The algebraic structure of Dyson--Schwinger equations with multiple insertion places

Karen Yeats; Nicholas Olson-Harris

The algebraic structure of Dyson--Schwinger equations with multiple insertion places

T0 review · 0 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-10 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Every single-scale Dyson–Schwinger equation now has a tubing expansion, including systems with several insertion places.

desk verdict Solid completion of the single-scale DSE tubing program; the main formula holds up and the paper deserves refereeing, with only minor proof-deferral concerns. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.12350 v2 pith:KGLZT3AM submitted 2025-01-21 math.CO math-phmath.MP

Nicholas Olson-Harris , Karen Yeats This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.COmath-phmath.MP MSC 05C0516T0581T15

keywords Dyson–SchwingerequationstubingsofrootedtreesmultipleinsertionplacesConnes–KreimerHopfalgebrarenormalizationgroupequationRiordanMellintransformscombinatorialalgebras

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 claims that every Dyson–Schwinger equation in the single-scale setting, including systems with several distinguished insertion places, has a series solution that is combinatorially controlled. The solution is indexed by binary tubings of rooted trees whose vertices carry primitive types and whose edges carry insertion-place labels, and each tubing contributes a monomial built from Mellin-transform coefficients together with falling-factorial insertion-exponent weights. Before this work, such expansions were available only for a single insertion place or for fully symmetric insertions. The paper also recasts the renormalization group equation in terms of the Riordan Hopf algebra, proves a conjecture of Nabergall on the invariant charge, and disproves a separate conjecture on reducing to ordinary equations.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the binary tubing of a rooted tree: a maximal laminar collection of connected convex subsets, with each non-singleton tube split into a lower and an upper tube. Each upper tube carries a type coming from the decorated edge on the path between tube roots, giving for every vertex a vector of e-ranks; the Mellin monomial multiplies the corresponding coefficients of the Mellin transforms, while the $\beta$-vector $\beta^k(\tau)$ extracts the coefficients attached to the root contributions. The other essential ingredient is Theorem 3.1, which identifies every 1-cocycle from $K[L_1,\dots,L_r]$ to $K[L]$ with an integro-differential operator $f \mapsto \int_0^L A(\partial/\partial u_1,\dots,\partial/\partial u_r)\, f(u,\dots,u)\, du$, together with the universal property of the edge-decorated Connes–Kreimer Hopf algebra that turns the tree-level combinatorial equation into the analytic one.

What would settle it

Pick a concrete two-insertion-place system (26) with m=2 and coefficients $b_{i,j}$, iterate the equation to order $x^5$ by hand or computer, and compare every coefficient with Theorem 3.17; a single mismatch would falsify the claimed solution. Alternatively, search for a 1-cocycle $K[L_1,L_2] \to K[L]$ satisfying the cocycle condition but not representable as $\int_0^L A(\partial/\partial u_1,\partial/\partial u_2)\, f(u,u)\, du$.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 3.17: for the system (28), the unique solution is $$G_i(x,L) = 1 + \sum_{t \in \mathcal{T}(P_i)} \left(\prod_{v \in t} \prod_{e \in E_{d(v)}} \$mu_e^{{\underline{\mathrm{od}}$(v,e)}}\right) \sum_{\tau \in \mathrm{Tub}(t)} \mathrm{mel}(\tau) \sum_{k=1}^{b(\tau)} a_{d(t),\$\beta$^k(\tau)} \frac{$x^{{w(t)}}$ L^k}{|\mathrm{Aut}(t)|\, k!}.$$ The proof passes through an edge-decorated generalization of the Connes–Kreimer Hopf algebra and a classification (Theorem 3.1) saying every 1-cocycle from $K[L_1,\dots,L_r]$ to $K[L]$ is an integro-differential operator of the form (29). The same framework yields a new algebraic formulation of the renormalization group equation, proving a conjecture of Nabergall and disproving another.

