Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 71 references

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

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-05 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Two-loop ttW amplitudes computed with full mass dependence

desk verdict First two-loop ttW amplitudes with exact masses; strong but thin validation, deserves a real referee. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.03746 v1 pith:HXIK6HDK submitted 2026-08-04 hep-ph hep-th

Matteo Becchetti , Dhimiter Canko , Xiang Chen , Vsevolod Chestnov , Maximilian Delto , Sara Ditsch , Tiziano Peraro , Mattia Pozzoli
show 2 more authors
Chiara Savoini Simone Zoia
This is my paper
classification hep-phhep-th
keywords top-antitop-plus-Wproductiontwo-loopQCDamplitudesleading-colourapproximationfinite-fieldreconstructionspecialfunctionsmasterintegralsNNLOcorrectionsttWhard
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper presents a numerical computation of the two-loop QCD amplitudes for top–antitop-plus-W production that keeps the exact top-quark and W-boson mass dependence, in the generalised leading-colour approximation. Rather than deriving a fully analytic expression, it writes the finite remainder as rational coefficients times special functions, evaluates the functions by solving differential equations, and reconstructs the coefficients exactly, point by point, from finite-field evaluations. If correct, this supplies the double-virtual ingredient for NNLO cross-section predictions for ttW, a process whose measured rates tend to exceed Standard Model expectations, and demonstrates a route for processes for which fully analytic two-loop amplitudes remain out of reach. The result is validated against an independent calculation in conventional dimensional regularisation.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is a Q-linear basis of special functions representing the epsilon expansions of the 330 master integrals, built from their differential equations without requiring a canonical form. Most functions are iterated integrals whose algebraic relations are controlled analytically; the 29 functions associated with elliptic curves and nested square roots are handled as Q-linearly independent on numerical evidence. The argument proceeds by cancelling UV and IR poles symbolically in this basis, then evaluating the functions numerically through power-series solutions of differential equations while reconstructing the rational coefficients exactly from finite-field evaluations at

What would settle it

Recompute the finite remainder at one of the benchmark points after choosing a deliberately different basis for the 29 elliptic/nested-root functions, and check whether the rational coefficients and the final hard function are unchanged. A change in the hard function beyond the quoted precision would indicate that the Q-linear independence premise fails; alternatively, an independent high-precision evaluation at ϵ = ±10⁻³ already exists, and disagreement at the five-significant-digit level would refute the result.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper claims that the two-loop leading-colour QCD amplitude for u d → t tbar W+ can be evaluated numerically over the whole physical phase space, with exact dependence on the top-quark and W-boson masses and with ultraviolet and infrared poles cancelling exactly. The construction expresses the master integrals in terms of special functions, most of which are iterated integrals, plus a small set tied to elliptic curves and nested square roots whose Q-linear independence is verified only numerically. The finite remainder is then written as a Q-linear combination of rational coefficients and these functions, with the rational coefficients reconstructed exactly at each rationalised phase-spa

Load-bearing premise

The 29 special functions tied to elliptic curves and nested square roots are assumed to be Q-linearly independent based only on numerical searches; if hidden algebraic relations among them exist, the rational-coefficient basis and the reconstructed amplitude representation would not be unique.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The computed hard functions provide the double-virtual contribution used to obtain the NNLO QCD ttW cross section in the companion calculation.
  • Differential NNLO predictions with full mass dependence become possible, moving beyond the soft-W and high-energy approximations used previously.
  • The hybrid recipe—pointwise exact rational reconstruction plus numerical special-function evaluation—demonstrates that complete phase-space coverage is feasible for a two-loop 2→3 process with internal masses.
  • The publicly provided grid of hard-function values gives a benchmark that future fully analytic or alternative numerical calculations can be checked against.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A natural stress test suggested by the paper's own caveat is to recompute a few grid points after replacing the 29 elliptic/nested-root special functions by an algebraically equivalent-looking basis; the physical hard function should stay unchanged even if individual rational coefficients reshuffle, and a shift would signal missed relations.
  • The same pipeline appears transferable to other two-loop 2→3 processes with two heavy mass scales, such as ttH production with exact top-mass dependence, where fully analytic results are still incomplete.
  • Because special-function evaluation dominates the runtime, faster evaluation or interpolation of the functions themselves could make the approach scale to finer grids and more processes.
  • The five-significant-digit precision is set by the numerical integration and replica estimates; improving boundary values and integration tolerances should push it further without changing the finite-field part of the pipeline.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper presents a numerical computation of the two-loop QCD amplitudes for pp -> t\bar{t}W in the generalised leading-colour approximation, retaining exact m_t and m_W dependence. The tHV calculation uses physical projectors, IBP reduction to 330 master integrals, an expansion of the master integrals in special functions following Ref. [27], pointwise finite-field reconstruction of rational coefficients, and numerical evaluation of the special functions via AMFlow DE solvers. The central deliverable is the colour- and polarisation-summed hard functions on a 224,640-point grid (149,760 distinct kinematics), which was used in the companion NNLO calculation. Validation includes one-loop checks against Ref. [39] and OpenLoops, an independent CDR calculation based on block-triangular reduction and numerical epsilon, compared at three benchmark points, and a replica analysis of special-function numerical noise.

