Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Two-loop helicity amplitudes for diphoton production with massive quark loop

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-09 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read Two-loop diphoton amplitudes now keep full top-quark mass dependence analytically.

desk verdict A real two-loop analytic amplitude, credible but with a genuine IBP-completeness caveat; deserves refereeing if the authors will share the finite remainders and address the missed-relations issue. read the letter →

arxiv 2502.03282 v1 pith:X6UQR4SH submitted 2025-02-05 hep-ph hep-th

Taushif Ahmed , Amlan Chakraborty , Ekta Chaubey , Mandeep Kaur This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phhep-th
keywords two-loopamplitudeshelicitydiphotonproductiontopquarkmassdependencegluonfusionquark-antiquarkannihilationellipticFeynmanintegralsQCDcorrections
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper is trying to establish that the two-loop QCD helicity amplitudes for diphoton production, both gluon-fusion and quark-antiquark annihilation, can be computed with the full top-quark mass kept exact rather than expanded away, and that the results can be written in analytic form. The interest for a reader is that these amplitudes are the hard scattering input needed for next-to-next-to-leading-order and next-to-next-to-next-to-leading-order diphoton cross sections at hadron colliders, where the heavy-quark loop first contributes at higher orders but can be numerically significant. The calculation is the first to complete this step for the gluon-fusion channel by incorporating the recently solved non-planar master integrals with elliptic sectors, and it produces finite remainders benchmarked around the top-quark threshold.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by a three-tier construction. First, physical projectors decompose the amplitude into a basis whose tensors match the independent helicity configurations, so the eight gluon and four quark helicity amplitudes are extracted directly. Second, all Feynman integrals are organised into two planar and two non-planar integral families, with integration-by-parts reduction yielding 173 master integrals for the $gg$ channel and 65 for the $q\bar{q}$ channel; the set includes a non-planar topology whose elliptic-sector master integrals were the last missing analytic ingredient. Third, a unified differential-equation system for the uncrossed families puts all master integrals in one consistent representation, so the final renormalised, infrared-subtracted finite remainders can be evaluated numerically at physical kinematics.

What would settle it

Run an independent integration-by-parts reduction of the 166 two-loop $gg\to\gamma\gamma$ diagrams with a different generator of identities and see whether it reproduces the same 173 master integrals; if any further missed relation exists, the master-integral basis would shrink and the reported benchmark finite remainders at $\theta=\pi/6$, $s=3$ GeV would change.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The core discovery is the first analytic two-loop helicity amplitudes for $gg\to\gamma\gamma$ and $q\bar{q}\to\gamma\gamma$ that keep the full dependence on the top-quark mass inside the loop. The amplitudes are decomposed directly into helicity components using physical projectors, reduced to master integrals by integration-by-parts identities, and expressed in terms of analytic functions that include the elliptic sectors of one non-planar integral family. After renormalising the heavy-quark mass on-shell and the remaining quantities in the $\overline{\rm MS}$ scheme, and subtracting infrared poles through standard factorisation, the authors obtain finite remainders and provide benchmark values at physical phase-space points around the top-quark threshold. The result is checked against an independent calculation, with complete numerical agreement.

Load-bearing premise

Everything rests on the assumption that the integration-by-parts reduction found every linear relation among the Feynman integrals, so that the reported set of 173 and 65 master integrals is complete; the authors state that standard reduction software initially missed three such relations, which they added by hand.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The gluon-fusion channel's two-loop helicity amplitudes are now available analytically with exact top-mass dependence, replacing numerical and semi-numerical evaluations of the loop integrals as the basis for cross-section predictions.
  • The quark-channel two-loop amplitudes with a heavy-quark loop are also available analytically, supplying the massive-loop ingredient for NNLO diphoton production through quark-antiquark annihilation.
  • The mixed renormalisation scheme and infrared-factorisation recipe convert the raw amplitudes into finite remainders, with benchmark values that future subtraction schemes can use for validation.
  • Because the uncrossed integral families and function basis are the same for dijet production, the same framework extends to two-loop top-mass-dependent dijet amplitudes.
  • These finite remainders open the way to diphoton cross-section predictions at higher orders under different subtraction schemes and to quantifying heavy-quark effects at high-luminosity hadron-collider runs.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A direct extension the paper only gestures at is to use the same integral families to produce the corresponding two-loop amplitudes for top-mass-dependent dijet production, since the hard functions share the same master-integral system.
  • The near-threshold benchmark values provide a clean test for whether mass-expanded heavy-top approximations remain reliable for diphoton production, or whether the exact threshold structure alters the finite remainders.
  • The availability of analytic finite remainders should make local subtraction schemes for diphoton production practical, since the singular limits of the amplitude are no longer tied to a numerical routine.
  • One could also scrutinise the analytic expressions for the elliptic sectors to see whether the apparent threshold complexity can be reorganised into simpler functions, which would improve numerical speed in the physical region.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The manuscript computes two-loop QCD helicity amplitudes for gg→γγ and q qbar→γγ with full top-quark mass dependence in the loop. The amplitudes are decomposed via physical projectors, reduced to master integrals using IBP relations, and expressed analytically in terms of polylogarithmic and elliptic functions. The paper presents the UV renormalization (on-shell for the top mass, MS for other quantities), IR factorization (applied only to the gluon channel), benchmark finite remainders at one phase-space point per channel, and bare amplitudes in an ancillary file. The authors claim the first analytic two-loop helicity amplitudes for the gluon-fusion channel with a massive quark loop.

