Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Elliptic leading singularities and canonical integrands

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that a derivative-free choice of algebraic one-forms of the second kind on an elliptic curve puts the associated Feynman integrals into a previously unreported differential-equation form whose epsilon expansions are pure…

desk verdict A genuinely new integrand-level route to canonical forms for elliptic Feynman integrals, with the simple-pole property that pure functions rely on still a conjecture with only a posteriori checks. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.20897 v3 pith:E2AHJ7SW submitted 2025-04-29 hep-th hep-ph

Ekta Chaubey , Vasily Sotnikov This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-thhep-ph MSC 81Q3014H52
keywords ellipticleadingsingularitiescanonicaldifferentialequationspurefunctionsalgebraicone-formssecond-kinddifferentialsFeynmanintegralsiteratedcurves
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

The paper extends the genus-zero method of d log integrands with integer leading singularities to elliptic (genus-one) geometry. It proposes building a basis of Feynman integrands by matching the integrand, after localization to a last integration variable, to a fixed set of algebraic one-forms on the elliptic curve — the holomorphic period form, a second-kind form chosen without taking derivatives, and third-kind forms with unit residues — and then rotating the basis by the matrix of elliptic leading singularities. The authors find that the differential equations satisfied by the resulting integrals take a special, previously unreported form, $\mathrm{d}G = ((1-n\,\epsilon)A_0+\epsilon A_1)G$, with $A_0$ nilpotent, $A_0$ and $A_1$ with disjoint entrywise support, and all one-forms in $A$ having at most simple poles locally. As a consequence, the $\epsilon$-expansion of the integrals is given order by order by Chen iterated integrals over simple-pole kernels, i.e. by pure functions. The construction is verified on the two- and three-mass sunrise graphs and several two-loop elliptic families, and the authors conjecture that it works universally for integrand bases of this type.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the derivative-free algebraic one-form of the second kind, $\omega_\phi = N_\phi(z)\, dz/\sqrt{P(z)}$, whose numerator $N_\phi$ is chosen so that its period integrals equal the quasi-period $\phi$ of the elliptic curve; together with the holomorphic one-form $\omega_\psi$ and the third-kind forms $\omega_{\pi_a}$, it forms the cohomology basis of eqs. (10)–(11). These one-forms are integrated over the two cycles of the elliptic curve to give elliptic leading singularities (eLS), whose period matrix (12) is then used in the rotation (17) to define canonical integrands with unit eLS on a preferred cycle. The special differential-equation structure (20) — in particular the disjoint-entry condition $(A_0)_{ij}(A_1)_{ij}=0$ and $A_0^2=0$ — is what allows the solution to be written as Chen iterated integrals with simple-pole kernels.

What would settle it

Choose one of the verified families, say the unequal-mass sunrise, and compute the local expansion of every entry of $A$ around a kinematic point where two roots of $P(z)$ coincide, using the cycle combination selected in Appendix B. If any entry of $A$ develops a double pole in the local coordinate — for example a term proportional to $z^{-2}\,dz$ in $\mathrm{d}(\psi_2/\psi_1)$ — then the Chen iterated-integral representation with simple-pole kernels fails and the pure-function claim is false; otherwise the check would strengthen the conjecture.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the integrand-level construction of Sec. II, using algebraic one-forms of the second kind without derivatives, produces a basis whose differential equations take the special form $\mathrm{d}G = A G$ with $A=(1-n\,\epsilon)A_0+\epsilon A_1$, $(A_0)_{ij}(A_1)_{ij}=0$, $A_0^2=0$, and all one-forms with at most simple poles, so solutions are pure functions. The matrix $A_0$ is built from the exact differentials of the period-matrix entries $\mathrm{d}(\psi_2/\psi_1)$ and $\mathrm{d}(\pi_{a,2}-\pi_{a,1}\psi_2/\psi_1)$, so it encodes the elliptic leading singularities themselves; $A_0$ is strictly upper triangular and nilpotent. The integer $n$ is observed in every example but its origin is unexplained. The authors conjecture that any Feynman integral family that can be brought to the integrand form of eq. (16) and rotated as in eq. (17) satisfies this same special differential equation.

