSTRACT. We derive the expressions for the local, on-shell closed co-
dimension 2 forms in the Cartan formulation of general relativity and explicitly
show their equivalence to those of the metric formulation.

Proceedings of the workshop “About various kinds of interactions” in honour of Philippe

Spindel, 4 & 5 June 2015, Mons, Belgium
2 G. BARNICH , P. M AO , R. RUZZICONI

1 Introduction
Surface charges in general relativity and gauge theories have a long history that goes back
to the founding papers on the Hamiltonian formulation, see [1] for a review and [2] for
further developments. Covariant approaches based on the linearized theory are discussed
in [3], chapter 20, and also in [4, 5]. A non-exhaustive list of subsequent references
includes [6–10]. More recently, there has been interest in first order formulations, see
e.g., [11–16].
Our approach here is based on actions, or more precisely, equivalence classes of La-
grangians up to total divergences. It originates in applications of the Batalin-Vilkovisky
formalism to the perturbative renormalization of gauge theories [17], [18], but can also
be formulated entirely independently of this machinery, see [19–25] for details.
The aim of this note is to provide explicit expressions for the local, on-shell closed co-
dimension 2 forms in the Cartan formulation of general relativity and prove their equiv-
alence with those of the metric formulation. The present note is extracted from a more
complete investigation that covers other first order formulations of general relativity [26].

2 Generalities

2.1 Local BRST cohomology and generalized auxiliary fields

One of the virtues of the approach is that non-trivial, local, co-dimension 2 forms that
are closed for all solutions of the equations of motion can be shown to be isomorphic
to local BRST cohomology classes in ghost number ´2. In turn, the latter are naturally
covariant under field redefinitions as well as suitably invariant under the introduction and
elimination of auxiliary and generalized auxiliary fields [17]. Auxiliary fields are a set of
fields whose Euler-Lagrange equations of motion can be solved algebraically to determine
them in terms of the remaining fields of the variational principle. Generalized auxiliary
fields extend this concept to the master action [27, 28]. They are present whenever the
vanishing of the gauge transformations of the fields can be solved algebraically for some
of the gauge parameters. The associated generalized auxiliary fields are sub-sets of fields
which are algebraically pure gauge, in the sense that they can be shifted arbitrarily by
gauge transformations that do not involve derivatives.
This is relevant for our purpose since the components of the Lorentz connection in
the Cartan formulation are auxiliary fields, while going from the vielbein to the metric
formulation involves elimination of generalized auxiliary fields. Indeed, in the linearized
formulation the skew-symmetric part of the vielbein fluctuations are algebraically pure
gauge since they can be shifted arbitrarily by Lorentz rotations. The argument can then
C ONSERVED CURRENTS IN THE C ARTAN FORMULATION OF GR 3

be extended to the non-linear theory as well, for instance by a perturbative analysis.

More details will be provided in [26].

2.2 General case

Let φi denote the fields of the variational principle, n the spacetime dimension and L “
L dn x the Lagrangian times the volume form. Here and below, we use the notation
1
pdn´p xqµ1 ...µp “ ǫµ1 ...µp µp`1 ...µn dxµp`1 . . . dxµn , (2.1)
p!pn ´ pq!
where the wedge product is omitted, ǫµ1 ...µn is completely antisymmetric and ǫ01...n´1 “ 1.
Let δǫ φi “ Rαi pǫα q denote a generating set of non trivial gauge transformations. Under
standard regularity assumptions, one can then show that there is an isomorphism between
equivalence classes of local, on-shell closed co-dimension 2 forms, with two such forms
being equivalent if they differ on-shell by an exact local form, and equivalence classes
of reducibility parameters f¯α rx, φs satisfying Rαi pf¯α q « 0, with two sets of reducibility
parameters being equivalent if they agree on-shell. In other words, the classification of lo-
cal, on-shell closed co-dimension 2 forms is done through the classification of reducibility
parameters, which is a tractable problem.
The construction of the n ´ 2 forms from the reducibility parameters can be summa-
rized as follows. For any f α , standard integrations by parts allow one to write
δL δL
Rαi pf α q “ f α Rα`i p q ` d H Sf , (2.2)
δφi δφi

