Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 minor 63 references

The Positivity Geometry of Photon--Dark-Photon Effective Field Theories

T0 review · 0 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-07-10 · grok-4.5

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

Pith's one-line read Elastic positivity carves a spectrahedral region in the twelve Wilson coefficients of the photon–dark-photon EFT and forces hierarchies among mixed-helicity amplitudes.

desk verdict First complete positivity geometry for the photon–massless-dark-photon EFT: 19 amplitudes, 12 Wilson coefficients, analytic spectrahedral bounds that place standard UV portals cleanly. read the letter →

arxiv 2607.06658 v1 pith:QXHSJSXN submitted 2026-07-07 hep-ph hep-exhep-th

Sayantan Chakraborty , Yash Dadhwal , Arun M. Thalapillil This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phhep-exhep-th
keywords positivityboundsdarkphotoneffectivefieldtheoryWilsoncoefficientsspectrahedronhelicityamplitudeskineticmixingaxionportal
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 maps the allowed low-energy theory of ordinary photons mixed with a massless dark photon. Below the electron mass the leading interactions are twelve dimension-eight operators. Analyticity and unitarity, encoded in a modified forward dispersion relation, force linear and nonlinear inequalities on those twelve Wilson coefficients. The inequalities define a spectrahedral geometry whose faces and vertices are populated by concrete ultraviolet models such as kinetic mixing and dark-axion portals. The same bounds imply amplitude hierarchies and two-sided constraints that remain valid even away from the forward limit. The result therefore converts abstract consistency requirements into a concrete geometric diagnostic that can discriminate among dark-sector completions.

What carries the argument

The modified forward function M(s) = [M(s)+M(–s)]/s^{3} whose contour integral around the infrared origin is non-negative by the optical theorem and Regge boundedness; the resulting elastic positivity condition on factorized two-particle states produces the spectrahedral bounds.

What would settle it

An explicit ultraviolet completion whose one-loop or tree-level matching produces Wilson coefficients lying strictly outside the claimed spectrahedron (for example, violating GS ≽ 0 or any of the independent inequalities (11)–(19)) would falsify the positivity geometry.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

Elastic positivity applied to a modified, s–u-odd forward dispersion relation yields an independent set of linear and nonlinear inequalities on the twelve CP-even Wilson coefficients of the photon–massless-dark-photon EFT. These inequalities define a spectrahedral geometry (including an elliptope slice GS ≽ 0 and a spectrahedral shadow of a lifted quartic matrix polynomial) that is the strongest model-independent constraint presently available on this theory.

Load-bearing premise

The argument assumes that massless spin-1 amplitudes are Regge-bounded and that graviton exchange can be completely decoupled or left only as a parametrically tiny residual, so the contour integral closes without gravitational poles.

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

0 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper constructs the complete CP-even dimension-8 EFT of a photon and a massless dark photon (12 Wilson coefficients, 19 independent helicity amplitudes) and derives elastic positivity bounds from a modified forward-limit dispersion relation that enforces s–u symmetry. Analytic linear, quadratic and nonlinear inequalities (Eqs. 11–19) are obtained in tractable C2⊗C4 subspaces; they define a spectrahedral geometry (Gram matrix GS ⪰ 0 and a spectrahedral shadow of a quartic matrix polynomial). These bounds imply non-forward amplitude hierarchies and two-sided constraints, and the loci of kinetic-mixing and dark-axion-portal UV completions inside the geometry are mapped explicitly.

Significance. The work supplies the first complete positivity analysis of the mixed photon–dark-photon EFT, a setting of direct experimental and astrophysical interest. The analytic spectrahedral constraints, the non-forward amplitude consequences, and the concrete UV-completion diagnostics constitute a genuine extension of the pure-photon literature and of the broader EFT-hedron programme. The End-Matter proofs of the optical-theorem identity and the spectrahedral lift, together with the explicit one-loop/tree-level UV calculations, make the results reproducible and immediately usable for model building.