Load-bearing premise

The whole tubing expansion rests on the classification of 1-cocycles into the integro-differential normal form (29); if some physically relevant insertion place produced a cocycle outside that form, the combinatorial formula would no longer apply.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

All single-scale Dyson–Schwinger equations, single or in systems, now have explicit series expansions with terms indexed by tubings rather than only by recursively generated Feynman diagrams.
The expansion works for arbitrary field-valued insertion exponents, not only integer ones, so the combinatorial control extends beyond the cases previously handled by chord diagrams.
For systems with an invariant charge, the renormalization group equation follows from a bialgebra morphism to the Riordan Hopf algebra, with $Q(x) = x\prod_i T_i(x)^{s_i}$ playing the role of $\Pi(x)$.
The conjecture of Nabergall on the invariant charge in the all-insertion-exponents-equal-minus-one case is proved, and the separate conjecture that a two-insertion-place equation reduces by a linear variable substitution to an ordinary equation is disproved.
Quasi-linear systems, where the total insertion exponent for each primitive is 1, reduce to ordinary linear Dyson–Schwinger equations by substituting $\tilde{A}_p(L) = A_p(\mu_e L : e \in E_p)$.

Reading between the lines

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

A natural testable extension is to read leading-log and resurgence behaviour of multiple-insertion-place solutions directly off the tubing statistics, in the same way tubing expansions have been used for the single-insertion case; the paper notes this direction is open.
The apparent nondifferentiability in Balduf's numerical growth-rate plots when two insertion places degenerate may indicate a genuine transition in coefficient asymptotics; the paper states it has no combinatorial explanation, so a tubing-statistics account of that kink would be a concrete next step.
Because boring cocycles reduce the new formula to the earlier single-insertion expansion, the formula is a genuine generalization rather than a parallel construction, and it may provide the right language for non-single-scale vertex insertions, a case the paper leaves open.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Quick take: this is a solid, well-scoped paper that completes the single-scale DSE tubing program, and the main solution formula in Theorem 3.17 checks out. It deserves a serious referee.

The genuinely new material is the edge-decorated tree Hopf algebra with tensor-power 1-cocycles, the generalized tubing expansion (Theorem 3.13), the RGE/invariant-charge story via the Riordan group, and the resolution of Nabergall's conjectures—one proof, one explicit disproof. The disproof uses a Sage computation that is concrete enough to reproduce; that is good practice. The paper is also honest about the overlap with Olson-Harris's thesis [27]: it states upfront that many results first appeared there. For a journal paper this is a real but manageable issue. The thesis is public, and the paper adds context, completes proofs, and integrates the material with the previous tubing framework. I would not call it a soundness flaw.

The math looks solid. I went through the induction in Lemma 3.15 and the cocycle classification in Theorem 3.1; both hold up. The classification theorem is proved rather than assumed, and the reverse direction correctly reconstructs the symbol A from the linear coefficients. The stress-test note is right: I found no load-bearing error in the derivation of Theorem 3.17.

Soft spots are minor. Theorem 2.7 is stated without proof and deferred to [27]; it is standard, but since it underlies the RGE characterization, a referee should ask for the proof or a fuller citation. Several other proofs are "analogous" to earlier ones—Theorem 3.16 in particular. That is acceptable in this context but makes the paper harder to check. The structural assumption underlying the whole expansion is that all tensor-power cocycles are of the integro-differential normal form (29). This is exactly the multiple-insertion analogue of the single-insertion assumption, and it is proved in the paper. If a physically relevant insertion place ever produced a cocycle outside this class, the expansion would not apply; but that is not a gap in this paper.

Who this is for: people working on combinatorial Dyson-Schwinger equations, Connes-Kreimer Hopf algebras, and resurgence-style analysis of QFT. The Riordan group section is also useful for anyone interested in Hopf-algebraic treatments of the RGE.

Recommendation: send it to peer review. Ask the referee to verify the deferred Theorem 2.7 proof and the induction in Lemma 3.15, but I expect both to pass. The paper is a credible end-of-era milestone for the single-scale program, not a new paradigm.

Referee Report

0 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper develops an algebraic-combinatorial framework for Dyson–Schwinger equations (DSEs) with several distinguished insertion places. The authors introduce an edge-decorated Connes–Kreimer Hopf algebra eH_{I,E}, classify 1-cocycles from K[L]^{⊗E_i} to K[L] as integro-differential operators (Theorem 3.1), and prove a tubing expansion for the universal map to K[L] (Theorem 3.13). Combining this with the combinatorial solution of the corresponding tree-level system (Theorem 3.16), they obtain explicit series solutions for systems of single-scale DSEs with multiple insertion places (Theorem 3.17). They also formulate the renormalization group equation in terms of the Riordan Hopf algebra, prove a conjecture of Nabergall on the invariant charge (Theorem 3.11), and disprove another Nabergall conjecture by comparing explicit low-order expansions.

