Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 132 references

Quantum de Sitter Entropy and Sphere Partition Functions: A-Hypergeometric Approach to Higher Loop Corrections

T0 review · 3 major / 4 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 gives rules that convert any scalar Feynman integral on the sphere into a generalized Euler integral solvable by A-hypergeometric series, and extends the reduction to vector and, conditionally, general-spin fields.

desk verdict The scalar construction is a genuine new technique and the checks are convincing; the vector and higher-spin claims are honestly flagged as incomplete and should not be taken as established. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.16636 v1 pith:HL7OQHFV submitted 2024-11-25 hep-th

Bhavya Bandaru This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-th MSC 33C7081T18
keywords deSitterentropyspherepartitionfunctionshigher-loopFeynmanintegralsembeddingspacepropagatorsgeneralizedEulerA-hypergeometricGKZsystemsincidencematrix
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

Quantum corrections to de Sitter entropy require higher-loop Feynman integrals on the Euclidean de Sitter sphere $S^{d+1}$, where the usual momentum-space tricks are unavailable. This paper establishes a new representation of the massive scalar propagator on the sphere as a radial Mellin transform quotient of the massless flat-space propagator in the embedding space $\mathbb{R}^{d+2}$. With that representation, every scalar Feynman diagram is converted, by rules read directly off the graph, into a generalized Euler integral in $2 n_P$ variables whose denominator is $\det(1+L^T L)^{(d+2)/2}$. Such integrals sit in the class solved algorithmically by A-hypergeometric series, so they cease to require angular integration of products of hypergeometric functions. The same construction is proven for massive and massless vector fields, whose integrals become sums over scalar-type integrals, and conjectured for general spin fields.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the embedding-space representation of the massive sphere propagator, Eq. (2.23), written as a bivariate radial Mellin transform quotient of the massless flat-space propagator in $\mathbb{R}^{d+2}$. Its practical output is the incidence matrix $L(\lambda, \mu)$ of the Feynman diagram: a sparse matrix with one row per propagator and one column per internal vertex, whose non-zero entries are the integration variables $\lambda_i$ and $\mu_i$. The denominator $\det(1+L^T L)$ encodes all distances and topology of the graph, and the exponent $-(d+2)/2$ comes from Gaussian integration over the embedding-space variables. This determinant form is what identifies the integral as a generalized Euler integral and places it under a Gel'fand-Kapranov-Zelevinsky system, whose solutions are A-hypergeometric series.

What would settle it

Compute the massive vector propagator (3.38) contracted with a longitudinal vector spherical harmonic on $S^3$ and check whether it yields the exact inverse mass-squared eigenvalue; the paper concedes the gauge fixing is ad hoc and only the transverse part is established, so a mismatch would falsify the vector extension. For the scalar core, evaluate the 3-melon integral on $S^3$ at a specific mass by direct angular integration and compare with the series arising from (1.19)---any disagreement beyond known regularisation ambiguities would falsify the claimed reduction.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the massive scalar propagator on $S^{d+1}$ can be written exactly as a quotient of the massless propagator in one higher-dimensional Euclidean flat space, with the scale redundancy fixed by a Faddeev-Popov determinant. Substituting this 'momentum-space-like' propagator into a Feynman diagram, integrating the Gaussian embedding-space variables, and fixing the remaining scaling symmetry produces a parametric integral of the form $\int \lambda^{\bar{\Delta}} \mu^{\Delta} [\det(1+L^T L)]^{-(d+2)/2}$ over one $\lambda$ and one $\mu$ per propagator, where $L$ is an incidence matrix whose entries are read off from the diagram. The paper proves this reduction for arbitrary scalar diagrams, works out explicit 1-, 2-, and 3-loop examples, and shows that vector Feynman integrals split into finite sums of such scalar integrals. For general spin fields the same statement is shown to hold conditionally on the existence of embedding-space propagators of the same type, and the paper flags that the gauge fixing used for vectors is ad hoc, with only the transverse part established.

Load-bearing premise

The construction stands or falls on the identity (2.23) identifying the massive sphere propagator with a scale-invariant quotient of the massless flat-space propagator, which requires the radial Mellin transform to commute with the momentum integral and the Faddeev-Popov fixing of the scaling redundancy to produce no surface terms; for vector and higher-spin fields it additionally assumes the gauge choices of Section 3.2 reproduce the exact position-space propagator, which the paper itself says is only established for the transverse part.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Any scalar Feynman diagram on $S^{d+1}$ can be written as a parametric integral in $2 n_P$ variables, with the graph structure contained entirely in a determinant $\det(1+L^T L)$, so no angular integrals over products of ${}_2F_1$ functions are needed.
  • Vector loops are not a separate computational class: each vector Feynman integral reduces to a finite sum of scalar-type Euler integrals, so the scalar solution machinery applies directly.
  • The 1-loop character integrals of the entropy problem are recovered from the new representation, and the same language extends to 2- and 3-loop diagrams, giving a route to non-local quantum corrections to de Sitter entropy beyond 1-loop.
  • Generalized correlation functions with external legs fit in the same scheme; external data appear as additional polynomials in the denominator, so the method covers sphere partition functions and not only closed vacuum graphs.
  • If general-spin embedding-space propagators with the required gauge fixing exist, a 'master' integral with a perturbed incidence matrix would encode all spins for a given graph, reducing any higher-spin loop computation to derivatives of one scalar master integral.

Reading between the lines

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

  • A direct numerical check of the 3-melon and pacman integrals in low dimensions, comparing the A-hypergeometric series against brute-force angular integration on the sphere, would settle the practical reliability of the claimed reduction at three loops.
  • Because the incidence-matrix determinant is the same object that appears in flat-space Lee-Pomeransky representations, the construction suggests a dictionary between flat and spherical Feynman integrals in which the sphere introduces one extra parameter per propagator; working out that dictionary could transfer known flat-space loop technology to de Sitter.
  • The paper's explicit admission that the vector gauge fixing is ad hoc suggests a concrete programme: impose the known longitudinal eigenvalues on the embedding-space vector propagator to fix the gauge ambiguity, which would turn the vector and higher-spin results from conditional into unconditional.
  • If the method extends to gravitons, the non-local quantum corrections to pure-gravity de Sitter entropy would become computable at higher loops, thereby supplying the invariant, model-constraining data the paper argues a microscopic theory must reproduce.
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. The paper develops an embedding-space method for computing Feynman integrals on the sphere S^{d+1}. The massive scalar propagator is represented as a radial Mellin quotient of the massless flat-space propagator in R^{d+2}, which converts scalar sphere integrals into generalized Euler integrals of the form ∫ λ^{bar Δ} μ^{Δ} [det(1+L^T L)]^{-(d+2)/2} over 2 n_P variables, with the incidence matrix L read from the Feynman diagram. A parallel construction for massive and massless vector fields is presented, and it is shown that vector integrals reduce to sums over underlying scalar integrals. The same reduction is claimed for general-spin fields conditional on the existence of embedding-space propagators of the assumed F∘G form. Explicit scalar results through three loops and representative vector examples are provided, together with a detailed review of A-hypergeometric systems in the appendices.

