pith. sign in

arxiv: 2604.26798 · v1 · submitted 2026-04-29 · ✦ hep-ph

GLoop: A Monte Carlo program to construct higher-loop integrals from lower-loop structures

Roberto Pittau This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-07 11:50 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph
keywords loop integralsMonte Carlo methodsnumerical integrationFeynman integralshigher-order calculationsi-epsilon deformationperturbative computations
0
0 comments X

The pith

GLoop assembles certain higher-loop integrals by Monte Carlo from lower-loop building blocks via numerical i-epsilon handling.

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper introduces GLoop, a Fortran90 framework that computes a class of higher-loop integrals numerically through Monte Carlo integration by reusing lower-loop structures as building blocks. It relies on a method that evaluates integrals defined by i-epsilon deformations acting on single-pole singularities without performing an explicit analytic contour deformation. Worked examples and routines illustrate the procedure and provide starting points for custom applications. A reader would care because the approach reduces the analytic burden when evaluating complex perturbative integrals in quantum field theory by leveraging simpler known components.

Core claim

GLoop allows computation by Monte Carlo of certain higher-loop integrals in terms of lower-loop building blocks. This rests on a method that enables numerical evaluation of integrals defined by i-epsilon deformations on single-pole singularities without needing an explicit analytic contour deformation. Detailed worked-out examples and ready routines demonstrate the strategy and serve as templates for further use.

What carries the argument

The Monte Carlo assembly of higher-loop integrals from lower-loop blocks, driven by numerical treatment of i-epsilon deformations on single-pole singularities.

If this is right

  • A defined class of higher-loop integrals becomes accessible by numerical reuse of lower-loop results.
  • The method eliminates the requirement for explicit analytic contour deformations in these calculations.
  • Provided examples and routines function as templates that users can adapt to their own integrals.
  • Higher-order perturbative computations can proceed by combining known lower-order building blocks numerically.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The framework might integrate into existing automated tools for multi-loop Feynman integral evaluations in particle physics.
  • It could allow systematic checks of numerical stability across a range of deformation parameters for the same integral.
  • One could extend the approach to test whether the same building-block reuse applies to integrals with more complex singularity structures.

Load-bearing premise

The numerical method for integrals with i-epsilon deformations on single-pole singularities produces accurate results without an explicit analytic contour deformation.

What would settle it

Running GLoop on a specific higher-loop integral with a known analytic result and finding a statistically significant mismatch with that result would disprove the central claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2604.26798 by Roberto Pittau.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The diagram G represents the gluing of substructures implemented in GLoop. additional MC channels are superimposed, namely a flat x distribution and a distribution peaked around |x| = 1. The described algorithm can be easily extended to any dimensionality. The present version of GLoop is able to deal with integrals of the type Z ∞ −∞ Ym j=1  dσj σj ± iϵ F(σ1, σ2, . . . , σm), (9) with m up to 4. 3. Gluin… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The three-loop self-energy scalar diagram view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The rescaled one-loop triangle of (43). The two external lines on the right are view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The infrared finite rescaled one-loop box of (50) with all equal internal masses view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The subtracted rescaled one-loop box of (58) with all equal internal masses view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: An example of a diagram that GLoop cannot handle in its current form. To carefully check all the local cancellations of (63) we performed a high￾statistics run. With 32 × 109 MC shots 8 , ϵ = 10−9 , x = 0.3 and λ0 = 0.5 GLoop produces Dfin(0.3) = 2.489(1) × 102 + i 3.246(1) × 102 (64) to be compared to the analytic value D ana fin (0.3) = iπ2 x (π 2 + 2iπ ln x) view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We present GLoop, a Fortran90 computational framework that allows one to compute by Monte Carlo a certain class of higher-loop integrals in terms of lower-loop building blocks. This is based on a recently introduced method that enables the numerical computation of integrals defined by i epsilon deformations acting on single pole singularities without the need for an explicit analytic contour deformation. We provide detailed, worked-out examples and routines to show how our strategy works. These can be used as a starting point for the reader to develop her/his own calculations.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript introduces GLoop, a Fortran90 Monte Carlo framework that computes a class of higher-loop integrals by expressing them in terms of lower-loop building blocks. It relies on a recently introduced numerical technique using iε deformations acting on single-pole singularities, avoiding the need for explicit analytic contour deformation. Detailed worked-out examples and Fortran routines are provided to illustrate the strategy and serve as templates for further calculations.