for some weakly vanishing n ´ 1 form

B δL
Sf “ Sαiµ p , f α q. (2.3)
Bdxµ δφi

The n ´ 2 form is then obtained by applying the contracting homotopy ρH for the hori-
zontal differential of the variational bi-complex [29, 30]

tdH , ρH uω p “ ω p for p ă n. (2.4)

to Sf ,
kf “ ρH Sf . (2.5)
Indeed, the Noether identities associated to the generating set of non-trivial gauge trans-
formations are
δL
Rα`i p i q “ 0. (2.6)
δφ
For particular reducibility parameters that satisfy Rαi pf¯α q “ 0, (2.2) reduces to dH Sf¯ “ 0
so that (2.4) reduces to
dH kf¯ “ Sf¯ « 0. (2.7)
4 G. BARNICH , P. M AO , R. RUZZICONI

One can then proceed to show that kf¯ satisfies (2.7) also for general reducibility parame-
ters (see [19] for details).
In this discussion, we have neglected non-trivial, identically conserved currents, which
are related to the topology of the bundle of fields. We have thus neglected “magnetic”
charges and concentrated on the “electric” ones. The former can easily be incorporated
when taking into account the cohomology of the horizontal differential of the variational
bi-complex in lower form degrees, and more specifically, in degree n ´ 2 for the present
case.

2.3 Linearized theories

For definiteness, let us take the example of the Einstein-Hilbert action in metric formula-
tion, where a generating set of gauge transformations is given by the Lie derivative of the
metric, δξ gµν “ Lξ gµν . In spacetime dimension n ě 3, one can then show that ξ ρ rx, gs
can be assumed not to depend on the fields, so that reducibility parameters correspond
to Killing vectors. Since a generic metric does not admit Killing vectors, there are no
non-trivial conserved n ´ 2 forms in general relativity. In linearized gravity however,
a generating set of gauge transformations is given by δξ hµν “ Lξ ḡµν , where ḡµν is the
background solution around which one linearizes the theory. There are then as many
conserved n ´ 2 forms as there are Killing vectors of the background solution. Explicit
expressions are obtained by applying the construction described previously, but now in
the framework of the linearized theory. For Einstein gravity, this has been done explicitly
in [19].
More generally, for gauge theories linearized around a solution φ̄i with gauge trans-
formations δǫ ϕi “ Rαi rx, φ̄spǫα q, one can show [20] that one may obtain the n ´ 2 forms
of the linearized theory from the weakly vanishing Noether current Sf of the full theory
through
|λ| ` 1 δ B
kf rδφ, φs “ kfµν pdn´2 xqµν “ Bpλq rδφi i ν Sf s, (2.8)
|λ| ` 2 δφppλqνq
Bdx

by replacing f by reducibility parameters of the linearized theory, φi by the background

solution φ̄i and δφi by any solution ϕ̄i of the theory linearized around φ̄i . Explicit expres-
sions for the higher order Euler-Lagrange derivatives can be found in [29] and [30]; our
conventions and notations for multi-indices are summarized in the appendix of [19].
This construction is applicable in the case of Lagrangians that are of finite, arbitrarily
high order in derivatives. In case Sf is of second order in derivatives, which usually
requires the Euler-Lagrange equations of motion to be of second order as well, one needs
the higher order Euler-Lagrange operators up to order 2,
1 δ B 2 δ B
kf rδφ, φs “ δφi i ν Sf ` Bσ rδφi i ν Sf s. (2.9)
2 δφ ν Bdx 3 δφ νσ Bdx
C ONSERVED CURRENTS IN THE C ARTAN FORMULATION OF GR 5

For theories for which Sf is of first order in derivatives, only the first higher order Euler-
Lagrange operator is involved and reduces to the partial derivative, so that the formula
simplifies to
1 B B
kf rδφ, φs “ δφi i ν Sf . (2.10)
2 Bφ ν Bdx
A first order formulation can always be achieved by introducing suitable auxiliary and
generalized auxiliary fields.
For notational simplicity, we take units where the gravitational constant is G “
p16πq´1 . More standard choices correspond to multiplying the action and forms below
by p16πGq´1 .