Significance. If correct, the result is a valuable building block for diphoton production at NNLO/N3LO with top-quark mass effects and has direct applications to dijet production. The paper has several strengths: a transparent helicity-projector setup, explicit handling of the elliptic master integrals, a consistent renormalization scheme, and multiple internal consistency checks (UV cancellation, IR pole matching, Bose symmetry). The bare amplitudes are also provided in an ancillary file, which supports reproducibility. The main weaknesses are the reliance on a manually completed IBP reduction that initially missed relations, the unavailability of the independent numerical cross-check, and the limited set of public benchmark finite remainders.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3, IBP reduction paragraph] The manuscript admits that the unified IBP system initially returned 91 master integrals and that three additional relations had to be supplied by hand because modern IBP software overlooks some mappings between integrals. The checks reported in Section 5 are insensitive to a missed finite rational coefficient in the master-integral expansion: UV/IR pole cancellation and Bose symmetry probe only divergent parts and discrete symmetries, not the finite coefficients of the master integrals. A further missed relation would therefore alter every coefficient in the ancillary file while passing all shown checks. Please document the three added relations explicitly and provide an independent validation of the reduction, for example by numerically evaluating both sides of the reduced expressions at several random phase-space points using AMFlow or by comparing against a second independent reduction.
  2. [Section 5, first paragraph] The claim of perfect numerical agreement with ref. [92] is the only finite-value external check in the paper, but ref. [92] is cited with the placeholder arXiv number 2501.xxxx and its results cannot currently be inspected. Please update the reference if the work has appeared, include a table with the comparison values, or otherwise make the cross-check verifiable. Without this, the finite remainders are supported only by a non-public agreement.
  3. [Section 4.2, eqs. (4.12)-(4.18)] The paper states without derivation that q qbar → γγ does not exhibit any IR divergences and therefore applies IR subtraction only to the gluon channel. Since the external quarks are massless and on-shell, the absence of IR poles is not self-evident; a short argument or a reference to the analogous statement in ref. [25] is needed to rule out soft and collinear singularities in the H^f and H^ft contributions. The finite remainders in Table 2 depend directly on this point.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Tables 2 and 3] The captions give 's = 3 GeV and N = 3'. The units of s are ambiguous; the introduction says the benchmarks are around the top-quark threshold, which s = 3 GeV is not. Please specify whether s is in units of m_t^2 (for example, s = 3 m_t^2) and define N (presumably N_c).
  2. [References] Reference [92] is listed with the placeholder identifier 2501.xxxx; the placeholder should be removed and replaced by a complete citation before publication.
  3. [Section 5 and Conclusions] The finite remainder is said to be 'available upon request from the authors.' Given the paper's claims, attaching the finite remainders in electronic form, or at least the numerical evaluation code, would improve reproducibility and is strongly encouraged.
  4. [Section 3, eq. (3.8)] The expansion in eq. (3.8) uses the bare coupling α_{s,b}, but the renormalisation of α_s is introduced only in Section 4.1. Adding an explicit pointer from eq. (3.8) to eq. (4.1) would improve readability.
  5. [Section 4.1, eq. (4.5)] The notation H^{g,(1)}_{λ,ren} = H^{g,(1)}_λ is introduced implicitly; stating this explicitly would avoid possible confusion.
  6. [Section 5, Tables 2 and 3] The text says 'a few benchmark numerical values' but the tables contain only one kinematic point per channel. Please state explicitly that further points can be made available, or include additional points in an appendix.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circular reduction found: the amplitudes are an independent IBP/master-integral combination; self-citations are to prior integral computations, not to the target amplitudes.