Load-bearing premise

The pure-function conclusion rests on the claim that every entry of $A$ has at most simple poles locally around each singular point; this is verified only by pulling the differential equation back on one generic line $\gamma(t)$ and inspecting the generic form (B2), not by a proof covering arbitrary paths or all singular-point configurations.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For any family in the construction, the $\epsilon$-expansion can be written directly as iterated integrals of explicit simple-pole one-forms, so no $\epsilon$-factorization or differential-equation post-processing is needed at higher orders.
  • The same basis provides an $\epsilon$-factorized form if desired: fully diagonalizing the period matrix (18) removes the homogeneous $A_0$ block, at the cost of breaking the explicit covariance under changing the preferred cycle.
  • The observed but unexplained integer $n$ in $(1-n\,\epsilon)$ becomes an invariant of each elliptic family; determining its meaning is posed as an open problem that may organize which integrals admit this form.
  • Because the construction is algorithmic and uses only integrand data and closed-form elliptic leading singularities, it is suited to automation and to multi-scale applications such as top-pair and diphoton production with massive loops.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the conjecture holds, the special form (20) could be used as a fast diagnostic: scanning integrand ansätze for the combination of unit eLS, disjoint support of $A_0$/$A_1$, and simple poles would identify pure elliptic sectors without a full integration-by-parts reduction.
  • The paper's observation that replacing $\omega_\phi$ by a derivative of $\omega_\psi$ destroys the structure suggests that the second-kind form should be chosen as an algebraic object, not a derived one; a natural extension is to prove (20) directly from the Gauss–Manin connection of the elliptic curve, without computing any integrals.
  • A testable boundary of the conjecture lies in higher-genus or higher-dimensional cases: applying the same integrand-level recipe to a three-loop banana or a K3/Calabi–Yau sector would show whether the simple-pole and disjoint-support properties persist beyond genus one.
  • The component-wise orthogonality $(A_0)_{ij}(A_1)_{ij}=0$ implies that in the $\epsilon$-expansion, no iterated integral receives simultaneous contributions from both matrices at the same index, which may lead to simpler analytic-continuation formulas than generic Fuchsian systems.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The manuscript proposes an integrand-level construction of Feynman-integral bases for elliptic leading singularities. The authors choose algebraic one-forms of the second kind, match them to Feynman integrands as in Eq. (16), and then apply the elliptic-leading-singularity rotation (17) to define a canonical basis. They observe that the resulting differential equations take the factorized form dG = A G with A = (1 - n epsilon) A0 + epsilon A1, (A0)_ij (A1)_ij = 0, A0^2 = 0, and all one-forms having at most simple poles. They conjecture that this structure is universal, support it with six examples summarized in Table I, and spell out the unequal-mass sunrise example in detail in Eqs. (21)-(24). The paper also contains closed-form expressions for elliptic leading singularities in Appendix A and a discussion of why the second-kind differential is crucial.