Significance. If the results hold, this is a major step forward: it provides the first practical two-loop virtual amplitudes for t\bar{t}W production with full mass dependence in the leading-colour approximation, enabling NNLO phenomenology. The methodological novelty of reconstructing rational coefficients point-by-point over the whole phase space, rather than analytically, is an important proof of concept. The paper is unusually transparent about its limitations: it explicitly acknowledges the possible overcompleteness of the f_i^(4*) functions and the numerical rather than symbolic verification of the pole-cancellation conditions. The ancillary files with benchmark values and grid data are a valuable resource. The main risk is that the accuracy of the grid is supported by only three external cross-check points and by internal checks that are not sensitive to certain systematic errors.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 6.3 / Table 6; Sec. 5] The grid-wide claim of at least five significant digits is supported by only three CDR benchmark comparisons. The replica method in Sec. 5 estimates floating-point noise in the special-function evaluation, but is insensitive to systematic errors in the algebraic assembly, rationalisation, branch assignments, and the sign of tr5, which can vary across phase space. Because the independent CDR calculation uses the same master integrals and DEs from Ref. [28] (Sec. 6.3), and because the grid contains points with rationalisation precision up to n=21 (Fig. 1) and near-denominator regions, a point-dependent systematic error outside the three benchmarks would be invisible. I ask the authors to either add CDR checks at a few representative tail/high-n/near-singular points, or to state clearly that the five-digit precision claim is an estimate that excludes such systematic errors.
  2. [Sec. 4, Eq. (3.16), Table 4] The paper explicitly states that Q-linear independence of the 29 f_i^(4*) functions was only checked numerically with PSLQ and that 'more complicated identities cannot be excluded' (Sec. 4). The finite-field reconstruction of the rational coefficients in Eq. (3.16) presupposes a well-defined Q-basis of special-function monomials. If hidden algebraic relations exist, the coefficient basis is non-unique and the pointwise rational reconstruction could be inconsistent, even though the numerical value of the amplitude would still be correct. The argument that the subset is 'small' does not remove this structural indeterminacy. I request a concrete robustness test: assemble the finite remainder at several phase-space points using two different PSLQ-selected bases and verify that the hard functions agree to the claimed precision, or provide an analytic proof of the required independence.
  3. [Sec. 4, Eqs. (4.5)-(4.7)] The exact cancellation of the epsilon poles, which is central to the method (Sec. 3.2), relies on conditions (4.5)-(4.7), but the paper only states that they were 'verified numerically at several random phase-space points' (Sec. 4). Since these are algebraic identities following from the DEs, a symbolic verification should be possible; at minimum, the authors should provide a precise statement of the domain on which the numerical verification was performed and quantify the residual risk. The CDR cross-check at three points is unlikely to detect a failure of these conditions in an unvisited region.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 1] The axis label 'Accepted rationalisation precision (n)' is not fully explained in the caption; state that n is the exponent in Eq. (5.5).
  2. [Sec. 5, text before Eq. (5.8)] The sign convention for tr5 in the grid reconstruction is described briefly; a short example or explicit formula for how the sign is determined from the grid variables would reduce ambiguity.
  3. [Table 5] The distinction between 'All auxiliary functions' and 'Master integrals' rows is not self-evident; clarify in the caption that the former refers to the enlarged set used in the DEs and the latter to the original MI set.
  4. [Sec. 6.3] It would be useful to state explicitly which parts of the CDR calculation are genuinely independent of the tHV calculation (reduction, projectors, epsilon treatment) and which inputs are shared (MIs/DEs), so readers can calibrate the strength of the cross-check.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the two-loop hard functions are computed from Feynman diagrams, IBP reduction, finite-field coefficient reconstruction, and DE-based numerical evaluation, none of which fits the target result.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained in the relevant sense. Starting from 210 leading-colour diagrams (Sec. 3.1), the projected amplitudes are reduced to 330 master integrals via IBP (Eq. 3.14), the MI Laurent expansion is represented by special functions (Sec. 4), rational coefficients are reconstructed pointwise from finite-field evaluations (Sec. 3.2), and the special functions are evaluated numerically by solving the DE systems with AMFlow (Sec. 5). The hard functions are then defined from the finite remainders through Eq. (2.22) and evaluated on the grid. Nothing is fitted to the final hard-function values, and no prediction is renamed from an input. The master integrals and DEs taken from Ref. [28] are external published inputs with stated assumptions that do not include the ttW hard function; using them is standard practice and does not constitute circularity. The CDR cross-check in Sec. 6 reuses the same Ref. [28] master integrals, so it is not a fully independent test of those integrals, but this is a validation limitation, not a circular reduction. The paper explicitly acknowledges in Sec. 4 that the f^(4*) subset may be overcomplete because only Q-linear independence was checked with PSLQ; this is an honest limitation and a correctness risk, not a step where a result is assumed via definition. No equation in the paper defines an output in terms of itself, and no self-citation is used to forbid alternatives or to force a unique choice. Therefore no significant circularity is present.