full rationale

We walked the derivation chain: Qgraf generates diagrams; FORM applies tensor/helicity projectors; IBP reduction via Reduze2/Kira/LiteRed/FiniteFlow maps 26,577 (gg) and 2,289 (qqbar) scalar integrals to master integrals; the master integrals are taken from published calculations, including the elliptic non-planar topology from the authors' own ref. [43]; the bare amplitudes are linear combinations of these master integrals; UV/IR renormalisation and IR factorisation use standard anomalous dimensions. No step fits a parameter to the target amplitudes, and no equation defines an input in terms of the claimed output. The self-citations ([42], [43], [44], [46]) are to prior computations of master integrals or technical methods, not to the diphoton amplitudes themselves; [43] is a published independent evaluation of the last missing integral family, so it is a legitimate building block rather than a circular premise. The paper itself flags a completeness limitation in Section 3: the unified IBP system initially yielded 91 masters and the authors had to add 3 missing relations by hand; if further relations were missed the coefficients would change, but this is an ordinary correctness risk, not a circularity. The external cross-check in Section 5 cites ref. [92] with placeholder identifier '2501.xxxx', so the numerical agreement is not currently inspectable; again this is a support/completeness weakness rather than circularity. No 'prediction' reduces by construction, no ansatz is smuggled in via citation, and no known result is merely renamed. Therefore the score is low (2), reflecting minor self-citation and the placeholder external check, not circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters are fitted; the top-quark mass, strong coupling, and color factors are standard model inputs. The axioms are standard QCD background, dimensional regularization conventions, IR factorization, and the correctness of master integrals and reduction software. No new particles, forces, or dimensions are introduced.

assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption QCD with a single massive top quark and nf=0 light flavors is the correct framework for the amplitudes.
    The calculation is performed in the Standard Model; the paper sets nf=0 (Section 4.1) and retains only the top-quark loop, which is valid for the considered perturbative order.
  • standard math 't Hooft-Veltman dimensional regularization with four-dimensional external momenta and polarizations correctly regulates the loop amplitudes.
    Adopted in Section 2; it is the standard scheme for computing helicity amplitudes with physical projectors.
  • domain assumption The known IR factorization formula for massless external partons at two loops applies to gg to gamma gamma.
    Used in Section 4.2 to define finite remainders via Eqs. (4.12) to (4.15), citing refs [64-73].
  • domain assumption The master integrals from refs [24,25,40-43], including the elliptic-sector result of ref [43], are correct and complete.
    The amplitude is expressed as a linear combination of these integrals; any error or incompleteness propagates directly into the final amplitudes.
  • domain assumption The IBP reductions from Kira, Reduze2, LiteRed and FiniteFlow are complete, including the three relations added manually.
    The authors report that standard IBP software missed three relations (Section 3), so the completeness of the reduction is an assumption that had to be patched.
  • domain assumption The physical projectors of refs [32,33] correctly project out the helicity components in the tHV scheme.
    The method is central to the tensor decomposition in Sections 2 and 3, and is assumed to be valid without further proof.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Two-loop helicity amplitudes for diphoton production with massive quark loop." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/X6UQR4SH

@misc{pith2026250203282,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Two-loop helicity amplitudes for diphoton production with massive quark loop},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/X6UQR4SH}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2502.03282}
}
abstract

We compute two-loop helicity amplitudes in QCD for diphoton production through quark- and gluon-initiated channels, accounting for a massive internal quark loop by keeping its full mass dependence. Using physical projectors, we directly decompose the amplitude into its helicity components. By renormalising the heavy quark mass in on-shell, and other quantities in $\overline{\rm MS}$ schemes, we obtain finite remainders. This work paves the way for calculating the cross-section for diphoton production at higher orders in QCD with a massive quark loop, employing different subtraction schemes. The effect of a heavy quark is expected to play a crucial role in high-luminosity LHC.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Two-loop QCD corrections to $ZH$ and off-shell $Z$ boson pair production in gluon fusion

    hep-ph 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    The paper provides fast, analytic two-loop virtual QCD corrections for gluon-induced ZH and off-shell ZZ production with full top-quark mass dependence, validated against numerical results at the sub-percent level.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

93 extracted references · 15 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [25]

    Becchetti, R

    M. Becchetti, R. Bonciani, L. Cieri, F. Coro and F. Ripani, Two-loop form factors for diphoton production in quark annihilation channel with heavy quark mass dependence , JHEP 12 (2023) 105 [ 2308.11412]

    arXiv 2023

  2. [43]

    Ahmed, E

    T. Ahmed, E. Chaubey, M. Kaur and S. Maggio, Two-loop non-planar four-point topology with massive internal loop , JHEP 05 (2024) 064 [ 2402.07311]

    arXiv 2024

  3. [92]

    Becchetti, F

    M. Becchetti, F. Coro, C. Nega, L. Tancredi and F. Wagner, Analytic two-loop amplitudes for q ¯q → γγ and gg → γγ mediated by a heavy-quark loop , 2501.xxxx

  4. [1]