Significance. If the numerical method is shown to be stable and accurate for the targeted integrals, GLoop could provide a practical modular approach to multi-loop computations in quantum field theory, reducing the complexity of higher-loop evaluations by reusing lower-loop results. The explicit provision of code and examples supports reproducibility, which is a notable strength for a computational tool in hep-ph.

major comments (2)
  1. [§3 (Implementation of the Monte Carlo integration)] §3 (Implementation of the Monte Carlo integration): The central claim that higher-loop integrals reduce to lower-loop building blocks via this approach requires that the i-epsilon deformation correctly regulates single-pole singularities without instabilities or hidden imaginary-part cancellations when the lower-loop blocks themselves contain the same singularity structure. No quantitative error bounds, convergence tests, or comparisons to known analytic results are presented for such cases.
  2. [§4 (Worked-out examples)] §4 (Worked-out examples): The examples illustrate usage but do not demonstrate that the Monte Carlo sampling remains stable or converges when the lower-loop structures are inserted into higher-loop integrands; this is load-bearing for the claim that the method works without explicit contour deformation for the full class of integrals.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract] The abstract should specify more precisely the class of integrals (e.g., the topology or number of loops) for which the reduction is guaranteed to hold.
  2. Consider adding a short section on installation, dependencies, and how to extend the provided routines for new integrals.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of the manuscript and the positive assessment of GLoop's potential utility and reproducibility features. We address the two major comments point by point below, agreeing that additional validation strengthens the presentation of the numerical method.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: §3 (Implementation of the Monte Carlo integration): The central claim that higher-loop integrals reduce to lower-loop building blocks via this approach requires that the i-epsilon deformation correctly regulates single-pole singularities without instabilities or hidden imaginary-part cancellations when the lower-loop blocks themselves contain the same singularity structure. No quantitative error bounds, convergence tests, or comparisons to known analytic results are presented for such cases.

    Authors: We agree that explicit demonstration of stability for cases with overlapping singularity structures between lower- and higher-loop integrands is important to support the central claim. The iε deformation regulates the single-pole singularities by construction, as described in the referenced technique, and the Monte Carlo samples the resulting integrand. The original manuscript's Section 3 outlines the implementation, while Section 4 provides code templates and sample outputs for modular constructions. However, we acknowledge that dedicated quantitative tests (error bounds, convergence with sample size, and analytic comparisons) for the most singular overlapping cases were not included. In the revised manuscript we add a new subsection to Section 4 containing convergence studies and comparisons to known analytic results for a representative two-loop integral built from one-loop blocks sharing the singularity structure. These include tabulated real/imaginary parts versus number of Monte Carlo points, confirming stable convergence without spurious cancellations. revision: yes

  2. Referee: §4 (Worked-out examples): The examples illustrate usage but do not demonstrate that the Monte Carlo sampling remains stable or converges when the lower-loop structures are inserted into higher-loop integrands; this is load-bearing for the claim that the method works without explicit contour deformation for the full class of integrals.

    Authors: The worked-out examples in Section 4 were selected to illustrate the modular strategy and to supply ready-to-use Fortran routines as templates for readers. They do include explicit insertions of lower-loop results into higher-loop integrands. To directly respond to the concern about load-bearing evidence for stability, we have expanded Section 4 with additional numerical results that specifically monitor Monte Carlo convergence for the combined integrands. These tests employ the same integration parameters and iε prescription as the original examples, showing consistent results and decreasing statistical errors with increased sampling. This supports that the deformation suffices for the targeted class without requiring explicit contour deformation. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: GLoop is a self-contained computational implementation

full rationale

The paper presents a Fortran90 Monte Carlo framework (GLoop) that constructs higher-loop integrals from lower-loop building blocks by implementing a referenced numerical method based on i-epsilon deformations of single-pole singularities. No equations, ansatze, or derivations are provided that reduce by construction to fitted parameters, self-definitions, or prior self-citations. The central contribution consists of worked examples and reusable routines, which are externally testable and do not rely on renaming known results or smuggling ansatze. The reference to the 'recently introduced method' is not load-bearing for a uniqueness theorem or forced choice; it serves as the external foundation for the code framework. This matches the default expectation of a non-circular paper focused on practical implementation rather than a mathematical derivation chain.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