2.4 Asymptotics
The strategy to use the linearized theory at infinity with prescribed asymptotics in order
to define conservation laws in general relativity is discussed in detail in [3].
Rather than trying to develop a theory for the asymptotic case, as done for instance
in [19] for the “asymptotically linear” case, one can take a more pragmatic point view that
consists in using the formula for the n ´ 2 forms above, while substituting asymptotic
reducibility parameters and asymptotic solutions determined by the fall-off conditions
instead of exact ones determined by the linearized theory. The approach is reminiscent
of the one for current algebras associated to broken global symmetries described in [31].
As a result, the currents are in general neither integrable nor conserved. This is precisely
what happens for general relativity with asymptotically flat boundary conditions at null
infinity [9, 24, 25].

3 Application to the Cartan formulation of GR

3.1 Cartan formulation

Consider an n dimensional spacetime with a moving, (pseudo-)orthonormal frame,
B
ea “ ea µ , ea “ ea µ dxµ , (3.1)
Bxµ

where ea µ ea ν “ δνµ , ea µ eb µ “ δab , and Ba f “ ea pf q. The structure functions are defined

by
1
rea , eb s “ D c ab ec ðñ dea “ ´ D a bc eb ec . (3.2)
2
For further use, note that if e “ det ea µ then

Bµ pe eµ a q “ e D bba , (3.3)
6 G. BARNICH , P. M AO , R. RUZZICONI

We thus assume that there is a pseudo-Riemannian metric,

gµν “ ea µ ηab eb ν , (3.4)

with a flat (Lorentz) metric in tangent space, ηab “ diagpp´q1, 1, . . . , 1q. As usual, tan-
gent space indices a, b, . . . and world indices µ, ν, . . . are lowered and raised with gab ,
gµν , and their inverses, and converted into each other using the vielbeins ea µ and their
inverse.
Local (Lorentz) rotations are denoted by Λa b pxq with Λa b ηbc Λd c “ ηad , or equiva-
lently, Λd b Λa b “ δad . Under a combined frame rotation and coordinate transformation, we
have
µ
e1a px1 q “ Λa b pxqeb ν pxqΛµ ν pxq, (3.5)
µ
Bx1
with Λµ ν “ .
Bxν
In addition, assume that there is an affine connection defined by

Dc ea “ Γb ac eb , (3.6)

and that metricity holds,

Da ηbc “ 0. (3.7)
This implies in particular that
Γabc “ ´Γbac , (3.8)
In terms of the Poincaré algebra,

rJab , Jcds “ ηbc Jad ´ ηac Jbd ´ ηbd Jac ` ηad Jbc , rJab , Pc s “ ηbc Pa ´ ηac Pb , (3.9)
1 ab
one defines the Lorentz connection Γ “ 2
Γ Jab , with Γab “ Γab µ dxµ “ Γab c ec , and
e “ ea Pa .
The torsion and curvature tensors are defined by
1 1
T “ T a Pa “ de ` rΓ, es, R “ Rab Jab “ dΓ ` rΓ, Γs, (3.10)
2 2
where the wedge product is omitted, and the bracket is the graded commutator.
More explicitly, T a “ 21 T a bc eb ec “ dea ` Γa b eb , so that

T a µν “ Bµ ea ν ´ Bν ea µ ` Γa bµ eb ν ´ Γa bν eb µ , (3.11)

T c ab “ 2Γc rbas ` D c ba , (3.12)

where round (square) brackets denote (anti) symmetrization of enclosed indices divided
by the factorial of the number of indices involved. In this case,

Bµ pe v µ q “ e pDµ ` eb ν Bµ eb ν qv µ “ Dµ pe v µ q, (3.13)
C ONSERVED CURRENTS IN THE C ARTAN FORMULATION OF GR 7

with Dµ v µ “ Bµ v µ for the Lorentz connection and the definition

Dµ e “ e peb ν Bµ eb ν q. (3.14)

In particular, this implies that

Dµ pe eµ a q “ e T b ab . (3.15)

For the curvature components, Ra b “ 21 Ra bcd ec ed “ dΓa b ` Γa c Γc b , we have

Rf cµν “ Bµ Γf cν ´ Bν Γf cµ ` Γf dµ Γd cν ´ Γf dν Γd cµ , (3.16)