Significance. The main result is a genuine advance: it removes the single-insertion-place restriction from the tubing approach and gives a uniform combinatorial description of the solution series, with each tubing contributing an explicit monomial in the Mellin-transform coefficients. The proof of Theorem 3.13 is detailed, and the classification Theorem 3.1 is proved rather than assumed. The computational disproof in §3.4 is explicit and essentially checkable by hand. The RGE/Riordan-group interpretation is conceptually useful, and the generalization to multiple insertion places is new. The paper is scoped honestly to the single-scale case, and the limits of the method are stated in §4.

minor comments (6)

[§3.5, Theorem 3.13] The statement 'satisfying ϕB_+^{(i)} = Λ_iϕ' is type-incorrect; the right-hand side should be Λ_iϕ^{⊗E_i} (equivalently Λ_iΨ_i in the notation of the proof). The proof itself uses the correct relation, so this is a local typo, but it should be fixed.
[§3.3, equations (30)–(32) and Lemma 3.9] The notation for the exponent vector is inconsistent: (30) and (32) use w_e, while Lemma 3.9 writes α_e in the equation for F(x) and then returns to w_e in the proof. Please unify the notation and state explicitly that each |w_p| > 0.
[§3.4] The final inference of the disproof is compressed. After the displayed x^4 difference, it would be clearer to spell out the class of linear substitutions being ruled out (fixed linear relations between the a_j's and the b_{i,j}'s) and to address the b_{0,0} = 0 case explicitly; as written, the reader must reconstruct this argument.
[§2.2, Theorem 2.7] Theorem 2.7 is stated without proof and deferred to [27]. Since it is used for the RGE results, a short proof or a precise pointer to the statement in [27] would improve self-containedness.
[§2.1 and §3.5, Theorems 2.6 and 3.16] The proofs of Theorem 2.6 and Theorem 3.16 are described as 'Analogous to Proposition 2.3'; given the vector-valued insertion exponents, one sentence explaining how the falling factorials are understood componentwise would remove ambiguity.
[§3.5, Figure 2] Figure 2 is referenced in the text but appears to be missing in the provided version; please ensure the figure is included in the published version.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the main tubing expansion is proved in-paper, not assumed; self-citations are background only.

full rationale

The central result Theorem 3.17 is obtained by composing the combinatorial solution Theorem 3.16 with the explicit formula for the universal map in Theorem 3.13. Theorem 3.16 is proved by the same generating-function argument as Proposition 2.3, and Theorem 3.13 is proved directly: Lemma 3.14 establishes the iterated-convolution identity for σ from the recursive tubing decomposition, Lemma 3.15 proves the key identity σ B_+^{(i)} = sum multinomial a_{i,α} σ[α] by induction on |α|, and the proof of Theorem 3.13 then verifies ψ B_+^{(i)} = Λ_i Ψ_i using the cocycle condition. The classification of 1-cocycles K[L_1,...,L_r] -> K[L] used here (Theorem 3.1) is proved in the paper, with the forward direction via I ⊛ ψ and the reverse direction reconstructing A from linear coefficients and integrating using the cocycle condition; it is not an imported ansatz. The Mellin coefficients a_{i,α} are inputs of the Dyson–Schwinger data, not fitted parameters, and the solution formula is not equivalent to the equation by construction. The RGE results are proved from the bialgebra morphism property (Theorem 2.22) and the invariant charge construction; the only self-citations are [4] for background tubing theorems and [27] for the standard infinitesimal-character facts in Theorem 2.7, and neither is load-bearing for the central derivation. I find no circular step requiring a nonzero circularity score.