minor comments (4)
  1. The phrase “currently provide the strongest model-independent theoretical constraints” (Introduction) is comparative; a short clause noting that the comparison is with existing pure-photon or restricted multi-U(1) bounds would make the claim self-contained.
  2. Figure 1 caption: the four vertices are listed, but the two shaded branches of the determinant-zero surface are not labelled; a brief parenthetical would aid readability.
  3. End Matter, kinetic-mixing conventions: the angle ϕ = sin^{-1} ε appears without an explicit range; stating 0 ≤ ϕ < π/2 would remove any ambiguity when comparing to the θ = 0 and θ = sin^{-1} ε loci discussed in the main text.
  4. A few typographical inconsistencies remain (e.g., “s−ucrossing” missing spaces, “Delbrück-like” hyphenation). A final proof-reading pass would eliminate them.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: elastic positivity bounds and spectrahedral geometry follow from standard S-matrix axioms applied to a newly enumerated EFT, with independent UV checks.

full rationale

The derivation chain begins from the complete enumeration of 19 independent helicity amplitudes (via parity, time-reversal and crossing) and the 12 CP-even dimension-8 operators of the photon–massless-dark-photon EFT. A modified forward dispersion relation M(s) = [M(s)+M(-s)]/s^{3} is constructed; contour integration, the optical theorem, s–u crossing and the standard assumptions of Regge boundedness plus gravity decoupling then yield the elastic positivity integral (10). Specializing to analytically tractable C^{2}⊗C^{4} subspaces produces the independent linear/quadratic/nonlinear inequalities (11)–(19), the Gram-matrix spectrahedron GS ⪰ 0 and the spectrahedral-shadow interpretation of the quartic constraints via the S-procedure. These steps are self-contained algebraic consequences of the positivity integral; they do not redefine the Wilson coefficients in terms of the bounds, do not fit parameters to data, and do not rest on load-bearing self-citations or uniqueness theorems of the present authors. The subsequent non-forward amplitude hierarchies (25) and two-sided bounds (26) are direct corollaries. Explicit one-loop (kinetic-mixing) and tree-level (dark-axion) UV completions merely evaluate the same Wilson coefficients and locate the resulting points inside the already-derived cone; they supply independent consistency checks rather than inputs. No step reduces by construction to its own premises.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on standard S-matrix axioms plus a small number of domain assumptions customary in the positivity literature; no free parameters are fitted and no new entities are postulated. The only non-standard technical choice is the particular odd function M(s) and the elastic (rather than full dual-cone) restriction.

assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption S-matrix analyticity in the complex s-plane with a branch cut along the real axis for massless particles
    Used to justify the contour integral of the odd function M(s) around the infrared arc C0 (after Eq. 7).
  • domain assumption Optical theorem / unitarity implying Im M ≥ 0 for physical forward amplitudes
    Combined with s–u crossing to obtain Im MA→A(−s−iϵ) ≥ 0 (Eq. 8 and End Matter).
  • domain assumption Regge boundedness of massless spin-1 amplitudes allowing the large-arc contribution to vanish
    Invoked immediately after Eq. 8 to drop the UV arc and obtain the positivity integral (9).
  • domain assumption Strict decoupling of gravity (M_Pl/Λ_EFT → ∞) or only parametrically suppressed residual graviton exchange
    Stated explicitly to neglect graviton-exchange poles that would otherwise obstruct the contour.
  • domain assumption CP-even, P-symmetric theory with canonically normalised kinetic terms (kinetic mixing already diagonalised)
    Fixes the 12-operator basis (5) and the helicity-amplitude counting.
  • ad hoc to paper Elastic positivity on factorised two-particle states (Segre variety) is sufficient to extract the reported bounds
    The authors note that the full dual convex cone encodes more information but restrict to elastic slices for analytic tractability.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The Positivity Geometry of Photon--Dark-Photon Effective Field Theories." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QXHSJSXN

@misc{pith2026260706658,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The Positivity Geometry of Photon--Dark-Photon Effective Field Theories},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QXHSJSXN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.06658}
}
read the original abstract