Significance. If the vector part is made fully rigorous, this would be a substantial technical advance for higher-loop computations in de Sitter entropy and, more generally, for sphere Feynman integrals. The scalar construction is internally coherent and passes nontrivial checks: it reproduces the known one-loop character integral and the explicit two-melon result, and the incidence-matrix rules are algorithmic and directly read off the diagram. The paper contains no parameter fitting and no circularly defined predictions; the claimed hypergeometric representations are concrete and falsifiable by independent computation. The appendices provide a self-contained introduction to GKZ systems, which is a useful reference in itself. The main weakness is that the vector extension relies on a gauge-fixing and delta-function input whose validity is to an important extent asserted rather than proven, and the general-spin extension is explicitly a conjecture. These are exactly the points that need attention before the strongest form of the central claim can be accepted.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section 3.5, Eqs. (3.38)–(3.47), with Section 5.1] The vector propagator is the load-bearing input for the vector reduction in Section 4.5, but its position-space form is only shown to match the known Wightman function away from θ=0; the delta-function/longitudinal piece in Eq. (3.46) is asserted rather than derived. The coincident-point limit enters Section 4.5 directly, for example in the vector one-loop trace in Eqs. (4.65)–(4.68) and in the vector two-melon contraction, so an incorrect contact term would change the claimed vector results. The eigenmode checks in Appendix A.3.2 are valuable, but they check matrix elements in a basis rather than the full distributional identity K_{μν}G^{νν'} = δ_μ^{ν'}δ. Please either prove this identity with the stated coefficient or explicitly reformulate the vector part of the main result as conditional on this gauge-fixing step.
  2. [Section 4.2, Eqs. (4.9)–(4.18), and Section 1.3] The master-integral statement for general spin is a theorem only under an explicitly unproven hypothesis, namely that every spin-s propagator admits a representation F∘G_η[Δ] with F polynomial in the invariants listed in Eq. (4.10). The paper's own footnote in Section 1.3 and the discussion in Section 5.1 acknowledge that such propagators are not yet constructed. Since the abstract already says "granting existence", this is not a contradiction, but the body uses unconditional language such as "higher spin integrals can also be turned into generalized Euler integrals" in Section 4.2. Please mark the conditional status in every theorem statement and in the conclusions, and separate the vector case, where the propagator is constructed, from the general-spin case, where it is hypothesized.
  3. [Section 2.2, Eqs. (2.21)–(2.23), and Section 4.1] The scalar identity interchanges the radial Mellin integral with the momentum-space integral and divides by the volume of the scaling group without a detailed treatment of possible surface terms at coincident points or of convergence of the λ, μ integrals. The Faddeev-Popov fixing in Section 4.1 similarly assumes that the gauge-fixing determinant in the multi-propagator case is a constant. If these interchanges fail, the scalar construction would acquire boundary contributions that are not captured by the incidence-matrix determinant. The agreement with known one-loop and two-melon results is reassuring, but for a general diagram the needed analytic justification is not given. A short proof of the absence of boundary terms, or a precise statement of the class of diagrams for which the identity holds, would remove this correctness risk.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Appendix A.1, Eq. (A.1)] The notation "S^{d+1}: d+1 ≡ D ≡ D−1" appears to be a typo; it should state D=d+2 and that the sphere dimension is D−1.
  2. [Throughout] There are many small typographical errors, including "extentions", "unaswered", and "signficantly"; a careful proofreading pass is recommended.
  3. [Section 4.1 and Eq. (4.3)] The weighted incidence matrix U(ς) is defined through a list of rules but the final block form in Eq. (4.3) is stated without an explicit example of a diagram with mixed vertex orientations; adding one small worked example of the construction of L from the diagram would substantially improve readability.
  4. [Section 1.2, Eq. (1.22)] The statement that these integrals can be solved algorithmically by A-hypergeometric series is correct in principle, but the convergence and analytic-continuation issues for the physically relevant mass parameters are only touched on in Appendix B; a brief summary in the main text of when the series are convergent would help the reader assess the practical scope.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the embedding-space Euler-integral reduction follows by derivation from a verified propagator representation; the general-spin extension is an explicit conjecture, not a circular step.

full rationale

The paper's central scalar result is a derivation, not a circle: starting from the known massive scalar propagator on S^{d+1}, it constructs a radial Mellin quotient representation in embedding space, verifies that representation against the eigenmode orthonormality conditions, and then performs Gaussian integrals over the embedding-space momenta and positions. The incidence-matrix determinant det(1+L^T L) and the resulting generalized Euler integral form arise from those Gaussian integrations; no parameter is fitted to the target Feynman integrals, and no target integral is used to define the propagator representation. Explicit results such as the one-loop character integral, the 2-melon expression, and the 3-melon formula are checked against the independently known one-loop character integral from [15], which functions as an external benchmark rather than as a load-bearing assumption. The vector extension is likewise constructed explicitly from the massless flat-space field-strength two-point function, with its transverse and longitudinal eigenvalue properties verified in appendix A.3.2; it is not assumed by circularly positing the desired vector integral form. The paper explicitly flags in Section 5.1 and in the footnote to Section 1.3 that general higher-spin embedding-space propagators are not yet constructed, and it presents the general-spin statement only conditionally, 'granting existence' of such propagators. That is an honest conjecture, not a disguised input. No equation is defined in terms of the result it is used to predict, and no fitted parameter is relabeled as a prediction. The derivation chain is therefore self-contained and non-circular.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on several structural assumptions about the embedding space representation, Gaussian integration over internal vertices, and the GKZ solution correspondence. There are no fitted parameters and no invented physical entities; the embedding space propagators and master integrals are mathematical constructions.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The massive scalar propagator on S^{d+1} equals the scale invariant quotient of the massless flat space propagator in R^{d+2} as in Eq. (2.23).
    Invoked in Section 2.2 and used for every Feynman integral; verified against eigenmode inner products in Appendix A.3.1 but not proven as a distribution identity at coincident points.
  • domain assumption Sphere Feynman integrals over internal vertices can be written as Gaussian integrals over embedding space momenta and positions with measure d^D X / |X|^D and no momentum conservation at vertices, as in Eqs. (4.1) to (4.8).
    This is the bridge from position space Feynman rules to the determinant formula; plausible but not fully justified when propagators are singular.
  • standard math The GKZ solution space equals the space of generalized Euler integrals for generic parameters, and restriction to physical parameters is valid after handling resonances.
    Cites [25,108,110]; used throughout Appendix B and Section 4.4. Physical parameter values sit on resonant hyperplanes, requiring separate treatment that is only sketched.
  • ad hoc to paper Embedding space vector propagators can be gauge fixed so that their reduction to the sphere reproduces the exact massive and massless vector propagators including the delta function piece.
    The paper states in Section 5.1 that the gauge fixing is ad hoc and needs systematization; footnote 2 says only the transverse part is established.
  • ad hoc to paper General spin propagators admit the scalar based embedding form F composed with G[Delta] of Eq. (2.28).
    Explicitly labeled a hypothesis in Section 1.3 and Section 5.1; no proof is given.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Quantum de Sitter Entropy and Sphere Partition Functions: A-Hypergeometric Approach to Higher Loop Corrections." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HL7OQHFV

@misc{pith2026241116636,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Quantum de Sitter Entropy and Sphere Partition Functions: A-Hypergeometric Approach to Higher Loop Corrections},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HL7OQHFV}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.16636}
}
read the original abstract

In order to find quantum corrections to the de Sitter entropy, a new approach to higher loop Feynman integral computations on the sphere is presented. Arbitrary scalar Feynman integrals on a spherical background are brought into the generalized Euler integral (A-hypergeometric series/GKZ system) form by expressing the massive scalar propagator as a quotient of a bivariate radial Mellin transform of the massless scalar propagator in one higher dimensional Euclidean flat space. This formulation is expanded to include massive and massless vector fields by construction of similar embedding space propagators. Vector Feynman integrals are shown to be sums over generalized Euler integrals formed of underlying scalar Feynman integrals. Granting existence of general spin embedding space propagators, the same is shown to be true for general spin Feynman integrals.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.16636 by the authors.