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

No free parameters are fitted. The calculation uses standard physical inputs (mt = 173.2 GeV, mW = 80.385 GeV, Nc = 3, nl = 5) and introduces no ad hoc constants. It does rest on self-published master integrals and a special-function basis whose linear independence is not fully proven analytically. No new physical particles, forces, or dimensions are introduced.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Master integrals and differential equations from Ref [28] are correct and complete.
    Sections 3.2 and 4 adopt the two-loop integral bases and DEs of Ref [28] without re-derivation. The independent CDR check also reuses these MIs, so it does not test their correctness independently.
  • domain assumption The universal UV and IR pole structure of the two-loop amplitude is fully captured by the anomalous dimensions and renormalisation constants in Appendix A.
    Section 2.2 removes poles using standard two-loop infrared factorisation for massive partons and standard MS plus on-shell renormalisation. This is established physics input, not proved in the paper.
  • ad hoc to paper The special functions f_i^(w), including f_i^(4*), form a Q-linearly independent basis for the finite remainder.
    Section 4 uses this basis to reconstruct rational coefficients from finite fields. For f_i^(4*), only PSLQ numerical checks are given, and the paper states that more complicated identities cannot be excluded.
  • ad hoc to paper Conditions (4.5) to (4.7) hold so that the epsilon poles can be expressed by iterated integrals and cancelled exactly.
    Section 4 states these conditions were verified numerically at several random phase-space points, not proven analytically. The exactness of the pole cancellation and the special-function representation rely on them.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Two-loop QCD amplitudes for $t\bar{t}W$ production at the LHC in the leading-colour approximation." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HXIK6HDK

@misc{pith2026260803746,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Two-loop QCD amplitudes for $t\bartW$ production at the LHC in the leading-colour approximation},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HXIK6HDK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.03746}
}
abstract

We present a numerical computation of the two-loop QCD scattering amplitudes for the production of a top-antitop quark pair in association with a $W$ boson ($t\bar{t}W$) at the LHC in the generalised leading-colour approximation, retaining the exact dependence on the top-quark and $W$-boson masses. Rather than pursuing a fully analytic calculation, we employ a hybrid framework that combines numerical evaluation with strong algebraic and analytic control, allowing ultraviolet and infrared singularities as well as large intermediate cancellations to be treated exactly. This is achieved by expressing the finite remainder in terms of a set of special functions with rational coefficients. The special functions are evaluated numerically by solving differential equations through power-series expansions, while the values of the rational coefficients are reconstructed, point by point, from finite-field evaluations. The calculation is performed in the 't Hooft-Veltman scheme and validated against an independent implementation in conventional dimensional regularisation employing a substantially different computational strategy. We finally provide the colour- and polarisation-summed hard functions evaluated on the phase-space grid used in a previous computation of the next-to-next-to-leading-order QCD corrections to the $t\bar{t}W$ cross section.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.03746 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Distribution of the grid points as a function of the accepted rationalisation precision [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_1.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

