Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 6 cited by

Numerical evaluation of two-loop QCD helicity amplitudes for $gg\to t \bar{t} g$ at leading colour

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper presents the first benchmark numerical evaluation of the two-loop helicity finite remainders for the gluon-fusion production of a top-antitop pair plus a gluon, $gg \to t\bar{t}g$, in the leading-colour approximation, and shows…

desk verdict First numerical two-loop finite remainders for gg → ttbar g at leading colour, with a new special-function method for elliptic integrals; the main caveat is the numerically-determined vanishing pattern, but the paper is honest and the result is solid. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.13876 v2 pith:AA6MQAMA submitted 2024-12-18 hep-ph hep-th

Simon Badger , Matteo Becchetti , Colomba Brancaccio , Heribertus Bayu Hartanto , Simone Zoia This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phhep-th
keywords two-loopamplitudeshelicitytop-quarkpairplusjetleadingcolourellipticFeynmanintegralsspecialfunctionbasisdifferentialequationsNNLOQCD
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

Top-quark pair production in association with a jet is one of the processes that will limit the precision of LHC measurements unless theoretical predictions reach next-to-next-to-leading order in QCD, and the missing piece has been the two-loop double-virtual amplitudes. This paper delivers the first benchmark numerical values for those two-loop helicity amplitudes in the gluon-fusion channel, at leading colour, at physical phase-space points. The obstacle was that the relevant Feynman integrals include elliptic functions, which resist the standard polylogarithmic function bases and make pole cancellation difficult. The authors solve the non-canonical differential equations by expanding the master integrals in an over-complete basis of special functions, and find that the non-polylogarithmic pieces enter only at order $\epsilon^4$, hence only in the finite remainder. This removes the main technical obstruction to NNLO $t\bar{t}+$jet predictions.

What carries the argument

The engine of the computation is the (over-complete) special-function basis for the master integrals. Starting from non-canonical differential equations whose connection matrices are degree-two polynomials in $\epsilon$ and contain non-logarithmic one-forms, the authors expand the master integrals order by order in $\epsilon$, use numerical evaluations to identify which $\epsilon$-coefficients vanish, and thereby extract an iterated-integral (polylogarithmic) part that can be handled with the standard pentagon-function machinery. The few remaining coefficients—twelve non-polylogarithmic functions originating from master integrals with nested square roots or elliptic curves—are treated as independent generators; they satisfy a closed system of 84 differential equations, which is solved by generalised power series. This construction is what allows the UV and IR poles to be cancelled analytically while keeping the elliptic content isolated in the finite remainder. Rational coefficients of the special-function monomials are evaluated with finite-field arithmetic, and helicity amplitudes are obtained through four-dimensional projectors combined with the massive spinor-helicity formalism.

What would settle it

Evaluate the master integrals in the set $S=\{15,19,20,35,36,37\}$ at the benchmark point of eqs. (5.1)–(5.2), or at a second independent physical point, using an independent numerical method that does not assume the special-function ansatz, to order $\epsilon^4$: if any of these integrals develops a non-polylogarithmic contribution at order $\epsilon^0$, $\epsilon^1$, $\epsilon^2$, or $\epsilon^3$, the claimed pole cancellation fails. A second concrete check is to recompute the two-loop finite remainders of table 3 at a different phase-space point and compare against a direct integration-by-parts plus numerical-integration evaluation; agreement at all digits would confirm the construction, while disagreement would falsify it.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the two-loop finite remainders for $gg \to t\bar{t}g$ at leading colour can be evaluated numerically in the physical phase space, despite the presence of elliptic Feynman integrals. The paper achieves this by Laurent-expanding all master integrals to order $\epsilon^4$ and expressing the coefficients in a (potentially over-complete) basis of 237 special functions: 225 polylogarithmic ones built with the pentagon-function algorithm, plus 12 non-polylogarithmic functions labelled $F_i^{(4*)}$ that come from the master integrals in the set $\{15,19,20,35,36,37\}$ of the non-canonical family. A decisive structural fact is that the non-polylogarithmic master integrals vanish below order $\epsilon^4$, so the ultraviolet and infrared poles contain only polylogarithmic functions and can be subtracted analytically; the elliptic and nested-square-root functions appear only in the finite remainder and are evaluated numerically through generalised power-series solutions of a minimal 84-function system of differential equations. Benchmark values of the finite remainders for the three independent gluon helicity configurations are given at the phase-space point of eqs. (5.1)–(5.2), normalised by the tree-level amplitude, together with cross-checks based on gauge invariance and on the predicted IR/UV pole structure.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the master integrals and boundary values obtained from the differential equations are correct, and that the numerical finding that the non-polylogarithmic master integrals $\{15,19,20,35,36,37\}$ vanish below order $\epsilon^4$ is complete rather than accidental; if any of those vanishings fails at some physical point, the analytic cancellation of the UV/IR poles and the construction of the special-function basis would break down.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The benchmark finite remainders provide the first numerical anchor for the double-virtual contribution to $t\bar{t}+$jet at NNLO in QCD, allowing future work to target fast evaluation across phase space and eventual phenomenological predictions.
  • Because the elliptic master integrals contribute only at order $\epsilon^4$, the universal pole structure of the amplitude is preserved and the UV/IR subtraction can be carried out analytically with polylogarithmic functions alone.
  • Expressing the master integrals in the special-function basis reduces the complexity of the rational coefficients—their maximum polynomial degree drops by roughly 30% relative to a master-integral representation—and five weight-4 special functions drop out of the finite remainders entirely.
  • The minimal 84-function system for the non-polylogarithmic part evaluates in about 16 seconds per path segment, substantially faster than solving all two-loop master integrals, indicating a realistic route to an efficient numerical library for this amplitude.
  • The method extends the pentagon-function approach to integrals whose differential equations are not in canonical form, so it applies to other two-loop $2 \to 3$ processes with internal masses where canonical forms are currently out of reach.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper: the completeness of the vanishing-coefficient list is verified at random points but not proved; checking the set $S=\{15,19,20,35,36,37\}$ at a dense grid of physical points, or with an independent evaluation method, would convert the construction from numerical evidence into a robust result.
  • Beyond the paper: the paper leaves the fast numerical evaluation of the 225 polylogarithmic functions to future work; a concrete next test is to implement those representations and compare total per-point evaluation time against the master-integral route at many phase-space points.
  • Beyond the paper: the 'mysterious' master integral 15, whose derivatives contain non-logarithmic one-forms that cancel only through a conspiracy of boundary values, may admit a basis transformation that removes the obstruction; if found, it could make the entire amplitude representation canonical and possibly analytic.
  • Beyond the paper: the special-function construction should transfer to other leading-colour massive two-loop processes whose differential equations are polynomial in $\epsilon$ but non-canonical, such as $t\bar{t}H$ or $W b\bar{b}$ production, as long as the non-polylogarithmic sectors start at the order needed for the finite part.
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