Rf cab “ Ba Γf cb ´ Bb Γf ca ` Γf da Γd cb ´ Γf db Γd ca ´ D d ab Γf cd . (3.17)
Furthermore,
rDa , Db svc “ ´Rd cab vd ´ T d ab Dd vc . (3.18)
Under a local frame rotation, we have

e1 “ ΛeΛ´1 , Γ1 “ ΛΓΛ´1 ` ΛdΛ´1 , (3.19)

so that
T 1 “ ΛT Λ´1, R1 “ ΛRΛ´1 . (3.20)
Defining Λ “ 1 ` ω ` Opω 2q, with ω “ 21 ω ab Jab , ω ab “ ´ω ba , we have

δω Γ “ ´pdω ` rΓ, ωsq ðñ δω Γab “ ´pdω ab ` Γa c ω cb ` Γb c ω ac q, (3.21)

and also
δω e “ rω, es ðñ δω ea “ ω a b eb . (3.22)
Under a coordinate transformation, we have
a a
e1 µ “ Λµ ν ea ν , Γ1 bµ “ Λµ ν Γa bν , (3.23)

and for x1 µ “ xµ ´ ξ µ ` Opξ 2q, Λµ ν “ δνµ ´ Bν ξ µ ` Opξ 2q, so that ων µ “ Bν ξ µ and

δξ ea µ “ Lξ eaµ , δξ Γa bµ “ Lξ Γa bµ , (3.24)

where Lξ denotes the Lie derivative.

The Bianchi identities are

dT ` rΓ, T s “ rR, es, dR ` rΓ, Rs “ 0. (3.25)

Explicitly,

Ra rbcds “ Drb T a cds ` T a f rb T f cds , Drf Ra |b|cds “ ´Ra bgrf T g cds , (3.26)
8 G. BARNICH , P. M AO , R. RUZZICONI

where a bar encloses indices that are not involved in the (anti) symmetrization. The Ricci
tensor is defined by Rab “ Rc acb , while Sab “ Rc cab “ 0. Contracting the Bianchi
identities gives

Rab ´ Rba “ ´Dc T c ab ´ 2Dra T c bsc ´ T c f c T f ab , (3.27)

2Drf R|b|ds ` Dc Rc bdf “ Rbg T g df ´ 2Rc brf |g| T g dsc . (3.28)

The curvature scalar is defined by R “ g ab Rab , the Einstein tensor by
1
Gab “ Rab ´ gab R. (3.29)
2
Contracting (3.28) with η bf gives the contracted Bianchi identities,
1
Db Gb a “ Rbc da T d bc ` Rb c T c ab . (3.30)
2

For any affine connection, metricity Da gbc “ 0, implies that the connection is given
by
Γabc “ tabc u ` Kabc ` rabc , (3.31)
where the Christoffel symbols are given by
1
tabc u “ pBb gac ` Bc gab ´ Ba gbc q “ tacb u, (3.32)
2
Kabc are the components of the contorsion tensor,
1
Kabc “ pTbac ` Tcab ´ Tabc q “ ´Kbac , (3.33)
2
and
1
rabc “ pDbac ` Dcab ´ Dabc q “ ´rbac . (3.34)
2
Furthermore, one can directly show that

Γa bµ “ ea ν pBµ eb ν ` Γν ρµ eρ b q ðñ Γabc “ eaν Bc eb ν ` ea µ eb ν ec ρ Γµνρ . (3.35)

with
Γµνρ “ tµνρ u ` Kµνρ . (3.36)
Note also that for a Lorentz connection, (3.31) reduces to

Γabc “ Kabc ` rabc . (3.37)

C ONSERVED CURRENTS IN THE C ARTAN FORMULATION OF GR 9

3.2 Variational principle

In the standard Cartan formulation, the variables of the variational principle are the com-
ponents of the vielbein ea µ and a Lorentz connection 1-form in the coordinate basis, Γa bµ
in terms of which the action is
ż ż
S rea , Γ cν s “ d x L “ dn x e pRab µν ea µ eb ν ´ 2Λq.
C µ b n C
(3.38)