71 extracted references · 9 canonical work pages

  1. [27]

    Badger, M

    S. Badger, M. Becchetti, C. Brancaccio, H. B. Hartanto, and S. Zoia,Numerical evaluation of two-loop QCD helicity amplitudes forgg→t tgat leading colour, JHEP03(2025) 070, [arXiv:2412.13876]

    arXiv 2025

  2. [39]

    Becchetti, M

    M. Becchetti, M. Delto, S. Ditsch, P. A. Kreer, M. Pozzoli, and L. Tancredi,One-loop QCD corrections to ¯ud→t¯tWatO ε2 , JHEP09(2025) 126, [arXiv:2502.14952]

    arXiv 2025

  3. [28]

    Becchetti, D

    M. Becchetti, D. Canko, V. Chestnov, T. Peraro, M. Pozzoli, and S. Zoia,Two-loop Feynman integrals for leading colourt tWproduction at hadron colliders, JHEP07(2025) 001, [arXiv:2504.13011]

    arXiv 2025

  4. [11]

    Badger, J

    S. Badger, J. M. Campbell, and R. K. Ellis,QCD Corrections to the Hadronic Production of a Heavy Quark Pair and a W-Boson Including Decay Correlations, JHEP03(2011) 027, [arXiv:1011.6647]

    arXiv 2011

  5. [12]

    J. M. Campbell and R. K. Ellis,t ¯tW +− production and decay at NLO, JHEP07(2012) 052, [arXiv:1204.5678]

    arXiv 2012

  6. [13]

    Maltoni, D

    F. Maltoni, D. Pagani, and I. Tsinikos,Associated production of a top-quark pair with vector bosons at NLO in QCD: impact ont tHsearches at the LHC, JHEP02(2016) 113, [arXiv:1507.05640]

    arXiv 2016

  7. [14]

    Frixione, V

    S. Frixione, V. Hirschi, D. Pagani, H. S. Shao, and M. Zaro,Electroweak and QCD corrections to top-pair hadroproduction in association with heavy bosons, JHEP06(2015) 184, [arXiv:1504.03446]

    arXiv 2015

  8. [15]

    Frederix, D

    R. Frederix, D. Pagani, and M. Zaro,Large NLO corrections int ¯tW ± andt ¯tt¯thadroproduction from supposedly subleading EW contributions, JHEP02(2018) 031, [arXiv:1711.02116]

    arXiv 2018

Show all 71 references
  1. [16]

    Bevilacqua, H.-Y

    G. Bevilacqua, H.-Y. Bi, H. B. Hartanto, M. Kraus, and M. Worek,The simplest of them all:t ¯tW ± at NLO accuracy in QCD, JHEP08(2020) 043, [arXiv:2005.09427]

    2020 arXiv

  2. [17]

    Denner and G

    A. Denner and G. Pelliccioli,NLO QCD corrections to off-shell t ¯tW+ production at the LHC, JHEP11 (2020) 069, [arXiv:2007.12089]. 23

    2020 arXiv

  3. [18]

    Bevilacqua, H.-Y

    G. Bevilacqua, H.-Y. Bi, H. B. Hartanto, M. Kraus, J. Nasufi, and M. Worek,NLO QCD corrections to off-shellt ¯tW ± production at the LHC: correlations and asymmetries, Eur. Phys. J. C81(2021), no. 7 675, [arXiv:2012.01363]

    2021 arXiv

  4. [19]

    Denner and G

    A. Denner and G. Pelliccioli,Combined NLO EW and QCD corrections to off-shell t tW production at the LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C81(2021), no. 4 354, [arXiv:2102.03246]

    2021 arXiv

  5. [20]

    Frederix and S

    R. Frederix and S. Frixione,Merging meets matching in MC@NLO, JHEP12(2012) 061, [arXiv:1209.6215]

    2012 arXiv

  6. [21]

    Frederix and I

    R. Frederix and I. Tsinikos,On improving NLO merging fort tWproduction, JHEP11(2021) 029, [arXiv:2108.07826]

    2021 arXiv

  7. [22]

    Dimitrakopoulos and M

    N. Dimitrakopoulos and M. Worek,Multi-scale improved predictions forpp→t ¯tW + +X, arXiv:2607.11652

    arXiv

  8. [23]