    CMS collaboration, Search for high-mass diphoton resonances in proton–proton collisions at 13 TeV and combination with 8 TeV search , Phys. Lett. B 767 (2017) 147 [ 1609.02507]. – 15 –

    arXiv 2017

  5. [2]

    ATLAS collaboration, Search for new phenomena in high-mass diphoton final states using 37 fb −1 of proton–proton collisions collected at √s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector , Phys. Lett. B 775 (2017) 105 [ 1707.04147]

    arXiv 2017

  6. [3]

    CDF collaboration, Measurement of the Cross Section for Prompt Isolated Diphoton Production Using the Full CDF Run II Data Sample , Phys. Rev. Lett. 110 (2013) 101801 [1212.4204]

    arXiv 2013

  7. [4]

    D0 collaboration, Measurement of the Differential Cross Sections for Isolated Direct Photon Pair Production in p¯p Collisions at √s = 1.96 TeV, Phys. Lett. B 725 (2013) 6 [ 1301.4536]

    arXiv 2013

  8. [5]

    CMS collaboration, Measurement of the Production Cross Section for Pairs of Isolated Photons in pp collisions at √s = 7 TeV, JHEP 01 (2012) 133 [ 1110.6461]

    arXiv 2012

Show all 93 references
  1. [6]

    CMS collaboration, Measurement of differential cross sections for the production of a pair of isolated photons in pp collisions at √s = 7 TeV, Eur. Phys. J. C 74 (2014) 3129 [1405.7225]

    2014 arXiv

  2. [7]

    ATLAS collaboration, Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC , Phys. Lett. B 716 (2012) 1 [ 1207.7214]

    2012 arXiv

  3. [8]

    CMS collaboration, Observation of a New Boson at a Mass of 125 GeV with the CMS Experiment at the LHC , Phys. Lett. B 716 (2012) 30 [ 1207.7235]

    2012 arXiv

  4. [9]

    Binoth, J.P

    T. Binoth, J.P. Guillet, E. Pilon and M. Werlen, A Full next-to-leading order study of direct photon pair production in hadronic collisions , Eur. Phys. J. C 16 (2000) 311 [hep-ph/9911340]

    2000 arXiv

  5. [10]

    Catani, L

    S. Catani, L. Cieri, D. de Florian, G. Ferrera and M. Grazzini, Diphoton production at hadron colliders: a fully-differential QCD calculation at NNLO , Phys.Rev.Lett. 108 (2012) 072001 [1110.2375]

    2012 arXiv

  6. [11]

    Campbell, R.K

    J.M. Campbell, R.K. Ellis, Y. Li and C. Williams, Predictions for diphoton production at the LHC through NNLO in QCD , JHEP 07 (2016) 148 [ 1603.02663]

    2016 arXiv

  7. [12]

    Catani, L

    S. Catani, L. Cieri, D. de Florian, G. Ferrera and M. Grazzini, Diphoton production at the LHC: a QCD study up to NNLO , JHEP 04 (2018) 142 [ 1802.02095]

    2018 arXiv

  8. [13]

    Schuermann, X

    R. Schuermann, X. Chen, T. Gehrmann, E.W.N. Glover, M. H¨ ofer and A. Huss, NNLO Photon Production with Realistic Photon Isolation , PoS LL2022 (2022) 034 [ 2208.02669]

    2022 arXiv

  9. [14]

    Grazzini, S

    M. Grazzini, S. Kallweit and M. Wiesemann, Fully differential NNLO computations with MATRIX, Eur. Phys. J. C 78 (2018) 537 [ 1711.06631]

    2018 arXiv

  10. [15]

    Dicus and S.S.D

    D.A. Dicus and S.S.D. Willenbrock, Photon Pair Production and the Intermediate Mass Higgs Boson , Phys. Rev. D 37 (1988) 1801

    1988

  11. [16]

    Del Duca, W.B

    V. Del Duca, W.B. Kilgore and F. Maltoni, Multiphoton amplitudes for next-to-leading order QCD, Nucl. Phys. B 566 (2000) 252 [ hep-ph/9910253]

    2000 arXiv

  12. [17]

    Anastasiou, E.W.N

    C. Anastasiou, E.W.N. Glover and M. Tejeda-Yeomans, Two loop QED and QCD corrections to massless fermion boson scattering , Nucl.Phys. B629 (2002) 255 [ hep-ph/0201274]

    2002 arXiv

  13. [18]

    Del Duca, F

    V. Del Duca, F. Maltoni, Z. Nagy and Z. Trocsanyi, QCD radiative corrections to prompt diphoton production in association with a jet at hadron colliders , JHEP 0304 (2003) 059 [hep-ph/0303012]

    2003 arXiv

  14. [19]

    Caola, A

    F. Caola, A. Von Manteuffel and L. Tancredi, Diphoton Amplitudes in Three-Loop Quantum Chromodynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126 (2021) 112004 [ 2011.13946]. – 16 –