Using
δRa bµν “ Dµ δΓa bν ´ Dν δΓa bµ , (3.39)
the variation of the action is given by
ż
δS “ dn x e 2pGa µ ` Λea µ qδea µ ` ea µ eb ν pDµ δΓab ν ´ Dν δΓab
C
“ ‰
µ q . (3.40)

Using now (3.13) and neglecting boundary terms, this gives

ż
δS “ dn x 2e pGa µ ` Λea µ qδea µ ` 2Dν pe ea µ eb ν qδΓab µ ,
C
“ ‰
(3.41)

so that
δLC
“ 2e pGa µ ` Λea µ q, (3.42)
δea µ
δLC
“ 2Dν pe era µ ebs ν q “ e pT µ ab ` 2eµra T c bsc q. (3.43)
δΓab µ
Contracting the equations of motions associated to (3.43) with eµ b gives T b ab “ 0. When
re-injecting, this implies T a bc “ 0. It follows that when the equations of motion for Γab µ
hold, the connection is torsionless and thus given by Γabc “ rabc . The fields Γab µ are thus
entirely determined by ea µ so that Γab µ are auxiliary fields.
Using (3.40) for an infinitesimal gauge transformation as in (3.21), (3.22), (3.24) un-
der the form ż
“ δLC δLC
δξ,ω S “ dn x
C µ ab
‰
µ δξ,ω ea `
δea ab δξ,ω Γ µ ,
δΓ
(3.44)
µ

and integrating by parts in order to isolate undifferentiated gauge parameters as in (2.6)

gives the Noether identities
δLC δLC
e µ ` Dµ “ 0, (3.45)
δera|µ| bs δΓab µ

δLC δLC δLC µ δLC ab

B e µ ` B Γab ` Bµ p e ´ Γ ρq “ 0. (3.46)
δea µ ρ a δΓab µ ρ µ δea ρ a δΓab µ
Equation (3.45) can be shown to be equivalent to (3.27). Using (3.45), equation (3.46)
can be written as
δLC µ δLC δLC
Bµ p ea q ` D e µ ` Rab ρµ “ 0, (3.47)
δea ρ δea µ ρ a δΓab µ

and then be shown to be equivalent to (3.30).

10 G. BARNICH , P. M AO , R. RUZZICONI

3.3 Construction of the co-dimension 2 forms

When keeping the boundary term, one finds the weakly vanishing Noether current asso-
ciated to the gauge symmetries as

µ δLC δLC µ ρ
Sξ,ω “ p´ω ab ` Γab ρ ξ ρ q ´ e ξ . (3.48)
δΓab µ δea ρ a
µν
The associated co-dimension 2 form kξ,ω “ kξ,ω pdn´2 xqµν computed through (2.10) is
given by

µν
“ e p2δea µ eb ν ` ec λ δec λ ea ν eb µ qp´ω ab ` Γab ρ ξ ρ q
“
kξ,ω
` δΓab ρ pξ ρ ea µ eb ν ` 2ξ µ ea ν eb ρ q ´ pµ ÐÑ νq . (3.49)
‰

This can also be written as

K K B
kξ,ω “ ´δKξ,ω ` Kδξ,δω ´ ξν Θξ , (3.50)
Bdxν

where
K
Kξ,ω “ 2e ea ν eb µ p´ω ab ` Γab ρ ξ ρqpdn´2 xqµν , Θξ “ 2e δΓab ρ ea µ eb ρ pdn´1 xqµ . (3.51)

According to the general results reviewed in section 2, the co-dimension 2 form is

µν
closed, dH kξ,ω “ 0, or equivalently, Bν kξ,ω “ 0, if ea µ , Γab µ are solutions to the Euler-
Lagrange equations of motion, and thus to the Einstein equations, δea µ , δΓab µ solutions
to the linearized equations and ω ab , ξ ρ satisfy

Lξ ea µ ` ωa b eb µ « 0, Lξ Γab µ « Dµ ω ab , (3.52)

where « now denotes on-shell for the background solution and is relevant in case the
parameters ω ab , ξ ρ explicitly depend on the background solution ea µ , Γab µ around which
one linearizes. Note that the first equation also implies in particular that ξ ρ is a possibly
field dependent Killing vector of the background solution gµν ,