    Buonocore, S

    L. Buonocore, S. Devoto, M. Grazzini, S. Kallweit, J. Mazzitelli, L. Rottoli, and C. Savoini,Precise Predictions for the Associated Production of a W Boson with a Top-Antitop Quark Pair at the LHC, Phys. Rev. Lett.131(2023), no. 23 231901, [arXiv:2306.16311]

    2023 arXiv

  9. [24]

    Febres Cordero, G

    F. Febres Cordero, G. Figueiredo, M. Kraus, B. Page, and L. Reina,Two-loop master integrals for leading-colorpp→t tHamplitudes with a light-quark loop, JHEP07(2024) 084, [arXiv:2312.08131]

    2024 arXiv

  10. [25]

    Agarwal, G

    B. Agarwal, G. Heinrich, S. P. Jones, M. Kerner, S. Y. Klein, J. Lang, V. Magerya, and A. Olsson, Two-loop amplitudes fort tHproduction: the quark-initiated N f -part, JHEP05(2024) 013, [arXiv:2402.03301]. [Erratum: JHEP 06, 142 (2024)]

    2024 arXiv

  11. [26]

    Badger, M

    S. Badger, M. Becchetti, C. Brancaccio, M. Czakon, H. B. Hartanto, R. Poncelet, and S. Zoia,Double virtual QCD corrections tot t+jet production at the LHC, JHEP05(2026) 044, [arXiv:2511.11424]

    2026 arXiv

  12. [29]

    Gehrmann, J

    T. Gehrmann, J. M. Henn, and N. A. Lo Presti,Pentagon functions for massless planar scattering amplitudes, JHEP10(2018) 103, [arXiv:1807.09812]

    2018 arXiv

  13. [30]

    Chicherin and V

    D. Chicherin and V. Sotnikov,Pentagon Functions for Scattering of Five Massless Particles, JHEP20 (2020) 167, [arXiv:2009.07803]

    2020 arXiv

  14. [31]

    Chicherin, V

    D. Chicherin, V. Sotnikov, and S. Zoia,Pentagon functions for one-mass planar scattering amplitudes, JHEP01(2022) 096, [arXiv:2110.10111]

    2022 arXiv

  15. [32]

    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(2024), no. 14 141601, [arXiv:2306.15431]

    2024 arXiv

  16. [33]

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

    2013 arXiv

  17. [34]

    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, [arXiv:2201.11669]

    2023 arXiv

  18. [35]

    von Manteuffel and R

    A. von Manteuffel and R. M. Schabinger,A novel approach to integration by parts reduction, Phys. Lett. B744(2015) 101–104, [arXiv:1406.4513]. 24

    2015 arXiv

  19. [36]

    Peraro,Scattering amplitudes over finite fields and multivariate functional reconstruction, JHEP12 (2016) 030, [arXiv:1608.01902]

    T. Peraro,Scattering amplitudes over finite fields and multivariate functional reconstruction, JHEP12 (2016) 030, [arXiv:1608.01902]

    2016 arXiv

  20. [37]

    Becchetti et al.,NNLO QCD predictions fort ¯tWproduction at hadron colliders,arXiv:2606.09503

    M. Becchetti et al.,NNLO QCD predictions fort ¯tWproduction at hadron colliders,arXiv:2606.09503

    arXiv

  21. [38]

    T. Peraro,Analytic multi-loop results using finite fields and dataflow graphs with FiniteFlow, in 14th International Symposium on Radiative Corrections: Application of Quantum Field Theory to Phenomenology, 12, 2019.arXiv:1912.03142

    2019 arXiv

  22. [40]

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

    S. Catani,The Singular behavior of QCD amplitudes at two loop order, Phys. Lett. B427(1998) 161–171, [hep-ph/9802439]

    1998 arXiv

  23. [41]

    Gardi and L

    E. Gardi and L. Magnea,Factorization constraints for soft anomalous dimensions in QCD scattering amplitudes, JHEP03(2009) 079, [arXiv:0901.1091]

    2009 arXiv

  24. [42]

    Gardi and L

    E. Gardi and L. Magnea,Infrared singularities in QCD amplitudes, Nuovo Cim. C32N5-6(2009) 137–157, [arXiv:0908.3273]

    2009 arXiv

  25. [43]