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript presents the first numerical evaluation of the two-loop leading-colour QCD helicity finite remainders for the gluon-fusion process gg -> tbar t g. The computation is performed at a single physical phase-space point specified in eqs. (5.1)-(5.2), with results collected in Table 3. The technical core is a new method for expressing the master integrals of Refs. [75,76] in an over-complete basis of special functions even though the differential equations are not in canonical form and elliptic sectors are present. The authors use numerical AMFlow evaluations to identify which epsilon-coefficients of the master integrals vanish, solve the non-canonical differential equations order by order in epsilon, isolate a set of 12 non-polylogarithmic functions that appear only at order epsilon^4, and evaluate them by generalised power series with DiffExp. The helicity amplitudes are obtained through four-dimensional projectors, finite-field IBP reduction, and rational reconstruction.

Significance. If the result is correct, this is an important milestone: it is the first two-loop 2 -> 3 amplitude with internal masses and elliptic master integrals evaluated numerically in the physical region, and the proposed method for extracting a polylogarithmic representation from non-canonical differential equations is likely to be reused in other computations. The paper is also unusually explicit about the assumptions underpinning the method, and it ships ancillary files containing the master-integral representations, the differential equations, and a DiffExp script, together with higher-precision values for future comparisons. The main caveat is that the central numerical result rests on numerically inferred exact vanishings that are not yet independently certified, so the significance of the paper is conditional on closing that verification gap.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. 4.1, bullet list after eq. (4.9)] The claim that the master integrals in the set S\{15} = {19,20,35,36,37} start contributing only at order epsilon^4, and that the non-logarithmic contributions to g15 vanish through order epsilon^3 via the boundary conspiracy of eq. (4.8), is established only by 'a number of numerical evaluations ... at random phase-space points'. The paper does not report how many points were sampled, what precision was used, or why the vanishing should be exact rather than very small. This vanishing pattern is load-bearing: it is what permits the analytic cancellation of UV/IR poles and justifies truncating the iterated-integral solution at order epsilon^3. The authors should either provide a quantitative account of these numerical checks (number of points, working precision, size of the supposedly vanishing coefficients) or give an analytic argument, for example from maximal cuts, that the vanishings are identically true on the physical region. Without this, the finite remainders in Table 3 are not fully certified.
  2. [Sec. 5, cross-check paragraph and Table 3] The internal cross-checks are consistent and valuable, but they do not independently validate the epsilon^4 non-polylogarithmic coefficients. The three evaluation strategies in Sec. 4.3 share the same differential equations, the same boundary values at d0, and the same algebraic transformation from master integrals to special functions, while the momentum-twistor reduction shares the same master-integral evaluation chain. An independent numerical check of the central result, such as a direct high-precision AMFlow evaluation of the finite remainder at the benchmark point or at a second phase-space point, would materially strengthen the claim that the elliptic-sector contributions are correctly captured.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Eq. (4.10)] The expression for F_5^(1) is missing a separator: it reads 'F (1)_5 = log(2d45) - i pi F (1)_6 = log(-2d15)', which should be two separate equations.
  2. [Sec. 3, rational reconstruction paragraph] The paper does not state how many prime fields were used for the rational reconstruction of the rational coefficients, nor how the phase-space point was rationalised. Adding this information would improve reproducibility.
  3. [Sec. 6, first paragraph] The conclusion says the finite remainders were computed 'at benchmark physical phase-space points', but the manuscript presents results at a single point. Either add a second benchmark point or rephrase to the singular.
  4. [Sec. 4.3, Table 2] The timing comparison is given per segment; it would be helpful to state the typical number of segments per phase-space point and the total wall-clock time per point for the current implementation, so that the practical cost of the method is clearer.
  5. [Abstract and Sec. 4.1] The statement that 'elliptic functions appear solely in the finite remainder' is stronger than what is demonstrated: the non-polylogarithmic sector contains 12 functions of mixed elliptic and nested-square-root origin, and the property is shown for the chosen master-integral basis and at sampled points, not as a basis-independent statement.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the two-loop finite remainder is a new output computed from external master-integral inputs and standard factorization formulae.