Figure 1.1
Figure 1.1. North and South Static Patches of De Sitter The red circles are representative of r Ωˆ d−1 in eq. (1.3). The dashed lines are asymptotes depicting the horizon at r = ℓ. the properties of dS, become relevant. Some useful reviews discussing the nature of de Sitter space in detail are [5–8]. Fortunately, there is at least one unambiguously defined non-trivial calculable quantity in empty de Sitter space, its entropy. T… view at source ↗
Figure 1.2
Figure 1.2. 3-Melon Feynman Diagram with mass parameter ∆ consisting of 3 massive scalar propagators of the same mass parameter ∆ connecting 2 internal vertices (X, ˆ Yˆ ) is I [∆] 2,3 = ˆ dΩXˆ dΩYˆ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2.1
Figure 2.1. dS Scalar Propagator as an analogue of AdS Bulk to Boundary Propagators (ii) Applying the condition τ = 1 G(X, ˆ Yˆ ) = 1 2π D 2 ˆ ∗ λ,µ λ ∆¯ µ ∆ e −|λ Xˆ−µ Yˆ | 2 (2.31) allows the integral to be evaluated as an expansion around σ = −1, i.e. w = 0, G(X, ˆ Yˆ ) = Γ( ∆+∆ ¯ 2 ) 4π D 2 − ˆ ∗ r r ∆¯ (1 − r) ∆ (1 − 4 r (1 − r) w) ∆+∆ ¯ 2 , − ˆ ∗ r ≡ ˆ 1 0 dr r (1 − r) (2.32) by expanding the integrand as a series in incr… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (5 more)
Figure 3.1
Figure 3.1. Figure 3.1: "Canonical" choice of Tangent Spaces on the Sphere wrt Geodesics In the first image, normalised unit vectors are tangent to the geodesic. The parallel propagator carries the tangent space at one point to the other along the geodesic in the direction of these unit vec…
Figure 4.1
Figure 4.1. Figure 4.1: 2-point function and related Feynman diagrams 4.4.1 Coincident point limit and 1-loop character integral The coincident point limit of the scalar propagator, i.e. geodesic distance θ = 0 or alternately σ = 1 in say eq. (2.36), is expectedly divergent: G[∆] ≡ G[∆](σ) …
Figure 4.2
Figure 4.2. Figure 4.2: 3-point function and related Feynman diagrams 4.4.6 n-Point function and n-melon Using eq. (4.26), a general scalar n-point function (corresponding to the feynman diagram Y X1 ∆1 X2 ∆2 X3 ∆3 · · · Xn ∆n ) is given by: Jn(Xˆ) = N¯ n ˆ ∗ λ, µ λ ∆¯ µ ∆ e −λ 2 e ( P λ µ …
Figure 4.3
Figure 4.3. Figure 4.3: 4-point function and related Feynman diagrams 4.4.9 2 simply connected loops Just like the tadpole diagram, fig. (4.3b) is also easily evaluated in terms of the 1-loop integral: I1,2,[0,0] = I[∆1] I[∆2] Ωd+1 . (4.61) The addition of vertices to each loop is just as s…
Figure 4.4
Figure 4.4. Figure 4.4: Irreducible 3-loop Feynman diagrams as limits of tree-level correlation functions 37 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p037_4_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

132 extracted references · 29 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Nine-Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Obser- vations: Final Maps and Results

    C. L. Bennett et al. “Nine-Year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) Obser- vations: Final Maps and Results”. In:The Astrophysical Journal Supplement Series208.2 (Sept. 2013), p. 20.doi: 10.1088/0067-0049/208/2/20

    doi:10.1088/0067-0049/208/2/20 2013

  2. [2]

    Observational evidence from supernovae for an accelerating universe and a cosmological constant

    A. G. Riess et al. “Observational evidence from supernovae for an accelerating universe and a cosmological constant”. In:Astron. J.116 (1998), pp. 1009–1038.doi: 10.1086/300499. arXiv: astro-ph/9805201

    arXiv 1998

  3. [3]

    The High-Z Supernova Search: Measuring Cosmic Deceleration and Global Curvature of the Universe Using Type Ia Supernovae

    B. P. Schmidt et al. “The High-Z Supernova Search: Measuring Cosmic Deceleration and Global Curvature of the Universe Using Type Ia Supernovae”. In:The Astrophysical Journal 507.1 (Nov. 1998), 46–63.doi: 10.1086/306308

    doi:10.1086/306308 1998

  4. [4]

    Supernovae, Dark Energy, and the Accelerating Universe: The Status of the Cosmological Parameters

    S. Perlmutter. “Supernovae, Dark Energy, and the Accelerating Universe: The Status of the Cosmological Parameters”. In:International Journal of Modern Physics A15.supp01b (2000), pp. 715–739.doi: 10.1142/S0217751X00005383

    work page doi:10.1142/s0217751x00005383 2000

  5. [5]

    Les Houches lectures on de Sitter space

    M. Spradlin, A. Strominger, and A. Volovich. “Les Houches lectures on de Sitter space”. In: Les Houches Summer School: Session 76: Euro Summer School on Unity of Funda- mental Physics: Gravity, Gauge Theory and Strings. Oct. 2001, pp. 423–453. arXiv:hep- th/0110007

    arXiv 2001

  6. [6]

    Quantum gravity in de Sitter space

    E. Witten. “Quantum gravity in de Sitter space”. In:Strings 2001: International Conference. June 2001. arXiv:hep-th/0106109. 90

    arXiv 2001

  7. [7]

    De Sitter Musings

    D. Anninos. “De Sitter Musings”. In: Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 27 (2012), p. 1230013. doi: 10.1142/S0217751X1230013X. arXiv: 1205.3855 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2012

  8. [8]

    Modave lectures on de Sitter space & holography

    D. A. Galante. “Modave lectures on de Sitter space & holography”. In:PoS Modave2022 (2023), p. 003.doi: 10.22323/1.435.0003. arXiv: 2306.10141 [hep-th]

    arXiv 2023

Show all 132 references
  1. [9]

    Action Integrals and Partition Functions in Quantum Gravity

    G. W. Gibbons and S. W. Hawking. “Action Integrals and Partition Functions in Quantum Gravity”. In:Phys. Rev. D15 (1977), pp. 2752–2756.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.15.2752

    1977 doi

  2. [10]

    Wave Function of the Universe

    J. B. Hartle and S. W. Hawking. “Wave Function of the Universe”. In:Phys. Rev. D 28 (1983). Ed. by L.-Z. Fang and R. Ruffini, pp. 2960–2975.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.28.2960

    1983 doi

  3. [11]

    Cosmological Event Horizons, Thermodynamics, and Particle Creation

    G. W. Gibbons and S. W. Hawking. “Cosmological Event Horizons, Thermodynamics, and Particle Creation”. In:Phys. Rev. D15 (1977), pp. 2738–2751.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.15. 2738

    1977 doi

  4. [12]

    Quantum Gravity and Path Integrals

    S. W. Hawking. “Quantum Gravity and Path Integrals”. In: Phys. Rev. D 18 (1978), pp. 1747–1753. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.18.1747

    1978 doi

  5. [13]

    Leading quantum correction to the Newtonian potential

    J. F. Donoghue. “Leading quantum correction to the Newtonian potential”. In:Phys. Rev. Lett. 72 (1994), pp. 2996–2999. doi: 10 . 1103 / PhysRevLett . 72 . 2996. arXiv: gr - qc / 9310024

    1994

  6. [14]