    Becher and M

    T. Becher and M. Neubert,Infrared singularities of scattering amplitudes in perturbative QCD, Phys. Rev. Lett.102(2009) 162001, [arXiv:0901.0722]. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 111, 199905 (2013)]

    2009 arXiv

  26. [44]

    Becher and M

    T. Becher and M. Neubert,On the Structure of Infrared Singularities of Gauge-Theory Amplitudes, JHEP 06(2009) 081, [arXiv:0903.1126]. [Erratum: JHEP 11, 024 (2013)]

    2009 arXiv

  27. [45]

    Becher and M

    T. Becher and M. Neubert,Infrared singularities of QCD amplitudes with massive partons, Phys. Rev. D 79(2009) 125004, [arXiv:0904.1021]. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 80, 109901 (2009)]

    2009 arXiv

  28. [46]

    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, [arXiv:0907.4791]

    2009 arXiv

  29. [47]

    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, JHEP11(2009) 062, [arXiv:0908.3676]

    2009 arXiv

  30. [48]

    ’t Hooft and M

    G. ’t Hooft and M. J. G. Veltman,Regularization and Renormalization of Gauge Fields, Nucl. Phys. B44 (1972) 189–213

    1972

  31. [49]

    Peraro and L

    T. Peraro and L. Tancredi,Physical projectors for multi-leg helicity amplitudes, JHEP07(2019) 114, [arXiv:1906.03298]

    2019 arXiv

  32. [50]

    Peraro and L

    T. Peraro and L. Tancredi,Tensor decomposition for bosonic and fermionic scattering amplitudes, Phys. Rev. D103(2021), no. 5 054042, [arXiv:2012.00820]

    2021 arXiv

  33. [51]

    Nogueira,Automatic Feynman Graph Generation, J

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

    1993

  34. [52]

    Ruijl, T

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

    arXiv

  35. [53]

    von Manteuffel and C

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

    arXiv

  36. [54]

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

    1981

  37. [55]

    K. G. Chetyrkin and F. V. Tkachov,Integration by parts: The algorithm to calculateβ-functions in 4 loops, Nucl. Phys. B192(1981) 159–204

    1981

  38. [56]

    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]. 25

    2000 arXiv

  39. [57]

    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, [arXiv:2305.08783]

    2024 arXiv

  40. [58]

    Peraro,FiniteFlow: multivariate functional reconstruction using finite fields and dataflow graphs, JHEP07(2019) 031, [arXiv:1905.08019]

    T. Peraro,FiniteFlow: multivariate functional reconstruction using finite fields and dataflow graphs, JHEP07(2019) 031, [arXiv:1905.08019]

    2019 arXiv

  41. [59]

    Badger, C

    S. Badger, C. Brønnum-Hansen, D. Chicherin, T. Gehrmann, H. B. Hartanto, J. Henn, M. Marcoli, R. Moodie, T. Peraro, and S. Zoia,Virtual QCD corrections to gluon-initiated diphoton plus jet production at hadron colliders, JHEP11(2021) 083, [arXiv:2106.08664]

    2021 arXiv

  42. [60]

    P. S. Wang,A p-adic algorithm for univariate partial fractions, in Proceedings of the Fourth ACM Symposium on Symbolic and Algebraic Computation, SYMSAC ’81, (New York, NY, USA), pp. 212–217, ACM, 1981

    1981

  43. [61]

    P. S. Wang, M. J. T. Guy, and J. H. Davenport,P-adic reconstruction of rational numbers, SIGSAM Bull.16(May, 1982) 2–3

    1982

  44. [62]

    Abreu, J

    S. Abreu, J. Dormans, F. Febres Cordero, H. Ita, and B. Page,Analytic Form of Planar Two-Loop Five-Gluon Scattering Amplitudes in QCD, Phys. Rev. Lett.122(2019), no. 8 082002, [arXiv:1812.04586]

    2019 arXiv

  45. [63]

    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, [arXiv:1711.09572]

    2018 arXiv

  46. [64]

    Liu and Y.-Q

    X. Liu and Y.-Q. Ma,Multiloop corrections for collider processes using auxiliary mass flow, Phys. Rev. D 105(2022), no. 5 L051503, [arXiv:2107.01864]

    2022 arXiv

  47. [65]

    Chen,Iterated path integrals, Bull

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

    1977

  48. [66]

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

    2010 arXiv

  49. [67]

    Ferguson and D

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

    1992

  50. [68]