Significance. If the conjectured form (20) is correct, the paper offers a genuinely new structural result for elliptic Feynman integrals: a canonical, epsilon-factorized-up-to-A0 system whose solutions are pure functions, obtained without epsilon-dependent rescalings or a posteriori DE manipulation. The main positive features are the parameter-free rotation (17), the explicit closed-form representation of the eLS in Appendix A, the absence of fitted free parameters, and one fully explicit worked example. The principal limitation is that the universality claim is a conjecture, and the pure-function conclusion rests on an unproved simple-pole property whose validation in Appendix B is not conclusive. The strength of the evidence is therefore somewhat below the strength of the claimed structural theorem, which is a central consideration for the recommendation.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. III and Appendix B] The pure-function conclusion rests on the statement that every entry of A in Eq. (20) has at most simple poles locally around every DE singularity. The validation in Appendix B pulls the DE back on a single random line gamma(t) and infers from the generic form (B2) that only simple poles are possible. This line check samples only generic points of each singular divisor; a double pole whose leading coefficient vanishes at the sampled point, or a pole supported at an intersection of divisors, would not be detected. Since the iterated-integral representation of the solutions is directly downstream of this property, please either prove the simple-pole statement for the constructed entries or verify it divisor-by-divisor in each worked example.
  2. [Sec. IV, Table I] The empirical support for the factorized form (20) is largely deferred: only the unequal-mass sunrise is presented explicitly in Eqs. (21)-(24), while the bases for the other five examples are stated to be provided in supplementary material and a followup paper. A central claim that a new DE form appears in several state-of-the-art examples needs to be checkable within the manuscript or its verified supplementary files; otherwise the claim should be explicitly weakened to a single detailed example plus a conjecture.
  3. [Sec. III, Eq. (20)] The derivation of the factorized structure is not shown in detail. The text states that (20) follows from the eLS rotation (17) and the coupled DEs (13)-(14), but the mechanism that guarantees (A0)_ij (A1)_ij = 0 and A0^2 = 0 is not exhibited. A short proof for the sunrise case, or at least a clear explanation of how the structure of (13) and (14) enforces the factorization, would substantially strengthen the paper's central observation.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Table I] The entries '4+2' and '1+0' in the third and fourth columns are not explained in the text; please define the notation for the number of master integrals and the number of third-kind eLS on each cut.
  2. [Sec. I and Sec. II] There are several typographical spacing errors, including 'd logintegrands' in the introduction and 'The periodψi' in Section II; a careful proofreading pass is needed.
  3. [Appendix B] The phrase 'random line' should be replaced by a deterministic and reproducible choice, since a random line is not a well-defined verification procedure for a journal publication.
  4. [Appendix B, Eqs. (B1) and (B2)] The constant coefficients c1,c2 in (B1) and the constants c_i in (B2) use overlapping notation for different objects; renaming one of the two sets would improve clarity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circular derivation: the integrand basis is fixed from elliptic leading singularities before any DE is computed, and the special form (20) is an observed, conjectural output rather than a fitted input.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained in the relevant sense. Section II fixes the algebraic cohomology basis and the canonical rotation (17) using only the elliptic leading singularities and a preferred cycle, before any differential equation is derived; Section III then obtains (19)-(20) through IBP reduction. No parameter is fitted to force the factorized form, and the product condition (A0)_ij (A1)_ij=0 and A0^2=0 are nontrivial outputs confirmed in several examples and explicitly labeled a conjecture. The appearance of d(ψ2/ψ1) and d(πi2−πi1 ψ2/ψ1) in A0 is a mathematical consequence of the normalized period matrix (18), not a disguised prediction; the paper states it as an observed identity. Self-citations ([43,66,81,83,84]) are example references and a footnote about iterated integrals with A0≠0; they are not load-bearing and none is used to exclude alternatives or to justify the central conjecture. The genuine weakness is rigor rather than circularity: the claim that all one-forms in A have only simple poles, on which the pure-function conclusion rests, is checked in Appendix B only by pulling the DE back on a random line γ(t) and inspecting the generic form (B2), and the paper itself labels the universal statement a conjecture. That is an unproven premise, not an input-output equivalence.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The construction relies on standard elliptic-function theory and on a specific localization assumption restricting it to one elliptic variable. The only genuinely ad hoc element is the simple-pole property, which is essential for pure functions but checked only numerically along random lines. No new physical entities are postulated and no numbers are fitted to data; the integer n in (1 - n epsilon) is an observed output, not an input parameter.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Existence of a finite basis of master integrals and validity of integration-by-parts reduction.
    Used throughout Sec. III to derive the differential equations; stated in Sec. I with references [6-9], not proved in the paper.
  • domain assumption After k-1 residues, the integrand reduces to a single elliptic curve variable z with quartic P(z) as in eq. (8).
    Sec. IIB states: 'we assume that the integrand has been already localized by taking k-1 residues ... and focus on the last integration over z.' This restricts the construction to genus-one obstructions with one elliptic modulus.
  • standard math The period relations (13), (14) and Legendre identity (15) for the one-forms in (10)-(11).
    Taken from Weinzierl's conventions [62] and standard elliptic function theory; not derived in the letter.
  • ad hoc to paper All one-forms in A have at most simple poles locally around every singular point, so solutions are pure functions.
    This is the load-bearing property asserted in Sec. III and 'validated' only a posteriori along a random line in Appendix B; no global proof is supplied.
  • domain assumption Non-elliptic subsectors can be chosen with unit leading singularities.
    Sec. III states: 'We assume that all integrals which do not couple to the elliptic curve have already been chosen to have unit LS.'

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Elliptic leading singularities and canonical integrands." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/E2AHJ7SW

@misc{pith2026250420897,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Elliptic leading singularities and canonical integrands},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/E2AHJ7SW}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.20897}
}
abstract

In the well-studied genus zero case, bases of $\mathrm{d}\log$ integrands with integer leading singularities define Feynman integrals that automatically satisfy differential equations in canonical form. Such integrand bases can be constructed without input from the differential equations and without explicit involvement of dimensional regularization parameter $\epsilon$. We propose a generalization of this construction to genus one geometry arising from the appearance of elliptic curves. We argue that a particular choice of algebraic one-forms of the second kind that avoids derivatives is crucial. We observe that the corresponding Feynman integrals satisfy a special form of differential equations that has not been previously reported, and that their solutions order by order in $\epsilon$ yield pure functions. We conjecture that our integrand-level construction universally leads to such differential equations.

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. First look at the evaluation of two-loop Feynman integrals for radiative return processes

    hep-ph 2026-07 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    Planar two-loop four-point master integrals for massive radiative-return QED, including elliptic and nested-root sectors, are reduced to polynomial-in-ε differential equations that evaluate stably in the physical region.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

95 extracted references · 3 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    A. V. Kotikov, Differential equations method: New tech- nique for massive Feynman diagrams calculation, Phys. Lett. B 254, 158 (1991)

    1991

  2. [2]

    A. V. Kotikov, Differential equation method: The Calcu- lation of N point Feynman diagrams, Phys. Lett. B267, 123 (1991), [Erratum: Phys.Lett.B 295, 409–409 (1992)]

    1991

  3. [3]