    The effective field theory treatment of quantum gravity

    J. F. Donoghue. “The effective field theory treatment of quantum gravity”. In:AIP Conf. Proc. 1483.1 (2012). Ed. by W. A. Rodrigues et al., pp. 73–94.doi: 10.1063/1.4756964 . arXiv: 1209.3511 [gr-qc]

    2012 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Quantum de Sitter horizon entropy from quasicanonical bulk, edge, sphere and topological string partition functions

    D. Anninos et al. “Quantum de Sitter horizon entropy from quasicanonical bulk, edge, sphere and topological string partition functions”. In: JHEP 01 (2022), p. 088. doi: 10 . 1007 / JHEP01(2022)088. arXiv: 2009.12464 [hep-th]

    2022 arXiv

  8. [16]

    The two-sphere partition function in two- dimensional quantum gravity

    D. Anninos, T. Bautista, and B. Mühlmann. “The two-sphere partition function in two- dimensional quantum gravity”. In:JHEP 09 (2021), p. 116.doi: 10.1007/JHEP09(2021)116. arXiv: 2106.01665 [hep-th]

    2021 arXiv

  9. [17]

    The two-sphere partition function in two-dimensional quantum gravity at fixed area

    B. Mühlmann. “The two-sphere partition function in two-dimensional quantum gravity at fixed area”. In:JHEP 09.189 (2021), p. 189.doi: 10.1007/JHEP09(2021)189. arXiv: 2106. 04532 [hep-th]

    2021 doi

  10. [18]

    Interpolating geometries and the stretched dS 2 horizon

    D. Anninos and E. Harris. “Interpolating geometries and the stretched dS 2 horizon”. In: JHEP 11 (2022), p. 166.doi: 10.1007/JHEP11(2022)166. arXiv: 2209.06144 [hep-th]

    2022 arXiv

  11. [19]

    The two-sphere partition function from timelike Liouville theory at three- looporder

    B. Mühlmann. “The two-sphere partition function from timelike Liouville theory at three- looporder”.In: JHEP 05(2022),p.057. doi: 10.1007/JHEP05(2022)057.arXiv: 2202.04549 [hep-th]

    2022 arXiv

  12. [20]

    dS2 supergravity

    D. Anninos, P. Benetti Genolini, and B. Mühlmann. “dS2 supergravity”. In:JHEP 11 (2023), p. 145. doi: 10.1007/JHEP11(2023)145. arXiv: 2309.02480 [hep-th]

    2023 arXiv

  13. [21]

    General-relativistic quantum field theory: An exactly soluble model

    P. Candelas and D. J. Raine. “General-relativistic quantum field theory: An exactly soluble model”. In:Phys. Rev. D12 (4 Aug. 1975), pp. 965–974.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.12.965

    1975 doi

  14. [22]

    Scalar effective Lagrangian in de Sitter space

    J. S. Dowker and R. Crichley. “Scalar effective Lagrangian in de Sitter space”. In:Phys. Rev. D 13 (2 Jan. 1976), pp. 224–234.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.13.224

    1976 doi

  15. [23]

    Quantum Field Theory in de Sitter Space: Renor- malization by Point Splitting

    T. S. Bunch and P. C. W. Davies. “Quantum Field Theory in de Sitter Space: Renor- malization by Point Splitting”. In:Proc. Roy. Soc. Lond. A360 (1978), pp. 117–134.doi: 10.1098/rspa.1978.0060

    1978

  16. [24]

    Harmonic analysis and propagators on homogeneous spaces

    R. Camporesi. “Harmonic analysis and propagators on homogeneous spaces”. In:Phys. Rept. 196 (1990), pp. 1–134.doi: 10.1016/0370-1573(90)90120-Q

    1990 doi

  17. [25]

    Generalized Euler integrals and A - hyper- geometric functions

    I. M. Gelfand, M. Kapranov, and A. Zelevinsky. “Generalized Euler integrals and A - hyper- geometric functions”. In:Advances in Mathematics84 (1990), pp. 255–271.doi: 10.1016/ 0001-8708(90)90048-R

    1990

  18. [26]

    An Evaluation of the Graviton Propagator in De Sitter Space

    B. Allen and M. Turyn. “An Evaluation of the Graviton Propagator in De Sitter Space”. In: Nucl. Phys. B292 (1987), p. 813.doi: 10.1016/0550-3213(87)90672-9

    1987 doi

  19. [27]

    Critical points and number of master integrals

    R. N. Lee and A. A. Pomeransky. “Critical points and number of master integrals”. In:JHEP 11 (2013), p. 165.doi: 10.1007/JHEP11(2013)165. arXiv: 1308.6676 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  20. [28]

    A Simple formula for reducing Feynman diagrams to scalar integrals

    A. I. Davydychev. “A Simple formula for reducing Feynman diagrams to scalar integrals”. In: Phys. Lett. B263 (1991), pp. 107–111.doi: 10.1016/0370-2693(91)91715-8. 91

    1991 doi

  21. [29]

    Covariant actions and propagators for all spins, masses, and dimensions

    L. W. Lindwasser. “Covariant actions and propagators for all spins, masses, and dimensions”. In: (July 2023). arXiv:2307.11750 [hep-th]

    2023 arXiv

  22. [30]

    On a conjecture of Regge and Sato on Feynman integrals

    M. Kashiwara and T. Kawai. “On a conjecture of Regge and Sato on Feynman integrals”. In: 1976. doi: 10.3792/pja/1195518341

    1976

  23. [32]

    Status of Intersection Theory and Feynman Integrals

    S. Mizera. “Status of Intersection Theory and Feynman Integrals”. In:PoS MA2019 (2022), p. 016. doi: 10.22323/1.383.0016

    2022 doi

  24. [33]

    KinematicsingularitiesofFeynmanintegralsandprincipalA-determinants

    R.P.Klausen.“KinematicsingularitiesofFeynmanintegralsandprincipalA-determinants”. In: JHEP 02 (2022), p. 004.doi: 10.1007/JHEP02(2022)004. arXiv:2109.07584 [hep-th]

    2022 arXiv

  25. [34]

    Nasrollahpoursamami

    E. Nasrollahpoursamami. Periods of Feynman Diagrams and GKZ D - Modules. 2016. arXiv: 1605.04970 [math-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  26. [35]

    Feynman integral relations from parametric annihilators

    T. Bitoun et al. “Feynman integral relations from parametric annihilators”. In:Lett. Math. Phys. 109.3 (2019), pp. 497–564.doi: 10.1007/s11005- 018- 1114- 8. arXiv: 1712.09215 [hep-th]

    2019 arXiv

  27. [36]

    Feynman integrals as A-hypergeometric functions

    L. de la Cruz. “Feynman integrals as A-hypergeometric functions”. In: JHEP 12 (2019), p. 123. doi: 10.1007/JHEP12(2019)123. arXiv: 1907.00507 [math-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  28. [37]

    Hypergeometric Series Representations of Feynman Integrals by GKZ Hy- pergeometric Systems

    R. P. Klausen. “Hypergeometric Series Representations of Feynman Integrals by GKZ Hy- pergeometric Systems”. In:JHEP 04 (2020), p. 121.doi: 10.1007/JHEP04(2020)121. arXiv: 1910.08651 [hep-th]

    2020 arXiv

  29. [38]

    The De Sitter Vacuum

    C. J. C. Burges. “The De Sitter Vacuum”. In:Nucl. Phys. B247 (1984), pp. 533–543.doi: 10.1016/0550-3213(84)90562-5

    1984 doi

  30. [39]

