Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 6 cited by

Complete function space for planar two-loop six-particle scattering amplitudes

T0 review · 3 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper derives the complete system of canonical differential equations for all planar two-loop massless six-particle master integrals, fixes the analytic boundary conditions, and shows this is sufficient to evaluate any…

desk verdict Major computational milestone—first complete analytic solution space for planar two-loop six-particle integrals up to weight four—with one honest gap in the completeness argument that should not block publication. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.01847 v2 pith:GNWUCGPK submitted 2025-01-03 hep-ph hep-th

Johannes Henn , Antonela Matijašić , Julian Miczajka , Tiziano Peraro , Yingxuan Xu , Yang Zhang This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phhep-th MSC 81Q3081T18 PACS 11.15.-q11.15.Bt
keywords planartwo-loopsix-particleamplitudescanonicaldifferentialequationsmasterintegralsCheniteratedsymbolalphabetuniformtranscendentalweightmomentumtwistorsNNLOQCD
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

This paper derives the complete system of canonical differential equations for all planar two-loop massless six-particle Feynman integrals, fixes the analytic boundary values, and writes every solution as a Chen iterated integral. The authors argue that this information is sufficient to evaluate any four-dimensional Yang-Mills scattering amplitude up to its finite part, because two-loop amplitudes have transcendental weight at most four and the uniform-weight master integrals cannot meet reduction coefficients with poles in $\epsilon$ without producing forbidden higher-weight contributions. They identify the complete function space up to weight four: 167 active alphabet letters and 945 independent symbols, including products of one-loop integrals. The results are validated numerically against direct Feynman-integral evaluation in the Euclidean region, removing the bottleneck of integral evaluation for planar two-to-four processes.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is the canonical differential equation system for uniform-transcendental-weight (UT) master integrals, $d\vec I = \epsilon\, d\tilde A\, \vec I$, constructed in momentum-twistor variables. The connection matrix is expanded as $\tilde A = \sum_j c_j \log \alpha_j$, where the alphabet letters $\alpha_j$ are algebraic functions of the kinematics; the alphabet is seeded by known five-point one-mass letters and extended with new algebraic letters generated by a leading-singularity method. Solving the system as Chen iterated integrals requires analytic boundary values, which are fixed by imposing regularity throughout the Euclidean region. The argument that this suffices for amplitudes has three parts: two-loop amplitudes in four dimensions have weight at most four; a UT integral of the same weight as the amplitude cannot meet an $\mathcal{O}(1/\epsilon)$ reduction coefficient without producing a forbidden higher-weight finite term; and the only exceptions are the six-dimensional double-pentagon integral (order $\epsilon^2$) and evanescent integrals, which vanish at weight four.