    Z. Bern, L. J. Dixon, and D. A. Kosower, Dimension- ally regulated pentagon integrals, Nucl. Phys. B412, 751 (1994), arXiv:hep-ph/9306240

    arXiv 1994

  4. [4]

    Remiddi, Differential equations for Feynman graph amplitudes, Nuovo Cim

    E. Remiddi, Differential equations for Feynman graph amplitudes, Nuovo Cim. A110, 1435 (1997), arXiv:hep- th/9711188

    arXiv 1997

  5. [5]

    Gehrmann and E

    T. Gehrmann and E. Remiddi, Differential equations for two loop four point functions, Nucl. Phys. B580, 485 (2000), arXiv:hep-ph/9912329

    arXiv 2000

  6. [6]

    F. V. Tkachov, A Theorem on Analytical Calculability of Four Loop Renormalization Group Functions, Phys. Lett. B 100, 65 (1981). 8

    1981

  7. [7]

    K.G.ChetyrkinandF.V.Tkachov,IntegrationbyParts: The Algorithm to Calculate beta Functions in 4 Loops, Nucl. Phys. B192, 159 (1981)

    1981

  8. [8]

    Laporta, High precision calculation of multiloop Feyn- man integrals by difference equations, Int

    S. Laporta, High precision calculation of multiloop Feyn- man integrals by difference equations, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 15, 5087 (2000), arXiv:hep-ph/0102033

    arXiv 2000

Show all 95 references
  1. [9]

    A. V. Smirnov and A. V. Petukhov, The Number of Mas- ter Integrals is Finite, Lett. Math. Phys.97, 37 (2011), arXiv:1004.4199 [hep-th]

    2011 arXiv

  2. [10]

    J. M. Henn, Multiloop integrals in dimensional regu- larization made simple, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 251601 (2013), arXiv:1304.1806 [hep-th]

    2013 arXiv

  3. [11]

    A. B. Goncharov, M. Spradlin, C. Vergu, and A.Volovich,ClassicalPolylogarithmsforAmplitudesand Wilson Loops, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 151605 (2010), arXiv:1006.5703 [hep-th]

    2010 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Duhr, Hopf algebras, coproducts and symbols: an application to Higgs boson amplitudes, JHEP 08, 043, arXiv:1203.0454 [hep-ph]

    C. Duhr, Hopf algebras, coproducts and symbols: an application to Higgs boson amplitudes, JHEP 08, 043, arXiv:1203.0454 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  5. [13]

    Chicherin and V

    D. Chicherin and V. Sotnikov, Pentagon Functions for Scattering of Five Massless Particles, JHEP 20, 167, arXiv:2009.07803 [hep-ph]

    2009 arXiv

  6. [14]

    R. N. Lee, Reducing differential equations for multiloop master integrals, JHEP 04, 108, arXiv:1411.0911 [hep- ph]

    arXiv

  7. [15]

    Prausa, epsilon: A tool to find a canonical basis of master integrals, Comput

    M. Prausa, epsilon: A tool to find a canonical basis of master integrals, Comput. Phys. Commun.219, 361 (2017), arXiv:1701.00725 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Abreu, B

    S. Abreu, B. Page, and M. Zeng, Differential equations from unitarity cuts: nonplanar hexa-box integrals, JHEP 01, 006, arXiv:1807.11522 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  9. [17]

    Meyer, Algorithmic transformation of multi-loop mas- ter integrals to a canonical basis with CANONICA, Com- put

    C. Meyer, Algorithmic transformation of multi-loop mas- ter integrals to a canonical basis with CANONICA, Com- put. Phys. Commun.222, 295 (2018), arXiv:1705.06252 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  10. [18]

    R. N. Lee, Libra: A package for transformation of dif- ferential systems for multiloop integrals, Comput. Phys. Commun. 267, 108058 (2021), arXiv:2012.00279 [hep- ph]

    2021 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Dlapa, J

    C. Dlapa, J. Henn, and K. Yan, Deriving canonical dif- ferential equations for Feynman integrals from a single uniform weight integral, JHEP05, 025, arXiv:2002.02340 [hep-ph]

    2002 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Adams, C

    L. Adams, C. Bogner, and S. Weinzierl, The two-loop sunrise graph in two space-time dimensions with arbi- trary masses in terms of elliptic dilogarithms, J. Math. Phys. 55, 102301 (2014), arXiv:1405.5640 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Søgaard and Y

    M. Søgaard and Y. Zhang, Elliptic Functions and Maximal Unitarity, Phys. Rev. D 91, 081701 (2015), arXiv:1412.5577 [hep-th]

    2015 arXiv

  14. [22]

    M. F. Paulos, M. Spradlin, and A. Volovich, Mellin Am- plitudes for Dual Conformal Integrals, JHEP 08, 072, arXiv:1203.6362 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  15. [23]