full rationale

The paper's central claim (benchmark two-loop finite remainders for gg -> tbar t g) is not equivalent to its inputs. The master integrals, their differential equations, and boundary values are imported from Refs. [75,76]; even though these are prior papers with overlapping authorship, they are parameter-free analytic/numerical inputs that do not contain the finite remainder being computed. The new special-function basis is an auxiliary representation, and the statement that non-polylogarithmic functions enter only at order epsilon^4 is established by independent AMFlow evaluations at random phase-space points, not by fitting the final remainder. The UV/IR pole cancellation and gauge-invariance checks are consistency validations of the rational coefficients, not self-definitional identities. A genuine limitation is that the completeness of the list of vanishing epsilon-coefficients rests on numerical sampling rather than on a proof; if a coefficient vanished only accidentally, the pole cancellation would fail. That is a correctness risk, not circularity, because the derivation would simply be wrong rather than reduced to its own output. No equation in the paper makes the predicted quantity identical by construction to a fitted parameter or to a self-cited uniqueness theorem.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on previous master-integral computations by the same group, on numerically-established vanishing properties of epsilon-coefficients, and on standard tools (IBP, finite-field arithmetic, DiffExp). No physical free parameters are fitted to data. The method introduces no new physical entities.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The master integrals, their differential equations, and boundary values from Badger et al. [75,76] are correct and complete for the leading-colour two-loop amplitude.
    All IBP reduction in Sec. 3 targets the master integrals of [76]; errors there would propagate directly into Table 3.
  • domain assumption The vanishing and non-vanishing pattern of the epsilon-expansion coefficients of the master integrals, determined numerically with AMFlow at random points, is exact rather than approximate.
    Sec. 4.1 uses this list to discard coefficients and to argue that elliptic functions start only at order epsilon^4; this is the load-bearing mechanism for analytic UV/IR pole subtraction.
  • domain assumption The special functions constructed with the algorithm of Ref. [53] form a generating set for all epsilon-coefficients up to order epsilon^4, and the over-complete basis does not hide linear relations that would change the finite remainder.
    Sec. 4.1 and Table 1 assert the representation; the check is numerical, via polynomial relations among boundary values checked numerically.
  • domain assumption The leading-colour approximation, defined by eq. (2.5), is the approximation in which the paper's claim is made.
    The paper never claims full-colour results; the finite remainders in Table 3 are leading-colour only.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Numerical evaluation of two-loop QCD helicity amplitudes for $gg\to t \bar{t} g$ at leading colour." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AA6MQAMA

@misc{pith2026241213876,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Numerical evaluation of two-loop QCD helicity amplitudes for $gg\to t \bart g$ at leading colour},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AA6MQAMA}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.13876}
}
read the original abstract

We present the first benchmark evaluation of the two-loop finite remainders for the production of a top-quark pair in association with a jet at hadron colliders in the gluon channel. We work in the leading colour approximation, and perform the numerical evaluation in the physical phase space. To achieve this result, we develop a new method for expressing the master integrals in terms of a (over-complete) basis of special functions that enables the infrared and ultraviolet poles to be cancelled analytically despite the presence of elliptic Feynman integrals. The special function basis makes it manifest that the elliptic functions appear solely in the finite remainder, and can be evaluated numerically through generalised series expansions. The helicity amplitudes are constructed using four dimensional projectors combined with finite-field techniques to perform integration-by-parts reduction, mapping to special functions and Laurent expansion in the dimensional regularisation parameter.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 6 Pith papers

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

  1. Two-loop QCD amplitudes for $t\bar{t}W$ production at the LHC in the leading-colour approximation

    hep-ph 2026-08 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    First two-loop QCD hard functions for ttW production with exact top and W masses in leading colour, evaluated on a 224,640-point grid and cross-checked by an independent calculation.

  2. Two-loop amplitude for $t\bar{t}W$ production at hadron colliders in the leading colour approximation

    hep-ph 2026-08 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    The leading-colour two-loop QCD amplitude for ttbar-W production is evaluated numerically at phase-space points using differential equations and finite-field rational reconstruction.

  3. Elliptic leading singularities and canonical integrands

    hep-th 2025-04 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A derivative-free elliptic one-form basis yields Feynman integrals whose differential equations have a new factorized form with pure-function solutions.

  4. Two-loop Feynman integrals for leading colour $t\bar{t}W$ production at hadron colliders

    hep-ph 2025-04 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A complete set of two-loop master integrals for leading-colour ttW production is reduced to differential equations that are at most quadratic in the dimensional regulator and evaluated numerically in the physical region.

  5. Accelerating Berends-Giele recursion for gluons in arbitrary dimensions over finite fields

    hep-ph 2025-02 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

    A publicly available GPU implementation of Berends-Giele recursion computes pure gluon amplitudes in arbitrary spacetime dimensions over finite fields.

