- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review D

Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Open Access

Bounding anisotropic Lorentz invariance violation from measurements of the effective energy scale of quantum gravity

Merce Guerrero1,2,*, Anna Campoy-Ordaz3,†, Robertus Potting2,4,‡, and Markus Gaug3,§

  • *Contact author: merce.guerrero@ua.pt
  • †Contact author: campoy@ieec.cat
  • ‡Contact author: rpotting@ualg.pt
  • §Contact author: markus.gaug@uab.cat
PDF

Phys. Rev. D 112, 104002 – Published 4 November, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/k3xg-wkrc

Abstract

Observations of energy-dependent photon time delays from distant flaring sources provide significant constraints on Lorentz invariance violation (LIV). Such effects originate from modified vacuum dispersion relations causing differences in propagation times for photons emitted simultaneously from gamma-ray bursts, active galactic nuclei, or pulsars. These modifications are often parametrized within a general framework by an effective quantum gravity energy scale EQG,n. While such general constraints are well established in the LIV literature, their translation into specific coefficients of alternative theoretical frameworks, such as the Standard-Model extension (SME), is rarely carried out. In particular, existing bounds on the quadratic case (n=2) of EQG,n can be systematically converted into constraints on the nonbirefringent, CPT-conserving SME coefficients c(I)jm(6). This work provides a concise overview of the relevant SME formalism and introduces a transparent conversion method from EQG,2 to SME parameters. We review the most stringent time-of-flight-based bounds on EQG,n and standardize them by accounting for systematics, applying missing prefactors, and transforming results into two-sided Gaussian uncertainties where needed. We then use these standardized constraints, along with additional bounds from the literature, to improve bounds on the individual SME coefficients of the photon sector by about an order of magnitude. A consistent methodology is developed to perform this conversion from the general LIV framework to the SME formalism.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (61)