Lξ gµν « 0, (3.53)

and that
ω ab « ´eb µ Lξ eaµ « ´erb µ Lξ easµ . (3.54)

3.4 Reduction to the metric formulation

In order to compare with the results in the metric formulation, let us go on-shell for the
auxiliary fields Γab µ and eliminate ω ab using (3.54). The former implies that we are in
C ONSERVED CURRENTS IN THE C ARTAN FORMULATION OF GR 11

the torsionless case with the Lorentz connection simplified to Γab µ “ r ab µ , while (3.35)
reduces to
Γab µ “ ea ν ∇µ ebν “ era ν ∇µ ebsν , (3.55)
with ∇µ v ν “ Bµ v ν ` tν ρµ uv ρ . Note also that the Killing equation can be written as
∇µ ξν ` ∇ν ξµ « 0. Together with (3.55), we have

´ ω ab ` Γab ρ ξ ρ « ´era ρ ebs σ ∇ρ ξ σ , (3.56)

δΓab ρ “ δera σ ∇ρ ebsσ ` era σ δtσ τ ρ uebsτ ` era σ ∇ρ δebsσ , (3.57)

with
1
δtσ τ ρ u “ g σδ p∇ρ δgδτ ` ∇τ δgδρ ´ ∇δ δgτ ρ q. (3.58)
2
Using that
1
δea µ eaν “ hµν ` δea rµ e|a|νs , (3.59)
2
with hµν “ δgµν , indices being lowered and raised with gµν and its inverse, and h “ hµµ ,
substitution into (3.49) gives

6 |g|∇ρ pδea rµ e|a|ν ξ ρs q ` kξµν ,

a
(3.60)

where the first term can be dropped since it is trivial in the sense that it corresponds to the
exterior derivative of an n ´ 3 form, while

kξµν “
a
|g| ξ ν ∇µ h ` ξ µ ∇σ hσν ` ξσ ∇ν hσµ
“

1 1 1
` h∇ν ξ µ ` hµσ ∇σ ξ ν ` hνσ ∇µ ξσ ´ pµ ÐÑ νq . (3.61)
‰
2 2 2
We have thus recovered the results of the metric formulation since the last expression
agrees with the one given in [20]1 , which in turn is equivalent to those derived directly in
the metric formulation in [19].

Acknowledgments
This work is supported in part by the Fund for Scientific Research-FNRS (Belgium) and
by IISN-Belgium. The work of P. Mao is supported in part by NSFC Grant No. 11575202.
1
up to a typo in the second term of equation (35) in that reference, where ξ˜µ Dσ hσµ should read
ξ˜µ Dσ hσν .
12 G. BARNICH , P. M AO , R. RUZZICONI

References
[1] R. Arnowitt, S. Deser, and C. Misner, Gravitation, an Introduction to Current
Research, ch. 7. The Dynamics of General Relativity, pp. 227–265. Wiley, New
York, 1962.

[2] T. Regge and C. Teitelboim, “Role of surface integrals in the Hamiltonian

formulation of general relativity,” Ann. Phys. 88 (1974) 286.

[3] C. Misner, K. Thorne, and J. Wheeler, Gravitation. W.H. Freeman, New York,
1973.

[4] L. F. Abbott and S. Deser, “Stability of gravity with a cosmological constant,”

Nucl. Phys. B195 (1982) 76.

[5] L. F. Abbott and S. Deser, “Charge definition in non-abelian gauge theories,” Phys.
Lett. B116 (1982) 259.

[6] J. D. Brown and J. James W. York, “Quasilocal energy and conserved charges
derived from the gravitational action,” Phys. Rev. D47 (1993) 1407–1419.

[7] V. Iyer and R. M. Wald, “Some properties of Noether charge and a proposal for
dynamical black hole entropy,” Phys. Rev. D50 (1994) 846–864,
gr-qc/9403028.

[8] V. Iyer and R. M. Wald, “A comparison of Noether charge and Euclidean methods
for computing the entropy of stationary black holes,” Phys. Rev. D52 (1995)
4430–4439, gr-qc/9503052.

[9] 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,
gr-qc/9911095.

[10] I. M. Anderson and C. G. Torre, “Asymptotic conservation laws in field theory,”

Phys. Rev. Lett. 77 (1996) 4109–4113, hep-th/9608008.