  6. 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

116 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages · cited by 6 Pith papers

  1. [76]

    Badger, M

    S. Badger, M. Becchetti, N. Giraudo and S. Zoia,Two-loop integrals fortt+jet production at hadron colliders in the leading colour approximation, JHEP 07 (2024) 073, [2404.12325]

    arXiv 2024

  2. [1]

    Khachatryan et al.,Measurement of differential cross sections for top quark pair production using the lepton+jets final state in proton-proton collisions at 13 TeV, Phys

    CMS collaboration, V. Khachatryan et al.,Measurement of differential cross sections for top quark pair production using the lepton+jets final state in proton-proton collisions at 13 TeV, Phys. Rev. D 95 (2017) 092001, [1610.04191]

    arXiv 2017

  3. [2]

    ATLAScollaboration, M. Aaboud et al.,Measurements of differential cross sections of top quark pair production in association with jets inpp collisions at √s = 13 TeV using the ATLAS detector, JHEP 10 (2018) 159, [1802.06572]

    arXiv 2018

  4. [3]

    CMS collaboration, A. M. Sirunyan et al.,Measurement of the cross section for t¯t production with additional jets and b jets in pp collisions at√s = 13 TeV, JHEP 07 (2020) 125, [2003.06467]

    arXiv 2020

  5. [4]

    CMS collaboration, A. Tumasyan et al.,Differential cross section measurements for the production of top quark pairs and of additional jets using dilepton events from pp collisions at√s = 13 TeV, 2402.08486

    arXiv

  6. [5]

    Alioli, P

    S. Alioli, P. Fernandez, J. Fuster, A. Irles, S.-O. Moch, P. Uwer et al.,A new observable to measure the top-quark mass at hadron colliders, Eur. Phys. J. C73 (2013) 2438, [1303.6415]

    arXiv 2013

  7. [6]

    Bevilacqua, H

    G. Bevilacqua, H. B. Hartanto, M. Kraus, M. Schulze and M. Worek,Top quark mass studies with ttj at the LHC, JHEP 03 (2018) 169, [1710.07515]

    arXiv 2018

  8. [7]

    Alioli, J

    S. Alioli, J. Fuster, M. V. Garzelli, A. Gavardi, A. Irles, D. Melini et al.,Top-quark mass extraction from t¯tj + X events at the LHC: theory predictions, inSnowmass 2021, 3, 2022. 2203.07344

    arXiv 2021

Show all 116 references
  1. [8]

    Alioli, J

    S. Alioli, J. Fuster, M. V. Garzelli, A. Gavardi, A. Irles, D. Melini et al.,Phenomenology of ttj + X production at the LHC, JHEP 05 (2022) 146, [2202.07975]. – 22 –

    2022 arXiv

  2. [9]

    Dittmaier, P

    S. Dittmaier, P. Uwer and S. Weinzierl,NLO QCD corrections to t anti-t + jet production at hadron colliders, Phys. Rev. Lett.98 (2007) 262002, [hep-ph/0703120]

    2007 arXiv

  3. [10]

    Buccioni, J.-N

    F. Buccioni, J.-N. Lang, J. M. Lindert, P. Maierhöfer, S. Pozzorini, H. Zhang et al.,OpenLoops 2, Eur. Phys. J. C79 (2019) 866, [1907.13071]

    2019 arXiv

  4. [11]

    Bevilacqua, M

    G. Bevilacqua, M. Czakon, M. V. Garzelli, A. van Hameren, A. Kardos, C. G. Papadopoulos et al., HELAC-NLO, Comput. Phys. Commun.184 (2013) 986–997, [1110.1499]

    2013 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Alwall, R

    J. Alwall, R. Frederix, S. Frixione, V. Hirschi, F. Maltoni, O. Mattelaer et al.,The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations, JHEP 07 (2014) 079, [1405.0301]

    2014 arXiv

  6. [13]

    Alioli, S.-O

    S. Alioli, S.-O. Moch and P. Uwer,Hadronic top-quark pair-production with one jet and parton showering, JHEP 01 (2012) 137, [1110.5251]

    2012 arXiv

  7. [14]

    Bevilacqua, H

    G. Bevilacqua, H. B. Hartanto, M. Kraus and M. Worek,Top Quark Pair Production in Association with a Jet with Next-to-Leading-Order QCD Off-Shell Effects at the Large Hadron Collider, Phys. Rev. Lett.116 (2016) 052003, [1509.09242]

    2016 arXiv

  8. [15]

    Bevilacqua, H

    G. Bevilacqua, H. B. Hartanto, M. Kraus and M. Worek,Off-shell Top Quarks with One Jet at the LHC: A comprehensive analysis at NLO QCD, JHEP 11 (2016) 098, [1609.01659]

    2016 arXiv

  9. [16]

    Gütschow, J

    C. Gütschow, J. M. Lindert and M. Schönherr,Multi-jet merged top-pair production including electroweak corrections, Eur. Phys. J. C78 (2018) 317

    2018

  10. [17]

    von Manteuffel and R

    A. von Manteuffel and R. M. Schabinger,A novel approach to integration by parts reduction, Phys. Lett. B 744 (2015) 101–104, [1406.4513]

    2015 arXiv

  11. [18]

    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]

    2016 arXiv

  12. [19]

    Klappert and F

    J. Klappert and F. Lange,Reconstructing rational functions with FireFly, Comput. Phys. Commun. 247 (2020) 106951, [1904.00009]

    2020 arXiv

  13. [20]

    Peraro,FiniteFlow: multivariate functional reconstruction using finite fields and dataflow graphs, JHEP 07 (2019) 031, [1905.08019]

    T. Peraro,FiniteFlow: multivariate functional reconstruction using finite fields and dataflow graphs, JHEP 07 (2019) 031, [1905.08019]

    2019 arXiv

  14. [21]

    A. V. Smirnov and F. S. Chukharev,FIRE6: Feynman Integral REduction with modular arithmetic, Comput. Phys. Commun.247 (2020) 106877, [1901.07808]

    2020 arXiv

  15. [22]

    Klappert, S

    J. Klappert, S. Y. Klein and F. Lange,Interpolation of dense and sparse rational functions and other improvements in FireFly, Comput. Phys. Commun.264 (2021) 107968, [2004.01463]

    2021 arXiv

  16. [23]

