{
  "annotation_id": "1b696c17-6ec6-432b-83e1-2bdc7555e24b",
  "date_created": "2026-03-02T18:01:49.023000Z",
  "date_modified": "2026-03-02T18:01:49.023000Z",
  "file_hash": "bf923ce2831d9dce659fb989ca2dcc5998eaddc48fdd935870815414f5837a85",
  "private": false,
  "record": {
    "abstract": "I analyse the conceptual and mathematical foundations of Lagrangian quantum\nfield theory (that is, the \"naive\" quantum field theory used in mainstream\nphysics, as opposed to algebraic quantum field theory). The objective is to see\nwhether Lagrangian quantum field theory has a sufficiently firm conceptual and\nmathematical basis to be a legitimate object of foundational study, or whether\nit is too ill-defined. The analysis covers renormalisation and infinities,\ninequivalent representations, and the concept of localised states; the\nconclusion is that Lagrangian QFT (at least as described here) is a perfectly\nrespectable physical theory, albeit somewhat different in certain respects from\nmost of those studied in foundational work.",
    "arxiv_id": "quant-ph/0112148",
    "authors": [
      "David Wallace"
    ],
    "categories": [
      "quant-ph"
    ],
    "journal_ref": "Synthese 151:33-80,2006",
    "title": "In defence of naivete: The conceptual status of Lagrangian QFT",
    "url": "https://arxiv.org/abs/quant-ph/0112148"
  },
  "schema_id": "dorsal/arxiv",
  "source": {
    "execution_id": "54ea076b-151d-4aa7-a114-48ba9e800bd5",
    "id": "arXiv Dataset IDs",
    "type": "Model",
    "variant": "snapshot-2026-03-01",
    "version": "0.1.0"
  },
  "user_id": 1000002
}