    Caron-Huot and K

    S. Caron-Huot and K. J. Larsen, Uniqueness of two-loop master contours, JHEP 10, 026, arXiv:1205.0801 [hep- ph]

    arXiv

  16. [24]

    Adams, C

    L. Adams, C. Bogner, and S. Weinzierl, The two-loop sunrise graph with arbitrary masses, J. Math. Phys.54, 052303 (2013), arXiv:1302.7004 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Bloch and P

    S. Bloch and P. Vanhove, The elliptic dilogarithm for the sunset graph, J. Number Theor. 148, 328 (2015), arXiv:1309.5865 [hep-th]

    2015 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Broedel, C

    J. Broedel, C. R. Mafra, N. Matthes, and O. Schlotterer, Ellipticmultiplezetavaluesandone-loopsuperstringam- plitudes, JHEP 07, 112, arXiv:1412.5535 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  19. [27]

    Bogner, A

    C. Bogner, A. Schweitzer, and S. Weinzierl, Analytic con- tinuation and numerical evaluation of the kite integral and the equal mass sunrise integral, Nucl. Phys. B922, 528 (2017), arXiv:1705.08952 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Ablinger, J

    J. Ablinger, J. Blümlein, A. De Freitas, M. van Hoeij, E. Imamoglu, C. G. Raab, C. S. Radu, and C. Schnei- der, Iterated Elliptic and Hypergeometric Integrals for Feynman Diagrams, J. Math. Phys.59, 062305 (2018), arXiv:1706.01299 [hep-th]

    2018 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Broedel, C

    J. Broedel, C. Duhr, F. Dulat, and L. Tancredi, Elliptic polylogarithms and iterated integrals on elliptic curves II: an application to the sunrise integral, Phys. Rev. D 97, 116009 (2018), arXiv:1712.07095 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Vergu and M

    C. Vergu and M. Volk, Traintrack Calabi-Yaus from Twistor Geometry, JHEP 07, 160, arXiv:2005.08771 [hep-th]

    2005 arXiv

  23. [31]

    J. L. Bourjaily, N. Kalyanapuram, C. Langer, and K. Patatoukos, Prescriptive unitarity with elliptic lead- ing singularities, Phys. Rev. D 104, 125009 (2021), arXiv:2102.02210 [hep-th]

    2021 arXiv

  24. [32]

    C. Duhr, A. Klemm, F. Loebbert, C. Nega, and F. Pork- ert, Geometry from integrability: multi-leg fishnet inte- grals in two dimensions, JHEP07, 008, arXiv:2402.19034 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  25. [33]

    C. Duhr, F. Gasparotto, C. Nega, L. Tancredi, and S. Weinzierl, On the electron self-energy to three loops in QED, JHEP11, 020, arXiv:2408.05154 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  26. [34]

    Badger, M

    S. Badger, M. Becchetti, N. Giraudo, and S. Zoia, Two- loop integrals for tt+jet production at hadron collid- ers in the leading colour approximation, JHEP07, 073, arXiv:2404.12325 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  27. [35]

    Driesse, G

    M. Driesse, G. U. Jakobsen, A. Klemm, G. Mogull, C.Nega, J.Plefka, B.Sauer,andJ.Usovitsch,Emergence of Calabi-Yau manifolds in high-precision black hole scat- tering, (2024), arXiv:2411.11846 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  28. [36]

    C. Duhr, F. Porkert, and S. F. Stawinski, Canonical dif- ferential equations beyond genus one, JHEP 02, 014, arXiv:2412.02300 [hep-th]

  29. [37]

    Duhr and S

    C. Duhr and S. Maggio, Feynman integrals, ellip- tic integrals and two-parameter K3 surfaces, (2025), arXiv:2502.15326 [hep-th]

    2025 arXiv

  30. [38]

    J. Chen, L. L. Yang, and Y. Zhang, On an approach to canonicalizing elliptic Feynman integrals, (2025), arXiv:2503.23720 [hep-th]

    2025

  31. [39]

    C. Duhr, A. Klemm, C. Nega, and L. Tancredi, The ice cone family and iterated integrals for Calabi-Yau vari- eties, JHEP 02, 228, arXiv:2212.09550 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  32. [40]

    Becchetti, C

    M. Becchetti, C. Dlapa, and S. Zoia, Canonical differen- tial equations for the elliptic two-loop five-point integral family relevant tot¯t+jet production at leading colour, (2025), arXiv:2503.03603 [hep-th]

    2025 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Broedel, C

    J. Broedel, C. Duhr, F. Dulat, B. Penante, and L. Tan- credi, Elliptic symbol calculus: from elliptic polyloga- rithms to iterated integrals of Eisenstein series, JHEP 08, 014, arXiv:1803.10256 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  34. [42]