    Klappert, F

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

    2021 arXiv

  17. [24]

    Badger, D

    S. Badger, D. Chicherin, T. Gehrmann, G. Heinrich, J. M. Henn, T. Peraro et al.,Analytic form of the full two-loop five-gluon all-plus helicity amplitude, Phys. Rev. Lett.123 (2019) 071601, [1905.03733]

    2019 arXiv

  18. [25]

    Badger, H

    S. Badger, H. B. Hartanto and S. Zoia,Two-Loop QCD Corrections to Wbb¯ Production at Hadron Colliders, Phys. Rev. Lett.127 (2021) 012001, [2102.02516]

    2021 arXiv

  19. [26]

    Badger, H

    S. Badger, H. B. Hartanto, J. Kryś and S. Zoia,Two-loop leading-colour QCD helicity amplitudes for Higgs boson production in association with a bottom-quark pair at the LHC, JHEP 11 (2021) 012, [2107.14733]

    2021 arXiv

  20. [27]

    Abreu, F

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

    2022 arXiv

  21. [28]

    Badger, H

    S. Badger, H. B. Hartanto, J. Kryś and S. Zoia,Two-loop leading colour helicity amplitudes for Wγ + j production at the LHC, JHEP 05 (2022) 035, [2201.04075]. – 23 –

    2022 arXiv

  22. [29]

    Agarwal, F

    B. Agarwal, F. Buccioni, A. von Manteuffel and L. Tancredi,Two-Loop Helicity Amplitudes for Diphoton Plus Jet Production in Full Color, Phys. Rev. Lett.127 (2021) 262001, [2105.04585]

    2021 arXiv

  23. [30]

    Badger, C

    S. Badger, C. Brønnum-Hansen, D. Chicherin, T. Gehrmann, H. B. Hartanto, J. Henn et al., Virtual QCD corrections to gluon-initiated diphoton plus jet production at hadron colliders, JHEP 11 (2021) 083, [2106.08664]

    2021 arXiv

  24. [31]

    Abreu, G

    S. Abreu, G. De Laurentis, H. Ita, M. Klinkert, B. Page and V. Sotnikov,Two-loop QCD corrections for three-photon production at hadron colliders, SciPost Phys. 15 (2023) 157, [2305.17056]

    2023 arXiv

  25. [32]

    Badger, M

    S. Badger, M. Czakon, H. B. Hartanto, R. Moodie, T. Peraro, R. Poncelet et al.,Isolated photon production in association with a jet pair through next-to-next-to-leading order in QCD, JHEP 10 (2023) 071, [2304.06682]

    2023 arXiv

  26. [33]

    Agarwal, F

    B. Agarwal, F. Buccioni, F. Devoto, G. Gambuti, A. von Manteuffel and L. Tancredi,Five-parton scattering in QCD at two loops, Phys. Rev. D109 (2024) 094025, [2311.09870]

    2024 arXiv

  27. [34]

    De Laurentis, H

    G. De Laurentis, H. Ita, M. Klinkert and V. Sotnikov,Double-virtual NNLO QCD corrections for five-parton scattering. I. The gluon channel, Phys. Rev. D109 (2024) 094023, [2311.10086]

    2024 arXiv

  28. [35]

    De Laurentis, H

    G. De Laurentis, H. Ita and V. Sotnikov,Double-virtual NNLO QCD corrections for five-parton scattering. II. The quark channels, Phys. Rev. D109 (2024) 094024, [2311.18752]

    2024 arXiv

  29. [36]

    Badger, H

    S. Badger, H. B. Hartanto, Z. Wu, Y. Zhang and S. Zoia,Two-loop amplitudes forO(α2 s) corrections toW γγproduction at the LHC, 2409.08146

    arXiv

  30. [37]

    Badger, H

    S. Badger, H. B. Hartanto, R. Poncelet, Z. Wu, Y. Zhang and S. Zoia,Full-colour double-virtual amplitudes for associated production of a Higgs boson with a bottom-quark pair at the LHC, 2412.06519

    arXiv

  31. [38]

    Agarwal, G

    B. Agarwal, G. Heinrich, S. P. Jones, M. Kerner, S. Y. Klein, J. Lang et al.,Two-loop amplitudes for ttH production: the quark-initiated Nf-part, JHEP 05 (2024) 013, [2402.03301]

    2024 arXiv

  32. [39]

    Gluza, K

    J. Gluza, K. Kajda and D. A. Kosower,Towards a Basis for Planar Two-Loop Integrals, Phys. Rev. D 83 (2011) 045012, [1009.0472]

    2011 arXiv

  33. [40]

    Ita,Two-loop Integrand Decomposition into Master Integrals and Surface Terms, Phys

    H. Ita,Two-loop Integrand Decomposition into Master Integrals and Surface Terms, Phys. Rev. D 94 (2016) 116015, [1510.05626]

    2016 arXiv

  34. [41]

    K. J. Larsen and Y. Zhang,Integration-by-parts reductions from unitarity cuts and algebraic geometry, Phys. Rev. D93 (2016) 041701, [1511.01071]

    2016 arXiv

  35. [42]

    Z. Wu, J. Boehm, R. Ma, H. Xu and Y. Zhang,NeatIBP 1.0, a package generating small-size integration-by-parts relations for Feynman integrals, Comput. Phys. Commun.295 (2024) 108999, [2305.08783]

    2024 arXiv

  36. [43]

    Gehrmann, J

    T. Gehrmann, J. M. Henn and N. A. Lo Presti,Analytic form of the two-loop planar five-gluon all-plus-helicity amplitude in QCD, Phys. Rev. Lett.116 (2016) 062001, [1511.05409]