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

The central claim rests on standard Hopf-algebra background (universal property, classification of 1-cocycles) and on the single-scale, distinguished-insertion-place modeling assumptions. No free parameters are fitted; the insertion exponents and Mellin coefficients are inputs. The invariant-charge relation is an additional assumption for the RGE results, not for the main tubing expansion.

assumptions (6)

standard math Universal property of the decorated Connes-Kreimer Hopf algebra (Theorem 2.2, from [20]).
Invoked to define the unique map φ: H_I → A from trees to the target algebra; not proved in this paper.
domain assumption Classification of 1-cocycles on K[L] (Theorem 2.15, from Panzer [28]).
Every 1-cocycle on the polynomial Hopf algebra is an integro-differential operator with a Mellin series A; used to write the DSEs and to define the coefficients a_{i,n}.
standard math Theorem 2.7 characterization of bialgebra morphisms H → K[L]; proof omitted and deferred to [27].
Used to connect the RGE to bialgebra morphisms; the proof is asserted to be standard but is not included.
domain assumption The base field K has characteristic 0.
Needed for binomial series, falling factorials, and exponential generating functions; stated in Section 1 and used throughout.
domain assumption The insertion exponents satisfy a linear relation with a common parameter s (µ_p = 1 + s w_p, or the multi-insertion analogue (30)) for the RGE and invariant charge results.
Required for Proposition 2.25, Theorem 2.30, and Theorem 3.11; the pure tubing solution (Theorem 3.17) does not need it.
domain assumption The single-scale DSE framework, where the external scale is one logarithm L and all kinematic dependence is reduced to the Mellin transforms.
The paper solves single-scale DSEs; non-single-scale insertions are explicitly left open in the conclusion.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The algebraic structure of Dyson--Schwinger equations with multiple insertion places." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/KGLZT3AM

@misc{pith2026250112350,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The algebraic structure of Dyson--Schwinger equations with multiple insertion places},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/KGLZT3AM}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.12350}
}

read the original abstract

We give combinatorially controlled series solutions to Dyson--Schwinger equations with multiple insertion places using tubings of rooted trees and investigate the algebraic relation between such solutions and the renormalization group equation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2501.12350 by the authors.

**Figure 1.** Examples of binary tubings. Upper and lower tubes highlighted in different colours. non-adjacency condition which is entirely different from the acyclicity condition for poset tubings. Thus the notions should not be confused. However, in the case of trees there is a close connection: tubings of a rooted tree (as a poset) are in bijection with tubings of the line graph of the tree. (This is essentially a special case… view at source ↗

**Figure 2.** An upper tube and its corresponding lower tube. The type of the upper tube is the decoration of the highlighted edge. This curious-looking convention can be justified by the observation that if Λi is boring then, by Remark 3.2, we can write Ai(Li) = B X e∈Ei Le ! for some series B(L). Our convention is such that in this case we have ai,α = [L |α| ]B(L). In particular, this will make our expansion manifestly identica… view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

38 extracted references · 33 canonical work pages

[27]

Some applications of combinatorial Hopf algebras to integro-differential equations and symmetric function identities

Nicholas Olson-Harris. “Some applications of combinatorial Hopf algebras to integro-differential equations and symmetric function identities”. PhD thesis. University of Waterloo, 2024.url: https://uwspace.uwaterloo.ca/items/ 8761e865-af96-42a1-8412-cd606585d152

work page 2024
[1]

Sur le groupe d’interpolation

Roland Bacher. “Sur le groupe d’interpolation”. Preprint. 2006. arXiv: math/ 0609736 [math.CO]

work page 2006
[2]

Dyson-Schwinger Equations in Minimal Subtraction

Paul-Hermann Balduf. “Dyson–Schwinger equations in minimal subtraction”. Annales de l’Institut Henri Poincar´ e. Combinatorics, Physics and their In- teractions, 2023. Published online first. arXiv: 2109.13684 [hep-th]

work page Pith review arXiv 2023
[3]

Variations of single-kernel Dyson-Schwinger equa- tions

Paul-Hermann Balduf. “Variations of single-kernel Dyson-Schwinger equa- tions”. Talk at ‘Combinatorics, Resurgence and Algebraic Geometry in Quan- tum Field Theory’, MPIM Bonn, August 23rd, 2024. https://paulbalduf. com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/2024_08_Balduf_Bonn.pdf. 2024. 42 REFERENCES

work page 2024
[4]