    Brown, Notes on motivic periods (2017), arXiv:1512.06410 [math.NT]

    F. Brown, Notes on motivic periods (2017), arXiv:1512.06410 [math.NT]

    2017 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Adams, E

    L. Adams, E. Chaubey, and S. Weinzierl, Simplifying Differential Equations for Multiscale Feynman Integrals beyond Multiple Polylogarithms, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 141602 (2017), arXiv:1702.04279 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Görges, C

    L. Görges, C. Nega, L. Tancredi, and F. J. Wagner, On a procedure to deriveϵ-factorised differential equations 9 beyond polylogarithms, JHEP07, 206, arXiv:2305.14090 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  37. [45]

    Mastrolia and S

    P. Mastrolia and S. Mizera, Feynman Integrals and In- tersection Theory, JHEP02, 139, arXiv:1810.03818 [hep- th]

    arXiv

  38. [46]

    Arkani-Hamed, J

    N. Arkani-Hamed, J. L. Bourjaily, F. Cachazo, S. Caron- Huot, and J. Trnka, The All-Loop Integrand For Scat- tering Amplitudes in Planar N=4 SYM, JHEP01, 041, arXiv:1008.2958 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  39. [47]

    Arkani-Hamed, J

    N. Arkani-Hamed, J. L. Bourjaily, F. Cachazo, and J. Trnka, Local Integrals for Planar Scattering Ampli- tudes, JHEP 06, 125, arXiv:1012.6032 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  40. [48]

    Arkani-Hamed, J

    N. Arkani-Hamed, J. L. Bourjaily, F. Cachazo, A. B. Goncharov, A. Postnikov, and J. Trnka,Grassmannian Geometry of Scattering Amplitudes (Cambridge Univer- sity Press, 2016) arXiv:1212.5605 [hep-th]

    2016 arXiv

  41. [49]

    F.Cachazo,SharpeningTheLeadingSingularity, (2008), arXiv:0803.1988 [hep-th]

    2008 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Leading Singularity

    J. L. Bourjaily, N. Kalyanapuram, C. Langer, K. Pata- toukos, and M. Spradlin, Elliptic, Yangian-Invariant “Leading Singularity”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 201601 (2021), arXiv:2012.14438 [hep-th]

    2021 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Frellesvig, On epsilon factorized differential equa- tions for elliptic Feynman integrals, JHEP 03, 079, arXiv:2110.07968 [hep-th]

    H. Frellesvig, On epsilon factorized differential equa- tions for elliptic Feynman integrals, JHEP 03, 079, arXiv:2110.07968 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  44. [52]

    Example of Feynman graphs considered in this work

    3 1 3 [24, 77, 78] 4 2 3 [79–83] 4+2 1+0 4 [43, 66, 84] 5 1 2 [34, 40, 71] 3 1 2 TABLE I. Example of Feynman graphs considered in this work. Thick lines denote massive lines (red, blue, green cor- respond to different masses),n is the integer in1−nϵ. supporting the correspondi...

    2020

  45. [53]

    C. Duhr, S. Maggio, C. Nega, B. Sauer, L. Tancredi, and F. J. Wagner, Aspects of canonical differential equa- tions for Calabi-Yau geometries and beyond, (2025), arXiv:2503.20655 [hep-th]

    2025 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Becchetti, D

    M. Becchetti, D. Canko, V. Chestnov, T. Peraro, M. Poz- zoli, and S. Zoia, Two-loop Feynman integrals for lead- ing colourt¯tW production at hadron colliders, (2025), arXiv:2504.13011 [hep-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Broedel, C

    J. Broedel, C. Duhr, F. Dulat, B. Penante, and L. Tan- credi, Elliptic Feynman integrals and pure functions, JHEP 01, 023, arXiv:1809.10698 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  48. [56]

    J. Henn, B. Mistlberger, V. A. Smirnov, and P. Wasser, Constructing d-log integrands and computing master in- tegrals for three-loop four-particle scattering, JHEP04, 167, arXiv:2002.09492 [hep-ph]

    2002 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Frellesvig and S

    H. Frellesvig and S. Weinzierl, Onε-factorised bases and pure Feynman integrals, SciPost Phys.16, 150 (2024), arXiv:2301.02264 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  50. [58]

    P. A. Baikov, Explicit solutions of the multiloop integral recurrence relations and its application, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 389, 347 (1997), arXiv:hep-ph/9611449

    1997 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Frellesvig and C

    H. Frellesvig and C. G. Papadopoulos, Cuts of Feyn- man Integrals in Baikov representation, JHEP04, 083, arXiv:1701.07356 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  52. [60]

    Bosma, M

    J. Bosma, M. Sogaard, and Y. Zhang, Maximal Cuts in Arbitrary Dimension, JHEP 08, 051, arXiv:1704.04255 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  53. [61]