    2016 arXiv

  37. [44]

    C. G. Papadopoulos, D. Tommasini and C. Wever,The Pentabox Master Integrals with the Simplified Differential Equations approach, JHEP 04 (2016) 078, [1511.09404]

    2016 arXiv

  38. [45]

    Abreu, B

    S. Abreu, B. Page and M. Zeng,Differential equations from unitarity cuts: nonplanar hexa-box integrals, JHEP 01 (2019) 006, [1807.11522]

    2019 arXiv

  39. [46]

    Chicherin, T

    D. Chicherin, T. Gehrmann, J. M. Henn, N. A. Lo Presti, V. Mitev and P. Wasser,Analytic result for the nonplanar hexa-box integrals, JHEP 03 (2019) 042, [1809.06240]

    2019 arXiv

  40. [47]

    Chicherin, T

    D. Chicherin, T. Gehrmann, J. M. Henn, P. Wasser, Y. Zhang and S. Zoia,All Master Integrals for Three-Jet Production at Next-to-Next-to-Leading Order, Phys. Rev. Lett.123 (2019) 041603, [1812.11160]

    2019 arXiv

  41. [48]

    Abreu, L

    S. Abreu, L. J. Dixon, E. Herrmann, B. Page and M. Zeng,The two-loop five-point amplitude in N = 4 super-Yang-Mills theory, Phys. Rev. Lett.122 (2019) 121603, [1812.08941]. – 24 –

    2019 arXiv

  42. [49]

    Abreu, H

    S. Abreu, H. Ita, F. Moriello, B. Page, W. Tschernow and M. Zeng,Two-Loop Integrals for Planar Five-Point One-Mass Processes, JHEP 11 (2020) 117, [2005.04195]

    2020 arXiv

  43. [50]

    D. D. Canko, C. G. Papadopoulos and N. Syrrakos,Analytic representation of all planar two-loop five-point Master Integrals with one off-shell leg, JHEP 01 (2021) 199, [2009.13917]

    2021 arXiv

  44. [51]

    Abreu, H

    S. Abreu, H. Ita, B. Page and W. Tschernow,Two-loop hexa-box integrals for non-planar five-point one-mass processes, JHEP 03 (2022) 182, [2107.14180]

    2022 arXiv

  45. [52]

    Kardos, C

    A. Kardos, C. G. Papadopoulos, A. V. Smirnov, N. Syrrakos and C. Wever,Two-loop non-planar hexa-box integrals with one massive leg, JHEP 05 (2022) 033, [2201.07509]

    2022 arXiv

  46. [53]

    Abreu, D

    S. Abreu, D. Chicherin, H. Ita, B. Page, V. Sotnikov, W. Tschernow et al.,All Two-Loop Feynman Integrals for Five-Point One-Mass Scattering, Phys. Rev. Lett.132 (2024) 141601, [2306.15431]

    2024 arXiv

  47. [54]

    Gehrmann, J

    T. Gehrmann, J. M. Henn and N. A. Lo Presti,Pentagon functions for massless planar scattering amplitudes, JHEP 10 (2018) 103, [1807.09812]

    2018 arXiv

  48. [55]

    Chicherin and V

    D. Chicherin and V. Sotnikov,Pentagon Functions for Scattering of Five Massless Particles, JHEP 20 (2020) 167, [2009.07803]

    2020 arXiv

  49. [56]

    Chicherin, V

    D. Chicherin, V. Sotnikov and S. Zoia,Pentagon functions for one-mass planar scattering amplitudes, JHEP 01 (2022) 096, [2110.10111]

    2022 arXiv

  50. [57]

    Gehrmann, J

    T. Gehrmann, J. Henn, P. Jakubčík, J. Lim, C. C. Mella, N. Syrrakos et al.,Graded transcendental functions: an application to four-point amplitudes with one off-shell leg, 2410.19088

    arXiv

  51. [58]

    Febres Cordero, G

    F. Febres Cordero, G. Figueiredo, M. Kraus, B. Page and L. Reina,Two-loop master integrals for leading-color pp → ttH amplitudes with a light-quark loop, JHEP 07 (2024) 084, [2312.08131]

    2024 arXiv

  52. [59]

    H. A. Chawdhry, M. L. Czakon, A. Mitov and R. Poncelet,NNLO QCD corrections to three-photon production at the LHC, JHEP 02 (2020) 057, [1911.00479]

    2020 arXiv

  53. [60]

    Kallweit, V

    S. Kallweit, V. Sotnikov and M. Wiesemann,Triphoton production at hadron colliders in NNLO QCD, Phys. Lett. B812 (2021) 136013, [2010.04681]

    2021 arXiv

  54. [61]

    H. A. Chawdhry, M. Czakon, A. Mitov and R. Poncelet,NNLO QCD corrections to diphoton production with an additional jet at the LHC, JHEP 09 (2021) 093, [2105.06940]

    2021 arXiv

  55. [62]

    Czakon, A

    M. Czakon, A. Mitov and R. Poncelet,Next-to-Next-to-Leading Order Study of Three-Jet Production at the LHC, Phys. Rev. Lett.127 (2021) 152001, [2106.05331]

    2021 arXiv

  56. [63]

    Badger, T

    S. Badger, T. Gehrmann, M. Marcoli and R. Moodie,Next-to-leading order QCD corrections to diphoton-plus-jet production through gluon fusion at the LHC, Phys. Lett. B824 (2022) 136802, [2109.12003]