What would settle it

A single legitimate Yang-Mills two-loop six-particle numerator whose integration-by-parts reduction onto the uniform-weight basis produces a $1/\epsilon$ coefficient multiplying an integral that starts at order $\epsilon^0$ would break the finite-part argument; likewise, a complete amplitude evaluation that requires any alphabet letter or symbol outside the 167 letters and 945 symbols at weight four would falsify the claimed completeness.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the full set of planar two-loop massless six-particle master integrals — 267 double-pentagon and 202 hexagon-box integrals — satisfies a canonical, $\epsilon$-factorized differential equation $d\vec I = \epsilon\, d\tilde A\, \vec I$ whose connection matrix is a sum of rational coefficients times logarithms of alphabet letters. Boundary values are fixed analytically at a reference point by regularity in the Euclidean region. The most complicated double-pentagon top sector contributes nothing new up to weight four: its five uniform-weight integrals are either evanescent in four dimensions or reduce, up to $\mathcal{O}(\epsilon)$, to the known dual-conformal double-pentagon integrals $\Omega_{\mathrm{even}}$ and $\tilde\Omega_{\mathrm{odd}}$ from maximally supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory. The solution space up to weight four therefore consists of 167 letters (11 of them genuine six-particle letters) and 945 independent symbols, of which 45 are genuine two-loop six-point symbols. All master integrals are provided as iterated integrals that can be evaluated numerically.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that every integral in a four-dimensional Yang-Mills amplitude reduces onto the uniform-weight master integrals with coefficients that are finite as $\epsilon$ goes to zero, except for the six-dimensional double-pentagon integral, whose coefficients may be of order $1/\epsilon$ but whose integral is of order $\epsilon^2$; this is verified for a complete set of integral numerators up to six powers of loop momentum on the maximal cut, and for a selection without the cut, but not proven for every possible numerator.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Any planar two-loop massless six-particle amplitude in four dimensions can be evaluated up to the finite part using the provided master integrals, boundary values, and iterated-integral representation.
  • The complete alphabet (167 letters) and symbol space (945 independent symbols up to weight four) provide the input for bootstrap methods and for studies of analytic structure such as Steinmann relations and factorization.
  • The removal of the Feynman-integral bottleneck enables NNLO predictions for $2\to 4$ massless QCD processes.
  • The analytic solutions allow systematic study of physical limits, including multi-Regge, collinear, and double-parton-scattering limits.
  • The comparison with Landau-singularity methods identifies 18 singular-locus components those methods miss, making the alphabet a benchmark for computational algebraic geometry approaches.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Editorial inference: if the $\epsilon$-finiteness of reduction coefficients holds for arbitrary numerators beyond rank six and the maximal cut, the completeness claim extends verbatim to amplitudes with higher-dimensional operators or effective-field-theory numerators, not just standard Yang-Mills ones.
  • Editorial inference: the 167-letter alphabet and 945-symbol tables are likely to reappear as building blocks in neighboring computations (three-loop five-point, one off-shell leg, or non-planar two-loop six-point), so the ancillary files could serve as a shared dictionary.
  • Editorial inference: the single letter $\alpha_{100}$, missed by the Baikov-based method, is a sharp test; a physical amplitude that requires $\alpha_{100}$ at weight two or three would confirm the exception and indicate a systematic gap in Baikov-based alphabet prediction.
  • Editorial inference: extending this program beyond weight four would require new integration kernels for the double-pentagon top sector; their number could be probed numerically at weight five via high-precision direct evaluation at one kinematic point and then compared against the current 167-letter alphabet.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The paper derives canonical differential equations for all planar two-loop massless six-particle master integrals, determines analytically the boundary values, and expresses the solutions as Chen iterated integrals. For the double-pentagon top sector it argues that only integrals already known from N=4 sYM contribute up to weight four, and it identifies the complete function space relevant for four-dimensional Yang-Mills amplitudes up to that weight: 167 active alphabet letters and 945 independent symbols (Table I). The claims are supported by finite-field verification of the epsilon-factorized form of the differential equations, by analytic solutions whose one-fold integral representation is checked against AMFlow at four Euclidean points to 40 digits, and by cross-checks against Landau and Baikov analyses.

Significance. If the completeness claim holds, this is a substantial result: it removes the master-integral bottleneck for planar two-loop 2-to-4 massless scattering and provides a concrete symbol alphabet, suitable for bootstrap and for studies of the analytic structure. The paper ships machine-checkable ancillary data (differential equation matrices, boundary values, and symbol lists) and validates the numerical evaluation against an independent method, which are clear strengths. The central caveat is that the completeness argument relies on a regularity property of IBP reduction coefficients that is checked on a finite set of integrands but not proven for arbitrary Yang-Mills numerators; since the symbol count in Table I is complete only under that assumption, the overall claim is plausible but not yet fully established.

major comments (3)
  1. [§4] The paragraph 'We argue that it is sufficient to expand the basis integrals up to weight four' bases the completeness claim on the assertion that reduction coefficients of any integral appearing in Yang-Mills amplitudes are finite as epsilon tends to zero, except for the six-dimensional double-pentagon integral I^DP_4. The stated support is a complete set of integrals up to rank six on the maximal cut and a selection without cut. This is a finite set of checks, not a proof for arbitrary numerators. Because the 945-symbol space in Table I is complete only if this property holds for all integrals that can appear, please either supply a general argument (e.g., from unitarity or from the structure of the IBP reduction on maximal cuts) or explicitly state that the completeness claim is conditional on this unproven reduction regularity.
  2. [§4] The statement that I^DP_4 'starts contributing at weight six only, i.e. at order epsilon^2' is load-bearing: an O(1/epsilon) reduction coefficient times this integral contributes to the finite part only if the integral has an O(epsilon^1) term. The paper does not derive this epsilon-expansion property; it is asserted. As written, the argument does not rule out an unlisted numerator whose reduction has an O(1/epsilon) coefficient while I^DP_4 has a weight-five O(epsilon^1) term, which would produce a weight-four finite contribution not covered by the 945 symbols. Please provide a derivation or a direct check of the epsilon expansion of I^DP_4 to the required order.
  3. [§3] The differential equation matrix is stated to be incomplete for one six-dimensional double-pentagon entry, and the missing matrix elements 'may or may not be of the form of eq. (8)'. The paper argues this is harmless because the top-sector integrals are either evanescent or known from N=4 sYM. That argument is only as strong as the reduction-coefficient claim of §4; if that claim fails, the missing entry could in principle introduce new functions beyond the 167-letter alphabet even in the finite part. Please make this logical dependence explicit and, if possible, characterize or reconstruct the missing entry to remove the residual uncertainty.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Introduction] In the introduction, 'startingfromresults' should read 'starting from results'.
  2. [Conclusion] The sentence 'This is a breakthrough in the field of analytic Feynman integral computation provides the relevant information...' is missing a conjunction or a full stop; please rephrase, e.g. '...computation and provides the relevant information...'.
  3. [§5] The abbreviations PB and DB are used without definition, e.g. in 'the top sector integrals of HB, PB and DB'; please define them at first use.
  4. [§5] The phrase 'In comparison with our results, we find that this method fails to identify 18 distinct components...' is unclear because the antecedent of 'this method' is not stated; please specify that it refers to the computational algebraic geometry approach of Refs. [18,19].
  5. [§4] The sentence following eq. (11), 'where the dot indicates a power of a13 = 2', is ambiguous; please clarify whether the dot denotes raising the propagator with index a13 to the second power.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the function-space result follows from a canonical differential-equation system with analytically determined boundary conditions and is cross-validated against independent AMFlow and Landau/Baikov analyses.