    Herrmann and J

    E. Herrmann and J. Parra-Martinez, Logarithmic forms and differential equations for Feynman integrals, JHEP 02, 099, arXiv:1909.04777 [hep-th]

    1909 arXiv

  54. [62]

    J. L. Bourjaily, A. J. McLeod, M. Spradlin, M. von Hippel, and M. Wilhelm, Elliptic Double-Box Integrals: Massless Scattering Amplitudes beyond Polylogarithms, Phys. Rev. Lett. 120, 121603 (2018), arXiv:1712.02785 [hep-th]

    2018 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Weinzierl,Feynman Integrals

    S. Weinzierl,Feynman Integrals. A Comprehensive Treat- ment for Students and Researchers , UNITEXT for Physics (Springer, 2022) arXiv:2201.03593 [hep-th]

    2022 arXiv

  56. [64]

    R. N. Lee, Presenting LiteRed: a tool for the Loop In- TEgrals REDuction, (2012), arXiv:1212.2685 [hep-ph]

    2012 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Peraro, FiniteFlow: multivariate functional recon- struction using finite fields and dataflow graphs, JHEP 07, 031, arXiv:1905.08019 [hep-ph]

    T. Peraro, FiniteFlow: multivariate functional recon- struction using finite fields and dataflow graphs, JHEP 07, 031, arXiv:1905.08019 [hep-ph]

    1905 arXiv

  58. [66]

    83, 831 (1977)

    K.-T.Chen,Iteratedpathintegrals,Bull.Am.Math.Soc. 83, 831 (1977)

    1977

  59. [67]

    Adams, E

    L. Adams, E. Chaubey, and S. Weinzierl, Analytic re- sults for the planar double box integral relevant to top- pair production with a closed top loop, JHEP10, 206, arXiv:1806.04981 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  60. [68]

    Adams and S

    L. Adams and S. Weinzierl, Feynman integrals and iter- ated integrals of modular forms, Commun. Num. Theor. Phys. 12, 193 (2018), arXiv:1704.08895 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Deneufchâtel, G

    M. Deneufchâtel, G. H. E. Duchamp, V. H. N. Minh, and A. I. Solomon, Independence of hyperlogarithms over function fields via algebraic combinatorics, (2011), arXiv:1101.4497 [math.CO]

    2011 arXiv

  62. [70]

    C. Duhr, F. Porkert, C. Semper, and S. F. Stawinski, Self-duality from twisted cohomology, JHEP 03, 053, arXiv:2408.04904 [hep-th]

  63. [71]

    Abreu, D

    S. Abreu, D. Chicherin, H. Ita, B. Page, V. Sotnikov, W. Tschernow, and S. Zoia, All Two-Loop Feynman In- tegrals for Five-Point One-Mass Scattering, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 141601 (2024), arXiv:2306.15431 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  64. [72]

    Badger, M

    S. Badger, M. Becchetti, C. Brancaccio, H. B. Hartanto, and S. Zoia, Numerical evaluation of two-loop QCD he- licity amplitudes forgg→ ttg at leading colour, JHEP 03, 070, arXiv:2412.13876 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  65. [73]

    Gehrmann, J

    T. Gehrmann, J. Henn, P. Jakubčík, J. Lim, C. C. Mella, N. Syrrakos, L. Tancredi, and W. J. Torres Bobadilla, Graded transcendental functions: an application to four- point amplitudes with one off-shell leg, JHEP12, 215, arXiv:2410.19088 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  66. [74]

    De Laurentis, H

    G. De Laurentis, H. Ita, B. Page, and V. Sotnikov, Com- pact Two-Loop QCD Corrections forVjj Production in Proton Collisions, (2025), arXiv:2503.10595 [hep-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  67. [75]

    O.V.Tarasov,Hypergeometricrepresentationofthetwo- loop equal mass sunrise diagram, Phys. Lett. B638, 195 (2006), arXiv:hep-ph/0603227

    2006 arXiv

  68. [76]

    A111, 365 (1998), arXiv:hep- th/9805118

    M.Caffo, H.Czyz, S.Laporta,andE.Remiddi,TheMas- ter differential equations for the two loop sunrise selfmass amplitudes, Nuovo Cim. A111, 365 (1998), arXiv:hep- th/9805118

    1998

  69. [77]

    Adams, C

    L. Adams, C. Bogner, and S. Weinzierl, The sunrise inte- gral around two and four space-time dimensions in terms of elliptic polylogarithms, Acta Phys. Polon. B46, 2131 (2015), arXiv:1510.02048 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  70. [78]

    Müller-Stach, S

    S. Müller-Stach, S. Weinzierl, and R. Zayadeh, A Second- Order Differential Equation for the Two-Loop Sunrise Graph with Arbitrary Masses, Commun. Num. Theor. Phys. 6, 203 (2012), arXiv:1112.4360 [hep-ph]