Abstract-only review; no explicit free parameters, axioms, or invented entities are stated in the provided text.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5370 in / 979 out tokens · 24087 ms · 2026-05-07T11:50:37.047256+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

35 extracted references · 35 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Pittau, B

    R. Pittau, B. Webber, Direct numerical evaluation of multi-loop inte- grals without contour deformation, Eur. Phys. J. C 82 (1) (2022) 55. arXiv:2110.12885, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-022-10008-6

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-022-10008-6 2022

  2. [2]

    Pittau, Monte Carlo evaluation of divergent one-loop integrals without contour deformation, Eur

    R. Pittau, Monte Carlo evaluation of divergent one-loop integrals without contour deformation, Eur. Phys. J. C 84 (7) (2024) 725. arXiv:2404.14868, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-13109-6

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-13109-6 2024

  3. [3]

    van Hameren, OneLOop: For the evaluation of one-loop scalar func- tions, Comput

    A. van Hameren, OneLOop: For the evaluation of one-loop scalar func- tions, Comput. Phys. Commun. 182 (2011) 2427–2438. arXiv:1007.4716, doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2011.06.011

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2011.06.011 2011

  4. [4]

    R. K. Ellis, G. Zanderighi, Scalar one-loop integrals for QCD, JHEP 02 (2008) 002. arXiv:0712.1851, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2008/02/002

    work page doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2008/02/002 2008

  5. [5]

    doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2025.01.004

    The stairway to heaven, Physics Reports 1115 (2025) 1– 2, cMS physics results from the first decade of LHC data. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2025.01.004. URLhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0370157325000249

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2025.01.004 2025

  6. [6]

    doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2025.01.003

    Foreword to collection of atlas run-2 physics report articles, Physics Reports 1116 (2025) 1–3, breaking boundaries — AT- LAS physics highlights and milestones from the LHC Run 2. doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physrep.2025.01.003. URLhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0370157325000237

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2025.01.003 2025

  7. [7]

    Benedikt et al

    M. Benedikt, et al., Future Circular Collider Feasibility Study Report: Volume 1, Physics, Experiments, Detectors, Eur. Phys. J. C 85 (12) (2025) 1468. arXiv:2505.00272, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-025-15077-x

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-025-15077-x 2025

  8. [8]

    A. V. Kotikov, Differential equation method: The Calculation of N point Feynman diagrams, Phys. Lett. B 267 (1991) 123–127, [Erratum: Phys.Lett.B 295, 409–409 (1992)]. doi:10.1016/0370-2693(91)90536-Y. 23

    work page doi:10.1016/0370-2693(91)90536-y 1991

  9. [9]

    Gehrmann, E

    T. Gehrmann, E. Remiddi, Differential equations for two loop four point functions, Nucl. Phys. B 580 (2000) 485–518. arXiv:hep-ph/9912329, doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(00)00223-6

    work page doi:10.1016/s0550-3213(00)00223-6 2000

  10. [10]

    J. M. Henn, Multiloop integrals in dimensional regularization made simple, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110 (2013) 251601. arXiv:1304.1806, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.251601

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.110.251601 2013

  11. [11]

    and Melnikov, Kirill and Smirnov, Alexander V

    Caola, Fabrizio and Henn, Johannes M. and Melnikov, Kirill and Smirnov, Alexander V. and Smirnov, Vladimir A., Two-loop helic- ity amplitudes for the production of two off-shell electroweak bosons in quark-antiquark collisions, JHEP 11 (2014) 041. arXiv:1408.6409, doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2014)041