[11] B. Julia and S. Silva, “Currents and superpotentials in classical gauge invariant
theories. 1. Local results with applications to perfect fluids and general relativity,”
Class.Quant.Grav. 15 (1998) 2173–2215, gr-qc/9804029.

[12] S. Silva, “On superpotentials and charge algebras of gauge theories,” Nucl. Phys.
B558 (1999) 391–415, hep-th/9809109.

[13] B. Julia and S. Silva, “Currents and superpotentials in classical gauge theories. II:
Global aspects and the example of affine gravity,” Class. Quant. Grav. 17 (2000)
4733–4744, gr-qc/0005127.
C ONSERVED CURRENTS IN THE C ARTAN FORMULATION OF GR 13

[14] T. Jacobson and A. Mohd, “Black hole entropy and Lorentz-diffeomorphism

Noether charge,” Phys. Rev. D92 (2015) 124010, 1507.01054.

[15] A. Corichi and J. D. Reyes, “The gravitational Hamiltonian, first order action,
Poincaré charges and surface terms,” Class. Quant. Grav. 32 (2015), no. 19,
195024, 1505.01518.

[16] A. Corichi, I. Rubalcava-Garca, and T. Vukasinac, “Actions, topological terms and

boundaries in first-order gravity: A review,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. D25 (2016), no. 04,
1630011, 1604.07764.

[17] G. Barnich, F. Brandt, and M. Henneaux, “Local BRST cohomology in the

antifield formalism. I. General theorems,” Commun. Math. Phys. 174 (1995)
57–92, hep-th/9405109.

[18] G. Barnich, F. Brandt, and M. Henneaux, “Local BRST cohomology in gauge

theories,” Phys. Rept. 338 (2000) 439–569, hep-th/0002245.

[19] G. Barnich and F. Brandt, “Covariant theory of asymptotic symmetries,

conservation laws and central charges,” Nucl. Phys. B633 (2002) 3–82,
hep-th/0111246.

[20] G. Barnich, “Boundary charges in gauge theories: Using Stokes theorem in the
bulk,” Class. Quant. Grav. 20 (2003) 3685–3698, hep-th/0301039.

[21] G. Barnich, S. Leclercq, and P. Spindel, “Classification of surface charges for a

spin 2 field on a curved background solution,” Lett. Math. Phys. 68 (2004)
175–181, gr-qc/0404006.

[22] G. Barnich and G. Compère, “Surface charge algebra in gauge theories and
thermodynamic integrability,” J. Math. Phys. 49 (2008) 042901, 0708.2378.

[23] G. Barnich and C. Troessaert, “Aspects of the BMS/CFT correspondence,” JHEP

05 (2010) 062, 1001.1541.

[24] G. Barnich and C. Troessaert, “BMS charge algebra,” JHEP 1112 (2011) 105,
1106.0213.

[25] G. Barnich and C. Troessaert, “Comments on holographic current algebras and

asymptotically flat four dimensional spacetimes at null infinity,” JHEP 1311
(2013) 003, 1309.0794.

[26] G. Barnich, P. Mao, and R. Ruzziconi, “Conserved currents in first order

formulations of general relativiy.” to appear, 2016.
14 G. BARNICH , P. M AO , R. RUZZICONI

[27] A. Dresse, P. Gregoire, and M. Henneaux, “Path integral equivalence between the
extended and nonextended Hamiltonian formalisms,” Phys. Lett. B245 (1990)
192–196.

[28] A. Dresse, J. M. L. Fisch, P. Gregoire, and M. Henneaux, “Equivalence of the

Hamiltonian and Lagrangian path integrals for gauge theories,” Nucl. Phys. B354
(1991) 191–217.

[29] I. Anderson, “The variational bicomplex,” tech. rep., Formal Geometry and
Mathematical Physics, Department of Mathematics, Utah State University, 1989.

[30] P. Olver, Applications of Lie Groups to Differential Equations. Springer Verlag,

New York, 2nd ed., 1993. 1st ed., 1986.

[31] R. Jackiw, “Field Theoretic Investigations in Current Algebra,” in Current Algebra

and Anomalies, pp. 81–210. Princeton University Press, 1985.