We derive positivity bounds on the complete dimension-eight effective field theory of photons and a massless dark photon. The mixed gauge sector contains twelve CP-even Wilson coefficients and an enlarged helicity-amplitude structure. Using a modified forward-limit dispersion relation, we analytically obtain non-trivial linear and non-linear elastic positivity constraints that define a spectrahedral geometry. We analyze implications of these bounds on non-forward amplitudes and discuss where kinetic-mixing and dark-axion-portal UV completions populate this geometry.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2607.06658 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Spectrahedron defining an allowed three [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

63 extracted references · 63 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Using a modified forward-limit dispersion relation, we derive elastic positivity bounds that currently provide the strongest model-independent theoretical constraints on this EFT. In analytically tractable subspaces, we ob- tain explicit linear, quadratic, and nonlinear inequali- ties, several of which admit geometric interpretations as spectrahedral slic...

    work page Pith review arXiv 2026

  2. [2]

    millicharged

    Along with Eq.(14), these translate to a hierarchy of low-energy amplitudes in the physical region ⏐⏐M++ +′+′(s,t) ⏐⏐2 ≲M++ ++(s,t) M+′+′ +′+′(s,t), ⏐⏐⏐M++′ ++ (s,t) ⏐⏐⏐ 2 ≲M++ ++(s,t) M++′ ++′(s,t), ⏐⏐⏐M+′+ +′+′(s,t) ⏐⏐⏐ 2 ≲M+′+′ +′+′(s,t)M++′ ++′(s,t). (25) Note that this hierarchy is valid even in the non-forward limit (t̸= 0). Here, and in below, we d...

    work page

  3. [3]

    Amplitudes 2026

    These saturate the bounds in Eqs.(12)-(19). It is found that the UV completion lies on the vertices of Fig.1, specifically as (sgn(gg′),sgn(ggε),sgn(g′gε))∈Vi. Finally, if the kinetic mixing portal and dark axion portal concurrently exist in the UV, it is seen that such a hybrid UV completion would then exist inside the elliptope in the IR. This is also g...

    work page 2026

  4. [4]

    Dark Sectors and New, Light, Weakly-Coupled Particles

    R. Essiget al., Working Group Report: New Light Weakly Coupled Particles, inSnowmass 2013: Snowmass on the Mississippi(2013) arXiv:1311.0029 [hep-ph]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2013

  5. [5]

    The Search for Feebly-Interacting Particles

    G. Lanfranchi, M. Pospelov, and P. Schuster, The Search for Feebly Interacting Particles, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.71, 279 (2021), arXiv:2011.02157 [hep-ph]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2021

  6. [6]

    Fabbrichesi, E

    M. Fabbrichesi, E. Gabrielli, and G. Lanfranchi,The Physics of the Dark Photon: A Primer(Springer Inter- national Publishing, 2021)

    work page 2021

  7. [7]

    The Dark Photon: a 2026 Perspective

    A. Caputo and R. Essig, The dark photon: a 2026 per- spective (2026), arXiv:2603.08430 [hep-ph]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2026

  8. [8]

    The Low-Energy Frontier of Particle Physics

    J. Jaeckel and A. Ringwald, The Low-Energy Frontier of Particle Physics, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.60, 405 (2010), arXiv:1002.0329 [hep-ph]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2010

Show all 63 references
  1. [9]

    S. Gori, M. Williams, P. Ilten, N. Tran, G. Krnjaic, N. Toro, B. Batell, N. Blinov, C. Hearty, R. McGehee, P. Harris, P. Schuster, and J. Zupan, Dark sector physics at high-intensity experiments (2022), arXiv:2209.04671 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Heisenberg and H

    W. Heisenberg and H. Euler, Consequences of Dirac The- ory of the Positron, arXiv e-prints , physics/0605038 (2006), arXiv:physics/0605038 [physics.hist-ph]

    2006 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Karplus and M

    R. Karplus and M. Neuman, The Scattering of Light by Light, Phys. Rev.83, 776 (1951)

    1951

  4. [12]

    A. I. Milstein and M. Schumacher, Present status of Del- bruck scattering, Phys. Rept.243, 183 (1994)

    1994

  5. [13]

    Battesti and C

    R. Battesti and C. Rizzo, Magnetic and Electric Proper- ties of Quantum Vacuum, Rep. Prog. Phys.76, 016401 (2013), arXiv:1211.1933 [physics.optics]