    2012 arXiv

  71. [79]

    Bogner, S

    C. Bogner, S. Müller-Stach, and S. Weinzierl, The un- equal mass sunrise integral expressed through iterated integrals onM1,3, Nucl. Phys. B 954, 114991 (2020), arXiv:1907.01251 [hep-th]

    2020 arXiv

  72. [80]

    von Manteuffel and L

    A. von Manteuffel and L. Tancredi, A non-planar two- loop three-point function beyond multiple polyloga- rithms, JHEP 06, 127, arXiv:1701.05905 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  73. [81]

    Becchetti, R

    M. Becchetti, R. Bonciani, L. Cieri, F. Coro, and F. Ri- pani, Two-loop form factors for diphoton production in quark annihilation channel with heavy quark mass de- pendence, JHEP 12, 105, arXiv:2308.11412 [hep-ph]. 10

    arXiv

  74. [82]

    Ahmed, E

    T. Ahmed, E. Chaubey, M. Kaur, and S. Maggio, Two- loop non-planar four-point topology with massive inter- nal loop, JHEP05, 064, arXiv:2402.07311 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  75. [83]

    Becchetti, F

    M. Becchetti, F. Coro, C. Nega, L. Tancredi, and F. J. Wagner, Analytic two-loop amplitudes forq¯q→ γγ and gg → γγ mediated by a heavy-quark loop, (2025), arXiv:2502.00118 [hep-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  76. [84]

    Ahmed, A

    T. Ahmed, A. Chakraborty, E. Chaubey, and M. Kaur, Two-loop helicity amplitudes for diphoton production with massive quark loop, (2025), arXiv:2502.03282 [hep- ph]

    2025 arXiv

  77. [85]

    Adams, E

    L. Adams, E. Chaubey, and S. Weinzierl, Planar Dou- ble Box Integral for Top Pair Production with a Closed Top Loop to all orders in the Dimensional Regulariza- tion Parameter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 142001 (2018), arXiv:1804.11144 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  78. [86]

    J. Chen, X. Jiang, C. Ma, X. Xu, and L. L. Yang, Baikov representations, intersection theory, and canonical Feyn- man integrals, JHEP07, 066, arXiv:2202.08127 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  79. [87]

    Moriello, Generalised power series expansions for the elliptic planar families of Higgs + jet production at two loops, JHEP 01, 150, arXiv:1907.13234 [hep-ph]

    F. Moriello, Generalised power series expansions for the elliptic planar families of Higgs + jet production at two loops, JHEP 01, 150, arXiv:1907.13234 [hep-ph]

    1907 arXiv

  80. [88]

    Hidding, DiffExp, a Mathematica package for com- puting Feynman integrals in terms of one-dimensional series expansions, Comput

    M. Hidding, DiffExp, a Mathematica package for com- puting Feynman integrals in terms of one-dimensional series expansions, Comput. Phys. Commun.269, 108125 (2021), arXiv:2006.05510 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  81. [89]

    Armadillo, R

    T. Armadillo, R. Bonciani, S. Devoto, N. Rana, and A. Vicini, Evaluation of Feynman integrals with arbi- trary complex masses via series expansions, Comput. Phys. Commun. 282, 108545 (2023), arXiv:2205.03345 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  82. [90]

    R. M. Prisco, J. Ronca, and F. Tramontano, LINE: Loop Integrals Numerical Evaluation, (2025), arXiv:2501.01943 [hep-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  83. [91]

    Caron-Huot and J

    S. Caron-Huot and J. M. Henn, Iterative structure of fi- nite loop integrals, JHEP06, 114, arXiv:1404.2922 [hep- th]

    arXiv

  84. [92]

    Chicherin, V

    D. Chicherin, V. Sotnikov, and S. Zoia, Pentagon func- tions for one-mass planar scattering amplitudes, JHEP 01, 096, arXiv:2110.10111 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  85. [93]

    Pögel, X

    S. Pögel, X. Wang, and S. Weinzierl, The three- loop equal-mass banana integral in ε-factorised form with meromorphic modular forms, JHEP 09, 062, arXiv:2207.12893 [hep-th]

    arXiv

  86. [94]

    Broedel, C

    J. Broedel, C. Duhr, F. Dulat, B. Penante, and L. Tan- credi, Elliptic polylogarithms and Feynman parameter integrals, JHEP 05, 120, arXiv:1902.09971 [hep-ph]

    1902 arXiv

  87. [95]

    Broedel, C

    J. Broedel, C. Duhr, and N. Matthes, Meromorphic mod- ular forms and the three-loop equal-mass banana inte- gral, JHEP 02, 184, arXiv:2109.15251 [hep-th]

    arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.