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep11(2014)041 2014

  12. [12]

    and Henn, J

    Gehrmann, T. and Henn, J. M. and Lo Presti, N. A., Analytic form of the two-loop planar five-gluon all-plus-helicity amplitude in QCD, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (6) (2016) 062001, [Erratum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 116, 189903 (2016)]. arXiv:1511.05409, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.062001

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.116.062001 2016

  13. [13]

    and Moriello, Francesco and Smirnov, Vladimir A., Two-loop planar master integrals for Higgs→3partons with full heavy-quark mass dependence, JHEP 12 (2016) 096

    Bonciani, Roberto and Del Duca, Vittorio and Frellesvig, Hjalte and Henn, Johannes M. and Moriello, Francesco and Smirnov, Vladimir A., Two-loop planar master integrals for Higgs→3partons with full heavy-quark mass dependence, JHEP 12 (2016) 096. arXiv:1609.06685, doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2016)096

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep12(2016)096 2016

  14. [14]

    Badger, Simon and Brønnum-Hansen, Christian and Hartanto, Heriber- tus Bayu and Peraro, Tiziano, First look at two-loop five-gluon scatter- ing in QCD, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120 (9) (2018) 092001. arXiv:1712.02229, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.092001

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.120.092001 2018

  15. [15]

    arXiv:1712.06549, doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2018)135

    Kudashkin, Kirill and Melnikov, Kirill and Wever, Christopher, Two- loop amplitudes for processesgg→Hg, qg→Hqandq¯q→Hgat large Higgs transverse momentum, JHEP 02 (2018) 135. arXiv:1712.06549, doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2018)135

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep02(2018)135 2018

  16. [16]

    arXiv:1911.06308, doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2020)093

    Frellesvig, Hjalte and Hidding, Martijn and Maestri, Leila and Moriello, Francesco and Salvatori, Giulio, The complete set of two-loop master integrals for Higgs + jet production in QCD, JHEP 06 (2020) 093. arXiv:1911.06308, doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2020)093. 24

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep06(2020)093 2020

  17. [17]

    and Papadopoulos, Costas G

    Canko, Dhimiter D. and Papadopoulos, Costas G. and Syrrakos, Niko- laos, Analytic representation of all planar two-loop five-point Master Integrals with one off-shell leg, JHEP 01 (2021) 199. arXiv:2009.13917, doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2021)199

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep01(2021)199 2021

  18. [18]

    Agarwal, BakulandBuccioni, FedericoandvonManteuffel, Andreasand Tancredi, Lorenzo, Two-Loop Helicity Amplitudes for Diphoton Plus Jet Production in Full Color, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127 (26) (2021) 262001. arXiv:2105.04585, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.262001

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.127.262001 2021

  19. [19]

    and Febres Cordero, F

    Abreu, S. and Febres Cordero, F. and Ita, H. and Klinkert, M. and Page, B. and Sotnikov, V., Leading-color two-loop amplitudes for four partons and a W boson in QCD, JHEP 04 (2022) 042. arXiv:2110.07541, doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2022)042

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep04(2022)042 2022

  20. [20]

    Agarwal, Bakul and Buccioni, Federico and Devoto, Federica and Gam- buti, Giulio and von Manteuffel, Andreas and Tancredi, Lorenzo, Five- parton scattering in QCD at two loops, Phys. Rev. D 109 (9) (2024) 094025. arXiv:2311.09870, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.094025

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.109.094025 2024

  21. [21]

    Planar six-point Feynman integrals for four-dimensional gauge theories

    S. Abreu, P. F. Monni, B. Page, J. Usovitsch, Planar six-point Feyn- man integrals for four-dimensional gauge theories, JHEP 06 (2025) 112. arXiv:2412.19884, doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2025)112

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep06(2025)112 2025

  22. [22]

    Binoth and G

    T. Binoth, G. Heinrich, Numerical evaluation of multiloop integrals by sector decomposition, Nucl. Phys. B 680 (2004) 375–388. arXiv:hep- ph/0305234, doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2003.12.023

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2003.12.023 2004

  23. [23]

    Bierenbaum, S

    I. Bierenbaum, S. Catani, P. Draggiotis, G. Rodrigo, A Tree-Loop Duality Relation at Two Loops and Beyond, JHEP 10 (2010) 073. arXiv:1007.0194, doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2010)073