    Two-loop QCD amplitudes fort ¯tWproduction at the LHC in the leading-colour approximation

    M. Becchetti, D. Canko, X. Chen, V. Chestnov, M. Delto, S. Ditsch, T. Peraro, M. Pozzoli, C. Savoini, and S. Zoia,Ancillary files for “Two-loop QCD amplitudes fort ¯tWproduction at the LHC in the leading-colour approximation ”, 8, 2026. DOI 10.5281/zenodo.21741495

    2026 doi

  51. [69]

    Pozzorini and E

    S. Pozzorini and E. Remiddi,Precise numerical evaluation of the two loop sunrise graph master integrals in the equal mass case, Comput. Phys. Commun.175(2006) 381–387, [hep-ph/0505041]

    2006 arXiv

  52. [70]

    Moriello,Generalised power series expansions for the elliptic planar families of Higgs + jet production at two loops, JHEP01(2020) 150, [arXiv:1907.13234]

    F. Moriello,Generalised power series expansions for the elliptic planar families of Higgs + jet production at two loops, JHEP01(2020) 150, [arXiv:1907.13234]

    2020 arXiv

  53. [71]

    M. N. Costantini, M. Madigan, L. Mantani, and J. M. Moore,A critical study of the Monte Carlo replica method, JHEP12(2024) 064, [arXiv:2404.10056]

    2024 arXiv

  54. [72]

    Buccioni, J.-N

    F. Buccioni, J.-N. Lang, J. M. Lindert, P. Maierh¨ ofer, S. Pozzorini, H. Zhang, and M. F. Zoller, OpenLoops 2, Eur. Phys. J. C79(2019), no. 10 866, [arXiv:1907.13071]

    2019 arXiv

  55. [73]

    Hahn,Generating Feynman diagrams and amplitudes with FeynArts 3, Comput

    T. Hahn,Generating Feynman diagrams and amplitudes with FeynArts 3, Comput. Phys. Commun.140 (2001) 418–431, [hep-ph/0012260]

    2001 arXiv

  56. [74]

    Bi, L.-H

    H.-Y. Bi, L.-H. Huang, R.-J. Huang, Y.-Q. Ma, and H.-M. Yu,Electroweak Corrections to Double Higgs Production at the LHC, Phys. Rev. Lett.132(2024), no. 23 231802, [arXiv:2311.16963]. 26

    2024 arXiv

  57. [75]

    Bi, Y.-Q

    H.-Y. Bi, Y.-Q. Ma, and D.-M. Mu,Electroweak loop corrections to gg→gH at the LHC, JHEP04 (2026) 087, [arXiv:2508.02588]

    2026 arXiv

  58. [76]

    H. T. Li, Y.-Q. Ma, C.-T. Tan, J. Wang, and H.-F. Zhang,Compton-Scattering Total Cross Section at Next-to-Next-to-Leading Order and Resummation of Leading Logarithms, Phys. Rev. Lett.136(2026), no. 2 021802, [arXiv:2511.09330]

    2026

  59. [77]

    X. Guan, X. Liu, Y.-Q. Ma, and W.-H. Wu,Blade: A package for block-triangular form improved Feynman integrals decomposition, Comput. Phys. Commun.310(2025) 109538, [arXiv:2405.14621]

    2025 arXiv

  60. [78]

    X. Guan, X. Liu, and Y.-Q. Ma,Complete reduction of integrals in two-loop five-light-parton scattering amplitudes, Chin. Phys. C44(2020), no. 9 093106, [arXiv:1912.09294]

    2020 arXiv

  61. [79]

    Bres´ o-Pla, G

    V. Bres´ o-Pla, G. Heinrich, V. Magerya, and A. Olsson,Interpolating amplitudes, SciPost Phys.19(2025), no. 5 123, [arXiv:2412.09534]

    2025

  62. [80]

    D. J. Broadhurst, N. Gray, and K. Schilcher,Gauge invariant on-shell Z(2) in QED, QCD and the effective field theory of a static quark, Z. Phys. C52(1991) 111–122

    1991

  63. [81]

    B¨ arnreuther, M

    P. B¨ arnreuther, M. Czakon, and P. Fiedler,Virtual amplitudes and threshold behaviour of hadronic top-quark pair-production cross sections, JHEP02(2014) 078, [arXiv:1312.6279]. 27

    2014 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 5, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.