    2021 arXiv

  15. [20]

    Chawdhry, M

    H.A. Chawdhry, M. Czakon, A. Mitov and R. Poncelet, Two-loop leading-color helicity amplitudes for three-photon production at the LHC , 2012.13553

    2012 arXiv

  16. [21]

    Agarwal, F

    B. Agarwal, F. Buccioni, A. von Manteuffel and L. Tancredi, Two-loop leading colour QCD corrections to q ¯q → γγg and qg → γγq , JHEP 04 (2021) 201 [ 2102.01820]

    2021 arXiv

  17. [22]

    Chawdhry, M

    H.A. Chawdhry, M. Czakon, A. Mitov and R. Poncelet, Two-loop leading-colour QCD helicity amplitudes for two-photon plus jet production at the LHC , 2103.04319

    arXiv

  18. [23]

    Agarwal, F

    B. Agarwal, F. Buccioni, A. von Manteuffel and L. Tancredi, Two-loop helicity amplitudes for diphoton plus jet production in full color , 2105.04585

    arXiv

  19. [24]

    Becchetti, R

    M. Becchetti, R. Bonciani, L. Cieri, F. Coro and F. Ripani, Full top-quark mass dependence in diphoton production at NNLO in QCD , Phys. Lett. B 848 (2024) 138362 [ 2308.10885]

    2024 arXiv

  20. [26]

    Z. Bern, A. De Freitas and L.J. Dixon, Two loop amplitudes for gluon fusion into two photons, JHEP 09 (2001) 037 [ hep-ph/0109078]

    2001 arXiv

  21. [27]

    Chawdhry, M

    H.A. Chawdhry, M. Czakon, A. Mitov and R. Poncelet, NNLO QCD corrections to diphoton production with an additional jet at the LHC , 2105.06940

    arXiv

  22. [28]

    Bern, L.J

    Z. Bern, L.J. Dixon and C. Schmidt, Isolating a light Higgs boson from the diphoton background at the CERN LHC , Phys.Rev. D66 (2002) 074018 [ hep-ph/0206194]

    2002 arXiv

  23. [29]

    Bargiela, F

    P. Bargiela, F. Caola, A. von Manteuffel and L. Tancredi, Three-loop helicity amplitudes for diphoton production in gluon fusion , 2111.13595

    arXiv

  24. [30]

    Maltoni, M.K

    F. Maltoni, M.K. Mandal and X. Zhao, Top-quark effects in diphoton production through gluon fusion at next-to-leading order in QCD , Phys. Rev. D 100 (2019) 071501 [1812.08703]

    2019 arXiv

  25. [31]

    L. Chen, G. Heinrich, S. Jahn, S.P. Jones, M. Kerner, J. Schlenk et al., Photon pair production in gluon fusion: Top quark effects at NLO with threshold matching , JHEP 04 (2020) 115 [ 1911.09314]

    2020 arXiv

  26. [32]

    Peraro and L

    T. Peraro and L. Tancredi, Physical projectors for multi-leg helicity amplitudes , JHEP 07 (2019) 114 [ 1906.03298]

    2019 arXiv

  27. [33]

    Peraro and L

    T. Peraro and L. Tancredi, Tensor decomposition for bosonic and fermionic scattering amplitudes, Phys. Rev. D 103 (2021) 054042 [ 2012.00820]

    2021 arXiv

  28. [34]

    Chen, A prescription for projectors to compute helicity amplitudes in D dimensions , 1904.00705

    L. Chen, A prescription for projectors to compute helicity amplitudes in D dimensions , 1904.00705

    1904 arXiv

  29. [35]

    Vermaseren, New features of FORM , math-ph/0010025

    J. Vermaseren, New features of FORM , math-ph/0010025

    arXiv

  30. [36]

    Maierh¨ ofer, J

    P. Maierh¨ ofer, J. Usovitsch and P. Uwer,Kira—A Feynman integral reduction program, Comput. Phys. Commun. 230 (2018) 99 [ 1705.05610]

    2018 arXiv

  31. [37]

    Klappert, F

    J. Klappert, F. Lange, P. Maierh¨ ofer and J. Usovitsch, Integral reduction with Kira 2.0 and finite field methods , Comput. Phys. Commun. 266 (2021) 108024 [ 2008.06494]

    2021 arXiv

  32. [38]

    Chetyrkin, A.L

    K.G. Chetyrkin, A.L. Kataev and F.V. Tkachov, Higher Order Corrections to Sigma-t (e+ e- —> Hadrons) in Quantum Chromodynamics , Phys. Lett. B 85 (1979) 277

    1979

  33. [39]