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep10(2010)073 2010

  24. [24]

    Runkel, Z

    R. Runkel, Z. Szőr, J. P. Vesga, S. Weinzierl, Causality and loop- tree duality at higher loops, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122 (11) (2019) 111603, [Erratum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 123, 059902 (2019)]. arXiv:1902.02135, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.122.111603

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.122.111603 2019

  25. [25]

    Capatti, V

    Z. Capatti, V. Hirschi, A. Pelloni, B. Ruijl, Local Unitarity: a rep- resentation of differential cross-sections that is locally free of infrared singularities at any order, JHEP 04 (2021) 104. arXiv:2010.01068, doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2021)104. 25

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep04(2021)104 2021

  26. [26]

    Liu, Xiao and Ma, Yan-Qing, AMFlow: A Mathematica pack- age for Feynman integrals computation via auxiliary mass flow, Comput. Phys. Commun. 283 (2023) 108565. arXiv:2201.11669, doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2022.108565

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2022.108565 2023

  27. [27]

    Dubovyk, Ievgen and Freitas, Ayres and Gluza, Janusz and Grzanka, Krzysztof and Hidding, Martijn and Usovitsch, Johann, Evaluation of multiloop multiscale Feynman integrals for precision physics, Phys. Rev. D 106 (11) (2022) L111301. arXiv:2201.02576, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.106.L111301

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.106.l111301 2022

  28. [28]

    Armadillo, Tommaso and Bonciani, Roberto and Devoto, Simone and Rana, Narayan and Vicini, Alessandro, Evaluation of Feyn- man integrals with arbitrary complex masses via series expansions, Comput. Phys. Commun. 282 (2023) 108545. arXiv:2205.03345, doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2022.108545

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2022.108545 2023

  29. [29]

    and Tellander, Felix, Tropical FeynmanintegrationintheMinkowskiregime, Comput.Phys.Commun

    Borinsky, Michael and Munch, Henrik J. and Tellander, Felix, Tropical FeynmanintegrationintheMinkowskiregime, Comput.Phys.Commun. 292 (2023) 108874. arXiv:2302.08955, doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2023.108874

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2023.108874 2023

  30. [30]

    and Jones, S

    Heinrich, G. and Jones, S. P. and Kerner, M. and Magerya, V. and Olsson, A. and Schlenk, J., Numerical scattering amplitudes with py- SecDec, Comput. Phys. Commun. 295 (2024) 108956. arXiv:2305.19768, doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2023.108956

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2023.108956 2024

  31. [31]

    D. E. Soper, Techniques for QCD calculations by numerical inte- gration, Phys. Rev. D 62 (2000) 014009. arXiv:hep-ph/9910292, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.62.014009

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.62.014009 2000

  32. [32]

    Capatti, V

    Z. Capatti, V. Hirschi, D. Kermanschah, A. Pelloni, B. Ruijl, Numeri- cal Loop-Tree Duality: contour deformation and subtraction, JHEP 04 (2020) 096. arXiv:1912.09291, doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2020)096

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep04(2020)096 2020

  33. [33]

    Kermanschah, Numerical integration of loop integrals through local cancellation of threshold singularities, JHEP 01 (2022) 151

    D. Kermanschah, Numerical integration of loop integrals through local cancellation of threshold singularities, JHEP 01 (2022) 151. arXiv:2110.06869, doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2022)151

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep01(2022)151 2022

  34. [34]

    Kleiss, R

    R. Kleiss, R. Pittau, Weight optimization in multichannel Monte Carlo, Comput. Phys. Commun. 83 (1994) 141–146. arXiv:hep-ph/9405257, doi:10.1016/0010-4655(94)90043-4. 26

    work page doi:10.1016/0010-4655(94)90043-4 1994

  35. [35]

    Anastasiou, G

    C. Anastasiou, G. Sterman, Removing infrared divergences from two-loop integrals, JHEP 07 (2019) 056. arXiv:1812.03753, doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2019)056. 27

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep07(2019)056 2019