  1. A. Addazi et al., Quantum gravity phenomenology at the dawn of the multi-messenger era-a review, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 125, 103948 (2022).
  2. G. Amelino-Camelia, Quantum-spacetime phenomenology, Living Rev. Relativity 16, 5 (2013).
  3. G. Amelino-Camelia, J. Ellis, N. E. Mavromatos, D. V. Nanopoulos, and S. Sarkar, Tests of quantum gravity from observations of γ-ray bursts, Nature (London) 393, 763 (1998).
  4. J. Bolmont et al., First combined study on Lorentz Invariance violation from observations of energy-dependent time delays from multiple-type gamma-ray sources. I. Motivation, method description, and validation through simulations of H.E.S.S., MAGIC, and VERITAS data sets, Astrophys. J. 930, 75 (2022).
  5. D. Mattingly, Modern tests of Lorentz invariance, Living Rev. Relativity 8, 5 (2005).
  6. U. Jacob and T. Piran, Lorentz-violation-induced arrival delays of cosmological particles, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 01 (2008) 031.
  7. S. Caroff et al., Discriminating between different modified dispersion relations from gamma-ray observations, Phys. Rev. D 111, 083021 (2025).
  8. C. Pfeifer, Redshift and lateshift from homogeneous and isotropic modified dispersion relations, Phys. Lett. B 780, 246 (2018).
  9. A. A. Abdo et al., A limit on the variation of the speed of light arising from quantum gravity effects, Nature (London) 462, 331 (2009).
  10. V. A. Acciari et al., Bounds on Lorentz invariance violation from MAGIC observation of GRB 190114C, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 021301 (2020).
  11. S. E. Boggs, C. B. Wunderer, K. Hurley, and W. Coburn, Testing Lorentz invariance with GRB 021206, Astrophys. J. 611, L77 (2004).
  12. Z. Cao et al., Stringent tests of Lorentz invariance violation from LHAASO observations of GRB 221009A, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 071501 (2024).
  13. J. Ellis, R. Konoplich, N. E. Mavromatos, L. Nguyen, A. S. Sakharov, and E. K. Sarkisyan-Grinbaum, Robust constraint on Lorentz violation using Fermi-LAT gamma-ray burst data, Phys. Rev. D 99, 083009 (2019).
  14. V. Vasileiou, A. Jacholkowska, F. Piron, J. Bolmont, C. Couturier, J. Granot, F. W. Stecker, J. Cohen-Tanugi, and F. Longo, Constraints on Lorentz invariance violation from Fermi-Large Area Telescope observations of gamma-ray bursts, Phys. Rev. D 87, 122001 (2013).
  15. S. Abe et al., Constraints on Lorentz invariance violation from the extraordinary Mrk 421 flare of 2014 using a novel analysis method, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 07 (2024) 044.
  16. H. E. S. S. Collaboration, Search for Lorentz invariance breaking with a likelihood fit of the PKS 2155-304 flare data taken on MJD 53944, Astropart. Phys. 34, 738 (2011).
  17. F. Kislat and H. Krawczynski, Search for anisotropic Lorentz invariance violation with γ -rays, Phys. Rev. D 92, 045016 (2015).
  18. MAGIC Collaboration, Probing quantum gravity using photons from a flare of the active galactic nucleus Markarian 501 observed by the MAGIC telescope, Phys. Lett. B 668, 253 (2008).
  19. MAGIC Collaboration, Constraining Lorentz invariance violation using the Crab Pulsar emission observed up to TeV energies by MAGIC, Astrophys. J. Suppl. Ser. 232, 9 (2017).
  20. J. Alfaro, H. A. Morales-Técotl, and L. F. Urrutia, Loop quantum gravity and light propagation, Phys. Rev. D 65, 103509 (2002).
  21. G. Amelino-Camelia, N. Loret, and G. Rosati, Speed of particles and a relativity of locality in κ-Minkowski quantum spacetime, Phys. Lett. B 700, 150 (2011).
  22. S. Das, E. C. Vagenas, and A. F. Ali, Discreteness of space from GUP II: Relativistic wave equations, Phys. Lett. B 690, 407 (2010).
  23. J. Ellis, N. E. Mavromatos, and D. V. Nanopoulos, Derivation of a vacuum refractive index in a stringy space time foam model, Phys. Lett. B 665, 412 (2008).
  24. R. Gambini and J. Pullin, Nonstandard optics from quantum space-time, Phys. Rev. D 59, 124021 (1999).
  25. A. Kempf, G. Mangano, and R. B. Mann, Hilbert space representation of the minimal length uncertainty relation, Phys. Rev. D 52, 1108 (1995).
  26. D. Colladay and V. A. Kostelecký, CPT violation and the standard model, Phys. Rev. D 55, 6760 (1997).
  27. D. Colladay and V. A. Kostelecký, Lorentz-violating extension of the standard model, Phys. Rev. Lett. 58, 116002 (1998).
  28. V. A. Kostelecky, Gravity, Lorentz violation, and the standard model, Phys. Rev. D 69, 105009 (2004).
  29. V. A. Kostelecký and M. Mewes, Electrodynamics with Lorentz-violating operators of arbitrary dimension, Phys. Rev. D 80, 015020 (2009).