    Chetyrkin and F.V

    K.G. Chetyrkin and F.V. Tkachov, Integration by parts: The algorithm to calculate β-functions in 4 loops , Nucl. Phys. B 192 (1981) 159. – 17 –

    1981

  34. [40]

    Caron-Huot and J.M

    S. Caron-Huot and J.M. Henn, Iterative structure of finite loop integrals , JHEP 06 (2014) 114 [1404.2922]

    2014 arXiv

  35. [41]

    Becchetti and R

    M. Becchetti and R. Bonciani, Two-Loop Master Integrals for the Planar QCD Massive Corrections to Di-photon and Di-jet Hadro-production , JHEP 01 (2018) 048 [ 1712.02537]

    2018 arXiv

  36. [42]

    A. A H, E. Chaubey and H.-S. Shao, Two-loop massive QCD and QED helicity amplitudes for light-by-light scattering , JHEP 03 (2024) 121 [ 2312.16966]

    2024 arXiv

  37. [44]

    Ahmed, A

    T. Ahmed, A. Chakraborty, E. Chaubey and M. Kaur, Ancillary files for Two-loop helicity amplitudes for diphoton production with massive quark loop , 2025. 10.5281/zenodo.14809205

    2025 doi

  38. [45]

    ’t Hooft and M.J.G

    G. ’t Hooft and M.J.G. Veltman, Regularization and Renormalization of Gauge Fields , Nucl. Phys. B44 (1972) 189

    1972

  39. [46]

    Ahmed, A

    T. Ahmed, A. A H, L. Chen, P.K. Dhani, P. Mukherjee and V. Ravindran, Polarised Amplitudes and Soft-Virtual Cross Sections for b¯b → ZH at NNLO in QCD , JHEP 01 (2020) 030 [ 1910.06347]

    2020 arXiv

  40. [47]

    Caola, A

    F. Caola, A. Chakraborty, G. Gambuti, A. von Manteuffel and L. Tancredi, Three-loop gluon scattering in QCD and the gluon Regge trajectory , 2112.11097

    arXiv

  41. [48]

    Binoth, E

    T. Binoth, E. Glover, P. Marquard and J. van der Bij, Two loop corrections to light by light scattering in supersymmetric QED , JHEP 05 (2002) 060 [ hep-ph/0202266]

    2002 arXiv

  42. [49]

    Ahmed, J

    T. Ahmed, J. Henn and B. Mistlberger, Four-particle scattering amplitudes in QCD at NNLO to higher orders in the dimensional regulator , JHEP 12 (2019) 177 [ 1910.06684]

    2019 arXiv

  43. [50]

    Caola, A

    F. Caola, A. Chakraborty, G. Gambuti, A. von Manteuffel and L. Tancredi, Three-loop helicity amplitudes for quark-gluon scattering in QCD , JHEP 12 (2022) 082 [ 2207.03503]

    2022 arXiv

  44. [51]

    Dixon, Calculating scattering amplitudes efficiently , hep-ph/9601359

    L.J. Dixon, Calculating scattering amplitudes efficiently , hep-ph/9601359

    arXiv

  45. [52]

    Nogueira, Automatic Feynman graph generation , J.Comput.Phys

    P. Nogueira, Automatic Feynman graph generation , J.Comput.Phys. 105 (1993) 279

    1993

  46. [53]

    Studerus, Reduze-Feynman Integral Reduction in C++, Comput.Phys.Commun

    C. Studerus, Reduze-Feynman Integral Reduction in C++, Comput.Phys.Commun. 181 (2010) 1293 [ 0912.2546]

    2010 arXiv

  47. [54]

    von Manteuffel and C

    A. von Manteuffel and C. Studerus, Reduze 2 - Distributed Feynman Integral Reduction , 1201.4330

    arXiv

  48. [55]

    Lee, Presenting LiteRed: a tool for the Loop InTEgrals REDuction , 1212.2685

    R.N. Lee, Presenting LiteRed: a tool for the Loop InTEgrals REDuction , 1212.2685

    arXiv

  49. [56]

    Laporta, High precision calculation of multiloop Feynman integrals by difference equations , Int.J.Mod.Phys

    S. Laporta, High precision calculation of multiloop Feynman integrals by difference equations , Int.J.Mod.Phys. A15 (2000) 5087 [ hep-ph/0102033]

    2000 arXiv

  50. [57]

    Peraro, FiniteFlow: multivariate functional reconstruction using finite fields and dataflow graphs, 1905.08019

    T. Peraro, FiniteFlow: multivariate functional reconstruction using finite fields and dataflow graphs, 1905.08019

    1905 arXiv

  51. [58]

    von Manteuffel and R.M

    A. von Manteuffel and R.M. Schabinger, A novel approach to integration by parts reduction , Phys. Lett. B744 (2015) 101 [ 1406.4513]