full rationale

The paper's central claim, that the planar two-loop six-particle function space up to weight four consists of 167 letters and 945 independent symbols, is derived from the canonical differential equations (7) and (8) for a complete integration-by-parts basis of master integrals, with boundary values fixed by regularity in the Euclidean region. No parameter is fitted to a target result and then renamed as a prediction. The alphabet is not assumed into the conclusion: it is constructed from known five-point letters plus additional algebraic letters, and the resulting letters are cross-checked against independent Landau singularity and Baikov analyses, with only one letter missed by the Baikov method. The double-pentagon top-sector integrals are not silently assumed: the paper identifies them with well-known dual-conformal double-pentagon integrals computed in the earlier published paper [48], which is independent support rather than a self-citation chain. Numerical values agree at 40 digits with AMFlow at four Euclidean points. The only load-bearing but unproven input is the assertion that reduction coefficients for arbitrary Yang-Mills numerators are finite as epsilon goes to zero, except for a harmless O(1/epsilon) coefficient multiplying an O(epsilon^2) integral; this is an extrapolation from a complete rank-six maximal-cut analysis and a selection without cut, and it is a correctness risk rather than a circular step. Accordingly, no specific reduction of output to input by construction, and no fitted-input-called-prediction pattern, can be exhibited.

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

No fitted numerical parameters appear in the derivation. The central claim rests on standard master-integral and differential-equation machinery, plus two load-bearing assumptions introduced for this paper: the weight-four truncation argument based on finite reduction coefficients, and the completeness of the alphabet ansatz. No new physical entities are postulated.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Two-loop amplitudes in four dimensions have transcendental weight at most four.
    Cited to [45] and used to truncate the epsilon expansion and to discard the double pentagon top sector; not derived in this paper.
  • ad hoc to paper Every integral appearing in Yang-Mills amplitudes reduces via IBP to a finite master-integral basis with reduction coefficients that, for UT bases, are finite as epsilon goes to zero, except for the discarded six-dimensional DP integral.
    Empirically verified on a complete set of integrals up to rank six on the maximal cut and on a selection without cut; not proven for all possible numerators.
  • ad hoc to paper The connection matrix dA can be expanded as a sum of rational coefficients times logarithms of an alphabet constructed from known five-point letters plus additional algebraic letters.
    Ansatz in eq. (8); completeness is cross-checked against Landau and Baikov analyses but not derived from first principles.
  • domain assumption Boundary values at the reference point are fixed by requiring regularity of the UT basis throughout the Euclidean region.
    Standard analytic continuation argument used to set integration constants; cited to [51-53].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Complete function space for planar two-loop six-particle scattering amplitudes." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/GNWUCGPK

@misc{pith2026250101847,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Complete function space for planar two-loop six-particle scattering amplitudes},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/GNWUCGPK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.01847}
}
read the original abstract