Tubings, chord diagrams, and Dyson–Schwinger equations

Paul-Hermann Balduf, Amelia Cantwell, Kurusch Ebrahimi-Fard, Lukas Naber- gall, Nicholas Olson-Harris, and Karen Yeats. “Tubings, chord diagrams, and Dyson–Schwinger equations”. Journal of the London Mathematical Society 110, 2024. url: https://londmathsoc.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ full/10.1112/jlms.70006

work page doi:10.1112/jlms.70006 2024
[5]

Approximate Differential Equations for Renormalization Group Functions in Models Free of Vertex Divergencies

Marc P. Bellon. “An efficient method for the solution of Schwinger–Dyson equations for propagators”. Nuclear Physics B 826, 2010, pp. 522–531. arXiv: 0907.2296 [hep-th]

work page Pith review arXiv 2010
[6]

Hopf algebras in renormalization theory: Locality and Dyson-Schwinger equations from Hochschild cohomology

Christoph Bergbauer and Dirk Kreimer. “Hopf algebras in renormalization theory: locality and Dyson–Schwinger equations from Hochschild cohomol- ogy”. In: Physics and Number Theory. Ed. by Louise Nyssen. IRMA Lectures in Mathematics and Theoretical Physics 10. EMS Press, 2006, pp. 133–164. arXiv: hep-th/0506190

work page Pith review arXiv
[7]

Feynman graph generation and calculations in the Hopf algebra of Feynman graphs

Michael Borinsky. “Feynman graph generation and calculations in the Hopf algebra of Feynman graphs”. Computer Physics Communications 185, 2014, pp. 3317–3330. arXiv: 1402.2613 [hep-th]

work page Pith review arXiv 2014

Show all 38 references

[8]

Tree-tubings and the combinatorics of resurgent Dyson-Schwinger equations

Michael Borinsky, Gerald V. Dunne, and Karen Yeats. “Tree-tubings and the combinatorics of resurgent Dyson-Schwinger equations”. Preprint. 2024. arXiv: 2408.15883 [math-ph]

2024 arXiv
[9]

Exact solutions of Dyson–Schwinger equa- tions for iterated one-loop integrals and propagator-coupling duality

D.J. Broadhurst and D. Kreimer. “Exact solutions of Dyson–Schwinger equa- tions for iterated one-loop integrals and propagator-coupling duality”. Nu- clear Physics B 600, 2001, pp. 403–422. arXiv: hep-th/0012146

2001 arXiv
[10]

Algebraic renormalisa- tion of regularity structures

Yvain Bruned, Martin Hairer, and Lorenzo Zambotti. “Algebraic renormalisa- tion of regularity structures”. Inventiones mathematicae 215, 2019, pp. 1039– 1156

2019
[11]

Coxeter complexes and graph-associahedra

Michael Carr and Satyan L. Devadoss. “Coxeter complexes and graph-associahedra”. Topology and its Applications 153, 2006, pp. 2155–2168. arXiv: math/0407229 [math.QA]

2006 arXiv
[12]

Pre-Lie algebras and the rooted trees operad

F´ ed´ eric Chapoton and Muriel Livernet. “Pre-Lie algebras and the rooted trees operad”. International Mathematics Research Notices 2001(8), 2001, pp. 395– 408

2001
[13]

Hopf algebras, renormalization and non- commutative geometry

Alain Connes and Dirk Kreimer. “Hopf algebras, renormalization and non- commutative geometry”. Communications in Mathematical Physics 199, 1998, pp. 203–242. arXiv: hep-th/9808042

1998 arXiv
[14]

Next-to k leading log expansions by chord diagrams

Julien Courtiel and Karen Yeats. “Next-to k leading log expansions by chord diagrams”. Communications in Mathematical Physics 377, 2020, pp. 469–501. arXiv: 1906.05139 [math-ph]

2020 arXiv
[15]

Terminal chords in connected chord di- agrams

Julien Courtiel and Karen Yeats. “Terminal chords in connected chord di- agrams”. Annales de l’Institut Henri Poincar´ e. Combinatorics, Physics and their Interactions 4, 2017, pp. 417–452. arXiv: 1603.08596 [math.CO]

2017 arXiv
[16]