    2015 arXiv

  52. [59]

    von Manteuffel and R.M

    A. von Manteuffel and R.M. Schabinger, Quark and gluon form factors to four-loop order in QCD: the N 3 f contributions, Phys. Rev. D95 (2017) 034030 [ 1611.00795]

    2017 arXiv

  53. [60]

    Peraro, Scattering amplitudes over finite fields and multivariate functional reconstruction , JHEP 12 (2016) 030 [ 1608.01902]

    T. Peraro, Scattering amplitudes over finite fields and multivariate functional reconstruction , JHEP 12 (2016) 030 [ 1608.01902]. – 18 –

    2016 arXiv

  54. [61]

    Vollinga and S

    J. Vollinga and S. Weinzierl, Numerical evaluation of multiple polylogarithms , Comput.Phys.Commun. 167 (2005) 177 [ hep-ph/0410259]

    2005 arXiv

  55. [62]

    Badger, E

    S. Badger, E. Chaubey, H.B. Hartanto and R. Marzucca, Two-loop leading colour QCD helicity amplitudes for top quark pair production in the gluon fusion channel , JHEP 06 (2021) 163 [ 2102.13450]

    2021 arXiv

  56. [63]

    Chaubey, Master integrals contributing to two-loop leading colour QCD helicity amplitudes for top-quark pair production in the gluon fusion channel , SciPost Phys

    E. Chaubey, Master integrals contributing to two-loop leading colour QCD helicity amplitudes for top-quark pair production in the gluon fusion channel , SciPost Phys. Proc. 7 (2022) 001 [2110.15844]

    2022 arXiv

  57. [64]

    Catani, The Singular behavior of QCD amplitudes at two loop order , Phys.Lett

    S. Catani, The Singular behavior of QCD amplitudes at two loop order , Phys.Lett. B427 (1998) 161 [ hep-ph/9802439]

    1998 arXiv

  58. [65]

    Sterman and M.E

    G.F. Sterman and M.E. Tejeda-Yeomans, Multiloop amplitudes and resummation , Phys. Lett. B 552 (2003) 48 [ hep-ph/0210130]

    2003 arXiv

  59. [66]

    Mert Aybat, L.J

    S. Mert Aybat, L.J. Dixon and G.F. Sterman, The Two-loop anomalous dimension matrix for soft gluon exchange , Phys. Rev. Lett. 97 (2006) 072001 [ hep-ph/0606254]

    2006 arXiv

  60. [67]

    Mert Aybat, L.J

    S. Mert Aybat, L.J. Dixon and G.F. Sterman, The Two-loop soft anomalous dimension matrix and resummation at next-to-next-to leading pole , Phys. Rev. D 74 (2006) 074004 [hep-ph/0607309]

    2006 arXiv

  61. [68]

    Becher and M

    T. Becher and M. Neubert, Infrared singularities of scattering amplitudes in perturbative QCD, Phys. Rev. Lett. 102 (2009) 162001 [ 0901.0722]

    2009 arXiv

  62. [69]

    Becher and M

    T. Becher and M. Neubert, On the Structure of Infrared Singularities of Gauge-Theory Amplitudes, JHEP 06 (2009) 081 [ 0903.1126]

    2009 arXiv

  63. [70]

    Dixon, Matter Dependence of the Three-Loop Soft Anomalous Dimension Matrix , Phys

    L.J. Dixon, Matter Dependence of the Three-Loop Soft Anomalous Dimension Matrix , Phys. Rev. D 79 (2009) 091501 [ 0901.3414]

    2009 arXiv

  64. [71]

    Gardi and L

    E. Gardi and L. Magnea, Factorization constraints for soft anomalous dimensions in QCD scattering amplitudes, JHEP 0903 (2009) 079 [ 0901.1091]

    2009 arXiv

  65. [72]

    Gardi and L

    E. Gardi and L. Magnea, Infrared singularities in QCD amplitudes , Nuovo Cim. C 32N5-6 (2009) 137 [ 0908.3273]

    2009 arXiv

  66. [73]

    Almelid, C

    O. Almelid, C. Duhr and E. Gardi, Three-loop corrections to the soft anomalous dimension in multileg scattering , Phys. Rev. Lett. 117 (2016) 172002 [ 1507.00047]

    2016 arXiv

  67. [74]

    Catani, S

    S. Catani, S. Dittmaier and Z. Trocsanyi, One loop singular behavior of QCD and SUSY QCD amplitudes with massive partons , Phys. Lett. B 500 (2001) 149 [ hep-ph/0011222]

    2001 arXiv

  68. [75]

    Ferroglia, M

    A. Ferroglia, M. Neubert, B.D. Pecjak and L.L. Yang, Two-loop divergences of scattering amplitudes with massive partons , Phys. Rev. Lett. 103 (2009) 201601 [ 0907.4791]