We derive the full system of canonical differential equations for all planar two-loop massless six-particle master integrals, and determine analytically the boundary conditions. This fully specifies the solutions, which may be written as Chen iterated integrals. We argue that this is sufficient information for evaluating any scattering amplitude in four dimensions up to the finite part. We support this claim by reducing, for the most complicated integral topologies, integrals with typical Yang-Mills numerators. We use the analytic solutions to the differential equations, together with dihedral symmetry, to provide the full solution space relevant for two-loop six-particle computations. This includes the relevant function alphabet, as well as the independent set of iterated integrals up to weight four. We also provide the answer for all master integrals in terms of iterated integrals that can be readily evaluated numerically. As a proof of concept, we provide a numerical implementation that evaluates the integrals in part of the Euclidean region, and validate this against numerical evaluation of the Feynman integrals. Our result removes the bottleneck of Feynman integral evaluation, paving the way to future analytic evaluations of six-particle scattering amplitudes.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.01847 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Genuine six–point two–loop planar Feynman [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p001_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Integral sectors where genuine six-particle [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

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. QCD Scattering Amplitudes and Prescriptive Unitarity

    hep-th 2026-02 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    The maximally-transcendental part of planar two-loop six-gluon MHV QCD amplitudes is bootstrapped at symbol level and expressed in a 137-letter alphabet.

  2. Geometric Landau Analysis and Symbol Bootstrap

    hep-th 2025-08 unverdicted novelty 7.0 of 10

    Boundary structure of negative geometries, combined with Landau analysis, determines physical singularities and yields symbol alphabets for six-point two-loop and five-point three-loop ladder integrals in planar N=4 s...

  3. Feynman Integrals Meet Second-Order Partial Differential Equations

    hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Feynman integrals can be solved globally over phase space by rewriting them as second-order PDE equilibrium problems and discretizing with finite elements.

  4. Novel cluster-algebraic letters for 5- and 6-point QCD processes

    hep-th 2026-03 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Candidate symbol alphabets for 5- and 6-point QCD processes are derived from the 9-particle N=4 super Yang-Mills cluster algebra, including new nested square-root letters.

  5. Hexagonal Wilson loop with Lagrangian insertion at two loops in $\mathcal{N}=4$ super Yang-Mills theory

    hep-th 2025-05 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    The two-loop symbol for the hexagonal Wilson loop with a Lagrangian insertion in planar N=4 super Yang-Mills theory is uniquely fixed by a symbol bootstrap and satisfies the expected Steinmann relations.

  6. Singularities of massless scattering and cluster algebras

    hep-th 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Partial flag cluster algebras reproduce a large part of the two-loop five- and six-point massless scattering symbol alphabets, with the momentum twistor embedding stronger at six points after permutation completion.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

65 extracted references · 11 canonical work pages · cited by 6 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Two-loop amplitudes in four dimensions involve terms up to transcendental weight four only [45]

    work page

  2. [2]

    Rethinking Quantum Field The- ory

    The canonical form of the differential equations makes the transcendental weight of the basis in- tegrals manifest. We argue that it is sufficient to expand the basis integrals up to weight four. Note that for a random basis, this is in general not enough, as the reduction coefficients may in general involve poles inϵ, which in turn would require us to ex...

    work page 2003

  3. [3]

    A. B. Goncharov, M. Spradlin, C. Vergu, and A. Volovich, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 151605 (2010), 1006.5703

    arXiv 2010

  4. [4]

    Zoia, Modern Analytic Methods for Computing Scat- tering Amplitudes: With Application to Two-Loop Five- Particle Processes(Springer Nature, 2022)

    S. Zoia, Modern Analytic Methods for Computing Scat- tering Amplitudes: With Application to Two-Loop Five- Particle Processes(Springer Nature, 2022)

    work page 2022

  5. [5]

    Gehrmann, J

    T. Gehrmann, J. M. Henn, and N. A. Lo Presti, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 062001 (2016), 1511.05409, [Erratum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 116, 189903 (2016)]

    arXiv 2016

  6. [6]

    Gehrmann, J

    T. Gehrmann, J. M. Henn, and N. A. Lo Presti, JHEP 10, 103 (2018), 1807.09812

    arXiv 2018

  7. [7]

    Abreu, L

    S. Abreu, L. J. Dixon, E. Herrmann, B. Page, and M. Zeng, Phys. Rev. Lett. 122, 121603 (2019), 1812.08941

    arXiv 2019

  8. [8]

    Chicherinet al., Phys

    D. Chicherinet al., Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 041603 (2019), 1812.11160

    arXiv 2019

Show all 65 references
  1. [9]

    Chicherin and V

    D. Chicherin and V. Sotnikov, JHEP 20, 167 (2020), 2009.07803

    2020 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Abreu, F

    S. Abreu, F. Febres Cordero, H. Ita, B. Page, and V. Sot- nikov, JHEP 07, 095 (2021), 2102.13609

    2021 arXiv

  3. [11]