    Vacuum States in de Sitter Space

    B. Allen. “Vacuum States in de Sitter Space”. In: Phys. Rev. D 32 (1985), p. 3136. doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.32.3136

    1985 doi

  31. [40]

    Spectral functions and zeta functions in hyperbolic spaces

    R. Camporesi and A. Higuchi. “Spectral functions and zeta functions in hyperbolic spaces”. In: J. Math. Phys.35 (1994), pp. 4217–4246.doi: 10.1063/1.530850

    1994 doi

  32. [41]

    Vector Two Point Functions in Maximally Symmetric Spaces

    B. Allen and T. Jacobson. “Vector Two Point Functions in Maximally Symmetric Spaces”. In: Commun. Math. Phys.103 (1986), p. 669.doi: 10.1007/BF01211169

    1986 doi

  33. [42]

    TASI lectures on AdS/CFT

    J. Penedones. “TASI lectures on AdS/CFT”. In: Theoretical Advanced Study Institute in Elementary Particle Physics: New Frontiers in Fields and Strings. 2017, pp. 75–136. doi: 10.1142/9789813149441_0002. arXiv: 1608.04948 [hep-th]

    2017 arXiv

  34. [43]

    Mode-sum construction of the two-point functions for the Stueckelberg vector fields in the Poincaré patch of de Sitter space

    M. B. Fröb and A. Higuchi. “Mode-sum construction of the two-point functions for the Stueckelberg vector fields in the Poincaré patch of de Sitter space”. In:J. Math. Phys.55 (2014), p. 062301.doi: 10.1063/1.4879496. arXiv: 1305.3421 [gr-qc]

    2014 arXiv

  35. [44]

    The Graviton Propagator in Maximally Symmetric Spaces

    M. Turyn. “The Graviton Propagator in Maximally Symmetric Spaces”. In:J. Math. Phys. 31 (1990), p. 669.doi: 10.1063/1.528903

    1990 doi

  36. [45]

    Quantizing Gravity with a Cosmological Constant

    S. M. Christensen and M. J. Duff. “Quantizing Gravity with a Cosmological Constant”. In: Nucl. Phys. B170 (1980), pp. 480–506.doi: 10.1016/0550-3213(80)90423-X

    1980 doi

  37. [46]

    On Loops in Inflation

    L. Senatore and M. Zaldarriaga. “On Loops in Inflation”. In:JHEP 12 (2010), p. 008.doi: 10.1007/JHEP12(2010)008. arXiv: 0912.2734 [hep-th]

    2010 arXiv

  38. [47]

    The IR stability of de Sitter: Loop corrections to scalar propagators

    D. Marolf and I. A. Morrison. “The IR stability of de Sitter: Loop corrections to scalar propagators”. In:Phys. Rev. D82 (2010), p. 105032.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.82.105032 . arXiv: 1006.0035 [gr-qc]

    2010 arXiv

  39. [48]

    The IR stability of de Sitter QFT: Physical initial conditions

    D. Marolf and I. A. Morrison. “The IR stability of de Sitter QFT: Physical initial conditions”. In: Gen. Rel. Grav.43 (2011), pp. 3497–3530.doi: 10.1007/s10714-011-1233-3 . arXiv: 1104.4343 [gr-qc]

    2011 arXiv

  40. [49]

    Infrared instability of the de Sitter space

    A. M. Polyakov. “Infrared instability of the de Sitter space”. In: (Sept. 2012). arXiv:1209. 4135 [hep-th]

    2012

  41. [50]

    Conformal QEDd, F-Theorem and the ϵ Expansion

    S. Giombi, I. R. Klebanov, and G. Tarnopolsky. “Conformal QEDd, F-Theorem and the ϵ Expansion”.In: J. Phys. A49.13(2016),p.135403. doi: 10.1088/1751-8113/49/13/135403. arXiv: 1508.06354 [hep-th]

    2016 arXiv

  42. [51]

    Generalized F-Theorem and the ϵ Expansion

    L. Fei et al. “Generalized F-Theorem and the ϵ Expansion”. In: JHEP 12 (2015), p. 155. doi: 10.1007/JHEP12(2015)155. arXiv: 1507.01960 [hep-th]. 92

    2015 arXiv

  43. [52]

    Massive scalar field in de Sitter spacetime: a two-loop calculation and a comparison with the stochastic approach

    A. Y. Kamenshchik, A. A. Starobinsky, and T. Vardanyan. “Massive scalar field in de Sitter spacetime: a two-loop calculation and a comparison with the stochastic approach”. In:Eur. Phys. J. C 82.4 (2022), p. 345.doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052- 022- 10295- z. arXiv: 2109. 05625 [gr-qc]

    2022 doi

  44. [53]

    Loops in de Sitter space

    S. L. Cacciatori, H. Epstein, and U. Moschella. “Loops in de Sitter space”. In:JHEP 07 (2024), p. 182.doi: 10.1007/JHEP07(2024)182. arXiv: 2403.13145 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  45. [54]

    Integration by parts: The algorithm to calculateβ- functions in 4 loops

    K. G. Chetyrkin and F. V. Tkachov. “Integration by parts: The algorithm to calculateβ- functions in 4 loops”. In: Nucl. Phys. B 192 (1981), pp. 159–204. doi: 10 . 1016 / 0550 - 3213(81)90199-1

    1981

  46. [55]

    A theorem on analytical calculability of 4-loop renormalization group func- tions

    F. V. Tkachov. “A theorem on analytical calculability of 4-loop renormalization group func- tions”. In:Phys. Lett. B100 (1981), pp. 65–68.doi: 10.1016/0370-2693(81)90288-4

    1981 doi

  47. [56]

    Automatic computation of Feynman diagrams

    R. Harlander and M. Steinhauser. “Automatic computation of Feynman diagrams”. In:Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.43 (1999), pp. 167–228.doi: 10.1016/S0146-6410(99)00095-2 . arXiv: hep-ph/9812357

    1999 arXiv

  48. [57]

    Differential equations for two-loop four-point functions

    T. Gehrmann and E. Remiddi. “Differential equations for two-loop four-point functions”. In: Nucl. Phys. B 580 (2000), pp. 485–518. doi: 10.1016/S0550- 3213(00)00223- 6 . arXiv: hep-ph/9912329

    2000 arXiv

  49. [58]

    Massive three - loop Feynman diagrams reducible to SC* primitives of algebras of the sixth root of unity

    D. J. Broadhurst. “Massive three - loop Feynman diagrams reducible to SC* primitives of algebras of the sixth root of unity”. In:Eur. Phys. J. C 8 (1999), pp. 311–333. doi: 10.1007/s100529900935. arXiv: hep-th/9803091

    1999 arXiv

  50. [59]

    Three loop on-shell charge renormalization without integration: Lambda- MS (QED) to four loops

    D. J. Broadhurst. “Three loop on-shell charge renormalization without integration: Lambda- MS (QED) to four loops”. In:Z. Phys. C54 (1992), pp. 599–606.doi: 10.1007/BF01559486

    1992 doi

  51. [60]

    Differential equations method: The Calculation of vertex type Feynman diagrams

    A. V. Kotikov. “Differential equations method: The Calculation of vertex type Feynman diagrams”. In:Phys. Lett. B259 (1991), pp. 314–322.doi: 10.1016/0370-2693(91)90834- D

    1991 doi

  52. [61]

    The Master differential equations for the two loop sunrise selfmass ampli- tudes

    M. Caffo et al. “The Master differential equations for the two loop sunrise selfmass ampli- tudes”. In:Nuovo Cim. A111 (1998), pp. 365–389. arXiv:hep-th/9805118

    1998 arXiv

  53. [62]