    2009 arXiv

  69. [76]

    Ferroglia, M

    A. Ferroglia, M. Neubert, B.D. Pecjak and L.L. Yang, Two-loop divergences of massive scattering amplitudes in non-abelian gauge theories , JHEP 11 (2009) 062 [ 0908.3676]

    2009 arXiv

  70. [77]

    Mitov, G.F

    A. Mitov, G.F. Sterman and I. Sung, The Massive Soft Anomalous Dimension Matrix at Two Loops, Phys. Rev. D 79 (2009) 094015 [ 0903.3241]

    2009 arXiv

  71. [78]

    Mitov, G.F

    A. Mitov, G.F. Sterman and I. Sung, Computation of the Soft Anomalous Dimension Matrix in Coordinate Space, Phys. Rev. D 82 (2010) 034020 [ 1005.4646]

    2010 arXiv

  72. [79]

    Liu and N

    Z.L. Liu and N. Schalch, Infrared Singularities of Multileg QCD Amplitudes with a Massive Parton at Three Loops , Phys. Rev. Lett. 129 (2022) 232001 [ 2207.02864]. – 19 –

    2022 arXiv

  73. [80]

    Steinhauser, Results and techniques of multiloop calculations , Phys

    M. Steinhauser, Results and techniques of multiloop calculations , Phys. Rept. 364 (2002) 247 [hep-ph/0201075]

    2002 arXiv

  74. [81]

    Korchemsky and A.V

    G.P. Korchemsky and A.V. Radyushkin, Renormalization of the Wilson Loops Beyond the Leading Order, Nucl. Phys. B 283 (1987) 342

    1987

  75. [82]

    Moch, J.A.M

    S. Moch, J.A.M. Vermaseren and A. Vogt, The Three loop splitting functions in QCD: The Nonsinglet case, Nucl. Phys. B 688 (2004) 101 [ hep-ph/0403192]

    2004 arXiv

  76. [83]

    A. Vogt, S. Moch and J.A.M. Vermaseren, The Three-loop splitting functions in QCD: The Singlet case, Nucl. Phys. B 691 (2004) 129 [ hep-ph/0404111]

    2004 arXiv

  77. [84]

    Br¨ user, A

    R. Br¨ user, A. Grozin, J.M. Henn and M. Stahlhofen, Matter dependence of the four-loop QCD cusp anomalous dimension: from small angles to all angles , JHEP 05 (2019) 186 [1902.05076]

    2019 arXiv

  78. [85]

    Henn, G.P

    J.M. Henn, G.P. Korchemsky and B. Mistlberger, The full four-loop cusp anomalous dimension in N = 4 super Yang-Mills and QCD , JHEP 04 (2020) 018 [ 1911.10174]

    2020 arXiv

  79. [86]

    von Manteuffel, E

    A. von Manteuffel, E. Panzer and R.M. Schabinger, Cusp and collinear anomalous dimensions in four-loop QCD from form factors , Phys. Rev. Lett. 124 (2020) 162001 [2002.04617]

    2020 arXiv

  80. [87]

    Ravindran, J

    V. Ravindran, J. Smith and W.L. van Neerven, Two-loop corrections to Higgs boson production, Nucl. Phys. B 704 (2005) 332 [ hep-ph/0408315]

    2005 arXiv

  81. [88]

    Moch, J.A.M

    S. Moch, J.A.M. Vermaseren and A. Vogt, The Quark form-factor at higher orders , JHEP 08 (2005) 049 [ hep-ph/0507039]

    2005 arXiv

  82. [89]

    S. Moch, J. Vermaseren and A. Vogt, Three-loop results for quark and gluon form-factors , Phys. Lett. B 625 (2005) 245 [ hep-ph/0508055]

    2005 arXiv

  83. [90]

    Agarwal, A

    B. Agarwal, A. von Manteuffel, E. Panzer and R.M. Schabinger, Four-loop collinear anomalous dimensions in QCD and N=4 super Yang-Mills , Phys. Lett. B 820 (2021) 136503 [2102.09725]

    2021 arXiv

  84. [91]

    Caola, A

    F. Caola, A. Chakraborty, G. Gambuti, A. von Manteuffel and L. Tancredi, Three-loop helicity amplitudes for four-quark scattering in massless QCD , JHEP 10 (2021) 206 [2108.00055]

    2021 arXiv

  85. [93]

    Liu and Y.-Q

    X. Liu and Y.-Q. Ma, AMFlow: A Mathematica package for Feynman integrals computation via auxiliary mass flow , Comput. Phys. Commun. 283 (2023) 108565 [ 2201.11669]. – 20 –

    2023 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 9, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.