Connected chord dia- grams and bridgeless maps

Julien Courtiel, Karen Yeats, and Noam Zeilberger. “Connected chord dia- grams and bridgeless maps”. Electronic Journal of Combinatorics 26, P4.37,
[17]

Homological coalgebra

Yukio Doi. “Homological coalgebra”. Journal of the Mathematical Society of Japan 33, 1981, pp. 31–50. REFERENCES 43

1981
[18]

Sequences of trees and higher-order renormalization group equations

William T. Dugan. “Sequences of trees and higher-order renormalization group equations”. Master’s thesis. University of Waterloo, 2019. url: https: //uwspace.uwaterloo.ca/handle/10012/14957

2019
[19]

General Dyson–Schwinger equations and systems

Lo ¨ ıc Foissy. “General Dyson–Schwinger equations and systems”. Communi- cations in Mathematical Physics 327, 2014, pp. 151–179. arXiv: 1112.2606 [math.RA]

2014 arXiv
[20]

Multigraded Dyson-Schwinger systems

Lo ¨ ıc Foissy. “Multigraded Dyson-Schwinger systems”.Journal of Mathemat- ical Physics 61, 2020, p. 051703. arXiv: 1511.06859 [math.RA]

2020 arXiv
[21]

P -associahedra

Pavel Galashin. “ P -associahedra”. Selecta Mathematica . New Series 30, 6,
[22]

Generalized chord diagram expansions of Dyson–Schwinger equations

Markus Hihn and Karen Yeats. “Generalized chord diagram expansions of Dyson–Schwinger equations”. Annales de l’Institut Henri Poincar´ e. Combi- natorics, Physics and their Interactions 6, 2019, pp. 573–605. arXiv: 1602. 02550 [math-ph]

2019
[23]

The Art of Computer Programming

Donald Knuth. The Art of Computer Programming . Vol. 3: Searching and Sorting. 2nd ed. Addison-Wesley, 1998

1998
[24]

On overlapping divergences

Dirk Kreimer. “On overlapping divergences”. Communications in Mathemat- ical Phyiscs 204, 1999, pp. 669–689. arXiv: q-alg/9707029

1999 arXiv
[25]

A chord diagram expansion coming from some Dyson-Schwinger equations

Nicolas Marie and Karen Yeats. “A chord diagram expansion coming from some Dyson-Schwinger equations”. Communications in Number Theory and Physics 7, 2014, pp. 251–291. arXiv: 1210.5457 [math.CO]

2014 arXiv
[26]

Enumerative perspectives on chord diagrams

Lukas Nabergall. “Enumerative perspectives on chord diagrams”. PhD thesis. University of Waterloo, 2022.url: https://uwspace.uwaterloo.ca/items/ 51239c85-b044-4e6b-97c6-710332c37c93

2022
[28]

Hopf-algebraic renormalization of Kreimer’s toy model

Erik Panzer. “Hopf-algebraic renormalization of Kreimer’s toy model”. Mas- ter’s thesis. Humboldt University of Berlin, 2011. arXiv:1202.3552 [math.QA]

2011 arXiv
[29]

Gauge symmetries and renormalization

David Prinz. “Gauge symmetries and renormalization”. Mathematical Physics, Analysis and Geometry 25, 20, 2022. arXiv: 2001.00104 [hep-th]

2022 arXiv
[30]

The Riordan group

Louis W. Shapiro, Seyoum Getu, Wen-Jin Woan, and Leon C. Woodson. “The Riordan group”. Discrete Applied Mathematics 34, 1991, pp. 229–239

1991
[31]

Richard P. Stanley. Enumerative Combinatorics . Vol. 2. Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics 62. Cambridge University Press, 1999

1999
[32]

Renormalization of gauge fields using Hopf al- gebras

Walter D. van Suijlekom. “Renormalization of gauge fields using Hopf al- gebras”. In: Quantum Field Theory. Competitive Models . Ed. by Bertfried Fauser, J¨ urgen Tolksdorf, and Eberhard Zeidler. Springer, 2009, pp. 135–154. arXiv: 0801.3170 [math-ph]

2009 arXiv
[33]

A primer on functional methods and the Schwinger-Dyson equations

Eric Swanson. “A primer on functional methods and the Schwinger-Dyson equations”. AIP Conference Proceedings 1296, Aug. 2010. arXiv:1008.4337. doi: 10.1063/1.3523221