    2022 arXiv

  57. [64]

    X. Chen, T. Gehrmann, E. W. N. Glover, A. Huss and M. Marcoli,Automation of antenna subtraction in colour space: gluonic processes, JHEP 10 (2022) 099, [2203.13531]

    2022 arXiv

  58. [65]

    Alvarez, J

    M. Alvarez, J. Cantero, M. Czakon, J. Llorente, A. Mitov and R. Poncelet,NNLO QCD corrections to event shapes at the LHC, JHEP 03 (2023) 129, [2301.01086]

    2023 arXiv

  59. [66]

    H. B. Hartanto, R. Poncelet, A. Popescu and S. Zoia,Next-to-next-to-leading order QCD corrections to Wbb¯ production at the LHC, Phys. Rev. D106 (2022) 074016, [2205.01687]

    2022 arXiv

  60. [67]

    H. B. Hartanto, R. Poncelet, A. Popescu and S. Zoia,Flavour anti-kT algorithm applied toW b¯b production at the LHC, 2209.03280

    arXiv

  61. [68]

    Buonocore, S

    L. Buonocore, S. Devoto, S. Kallweit, J. Mazzitelli, L. Rottoli and C. Savoini,Associated production of a W boson and massive bottom quarks at next-to-next-to-leading order in QCD, Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023) 074032, [2212.04954]

    2023 arXiv

  62. [69]

    Catani, S

    S. Catani, S. Devoto, M. Grazzini, S. Kallweit, J. Mazzitelli and C. Savoini,Higgs Boson Production in Association with a Top-Antitop Quark Pair in Next-to-Next-to-Leading Order QCD, Phys. Rev. Lett.130 (2023) 111902, [2210.07846]. – 25 –

    2023 arXiv

  63. [70]

    Buonocore, S

    L. Buonocore, S. Devoto, M. Grazzini, S. Kallweit, J. Mazzitelli, L. Rottoli et al.,Precise Predictions for the Associated Production of a W Boson with a Top-Antitop Quark Pair at the LHC, Phys. Rev. Lett.131 (2023) 231901, [2306.16311]

    2023 arXiv

  64. [71]

    Mazzitelli, V

    J. Mazzitelli, V. Sotnikov and M. Wiesemann,Next-to-next-to-leading order event generation for Z-boson production in association with a bottom-quark pair, 2404.08598

    arXiv

  65. [72]

    Devoto, M

    S. Devoto, M. Grazzini, S. Kallweit, J. Mazzitelli and C. Savoini,Precise predictions fort¯tH production at the LHC: inclusive cross section and differential distributions, 2411.15340

    arXiv

  66. [73]

    Biello, J

    C. Biello, J. Mazzitelli, A. Sankar, M. Wiesemann and G. Zanderighi,Higgs boson production in association with massive bottom quarks at NNLO+PS, 2412.09510

    arXiv

  67. [74]

    Badger, M

    S. Badger, M. Becchetti, E. Chaubey, R. Marzucca and F. Sarandrea,One-loop QCD helicity amplitudes for pp→ ttj to O(ε2), JHEP 06 (2022) 066, [2201.12188]

    2022 arXiv

  68. [75]

    Badger, M

    S. Badger, M. Becchetti, E. Chaubey and R. Marzucca,Two-loop master integrals for a planar topology contributing to pp→ttj, JHEP 01 (2023) 156, [2210.17477]

    2023 arXiv

  69. [77]

    J. L. Bourjaily et al.,Functions Beyond Multiple Polylogarithms for Precision Collider Physics, in Snowmass 2021, 3, 2022. 2203.07088

    2021 arXiv

  70. [78]

    J. M. Henn,Multiloop integrals in dimensional regularization made simple, Phys. Rev. Lett.110 (2013) 251601, [1304.1806]

    2013 arXiv

  71. [79]

    Moriello,Generalised power series expansions for the elliptic planar families of Higgs + jet production at two loops, JHEP 01 (2020) 150, [1907.13234]

    F. Moriello,Generalised power series expansions for the elliptic planar families of Higgs + jet production at two loops, JHEP 01 (2020) 150, [1907.13234]

    2020 arXiv

  72. [80]

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

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

    2021 arXiv

  73. [81]

    Peraro and L

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

    2019 arXiv

  74. [82]

    Peraro and L

    T. Peraro and L. Tancredi,Tensor decomposition for bosonic and fermionic scattering amplitudes, Phys. Rev. D103 (2021) 054042, [2012.00820]

    2021 arXiv

  75. [83]

    Buccioni, P

    F. Buccioni, P. A. Kreer, X. Liu and L. Tancredi,One loop QCD corrections to gg→ ttH at O ϵ2 , JHEP 03 (2024) 093, [2312.10015]

    2024 arXiv

  76. [84]

    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

  77. [85]

    Mitov and S

    A. Mitov and S. Moch,The Singular behavior of massive QCD amplitudes, JHEP 05 (2007) 001, [hep-ph/0612149]

    2007 arXiv

  78. [86]

    Czakon, A

    M. Czakon, A. Mitov and S. Moch,Heavy-quark production in gluon fusion at two loops in QCD, Nucl. Phys. B 798 (2008) 210–250, [0707.4139]

    2008 arXiv

  79. [87]

    Melnikov and T

    K. Melnikov and T. van Ritbergen,The Three loop on-shell renormalization of QCD and QED, Nucl. Phys. B 591 (2000) 515–546, [hep-ph/0005131]

    2000 arXiv

  80. [88]

    Catani,The singular behaviour of QCD amplitudes at two-loop order, Phys

    S. Catani,The singular behaviour of QCD amplitudes at two-loop order, Phys. Lett. B427 (1998) 161–171

    1998

  81. [89]

    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

  82. [90]

    Becher and M

    T. Becher and M. Neubert,On the structure of infrared singularities of gauge-theory amplitudes, JHEP 06 (2009) 081. – 26 –

    2009

  83. [91]

    Gardi and L

    E. Gardi and L. Magnea,Factorization constraints for soft anomalous dimensions in QCD scattering amplitudes, JHEP 03 (2009) 079, [0901.1091]

    2009 arXiv

  84. [92]

    Gardi and L

    E. Gardi and L. Magnea,Infrared singularities in QCD amplitudes, Nuovo Cim. C 32N5-6 (2009) 137–157, [0908.3273]

    2009 arXiv

  85. [93]

    Catani, S

    S. Catani, S. Dittmaier and Z. Trocsanyi,One loop singular behavior of QCD and SUSY QCD amplitudes with massive partons, Phys. Lett. B500 (2001) 149–160, [hep-ph/0011222]

    2001 arXiv

  86. [94]

    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

  87. [95]

    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

  88. [96]

    Kleiss and W

    R. Kleiss and W. J. Stirling,Spinor Techniques for Calculating p anti-p —> W+- / Z0 + Jets, Nucl. Phys. B 262 (1985) 235–262

    1985

  89. [97]

    Nogueira,Automatic Feynman Graph Generation, J

    P. Nogueira,Automatic Feynman Graph Generation, J. Comput. Phys.105 (1993) 279–289

    1993

  90. [98]

    Ruijl, T

    B. Ruijl, T. Ueda and J. Vermaseren,FORM version 4.2, 1707.06453

    arXiv

  91. [99]

    F. V. Tkachov,A theorem on analytical calculability of 4-loop renormalization group functions, Phys. Lett. B100 (1981) 65–68

    1981

  92. [100]

    K. G. Chetyrkin and F. V. Tkachov,Integration by parts: The algorithm to calculateβ-functions in 4 loops, Nucl. Phys. B 192 (1981) 159–204

    1981

  93. [101]

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

    S. Laporta,High-precision calculation of multiloop Feynman integrals by difference equations, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A15 (2000) 5087–5159, [hep-ph/0102033]

    2000 arXiv

  94. [102]

    J. M. Henn, A. Matijašić and J. Miczajka,One-loop hexagon integral to higher orders in the dimensional regulator, JHEP 01 (2023) 096, [2210.13505]

    2023 arXiv

  95. [103]

    Badger, J

    S. Badger, J. Kryś, R. Moodie and S. Zoia,Lepton-pair scattering with an off-shell and an on-shell photon at two loops in massless QED, JHEP 11 (2023) 041, [2307.03098]

    2023 arXiv

  96. [104]

    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

  97. [105]

    J. M. Henn, A. Matijašić, J. Miczajka, T. Peraro, Y. Xu and Y. Zhang,A computation of two-loop six-point Feynman integrals in dimensional regularization, JHEP 08 (2024) 027, [2403.19742]

    2024 arXiv

  98. [106]

    Y. Liu, A. Matijašić, J. Miczajka, Y. Xu, Y. Xu and Y. Zhang,An Analytic Computation of Three-Loop Five-Point Feynman Integrals, 2411.18697

    arXiv

  99. [107]

    Chen,Iterated path integrals, Bull

    K.-T. Chen,Iterated path integrals, Bull. Am. Math. Soc.83 (1977) 831–879

    1977

  100. [108]

    Abreu, R

    S. Abreu, R. Britto and C. Duhr,The SAGEX review on scattering amplitudes Chapter 3: Mathematical structures in Feynman integrals, J. Phys. A55 (2022) 443004, [2203.13014]

    2022 arXiv

  101. [109]

    A. B. Goncharov, M. Spradlin, C. Vergu and A. Volovich,Classical Polylogarithms for Amplitudes and Wilson Loops, Phys. Rev. Lett.105 (2010) 151605, [1006.5703]

    2010 arXiv

  102. [110]

    Liu, Y.-Q

    X. Liu, Y.-Q. Ma and C.-Y. Wang,A Systematic and Efficient Method to Compute Multi-loop Master Integrals, Phys. Lett. B779 (2018) 353–357, [1711.09572]

    2018 arXiv

  103. [111]

    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]

    2023 arXiv

  104. [112]

    H. R. P. Ferguson and D. H. Bailey,A Polynomial Time, Numerically Stable Integer Relation Algorithm, RNR Technical Report RNR-91-032(1992)

    1992

  105. [113]

    Numerical evaluation of two-loop QCD helicity amplitudes forgg → t¯tg at leading colour

    S. Badger, M. Becchetti, C. Brancaccio, H. B. Hartanto and S. Zoia,Ancillary files for “Numerical evaluation of two-loop QCD helicity amplitudes forgg → t¯tg at leading colour”, 12, 2024. 10.5281/zenodo.14473301. – 27 –

    2024 doi

  106. [114]

    Caron-Huot and J

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

    2014 arXiv

  107. [115]

    https://gitlab.com/pentagon-functions/PentagonFunctions-cpp

  108. [116]

    Brancaccio,Towards two-loop QCD corrections topp → t¯tj, in17th International Workshop on Top Quark Physics, 11, 2024

    C. Brancaccio,Towards two-loop QCD corrections topp → t¯tj, in17th International Workshop on Top Quark Physics, 11, 2024. 2411.10856. – 28 –

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.