    Differential equation method: The Calculation of N point Feynman dia- grams

    A. V. Kotikov. “Differential equation method: The Calculation of N point Feynman dia- grams”. In:Phys. Lett. B267 (1991), pp. 123–127.doi: 10.1016/0370-2693(91)90536-Y

    1991 doi

  54. [63]

    Explicit solutions of the multiloop integral recurrence relations and its ap- plication

    P. A. Baikov. “Explicit solutions of the multiloop integral recurrence relations and its ap- plication”. In:Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A389 (1997). Ed. by M. Werlen and D. Perret-Gallix, pp. 347–349. doi: 10.1016/S0168-9002(97)00126-5. arXiv: hep-ph/9611449

    1997 arXiv

  55. [64]

    High-precision calculation of multiloop Feynman integrals by difference equa- tions

    S. Laporta. “High-precision calculation of multiloop Feynman integrals by difference equa- tions”.In: Int. J. Mod. Phys. A15(2000),pp.5087–5159. doi: 10.1142/S0217751X00002159. arXiv: hep-ph/0102033

    2000 arXiv

  56. [65]

    The Four-loop QCD beta-function and anomalous dimensions

    M. Czakon. “The Four-loop QCD beta-function and anomalous dimensions”. In:Nucl. Phys. B 710 (2005), pp. 485–498. doi: 10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2005.01.012 . arXiv: hep- ph/ 0411261

    2005 doi

  57. [66]

    The Third-order QCD corrections to deep- inelastic scattering by photon exchange

    J. A. M. Vermaseren, A. Vogt, and S. Moch. “The Third-order QCD corrections to deep- inelastic scattering by photon exchange”. In: Nucl. Phys. B 724 (2005), pp. 3–182. doi: 10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2005.06.020. arXiv: hep-ph/0504242

    2005 arXiv

  58. [67]

    Five-Loop Running of the QCD coupling constant

    P. A. Baikov, K. G. Chetyrkin, and J. H. Kühn. “Five-Loop Running of the QCD coupling constant”. In:Phys. Rev. Lett.118.8 (2017), p. 082002.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.118. 082002. arXiv: 1606.08659 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  59. [68]

    The five-loop beta function of Yang-Mills theory with fermions

    F. Herzog et al. “The five-loop beta function of Yang-Mills theory with fermions”. In:JHEP 02 (2017), p. 090.doi: 10.1007/JHEP02(2017)090. arXiv: 1701.01404 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  60. [69]

    The five-loop Beta function for a general gauge group and anomalous dimen- sions beyond Feynman gauge

    T. Luthe et al. “The five-loop Beta function for a general gauge group and anomalous dimen- sions beyond Feynman gauge”. In:JHEP 10 (2017), p. 166.doi: 10.1007/JHEP10(2017)166. arXiv: 1709.07718 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  61. [70]

    Algebraic algorithms for multiloop calculations. The First 15 years. What’s next?

    F. V. Tkachov. “Algebraic algorithms for multiloop calculations. The First 15 years. What’s next?” In: Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 389 (1997). Ed. by M. Werlen and D. Perret-Gallix, pp. 309–313. doi: 10.1016/S0168-9002(97)00110-1. arXiv: hep-ph/9609429. 93

    1997 arXiv

  62. [71]

    Holonomy Structure of Landau Singularities and Feynman Integrals

    M. Sato et al. “Holonomy Structure of Landau Singularities and Feynman Integrals”. In:Pub- lications of the Research Institute for Mathematical Sciences12.Supplement (1977), pp. 387–

    1977

  63. [72]

    Periods and Feynman integrals

    C. Bogner and S. Weinzierl. “Periods and Feynman integrals”. In:J. Math. Phys.50 (2009), p. 042302. doi: 10.1063/1.3106041. arXiv: 0711.4863 [hep-th]

    2009 arXiv

  64. [73]

    Feynman Diagrams, Differential Reduction, and Hypergeometric Functions

    M. Y. Kalmykov et al. “Feynman Diagrams, Differential Reduction, and Hypergeometric Functions”. In:PoS ACAT08 (2008). Ed. by T. Speer, F. Carminati, and M. Werlen, p. 125. doi: 10.22323/1.070.0125. arXiv: 0901.4716 [hep-th]

    2008 arXiv

  65. [74]

    Mellin–Barnes representations of Feynman diagrams, linear systems of differential equations, and polynomial solutions

    M. Y. Kalmykov and B. A. Kniehl. “Mellin–Barnes representations of Feynman diagrams, linear systems of differential equations, and polynomial solutions”. In:Physics Letters B 714.1 (2012), pp. 103–109.doi: 10.1016/j.physletb.2012.06.045

    2012 doi

  66. [75]

    Hypergeometric Functions and Feynman Diagrams

    M. Kalmykov et al. “Hypergeometric Functions and Feynman Diagrams”. In:Antidifferen- tiation and the Calculation of Feynman Amplitudes. Dec. 2020.doi: 10.1007/978-3-030- 80219-6_9. arXiv: 2012.14492 [hep-th]

    2020 arXiv

  67. [76]

    Landau discriminants

    S. Mizera and S. Telen. “Landau discriminants”. In:JHEP 08 (2022), p. 200.doi: 10.1007/ JHEP08(2022)200. arXiv: 2109.08036 [math-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  68. [77]

    Principal Landau Determinants

    C. Fevola, S. Mizera, and S. Telen. “Principal Landau Determinants”. In: (Nov. 2023). arXiv: 2311.16219 [math-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  69. [78]

    Symmetric Tensor Spherical Harmonics on theN Sphere and Their Application to the De Sitter Group SO(N,1)

    A. Higuchi. “Symmetric Tensor Spherical Harmonics on theN Sphere and Their Application to the De Sitter Group SO(N,1)”. In:J. Math. Phys.28 (1987), p. 1553.doi: 10.1063/1. 527513

    1987 doi

  70. [79]

    On the Eigen functions of the Dirac operator on spheres and real hyperbolic spaces

    R. Camporesi and A. Higuchi. “On the Eigen functions of the Dirac operator on spheres and real hyperbolic spaces”. In:J. Geom. Phys.20 (1996), pp. 1–18.doi: 10.1016/0393- 0440(95)00042-9. arXiv: gr-qc/9505009

    1996 arXiv

  71. [80]

    On the Definition and Approximation of Feynman’s Path Integrals

    C. Morette. “On the Definition and Approximation of Feynman’s Path Integrals”. In:Phys. Rev. 81 (5 Mar. 1951), pp. 848–852.doi: 10.1103/PhysRev.81.848

    1951 doi

  72. [81]

    Dynamical theory in curved spaces. 1. A Review of the classical and quantum action principles

    B. S. DeWitt. “Dynamical theory in curved spaces. 1. A Review of the classical and quantum action principles”. In:Rev. Mod. Phys.29 (1957), pp. 377–397.doi: 10.1103/RevModPhys. 29.377

    1957 doi

  73. [82]

    The Massless Minimally Coupled Scalar Field in De Sitter Space

    B. Allen and A. Folacci. “The Massless Minimally Coupled Scalar Field in De Sitter Space”. In: Phys. Rev. D35 (1987), p. 3771.doi: 10.1103/PhysRevD.35.3771

    1987 doi

  74. [83]

    Maximally symmetric vector propagator

    N. C. Tsamis and R. P. Woodard. “Maximally symmetric vector propagator”. In:Journal of Mathematical Physics48.5 (May 2007), p. 052306.doi: 10.1063/1.2738361

    2007 doi

  75. [84]

    Stueckelberg massive electromagnetism in de Sitter and anti–de Sitter spacetimes: Two-point functions and renormalized stress-energy tensors

    A. Belokogne, A. Folacci, and J. Queva. “Stueckelberg massive electromagnetism in de Sitter and anti–de Sitter spacetimes: Two-point functions and renormalized stress-energy tensors”. In: Phys. Rev. D 94.10 (2016), p. 105028. doi: 10 . 1103 / PhysRevD . 94 . 105028. arXiv: 161...

    2016 arXiv

  76. [85]

    Photon propagator in de Sitter space in the general covariant gauge

    D. Glavan and T. Prokopec. “Photon propagator in de Sitter space in the general covariant gauge”. In: JHEP 05 (2023), p. 126.doi: 10.1007/JHEP05(2023)126 . arXiv: 2212.13982 [gr-qc]

    2023 arXiv

  77. [86]

    Graviton Fluctuations in De Sitter Space

    I. Antoniadis and E. Mottola. “Graviton Fluctuations in De Sitter Space”. In:J. Math. Phys. 32 (1991), pp. 1037–1044.doi: 10.1063/1.529381

    1991 doi

  78. [87]

    Massive spin-2 propagators on de Sitter space

    C. Gabriel and P. Spindel. “Massive spin-2 propagators on de Sitter space”. In:J. Math. Phys. 38 (1997), pp. 622–638.doi: 10.1063/1.532007. arXiv: hep-th/9912054

    1997 arXiv

  79. [88]

    Graviton and gauge boson propagators in AdS(d+1)

    E. D’Hoker et al. “Graviton and gauge boson propagators in AdS(d+1)”. In:Nucl. Phys. B 562 (1999), pp. 330–352.doi: 10.1016/S0550-3213(99)00524-6. arXiv: hep-th/9902042

    1999 arXiv

  80. [89]

    The Covariant graviton propagator in de Sitter space-time

    A. Higuchi and S. S. Kouris. “The Covariant graviton propagator in de Sitter space-time”. In: Class. Quant. Grav.18 (2001), pp. 4317–4328.doi: 10.1088/0264- 9381/18/20/311 . arXiv: gr-qc/0107036

    2001 arXiv

  81. [90]

    ’Massive’ spin two field in de Sitter space

    T. Garidi, J. P. Gazeau, and M. V. Takook. “’Massive’ spin two field in de Sitter space”. In: J. Math. Phys.44 (2003), pp. 3838–3862.doi: 10.1063/1.1599055. arXiv:hep-th/0302022

    2003 arXiv

  82. [91]

    The GravitonPropagatorindeDonder Gauge on de Sitter Background

    S.P. Miao,N. C.Tsamis, andR.P. Woodard. “The GravitonPropagatorindeDonder Gauge on de Sitter Background”. In:J. Math. Phys.52 (2011), p. 122301.doi: 10.1063/1.3664760. arXiv: 1106.0925 [gr-qc]. 94

    2011 arXiv

  83. [92]

    Massive spin-2 theories

    S. Folkerts, C. Germani, and N. Wintergerst. “Massive spin-2 theories”. In:Cosmology and Particle Physics beyond Standard Models: Ten Years of the SEENET-MTP Network. Ed. by L. Álvarez-Gaumé, G. S. Djordjevic, and D. Stojkovic. Feb. 2014, pp. 87–97. arXiv: 1310.0453 [hep-th]

    2014 arXiv

  84. [93]

    Graviton Loop Corrections to Vacuum Polarization in de Sitter in a General Covariant Gauge

    D. Glavan et al. “Graviton Loop Corrections to Vacuum Polarization in de Sitter in a General Covariant Gauge”. In:Class. Quant. Grav.32.19 (2015), p. 195014. doi: 10.1088/0264- 9381/32/19/195014. arXiv: 1504.00894 [gr-qc]

    2015 arXiv

  85. [94]

    Two point functions and quantum fields in de Sitter universe

    J. Bros and U. Moschella. “Two point functions and quantum fields in de Sitter universe”. In: Rev. Math. Phys. 8 (1996), pp. 327–392. doi: 10 . 1142 / S0129055X96000123. arXiv: gr-qc/9511019

    1996 arXiv

  86. [95]

    Cosmological perturbation theory and quantum gravity

    R. Brunetti et al. “Cosmological perturbation theory and quantum gravity”. In:JHEP 08 (2016), p. 032.doi: 10.1007/JHEP08(2016)032. arXiv: 1605.02573 [gr-qc]

    2016 arXiv

  87. [96]

    Propagators for gauge-invariant observables in cosmology

    M. B. Fröb and W. C. C. Lima. “Propagators for gauge-invariant observables in cosmology”. In: Class. Quant. Grav.35.9 (2018), p. 095010.doi: 10.1088/1361- 6382/aab427 . arXiv: 1711.08470 [gr-qc]

    2018 arXiv

  88. [97]

    Majorana propagator on de Sitter space

    T. Prokopec and V. H. Unnithan. “Majorana propagator on de Sitter space”. In:Eur. Phys. J. C 82.11 (2022), p. 1015.doi: 10.1140/epjc/s10052-022-10970-1 . arXiv: 2203.15678 [hep-th]

    2022 arXiv

  89. [98]

    de Sitter Supersymmetry Revisited

    T. Anous, D. Z. Freedman, and A. Maloney. “de Sitter Supersymmetry Revisited”. In:JHEP 07 (2014), p. 119.doi: 10.1007/JHEP07(2014)119. arXiv: 1403.5038 [hep-th]

    2014 arXiv

  90. [99]

    De Sitter at all loops: the story of the Schwinger model

    D. Anninos, T. Anous, and A. Rios Fukelman. “De Sitter at all loops: the story of the Schwinger model”. In: JHEP 08 (2024), p. 155. doi: 10.1007/JHEP08(2024)155 . arXiv: 2403.16166 [hep-th]

    2024 arXiv

  91. [100]

    Duality in Calabi-Yau Moduli Space

    B. R. Greene and M. R. Plesser. “Duality in Calabi-Yau Moduli Space”. In:Nucl. Phys. B 338 (1990), pp. 15–37.doi: 10.1016/0550-3213(90)90622-K

    1990 doi

  92. [101]

    Calabi-Yau Manifolds and Renormalization Group Flows

    B. R. Greene, C. Vafa, and N. P. Warner. “Calabi-Yau Manifolds and Renormalization Group Flows”. In:Nucl. Phys. B324 (1989), p. 371.doi: 10.1016/0550-3213(89)90471-9

    1989 doi

  93. [102]

    Newconstructionsofmirrormanifolds:Probing moduli space far from Fermat points

    B.R.Greene,M.R.Plesser,andS.S.Roan.“Newconstructionsofmirrormanifolds:Probing moduli space far from Fermat points”. In:AMS/IP Stud. Adv. Math.9 (1998). Ed. by S.-T. Yau, pp. 347–389

    1998

  94. [103]

    A Pair of Calabi-Yau manifolds as an exactly soluble superconformal theory

    P. Candelas et al. “A Pair of Calabi-Yau manifolds as an exactly soluble superconformal theory”. In: Nucl. Phys. B 359 (1991). Ed. by S.-T. Yau, pp. 21–74.doi: 10.1016/0550- 3213(91)90292-6

    1991 doi

  95. [104]

    Mirror symmetry, mirror map and applications to complete intersection Calabi - Yau spaces

    S. Hosono et al. “Mirror symmetry, mirror map and applications to complete intersection Calabi - Yau spaces”. In:Nucl. Phys. B433 (1995). Ed. by B. Greene and S.-T. Yau, pp. 501–

    1995

  96. [105]