    2013 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Marklund and P

    M. Marklund and P. K. Shukla, Nonlinear Collective Effects in Photon–Photon and Photon–Plasma Inter- actions, Rev. Mod. Phys.78, 591 (2006), arXiv:hep- ph/0602123

    2006

  7. [15]

    Redondo and A

    J. Redondo and A. Ringwald, Light Shining Through Walls, Contemp. Phys.52, 211 (2011), arXiv:1011.3741 [hep-ph]

    2011 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Karbstein, C

    F. Karbstein, C. Sundqvist, K. S. Schulze, I. Uschmann, H. Gies, and G. G. Paulus, Vacuum Birefringence at X-Ray Free-Electron Lasers, New J. Phys.23, 095001 (2021), arXiv:2105.13869 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  9. [17]

    A. K. Harding and D. Lai, Physics of Strongly Magne- tized Neutron Stars, Rep. Prog. Phys.69, 2631 (2006), arXiv:astro-ph/0606674

    2006 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Hoseinpour, M

    A. Hoseinpour, M. Zarei, G. Orlando, N. Bartolo, and 6 S. Matarrese,CMB Vmodes from photon-photon for- ward scattering revisited, Phys. Rev. D102, 063501 (2020), arXiv:2006.14418 [astro-ph.CO]

    2020 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Adams, N

    A. Adams, N. Arkani-Hamed, S. Dubovsky, A. Nicolis, and R. Rattazzi, Causality, analyticity and an ir obstruc- tion to uv completion, Journal of High Energy Physics 2006, 014 (2006)

    2006

  12. [20]

    Vafa, The string landscape and the swampland (2005), arXiv:hep-th/0509212 [hep-th]

    C. Vafa, The string landscape and the swampland (2005), arXiv:hep-th/0509212 [hep-th]

    2005 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Arkani-Hamed, T.-C

    N. Arkani-Hamed, T.-C. Huang, and Y.-t. Huang, The eft-hedron, Journal of High Energy Physics2021, 10.1007/jhep05(2021)259 (2021)

    2021 doi

  14. [22]

    de Rham, S

    C. de Rham, S. Kundu, M. Reece, A. J. Tolley, and S.- Y. Zhou, Snowmass white paper: Uv constraints on ir physics (2022), arXiv:2203.06805 [hep-th]

    2022 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Henriksson, B

    J. Henriksson, B. McPeak, F. Russo, and A. Vichi, Rigor- ous bounds on light-by-light scattering, Journal of High Energy Physics2022, 10.1007/jhep06(2022)158 (2022)

    2022 doi

  16. [24]

    S. D. Chowdhury, K. Ghosh, P. Haldar, P. Raman, and A. Sinha, Crossing Symmetric Spinning S-matrix Bootstrap: EFT bounds, SciPost Phys.13, 051 (2022), arXiv:2112.11755 [hep-th]

    2022 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Häring, A

    K. Häring, A. Hebbar, D. Karateev, M. Meineri, and J. Penedones, Bounds on photon scattering, Journal of High Energy Physics2024, 10.1007/jhep10(2024)103 (2024)

    2024 doi

  18. [26]

    T.Noumi, S.Sato,andJ.Tokuda,Phenomenologicalmo- tivation for gravitational positivity bounds: A case study of dark sector physics, Phys. Rev. D108, 056013 (2023), arXiv:2205.12835 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  19. [27]

    K. Aoki, T. Noumi, R. Saito, S. Sato, S. Shirai, J. Tokuda, and M. Yamazaki, Gravitational positivity for phenomenologists: Dark gauge boson in the swamp- land, Phys. Rev. D110, 016002 (2024), arXiv:2305.10058 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Kim and P

    S. Kim and P. Ko, Constraining millicharged dark matter with gravitational positivity bounds (2025), arXiv:2405.04454 [hep-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Andriolo, D

    S. Andriolo, D. Junghans, T. Noumi, and G. Shiu, A Tower Weak Gravity Conjecture from Infrared Consistency, Fortsch. Phys.66, 1800020 (2018), arXiv:1802.04287 [hep-th]