2010
[34]

Massey products for graph homology

Benjamin C. Ward. “Massey products for graph homology”. International Mathematics Research Notices 2022, 2021, pp. 8086–8161. url: https : / / academic.oup.com/imrn/article/2022/11/8086/6071864

2022
[35]

A Combinatorial Perspective on Quantum Field Theory

Karen Yeats. A Combinatorial Perspective on Quantum Field Theory. Springer Briefs in Mathematical Physics 15. Springer, 2017. 44 REFERENCES

2017
[36]

Growth estimates for Dyson-Schwinger equations

Karen Yeats. “Growth estimates for Dyson-Schwinger equations”. PhD thesis. Boston University, 2008

2008
[2019]

combinatorics

url: https : / / www . combinatorics . org / ojs / index . php / eljc / article/view/v26i4p37
[2023]

arXiv: 2110.07257 [math.CO]

arXiv

Pith tools

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

[1] [27]

Some applications of combinatorial Hopf algebras to integro-differential equations and symmetric function identities

Nicholas Olson-Harris. “Some applications of combinatorial Hopf algebras to integro-differential equations and symmetric function identities”. PhD thesis. University of Waterloo, 2024.url: https://uwspace.uwaterloo.ca/items/ 8761e865-af96-42a1-8412-cd606585d152

work page 2024

[2] [1]

Sur le groupe d’interpolation

Roland Bacher. “Sur le groupe d’interpolation”. Preprint. 2006. arXiv: math/ 0609736 [math.CO]

work page 2006

[3] [2]

Dyson-Schwinger Equations in Minimal Subtraction

Paul-Hermann Balduf. “Dyson–Schwinger equations in minimal subtraction”. Annales de l’Institut Henri Poincar´ e. Combinatorics, Physics and their In- teractions, 2023. Published online first. arXiv: 2109.13684 [hep-th]

work page Pith review arXiv 2023

[4] [3]

Variations of single-kernel Dyson-Schwinger equa- tions

Paul-Hermann Balduf. “Variations of single-kernel Dyson-Schwinger equa- tions”. Talk at ‘Combinatorics, Resurgence and Algebraic Geometry in Quan- tum Field Theory’, MPIM Bonn, August 23rd, 2024. https://paulbalduf. com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/2024_08_Balduf_Bonn.pdf. 2024. 42 REFERENCES

work page 2024

[5] [4]

Tubings, chord diagrams, and Dyson–Schwinger equations

Paul-Hermann Balduf, Amelia Cantwell, Kurusch Ebrahimi-Fard, Lukas Naber- gall, Nicholas Olson-Harris, and Karen Yeats. “Tubings, chord diagrams, and Dyson–Schwinger equations”. Journal of the London Mathematical Society 110, 2024. url: https://londmathsoc.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/ full/10.1112/jlms.70006

work page doi:10.1112/jlms.70006 2024

[6] [5]

Approximate Differential Equations for Renormalization Group Functions in Models Free of Vertex Divergencies

Marc P. Bellon. “An efficient method for the solution of Schwinger–Dyson equations for propagators”. Nuclear Physics B 826, 2010, pp. 522–531. arXiv: 0907.2296 [hep-th]

work page Pith review arXiv 2010

[7] [6]

Hopf algebras in renormalization theory: Locality and Dyson-Schwinger equations from Hochschild cohomology

Christoph Bergbauer and Dirk Kreimer. “Hopf algebras in renormalization theory: locality and Dyson–Schwinger equations from Hochschild cohomol- ogy”. In: Physics and Number Theory. Ed. by Louise Nyssen. IRMA Lectures in Mathematics and Theoretical Physics 10. EMS Press, 2006, pp. 133–164. arXiv: hep-th/0506190

work page Pith review arXiv

[8] [7]

Feynman graph generation and calculations in the Hopf algebra of Feynman graphs

Michael Borinsky. “Feynman graph generation and calculations in the Hopf algebra of Feynman graphs”. Computer Physics Communications 185, 2014, pp. 3317–3330. arXiv: 1402.2613 [hep-th]

work page Pith review arXiv 2014