  30. V. A. Kostelecký and N. Russell, Data tables for Lorentz and CPT violation, Rev. Mod. Phys. 83, 11 (2011).
  31. J. N. Wei, Z.-K. Liu, J.-J. Wei, B.-B. Zhang, and X.-F. Wu, Exploring anisotropic Lorentz invariance violation from the spectral-lag transitions of gamma-ray bursts, Universe 8, 519 (2022).
  32. J. Ellis and N. E. Mavromatos, Probes of Lorentz violation, Astropart. Phys. 43, 50 (2013).
  33. V. A. Kostelecký and R. Potting, CPT and strings, Nucl. Phys. B359, 545 (1991).
  34. V. A. Kostelecký and R. Potting, CPT, strings, and meson factories, Phys. Rev. D 51, 3923 (1995).
  35. V. A. Kostelecký and S. Samuel, Gravitational phenomenology in higher-dimensional theories and strings, Phys. Rev. D 40, 1886 (1989).
  36. N. E. Mavromatos, Quantum-gravity induced Lorentz violation and dynamical mass generation, Phys. Rev. D 83, 025018 (2011).
  37. J. D. Tasson, What do we know about Lorentz invariance?, Rep. Prog. Phys. 77, 062901 (2014).
  38. R. Bluhm, Overview of the SME: Implications and phenomenology of Lorentz violation, Lect. Notes Phys. 702, 191 (2006).
  39. V. A. Kostelecky and M. Mewes, Cosmological constraints on Lorentz violation in electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 251304 (2001).
  40. V. A. Kostelecký and M. Mewes, Signals for Lorentz violation in electrodynamics, Phys. Rev. D 66, 056005 (2002).
  41. A. Kostelecky and Z. Li, Backgrounds in gravitational effective field theory, Phys. Rev. D 103, 024059 (2021).
  42. F. Kislat and H. Krawczynski, Planck-scale constraints on anisotropic Lorentz and CPT invariance violations from optical polarization measurements, Phys. Rev. D 95, 083013 (2017).
  43. V. A. Kostelecký and M. Mewes, Astrophysical tests of Lorentz and CPT violation with photons, Astrophys. J. Lett. 689, L1 (2008).
  44. S. Navas et al., Review of particle physics, 25. Cosmological parameters, Phys. Rev. D 110, 030001 (2024).
  45. S. S. Wilks, The large-sample distribution of the likelihood ratio for testing composite hypotheses, Ann. Math. Stat. 9, 60 (1938).
  46. A. Abramowski et al., The 2012 flare of PG 1553+113 seen with H.E.S.S. and FERMI-LAT, Astrophys. J. 802, 65 (2015).
  47. J. Dorigo Jones et al., Improving blazar redshift constraints with the edge of the Ly α forest: 1ES 1553+113 and implications for observations of the WHIM, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc. 509, 4330 (2022).
  48. H. Abdalla et al., The 2014 TeV γ-ray flare of Mrk 501 seen with H.E.S.S.: Temporal and spectral constraints on Lorentz invariance violation, Astrophys. J. 870, 93 (2019).
  49. J. Aleksić et al., The major upgrade of the MAGIC telescopes, Part II: A performance study using observations of the Crab Nebula, Astropart. Phys. 72, 76 (2016).
  50. T. Ashton et al., A NECTAr-based upgrade for the Cherenkov cameras of the H.E.S.S. 12-meter telescopes, Astropart. Phys. 118, 102425 (2020).
  51. F. Aharonian et al., Calibration of the air shower energy scale of the water and air Cherenkov techniques in the LHAASO experiment, Phys. Rev. D 104, 062007 (2021).
  52. MAGIC Collaboration, Probing quantum gravity using photons from a flare of the active galactic nucleus Markarian 501 observed by the MAGIC telescope, Phys. Lett. B 668, 253 (2008).
  53. S. A. Murphy and A. W. van der Vaart, On profile likelihood, J. Am. Stat. Assoc. 95, 449 (2000).
  54. R. J. Barlow, Practical statistics for particle physics, CERN Yellow Rep. School Proc. 5, 149 (2020).
  55. L. Lista, Practical statistics for particle physicists, in Proceedings of the 2016 European School of High-Energy Physics (2017), arXiv:1609.04150.
  56. L. Demortier, S. Jain, and H. B. Prosper, Reference priors for high energy physics, Phys. Rev. D 82, 034002 (2010).
  57. H. Jeffreys, An invariant form for the prior probability in estimation problems, Proc. R. Soc. A 186, 453 (1946).
  58. G. D’Agostini, Bayesian Reasoning in Data Analysis (World Scientific, Singapore, 2003).
  59. G. D’Agostini, Asymmetric uncertainties: Sources, treatment and potential dangers, arXiv:physics/0403086.
  60. J. J. Wei, X.-F. Wu, B.-B. Zhang, L. Shao, P. Mészáros, and V. A. Kostelecký, Constraining anisotropic Lorentz violation via the spectral-lag transition of GRB 160625B, Astrophys. J. 842, 115 (2017).
  61. https://github.com/mgaug/bounding_coeffs.

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. D 112, 104002– Published 4 November, 2025
  • Received 11 July 2025
  • Accepted 31 July 2025
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article’s title, journal citation, and DOI.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation