Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 1 cited by

Towards two-loop QCD corrections to $ \mathbf{pp \to t \bar{t} j}$

T0 review · 3 major / 3 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper reports first numerical evaluations of the two-loop leading-colour helicity amplitude for $gg\to t\bar{t}g$, with the infrared and ultraviolet poles identified analytically, supplying the hardest missing double-virtual…

desk verdict First finite-remainder numbers for gg->tbar tg at two loops, but the finite part is exactly what is not yet independently constrained. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.10856 v1 pith:AENCDONO submitted 2024-11-16 hep-ph

Colomba Brancaccio This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-ph PACS 12.38.Bx
keywords two-loopamplitudesQCDcorrectionstop-antitop-jetproductionhelicityleadingcolourellipticFeynmanintegralsfiniteremainders
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-antitop-jet production is the largest associated-production process at hadron colliders, but its complete next-to-next-to-leading-order (NNLO) QCD prediction is still out of reach because the two-loop amplitudes have not been computed. This paper focuses on the hardest channel, $gg\to t\bar{t}g$, and presents the framework and first numerical results: a special-function basis in which the elliptic integrals enter only at order $\varepsilon^0$, so the ultraviolet and infrared poles can be identified analytically and the finite remainder extracted. The concrete result is Table 1, which lists five benchmark numerical values of the leading-colour finite remainder for the all-plus helicity configuration. If these values are correct, they remove the gluon-channel double-virtual blockage for NNLO $pp\to t\bar{t}j$ predictions.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing machinery is the special-function basis built on the pentagon-box master integrals, where a pentagon-box topology is a two-loop diagram formed by a pentagon and a box sharing a loop. The six leading-colour integral families (three hexagon-triangle and three pentagon-box topologies) are reduced to the pentagon-box set, and the amplitude is written as $\sum_i \sum_{k=-4}^{0} \varepsilon^k r_{ki}(\vec x) F_i(\vec x)$. The basis is chosen so that most $F_i$ are multiple polylogarithms and the few elliptic functions contribute only from $\varepsilon^0$ onward; this separation is what makes the pole structure analytically accessible. The finite remainders are then obtained by evaluating the special functions through one-dimensional series expansions, using differential equations.

What would settle it

Recompute the five phase-space points of Table 1 with a different integral-reduction strategy and a different numerical evaluator; any disagreement larger than the quoted precision would show that the diagram mapping or the special-function evaluation is wrong.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The author establishes that the two-loop leading-colour helicity amplitude for $gg\to t\bar{t}g$ can be brought to a numerically evaluable form: all master integrals of the hexagon-triangle topologies are mapped to the previously computed pentagon-box master integrals, and the amplitude is expanded in a basis of special functions where the elliptic parts only contribute starting at order $\varepsilon^0$. With this structure the ultraviolet and infrared poles are identified analytically and checked against UV renormalization and IR subtraction, and the finite remainder in the 't Hooft–Veltman scheme is extracted. The central concrete result is Table 1, which lists five phase-space values of $A^{(2)}_{\mathrm{LC}}(+++++; n_t n_{\bar t})$ in the physical region; these are reported as the first numerical evaluations of this finite remainder.

Load-bearing premise

The calculation assumes without proof that the more complicated loop diagrams can be rewritten in terms of the previously published pentagon-box integrals, and that those published integrals are correct.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The gluon channel is the most difficult production channel; with its finite remainder in hand, the double-virtual contribution at leading colour can be combined with one-loop and real-radiation contributions to move toward NNLO predictions for $pp\to t\bar{t}j$.
  • The five benchmark phase-space points in Table 1 give independent groups a concrete numerical target for checking their own calculations of this two-loop amplitude.
  • The demonstrated separation of elliptic functions away from the pole order shows that analytic UV and IR pole identification remains feasible even when elliptic Feynman integrals are present.
  • The framework produces the finite remainder in the 't Hooft–Veltman scheme, the scheme-dependent object needed for a future NNLO phenomenology analysis.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Beyond the paper: the same elliptic-sector separation could be applied to other 2→3 processes with internal massive propagators, such as the quark-initiated channels of $pp\to t\bar{t}j$, where the pole structure is likely to be handled in the same way.
  • Beyond the paper: if the hexagon-to-pentagon mapping is exact and the special-function basis is reconstructed analytically rather than numerically, the amplitude could be evaluated much faster over full phase space, opening the way to differential distributions at NNLO.
  • Beyond the paper: the benchmark values could be used to quantify the size of subleading-colour corrections once a full-colour computation becomes available, telling whether the leading-colour approximation is sufficient for precision phenomenology.
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 / 3 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports on progress toward the two-loop QCD amplitudes for pp -> tbar t j, focusing on the gg -> tbar t g channel at leading colour. After colour decomposition and a spinor-helicity setup, the amplitude is reduced to master integrals of three pentagon-box families, with hexagon-triangle topologies claimed to be mapped to them. The paper describes a special-function basis in which elliptic functions start only at order epsilon^0, allowing analytic identification of UV and IR poles, and presents a table of five numerical evaluations of the finite remainder A^(2)_LC(+++++; n_t n_tbar) obtained by evaluating the basis with DiffExp at benchmark phase-space points.

Significance. If correct, these are the first numerical two-loop finite remainders for the leading-colour gg -> tbar t g helicity amplitude, a key ingredient for NNLO predictions for ttbar+jet production. The paper deserves credit for the analytic structure: the pole structure is checked against established UV renormalization and IR subtraction, the Ward identity is used for gauge invariance, and the construction of a basis where elliptic sectors enter only at epsilon^0 is a useful methodological step. However, the numerical finite part, which is the only new quantitative result, lacks independent verification, and the central topology mapping is not documented; the result is therefore promising but not yet validated.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3 / Table 1] The central claim of the paper is the set of finite remainders A^(2)_LC(+++++; n_t n_tbar) in Table 1. These are values at order epsilon^0, but the checks reported in Section 3 (Ward identity and analytic matching of UV/IR poles) are insensitive to an error in the epsilon^0 coefficient; a bug in the special-function basis, in the DiffExp evaluation, or in the finite-field reconstruction would change every entry in Table 1 while leaving these checks unchanged. The manuscript should provide an independent numerical cross-check of the finite remainder at the benchmark points, for example by sector decomposition or by a second evaluation method, and should state the numerical precision of the quoted digits.
  2. [Section 2, Figs. 1d-1f] The reduction of the hexagon-triangle master integrals to the pentagon-box families of Refs. [24,25] is asserted without proof. This mapping is load-bearing for the finite part because elliptic contributions are stated to enter only at order epsilon^0, so the analytic pole check cannot detect a mapping error at finite order. The mapping should be documented in an appendix or supplied as a transformation table, or validated independently.
  3. [Table 1 caption] The caption states that the rationalised kinematic values are 'available on request'. Since the numerical values in Table 1 are the only new quantitative result, the exact kinematics (rationalised invariants, signs, and values of tr5) and the corresponding numerical outputs should be provided in an ancillary file for reproducibility. 'Available on request' is not sufficient for a published result.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Section 2, Eq. (1)] The variable x_vec is introduced as 'a set of momentum twistor variables or Mandelstam invariants'; the manuscript should specify which choice is actually used in the numerical evaluations in Table 1.
  2. [Section 3] The computation of the mass counterterm is mentioned but not described; a brief statement of the renormalization scheme (on-shell vs MSbar) and how the counterterm is implemented in the finite remainder would be helpful.
  3. [Section 3] The phrase 'first numerical evaluations' should be accompanied by an estimate of the numerical accuracy of the DiffExp evaluation; Table 1 quotes four significant figures without stating how many are stable.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the finite remainders are new numerical outputs built on independently published master integrals and standard evaluation tools, not on the result being derived.

full rationale

Walking the derivation chain, the paper starts from QGRAF diagram generation, performs colour and spinor-helicity decomposition, reduces scalar integrals to master integrals via IBP identities with NeatIBP/FiniteFlow, maps hexagon-triangle topologies to pentagon-box families, inserts the master integrals of Refs. [24,25], and finally evaluates the special-function basis numerically with DiffExp to produce the Table 1 finite remainders. No step defines the target quantity in terms of itself, fits a parameter to the finite remainder and then calls it a prediction, or invokes a uniqueness theorem to forbid alternatives. The heavy reliance on Refs. [24,25] is a dependence on previously published master integrals with their own derivations, not a circular reduction: the present paper's output is a nontrivial linear combination of those integrals with reconstructed rational coefficients. Moreover, Refs. [24,25] are not authored by the present author, and even treating them as same-group citations, hard rule 4 applies because they are independent published results with stated assumptions that do not include the target amplitude. The stated Ward identity and pole checks are weaker than a full finite-part validation, and the skeptic's concern about the unverified epsilon^0 evaluation is a legitimate correctness risk, but it is not circularity: an unchecked numerical evaluation is not an input recycled as output. The paper is self-contained as a computation report and contains no definitional or fitted-input circular step.

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

No free parameters are fitted; the amplitude depends only on standard inputs. The main load-bearing assumptions are the correctness of the master integrals from the author's collaboration, the leading-colour approximation, and the existence and form of the special function basis.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The two-loop amplitude is computed in the leading-colour approximation.
    Section 2 states this approximation is expected to give a good estimation of the double virtual contribution, but no numerical validation of the approximation is provided.
  • domain assumption The master integrals for the pentagon-box topologies from Refs. [24,25] are correct and complete.
    The amplitude reduction maps all hexagon-triangle master integrals to these integrals; the paper does not re-derive them.
  • ad hoc to paper A special function basis exists in which elliptic contributions start only at order epsilon^0 and the remaining functions are algebraically independent polylogarithms.
    Section 2 extends Refs. [34-37] to construct such a basis; the property is asserted, not proven in this proceedings.
  • domain assumption Dimensional regularization and the 't Hooft-Veltman scheme are used throughout.
    Standard choice for QCD amplitudes; the pole checks are performed in this scheme.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Towards two-loop QCD corrections to $ \mathbf{pp \to t \bar{t} j}$." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/AENCDONO

@misc{pith2026241110856,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Towards two-loop QCD corrections to $ \mathbfpp \to t \bart j$},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/AENCDONO}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.10856}
}
abstract

I discuss the status of the computation of the two-loop QCD corrections to top-quark pair production associated with a jet at hadron colliders. This amplitude is a missing ingredient for next-to-next-to-leading order (NNLO) QCD predictions. I briefly present computational techniques to tackle the algebraic and analytic complexities of two-loop multi-scale amplitudes, in particular where massive propagators give rise to elliptic Feynman integrals. I then describe how a special function basis for the helicity amplitudes is obtained and present first numerical evaluations for the finite remainders of the $gg\to t\bar{t}g$ channel, after the infrared and ultraviolet poles have been identified analytically.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.10856 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The integral families contributing to the two-loop [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗

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

    hep-ph 2024-12 conditional novelty 8.0 of 10

    The two-loop finite remainders for gg to ttbar g at leading colour are evaluated numerically at one benchmark point, with elliptic functions confined to the finite part.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

43 extracted references · 32 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [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, 092001 (2017), doi:10.1103 /PhysRevD.95.092001

    work page 2017

  2. [2]

    ATLAS collaboration, M. Aaboud et al., Measurements of differential cross sections of top quark pair production in association with jets in pp collisions at ps = 13 TeV using the ATLAS detector, JHEP 10, 159 (2018), doi:10.1007 /jhep10(2018)159

    work page 2018

  3. [3]

    CMS collaboration, A. M. Sirunyan et al.,Measurement of the cross section fortt production with additional jets and b jets in pp collisions at ps = 13 TeV, JHEP 07, 125 (2020), doi:10.1007/jhep07(2020)125

    doi:10.1007/jhep07(2020)125 2020

  4. [4]

    CMS collaboration, Differential cross section measurements for the production of top quark pairs and of additional jets using dilepton events from pp collisions atps = 13 TeV,(2024), 2402.08486

    arXiv 2024

  5. [5]

    Alioli, P

    S. Alioli, P . Fernandez, J. Fuster, A. Irles, S. Moch, P . Uwer and M. Vos,A new observable to measure the top-quark mass at hadron colliders , Eur. Phys. J. C 73, 2438 (2013), doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-013-2438-2

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-013-2438-2 2013

  6. [6]

    Dittmaier, P

    S. Dittmaier, P . Uwer and S. Weinzierl, NLO QCD Corrections to t t + jet Production at Hadron Colliders , Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 262002 (2007), doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.98.262002

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.98.262002 2007

  7. [7]

    Dittmaier, P

    S. Dittmaier, P . Uwer and S. Weinzierl,Hadronic top-quark pair production in association with a hard jet at next-to-leading order QCD: Phenomenological studies for the Tevatron and the LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C 59, 625 (2009), doi:10.1140 /epjc/s10052-008-0816-y

    work page 2009

  8. [8]

    Melnikov and M

    K. Melnikov and M. Schulze, NLO QCD corrections to top quark pair production in association with one hard jet at hadron colliders , Nucl. Phys. B 840, 129 (2010), doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2010.07.003

    work page doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2010.07.003 2010

Show all 43 references
  1. [9]

    Alioli, S.-O

    S. Alioli, S.-O. Moch and P . Uwer, Hadronic top-quark pair-production with one jet and parton showering, JHEP 01, 137 (2012), doi:10.1007 /jhep01(2012)137

    2012

  2. [10]

    Czakon, H

    M. Czakon, H. B. Hartanto, M. Kraus and M. Worek, Matching the Nagy-Soper parton shower at next-to-leading order, JHEP 06, 033 (2015), doi:10.1007 /JHEP06(2015)033

    2015

  3. [11]

    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, 052003 (2016), doi:10.1103 /PhysRevLett.116.052003

    2016

  4. [12]

    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, 098 (2016), doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2016)098

    2016 doi

  5. [13]

    Gütschow, J

    C. Gütschow, J. M. Lindert and M. Schönherr,Multi-jet merged top-pair production includ- ing electroweak corrections, Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 317 (2018), doi:10.1140 /epjc/s10052- 018-5804-2

    2018

  6. [14]

    Badger, M

    S. Badger, M. Czakon, H. B. Hartanto, R. Moodie, T . Peraro, R. Poncelet and S. Zoia, Isolated photon production in association with a jet pair through next-to-next-to-leading order in QCD, JHEP 10, 071 (2023), doi:10.1007 /JHEP10(2023)071. 6 SciPost Physics Proceedings Submission

    2023

  7. [15]

    Abreu, G

    S. Abreu, G. De Laurentis, H. Ita, M. Klinkert, B. Page and V . Sotnikov,Two-loop QCD cor- rections for three-photon production at hadron colliders, SciPost Phys. 15(4), 157 (2023), doi:10.21468/SciPostPhys.15.4.157

    2023 doi

  8. [16]

    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. D 109, 094025 (2024), doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.094025

    2024 doi

  9. [17]

    De Laurentis, H

    G. De Laurentis, H. Ita, M. Klinkert and V . Sotnikov, Double-virtual NNLO QCD correc- tions for five-parton scattering. I. The gluon channel , Phys. Rev. D 109, 094023 (2024), doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.094023

    2024 doi

  10. [18]

    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. D 109, 094024 (2024), doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.094024

    2024 doi

  11. [19]

    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, 042 (2022), doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2022)042

    2022 doi

  12. [20]

    Badger, H

    S. Badger, H. B. Hartanto, J. Kry ´s and S. Zoia, Two-loop leading colour he- licity amplitudes for W ±γ + j production at the LHC , JHEP 05, 035 (2022), doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2022)035

    2022 doi

  13. [21]

    Badger, H

    S. Badger, H. B. Hartanto, Z. Wu, Y. Zhang and S. Zoia, Two-loop amplitudes for O(α2 s ) corrections to Wγγ production at the LHC (2024), 2409.08146

    2024 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Agarwal, G

    B. Agarwal, G. Heinrich, S. P . Jones, M. Kerner, S. Y. Klein, J. Lang, V . Magerya and A. Olsson, Two-loop amplitudes for t tH production: the quark-initiated N f -part, JHEP 05, 013 (2024), doi:10.1007 /JHEP05(2024)013

    2024

  15. [23]

    Badger, M

    S. Badger, M. Becchetti, E. Chaubey , R. Marzucca and F . Sarandrea,One-loop QCD helicity amplitudes for pp→ tt j to O(ϵ2), JHEP 06, 066 (2022), doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2022)066

    2022 doi

  16. [24]

    Badger, M

    S. Badger, M. Becchetti, E. Chaubey and R. Marzucca, Two-loop master inte- grals for a planar topology contributing to pp →tt j, JHEP 01, 156 (2023), doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2023)156

    2023 doi

  17. [25]

    Badger, M

    S. Badger, M. Becchetti, N. Giraudo and S. Zoia, Two-loop integrals for t t+jet pro- duction at hadron colliders in the leading colour approximation , JHEP 07, 073 (2024), doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2024)073

    2024 doi

  18. [26]

    Nogueira, Automatic Feynman graph generation , J

    P . Nogueira, Automatic Feynman graph generation , J. Comput. Phys 105, 279 (1993), doi:10.1006/jcph.1993.1074

    1993

  19. [27]

    Badger, J

    S. Badger, J. Henn, J. C. Plefka and S. Zoia, Scattering Amplitudes in Quantum Field Theory, Lect. Notes Phys. 1021 (2024), doi:10.1007 /978-3-031-46987-9

    2024

  20. [28]

    F . V . Tkachov,A theorem on analytical calculability of 4-loop renormalization group func- tions, Phys. Lett. B 100, 65 (1981), doi:10.1016 /0370-2693(81)90288-4

    1981

  21. [29]

    K. G. Chetyrkin and F . V . Tkachov, Integration by parts: The algorithm to calculate β- functions in 4 loops, Nucl. Phys. B 192, 159 (1981), doi:10.1016/0550-3213(81)90199- 1. 7 SciPost Physics Proceedings Submission

    1981 doi

  22. [30]

    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, 108999 (2024), doi:10.1016 /j.cpc.2023.108999

    2024

  23. [31]

    Peraro,Scattering amplitudes over finite fields and multivariate functional reconstruction, JHEP 12, 030 (2016), doi:10.1007 /JHEP12(2016)030

    T . Peraro,Scattering amplitudes over finite fields and multivariate functional reconstruction, JHEP 12, 030 (2016), doi:10.1007 /JHEP12(2016)030

    2016

  24. [32]

    Peraro,FiniteFlow: multivariate functional reconstruction using finite fields and dataflow graphs, JHEP 07, 031 (2019), doi:10.1007 /JHEP07(2019)031

    T . Peraro,FiniteFlow: multivariate functional reconstruction using finite fields and dataflow graphs, JHEP 07, 031 (2019), doi:10.1007 /JHEP07(2019)031

    2019

  25. [33]

    J. L. Bourjaily et al., Functions Beyond Multiple Polylogarithms for Precision Collider Physics, In Snowmass 2021 (2022), 2203.07088

    2022 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Gehrmann, J

    T . Gehrmann, J. M. Henn and N. A. Lo Presti, Pentagon functions for massless planar scattering amplitudes, JHEP 10, 103 (2018), doi:10.1007 /JHEP10(2018)103

    2018

  27. [35]

    Chicherin and V

    D. Chicherin and V . Sotnikov,Pentagon Functions for Scattering of Five Massless Particles, JHEP 20, 167 (2020), doi:10.1007 /JHEP12(2020)167

    2020

  28. [36]

    Chicherin, V

    D. Chicherin, V . Sotnikov and S. Zoia, Pentagon functions for one-mass planar scattering amplitudes, JHEP 01, 096 (2022), doi:10.1007 /JHEP01(2022)096

    2022

  29. [37]

    Abreu, D

    S. Abreu, D. Chicherin, H. Ita, B. Page, V . Sotnikov, W . Tschernow and S. Zoia,All Two- Loop Feynman Integrals for Five-Point One-Mass Scattering, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 141601 (2024), doi:10.1103 /PhysRevLett.132.141601

    2024

  30. [38]

    Kleiss and W

    R. Kleiss and W . J. Stirling, Spinor Techniques for Calculating p anti-p —> W+- / Z0 + Jets, Nucl. Phys. B 262, 235 (1985), doi:10.1016 /0550-3213(85)90285-8

    1985

  31. [39]

    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, 163 (2021), doi:10.1007 /JHEP06(2021)163

    2021

  32. [40]

    Becher and M

    T . Becher and M. Neubert,Infrared singularities of QCD amplitudes with massive partons, Phys. Rev. D79, 125004 (2009), doi:10.1103 /PhysRevD.79.125004

    2009

  33. [41]

    Becher and M

    T . Becher and M. Neubert, On the structure of infrared singularities of gauge-theory am- plitudes, JHEP 06, 081 (2009), doi:10.1088 /1126-6708/2009/06/081

    2009

  34. [42]

    Moriello,Generalised power series expansions for the elliptic planar families of Higgs + jet production at two loops, JHEP 01, 150 (2020), doi:10.1007 /JHEP01(2020)150

    F . Moriello,Generalised power series expansions for the elliptic planar families of Higgs + jet production at two loops, JHEP 01, 150 (2020), doi:10.1007 /JHEP01(2020)150

    2020

  35. [43]

    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, 108125 (2021), doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2021.108125. 8

    2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.