    2018 arXiv

  22. [30]

    de Rham, S

    C. de Rham, S. Melville, A. J. Tolley, and S.-Y. Zhou, Uv complete me: positivity bounds for parti- cles with spin, Journal of High Energy Physics2018, 10.1007/jhep03(2018)011 (2018)

    2018 doi

  23. [31]

    Hebbar, D

    A. Hebbar, D. Karateev, and J. Penedones, Spinning S- matrix Bootstrap in 4d (2022), arXiv:2011.11708 [hep- th]

    2022 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Bellazzini, J

    B. Bellazzini, J. Elias Miró, R. Rattazzi, M. Riembau, and F. Riva, Positive moments for scattering amplitudes, Phys. Rev. D104, 036006 (2021), arXiv:2011.00037 [hep- th]

    2021 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Alberte, C

    L. Alberte, C. de Rham, S. Jaitly, and A. J. Tolley, Pos- itivity Bounds and the Massless Spin-2 Pole, Phys. Rev. D102, 125023 (2020), arXiv:2007.12667 [hep-th]

    2020 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Tokuda, K

    J. Tokuda, K. Aoki, and S. Hirano, Gravitational pos- itivity bounds, Journal of High Energy Physics2020, 10.1007/jhep11(2020)054 (2020)

    2020 doi

  27. [35]

    S. D. Chowdhury, A. Gadde, T. Gopalka, I. Halder, L. Janagal, and S. Minwalla, Classifying and constrain- ing local four photon and four graviton s-matrices (2019), arXiv:1910.14392 [hep-th]

    2019 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Chandorkar, S

    D. Chandorkar, S. D. Chowdhury, S. Kundu, and S. Min- walla, Bounds on regge growth of flat space scattering from bounds on chaos (2021), arXiv:2102.03122 [hep-th]

    2021 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Zhang and S.-Y

    C. Zhang and S.-Y. Zhou, Convex Geometry Perspective on the (Standard Model) Effective Field Theory Space, Phys. Rev. Lett.125, 201601 (2020), arXiv:2005.03047 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  30. [38]

    X. Li, H. Xu, C. Yang, C. Zhang, and S.-Y. Zhou, Pos- itivity in Multifield Effective Field Theories, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 121601 (2021), arXiv:2101.01191 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Vandenberghe and S

    L. Vandenberghe and S. Boyd, Semidefinite program- ming, SIAM Review38, 49 (1996)

    1996

  32. [40]

    Laurent, F

    M. Laurent, F. M. Mascarin, and S. Telen, The algebraic boundary of graph elliptopes (2026), arXiv:2605.02484 [math.AG]

    2026 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Pólik and T

    I. Pólik and T. Terlaky, A survey of the s-lemma, SIAM Review49, 371 (2007)

    2007

  34. [42]

    Gouveia, P

    J. Gouveia, P. A. Parrilo, and R. R. Thomas, Lifts of convex sets and cone factorizations, Mathematics of Op- erations Research38, 248 (2013)

    2013

  35. [43]

    Scheiderer, Spectrahedral shadows, SIAM Journal on Applied Algebra and Geometry2, 26 (2018)

    C. Scheiderer, Spectrahedral shadows, SIAM Journal on Applied Algebra and Geometry2, 26 (2018)

    2018

  36. [44]

    D. P. Aguillardet al.(Muon g-2), Measurement of the Positive Muon Anomalous Magnetic Moment to 127 ppb, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 101802 (2025), arXiv:2506.03069 [hep-ex]

    2025

  37. [45]

    Aliberti, T

    R. Aliberti, T. Aoyama, E. Balzani, A. Bashir, G. Ben- ton, J. Bijnens, V. Biloshytskyi, T. Blum, D. Boito, M. Bruno,et al., The anomalous magnetic moment of the muon in the standard model: an update, Physics Re- ports1143, 1 (2025), the anomalous magnetic moment of the muon i...