    H. A. Chawdhry, M. Czakon, A. Mitov, and R. Poncelet, JHEP 07, 164 (2021), 2103.04319

    2021 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Agarwal, F

    B. Agarwal, F. Buccioni, A. von Manteuffel, and L. Tan- credi, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 262001 (2021), 2105.04585

    2021 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Czakon, A

    M. Czakon, A. Mitov, and R. Poncelet, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 152001 (2021), 2106.05331, [Erratum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 129, 119901 (2022)]

    2021 arXiv

  6. [14]

    D. D. Canko, C. G. Papadopoulos, and N. Syrrakos, JHEP 01, 199 (2021), 2009.13917

    2021 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Chicherin, V

    D. Chicherin, V. Sotnikov, and S. Zoia, JHEP01, 096 (2022), 2110.10111

    2022 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Kardos, C

    A. Kardos, C. G. Papadopoulos, A. V. Smirnov, N. Syrrakos, and C. Wever, JHEP 05, 033 (2022), 2201.07509

    2022 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Abreu et al., Phys

    S. Abreu et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 141601 (2024), 2306.15431

    2024 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Badger, H

    S. Badger, H. B. Hartanto, and S. Zoia, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 012001 (2021), 2102.02516

    2021 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Dlapa, M

    C. Dlapa, M. Helmer, G. Papathanasiou, and F. Tellan- der, JHEP 10, 161 (2023), 2304.02629

    2023 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Fevola, S

    C. Fevola, S. Mizera, and S. Telen, Phys. Rev. Lett.132, 101601 (2024), 2311.14669

    2024 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Fevola, S

    C. Fevola, S. Mizera, and S. Telen, Comput. Phys. Com- mun. 303, 109278 (2024), 2311.16219

    2024 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Golden, A

    J. Golden, A. B. Goncharov, M. Spradlin, C. Vergu, and A. Volovich, JHEP01, 091 (2014), 1305.1617

    2014 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Chicherin, J

    D. Chicherin, J. M. Henn, and G. Papathanasiou, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 091603 (2021), 2012.12285

    2021 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Henke and G

    N. Henke and G. Papathanasiou, JHEP10, 007 (2021), 2106.01392

    2021 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Caron-Huot, L

    S. Caron-Huot, L. J. Dixon, A. McLeod, and M. von Hippel, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 241601 (2016), 1609.00669

    2016 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Caron-Huot, M

    S. Caron-Huot, M. Giroux, H. S. Hannesdottir, and S. Mizera, JHEP 04, 060 (2024), 2310.12199

    2024 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Hennet al., (2024), 2406.14604

    J. Hennet al., (2024), 2406.14604

    2024 arXiv

  20. [28]

    L. J. Dixon, O. Gurdogan, A. J. McLeod, and M. Wil- helm, Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 111602 (2022), 2112.06243

    2022 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Tkachov, Physics Letters B100, 65 (1981)

    F. Tkachov, Physics Letters B100, 65 (1981)

    1981

  22. [30]

    K. G. Chetyrkin and F. V. Tkachov, Nucl. Phys. B192, 159 (1981)

    1981

  23. [31]

    Kotikov, Physics Letters B267, 123 (1991)

    A. Kotikov, Physics Letters B267, 123 (1991)

    1991

  24. [32]

    Z. Bern, L. J. Dixon, and D. A. Kosower, Nucl. Phys. B 412, 751 (1994), hep-ph/9306240

    1994 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Gehrmann and E

    T. Gehrmann and E. Remiddi, Nucl. Phys. B580, 485 (2000), hep-ph/9912329

    2000 arXiv

  26. [34]

    J. M. Henn, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 251601 (2013), 1304.1806

    2013 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Arkani-Hamed, J

    N. Arkani-Hamed, J. L. Bourjaily, F. Cachazo, and J. Trnka, JHEP06, 125 (2012), 1012.6032

    2012 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Hodges, JHEP05, 135 (2013), 0905.1473

    A. Hodges, JHEP05, 135 (2013), 0905.1473

    2013 arXiv

  29. [37]

    J. M. Hennet al., JHEP 08, 027 (2024), 2403.19742

    2024 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Matijašić, Singularity structure of Feynman integrals with applications to six-particle scattering processes, PhD thesis, Munich U., 2024

    A. Matijašić, Singularity structure of Feynman integrals with applications to six-particle scattering processes, PhD thesis, Munich U., 2024