    GKZ generalized hypergeometric systems in mirror symmetry of Calabi-Yau hypersurfaces

    S. Hosono, B. H. Lian, and S.-T. Yau. “GKZ generalized hypergeometric systems in mirror symmetry of Calabi-Yau hypersurfaces”. In:Commun. Math. Phys.182 (1996), pp. 535–578. doi: 10.1007/BF02506417. arXiv: alg-geom/9511001

    1996 arXiv

  97. [106]

    Hori et al

    K. Hori et al. Mirror symmetry. Vol. 1. Clay mathematics monographs. Providence, USA: American Mathematical Society, 2003.isbn: 9780821829554

    2003

  98. [107]

    Feynman integrals and iterated integrals on moduli spaces of curves of genus zero

    C. Bogner and F. Brown. “Feynman integrals and iterated integrals on moduli spaces of curves of genus zero”. In:Commun. Num. Theor. Phys.09 (2015), pp. 189–238. doi: 10. 4310/CNTP.2015.v9.n1.a3. arXiv: 1408.1862 [hep-th]

    2015 arXiv

  99. [108]

    I. M. Gelfand, M. M. Kapranov, and A. Zelevinsky.Discriminants, resultants and multidi- mensional determinants. Birkhäuser, Boston, 1994.doi: 10.1007/978-0-8176-4771-1

    1994 doi

  100. [109]

    Saito, B

    M. Saito, B. Sturmfels, and N. Takayama.Gröbner deformations of hypergeometric differen- tial equations. Vol. 6. Springer Science & Business Media, 2000.doi: 10.1007/978-3-662- 04112-3

    doi

  101. [110]

    Resonance equals reducibility for A-hypergeometric systems

    M. Schulze and U. Walther. “Resonance equals reducibility for A-hypergeometric systems”. In: Algebra & Number Theory6.3 (July 2012), 527–537.doi: 10.2140/ant.2012.6.527

    2012 doi

  102. [111]

    The rank of a hypergeometric system

    C. Berkesch. “The rank of a hypergeometric system”. In: Compositio Mathematica 147.1 (2011), pp. 284 –318.doi: 10.1112/S0010437X10004811. 95

    2011 doi

  103. [112]

    Irreducibility of A-hypergeometric systems

    F. Beukers. “Irreducibility of A-hypergeometric systems”. In: Indagationes Mathematicae 21.1 (2011), pp. 30–39.doi: 10.1016/j.indag.2010.12.002

    2011 doi

  104. [113]

    First syzygies of irreducible A-hypergeometric quotients

    M. Saito. “First syzygies of irreducible A-hypergeometric quotients”. In:Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra217.1 (2013), pp. 31–44.doi: 10.1016/j.jpaa.2012.04.010

    2013 doi

  105. [114]

    Algebraic aspects of hypergeometric differential equations

    T. Reichelt et al. “Algebraic aspects of hypergeometric differential equations”. In:Beiträge zur Algebra und Geometrie/Contributions to Algebra and Geometry62 (2021), pp. 137–203. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2004.07262

    2021 doi arXiv

  106. [115]

    Macaulay matrix for Feynman integrals: linear relations and intersection numbers

    V. Chestnov et al. “Macaulay matrix for Feynman integrals: linear relations and intersection numbers”. In:JHEP 09 (2022), p. 187.doi: 10.1007/JHEP09(2022)187. arXiv:2204.12983 [hep-th]

    2022 arXiv

  107. [116]

    Restrictions of Pfaffian systems for Feynman integrals

    V. Chestnov et al. “Restrictions of Pfaffian systems for Feynman integrals”. In:JHEP 11 (2023), p. 202.doi: 10.1007/JHEP11(2023)202. arXiv: 2305.01585 [hep-th]

    2023 arXiv

  108. [117]

    D. R. Grayson and M. E. Stillman.Macaulay2, a software system for research in algebraic geometry. Available athttp://www2.macaulay2.com

  109. [118]

    Computing in algebraic geometry and commutative algebra using Macaulay 2

    M. S. D. Eisenbud D. Grayson and B. Sturmfels. “Computing in algebraic geometry and commutative algebra using Macaulay 2”. In:J. Symb. Comput. 36 (Sept. 2003), pp. 595–

    2003

  110. [119]

    Mellin transforms of multivariate rational functions

    L. Nilsson and M. Passare. “Mellin transforms of multivariate rational functions”. In:Journal of Geometric Analysis23.1 (2013), pp. 24–46.doi: 10.48550/arXiv.1010.5060

    2013 doi arXiv

  111. [120]

    J. L. David A. Cox and D. O’shea.Using Algebraic Geometry. Springer New York, NY, 2005. doi: 10.1007/b138611

    2005 doi

  112. [121]

    Algorithms forb-Functions, Restrictions, and Algebraic Local Cohomology Groups ofD-Modules

    T. Oaku. “Algorithms forb-Functions, Restrictions, and Algebraic Local Cohomology Groups ofD-Modules”. In:Advances in Applied Mathematics19.1 (1997), pp. 61–105.doi: 10.1006/ aama.1997.0527

    1997

  113. [122]

    Algorithms for D-modules-restriction, tensor product, localiza- tion, and local cohomology groups

    T. Oaku and N. Takayama. “Algorithms for D-modules-restriction, tensor product, localiza- tion, and local cohomology groups”. In:Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra156.2-3 (2001), pp. 267–308. doi: 10.48550/arXiv.math/9805006

    2001 doi arXiv

  114. [123]

    Buehring

    W. Buehring. Partial sums of hypergeometric series of unit argument. 2003. arXiv: math/ 0311126 [math.CA]

    2003

  115. [124]

    Parameter shift in normal generalized hypergeometric systems

    M. Saito. “Parameter shift in normal generalized hypergeometric systems”. In:Tohoku Math- ematical Journal44.4 (1992), pp. 523 –534.doi: 10.2748/tmj/1178227247

    1992

  116. [125]

    Hypergeometric Polynomials and Integer Programming

    M. Saito, B. Sturmfels, and N. Takayama. “Hypergeometric Polynomials and Integer Programming”. In: Compositio Mathematica 115.2 (1999), 231–240. doi: 10 . 1023 / A : 1000609524994

    1999

  117. [126]

    A-hypergeometric functions and creation operators for Feyn- man and Witten diagrams

    F. Caloro and P. McFadden. “A-hypergeometric functions and creation operators for Feyn- man and Witten diagrams”. In: (Sept. 2023). arXiv:2309.15895 [hep-th]

    2023 arXiv

  118. [127]

    Lectures on the Antifield-BRST Formalism for Gauge Theories

    M. Henneaux. “Lectures on the Antifield-BRST Formalism for Gauge Theories”. In:Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl.18 (1990). Ed. by M. Asorey, J. F. Carinena, and L. A. Ibort, pp. 47–

    1990

  119. [128]

    Henneaux and C

    M. Henneaux and C. Teitelboim. Quantization of gauge systems. 1992. isbn: 978-0-691- 03769-1. doi: 10.1515/9780691213866

    1992 doi

  120. [129]

    T. Tantau. The TikZ and PGF Packages. Manual for version 3.0.0. Dec. 20, 2013. 96

    2013

  121. [131]

    doi: 10.1016/0920-5632(90)90647-D

    doi

  122. [438]

    doi: 10.2977/prims/1195196618

  123. [554]

    arXiv: hep-th/9406055

    doi: 10.1016/0550-3213(94)00440-P. arXiv: hep-th/9406055

    arXiv

  124. [611]

    doi: 10.1016/S0747-7171(03)00096-8

    doi

Pith tools

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