    2025

  38. [46]

    Aldins, S

    J. Aldins, S. J. Brodsky, A. J. Dufner, and T. Kinoshita, Photon-Photon Scattering Contribution to the Sixth- Order Magnetic Moments of the Muon and Electron, Phys. Rev. D1, 2378 (1970)

    1970

  39. [47]

    Kinoshita and M

    T. Kinoshita and M. Nio, Improvedα4 Term of the Muon Anomalous Magnetic Moment, Phys. Rev. D70, 113001 (2004), arXiv:hep-ph/0402206

    2004 arXiv

  40. [48]

    A. Kurz, T. Liu, P. Marquard, A. V. Smirnov, V. A. Smirnov, and M. Steinhauser, Light-by-Light-Type Cor- rections to the Muon Anomalous Magnetic Moment at Four-Loop Order, Phys. Rev. D92, 073019 (2015), arXiv:1508.00901 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Holdom, TwoU(1)’s andεcharge shifts, Physics Let- ters B166, 196 (1986)

    B. Holdom, TwoU(1)’s andεcharge shifts, Physics Let- ters B166, 196 (1986)

    1986

  42. [50]

    Galison and A

    P. Galison and A. Manohar, TWO Z’s OR NOT TWO Z’s?, Phys. Lett. B136, 279 (1984)

    1984

  43. [51]

    R. D. Peccei and H. R. Quinn, CP Conservation in the Presence of Pseudoparticles, Phys. Rev. Lett.38, 1440 (1977)

    1977

  44. [52]

    Kaneta, H.-S

    K. Kaneta, H.-S. Lee, and S. Yun, Portal Connecting Dark Photons and Axions, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 101802 (2017), arXiv:1611.01466 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  45. [53]

    W. R. Inc., Mathematica, Version 12.1, champaign, IL, 2020

    2020

  46. [54]

    N. D. Christensen and C. Duhr, FeynRules - Feynman rules made easy, Computer Physics Communications 180, 1614 (2009)

    2009

  47. [55]

    Christensen, P

    N. Christensen, P. de Aquino, C. Degrande, C. Duhr, B. Fuks, M. Herquet, F. Maltoni, and S. Schumann, A comprehensive approach to new physics simulations, The European Physical Journal C71, 10.1140/epjc/s10052- 011-1541-5 (2011)

    2011 doi

  48. [56]

    Alloul, N

    A. Alloul, N. D. Christensen, C. Degrande, C. Duhr, 7 and B. Fuks, FeynRules 2.0 – A complete toolbox for tree-level phenomenology, Computer Physics Communi- cations185, 2250 (2014)

    2014

  49. [57]

    Shtabovenko, R

    V. Shtabovenko, R. Mertig, and F. Orellana, New devel- opments in FeynCalc 9.0, Computer Physics Communi- cations207, 432 (2016)

    2016

  50. [58]

    Shtabovenko, R

    V. Shtabovenko, R. Mertig, and F. Orellana, FeynCalc 9.3: New features and improvements, Computer Physics Communications256, 107478 (2020)

    2020

  51. [59]

    Shtabovenko, R

    V. Shtabovenko, R. Mertig, and F. Orellana, FeynCalc 10: Do multiloop integrals dream of computer codes?, Computer Physics Communications306, 109357 (2025)

    2025

  52. [60]

    Mertig, M

    R. Mertig, M. Böhm, and A. Denner, Feyn Calc - Computer-algebraic calculation of Feynman amplitudes, Computer Physics Communications64, 345 (1991)

    1991

  53. [61]

    Hahn, Generating Feynman diagrams and amplitudes with FeynArts 3, Computer Physics Communications 140, 418 (2001)

    T. Hahn, Generating Feynman diagrams and amplitudes with FeynArts 3, Computer Physics Communications 140, 418 (2001)

    2001

  54. [62]

    H. H. Patel, Package-X: A Mathematica package for the analytic calculation of one-loop integrals, Computer Physics Communications197, 276 (2015)

    2015

  55. [63]

    H. H. Patel, Package -X 2.0: A Mathematica package for the analytic calculation of one-loop integrals, Computer Physics Communications218, 66 (2017). END MA TTER Positive semidefiniteness ofImMA→A(−s−iϵ) We have M(−s−iϵ) = ∑ i,j,k,l Mk,l i,j(−s−iϵ)aibja∗ kb∗ l = ∑ i,j,k,l M−i,...

    2017

Pith tools

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