    2024

  31. [39]

    Badger, H

    S. Badger, H. Frellesvig, and Y. Zhang, JHEP12, 045 (2013), 1310.1051

    2013 arXiv

  32. [40]

    J. Henn, T. Peraro, Y. Xu, and Y. Zhang, JHEP03, 056 (2022), 2112.10605

    2022 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Dlapa, X

    C. Dlapa, X. Li, and Y. Zhang, JHEP07, 227 (2021), 2103.04638

    2021 arXiv

  34. [42]

    von Manteuffel and R

    A. von Manteuffel and R. M. Schabinger, Phys. Lett. B 744, 101 (2015), 1406.4513

    2015 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Peraro, JHEP12, 030 (2016), 1608.01902

    T. Peraro, JHEP12, 030 (2016), 1608.01902

    2016 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Abreuet al., JHEP 11, 117 (2020), 2005.04195

    S. Abreuet al., JHEP 11, 117 (2020), 2005.04195

    2020 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Heller, A

    M. Heller, A. von Manteuffel, and R. M. Schabinger, Phys. Rev. D102, 016025 (2020), 1907.00491

    2020 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Matijašić and J

    A. Matijašić and J. Miczajka,Effortless: Efficient gen- eration of odd letters with multiple roots as leading sin- gularities (In preparation, 2025)

    2025

  39. [47]

    H. S. Hannesdottir, A. J. McLeod, M. D. Schwartz, and C. Vergu, Phys. Rev. D 105, L061701 (2022), 2109.09744

    2022 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Gehrmann and E

    T. Gehrmann and E. Remiddi, Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl. 89, 251 (2000), hep-ph/0005232

    2000 arXiv

  41. [49]

    5 for the I DP-a i defined in [38]

    In this paper, we use the notationI DP i , i = 1,... 5 for the I DP-a i defined in [38]. Note that in [38], the UT inte- grals are defined without the overall factorϵ4. To extend these top sector UT integrals to a whole family UT basis, the ϵ4 factor is not included in the auc...

  42. [50]

    L. J. Dixon, J. M. Drummond, and J. M. Henn, JHEP 01, 024 (2012), 1111.1704

    2012 arXiv

  43. [51]

    J. M. Henn, A. Matijašić, and J. Miczajka, JHEP01, 096 (2023), 2210.13505

    2023 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Jiang, J

    X. Jiang, J. Liu, X. Xu, and L. L. Yang, (2024), 2401.07632

    2024 arXiv

  45. [53]

    J. M. Henn, A. V. Smirnov, and V. A. Smirnov, JHEP 03, 088 (2014), 1312.2588

    2014 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Chicherinet al., JHEP 03, 042 (2019), 1809.06240

    D. Chicherinet al., JHEP 03, 042 (2019), 1809.06240

    2019 arXiv

  47. [55]

    J. Henn, B. Mistlberger, V. A. Smirnov, and P. Wasser, JHEP 04, 167 (2020), 2002.09492

    2020 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Caron-Huot and J

    S. Caron-Huot and J. M. Henn, JHEP06, 114 (2014), 1404.2922

    2014 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Liu and Y.-Q

    X. Liu and Y.-Q. Ma, Comput. Phys. Commun. 283, 108565 (2023), 2201.11669

    2023 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Liu, Y.-Q

    X. Liu, Y.-Q. Ma, and C.-Y. Wang, Phys. Lett. B779, 353 (2018), 1711.09572

    2018 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Inspired by [63], an11-propagator integral representation for two-loop six-point integrals was used to speed up the AMFlow numeric computation

  52. [60]

    V. S. Fadin and L. N. Lipatov, Nucl. Phys. B406, 259 (1993)

    1993

  53. [61]

    P. K. Dhani, G. Rodrigo, and G. F. R. Sborlini, JHEP 12, 188 (2023), 2310.05803

    2023 arXiv

  54. [62]

    L. J. Dixon and I. Esterlis, JHEP 07, 116 (2016), 1602.02107, [Erratum: JHEP 08, 131 (2016)]

    2016 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Liuet al., (2024), 2411.18697

    Y. Liuet al., (2024), 2411.18697. 7

    2024 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Abreu, P

    S. Abreu, P. F. Monni, B. Page, and J. Usovitsch, (2024), 2412.19884

    2024 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Bargiela and T.-Z

    P. Bargiela and T.-Z. Yang, Phys. Rev. D110, 096019 (2024), 2408.06325

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 10, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.