Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 51 references

Multiloop sunset Feynman integrals in two dimensions admit exact all-order expansions built from symmetric polynomials of logarithms, with coefficients computable to every loop order.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-02 19:09 UTC pith:FQMZYECS

load-bearing objection All-loop sunset representation is a real step forward, but exactness rests on an unproved contour-closing step and a sign in the coefficient formula needs checking. the 4 major comments →

arxiv 2603.03183 v2 pith:FQMZYECS submitted 2026-03-03 hep-th hep-phmath-phmath.MP

The multiloop sunset to all orders

Pierre Vanhove This is my paper
classification hep-th hep-phmath-phmath.MP
keywords sunset integralmultiloop Feynman integralsMellin-Barnes representationsymmetric polynomialsmirror symmetryPicard-Fuchs equationdimension-shifting relationstwo-dimensional quantum field theory
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper aims to prove that the multiloop sunset Feynman integral in two spacetime dimensions, for any number of loops and any masses, equals a convergent infinite series rather than only an asymptotic approximation. Each term is an explicit rational coefficient times powers of mass ratios times symmetric polynomials in logarithmic mass-ratio factors, so the whole transcendental content is captured by logarithms and symmetric polynomials. If true, this gives a practical, high-precision way to evaluate sunset integrals without elliptic integrals or iterated polylogarithms. For equal masses the paper further derives a closed expression using a flat coordinate, a holomorphic period, and a Frobenius basis, with coefficients built from odd zeta values and integers. It also establishes a dimension-raising relation that expresses the D+2-dimensional equal-mass sunset integral from the D-dimensional one through a differential operator of order L-1, enabling reconstruction of four-dimensional results from two-dimensional ones.

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 2.1: for |p^2| greater than the square of the sum of the masses, the L-loop sunset integral in two dimensions has the exact convergent expansion I^{(L)}_⊖(p²,m²) = −(1/p²) ∑_{(r_i)} [(r_1+...+r_{L+1})!²/(r_1!²...r_{L+1}!²)] ∏ (−m_i²/p²)^{r_i} ∑_k c_k(r_1+...+r_{L+1}) P^{L+1−k}_{L+1}(ℓ_i(r_i)), where ℓ_i(r)=log(−m_i²/p²)−2∑_{n=1}^r 1/n and P^k_{L+1} are elementary symmetric polynomials. The coefficients c_k are explicit finite sums involving complete Bell polynomials and polygamma values. The paper states this series represents the exact value of the integral, not just an asymptotic expansion. For equal masses, Theorem 4.1 gives an equivalent expression in terms o

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by a Mellin-Barnes representation of the sunset integral, followed by contour closure in (L+1) complex variables. Multiple poles are extracted by residue derivatives; Faà di Bruno's formula and complete Bell polynomials organize the derivatives of the ratio of Gamma functions, producing the symmetric polynomials P^k_{L+1} and the logarithmic factors ℓ_i(r). In the equal-mass case, the central objects are the flat coordinate R^{(L)}(p²), the holomorphic period π^{(L)}_⊖ (whose derivative gives the period), and the Frobenius basis Frob^{(L)}_r(p²); the structure of the inhomogeneous Picard-Fuchs equation with constant source term −(L+1)! makes the all-order solution tra

Load-bearing premise

The exactness of the series rests on the claim that the Mellin-Barnes integrand decays sufficiently rapidly on the chosen closing arcs so that no residual contribution survives; the paper states that the Gamma functions ensure exponential decay but does not provide the arc-bound estimate, and if that estimate fails the expansion would be only asymptotic rather than exact.

What would settle it

Choose a concrete unequal-mass sunset at, say, three loops with masses (1,2,3,4) and large Euclidean p², compute the partial sums of the series in Theorem 2.1 to high order, and compare numerically to a direct high-precision evaluation of the original Feynman parameter integral; any discrepancy at the 10^{-40} level would falsify the exactness claim. Alternatively, numerically estimate the Mellin-Barnes integrand of equation (14) on large arcs |ζ|=R, |z_i|=R with R→∞; a nonvanishing arc contribution would show the residue computation misses a residual term and the equality fails.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Sunset integrals in two dimensions can be evaluated numerically to arbitrary precision by summing an explicit, convergent series, without elliptic integrals or iterated polylogarithms.
  • The exact all-order expansion confirms and strengthens the general asymptotic theorem for convergent Feynman integrals: for the sunset case the large-momentum expansion is not merely asymptotic but exact, with r_max equal to the loop order.
  • For equal masses, the all-loop expression makes the mirror-symmetry structure explicit: coefficients are integers, rational numbers, and odd zeta values, and the leading-log terms match the Gamma-class prediction of the associated Fano variety.
  • The dimension-raising relation gives a systematic algorithm for computing the epsilon expansion of the four-dimensional sunset integral from the two-dimensional integral, including finite parts, using only derivatives and rational/polynomial coefficients.
  • The explicit coefficients, implemented in code, make the results available for checking lower-loop computations and for formal analysis of higher-loop behavior in the large-momentum regime.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial inference: The same Mellin-Barnes residue method may yield exact convergent series for other convergent massive Feynman integrals in two dimensions, such as multiloop irreducible graphs with more than two external legs; the sunset is only the simplest case where the contour-closing structure is fully explicit.
  • Editorial inference: If the exactness claim holds, the two-dimensional results provide a practical boundary condition for a wider program of dimension-shifting for general Feynman integrals, not only the sunset family, potentially reducing four-dimensional integral evaluations to two-dimensional convergent series plus derivatives.
  • Editorial inference: The explicit symmetric-polynomial form suggests a combinatorial interpretation of the coefficients as complete homogeneous symmetric functions of harmonic numbers; this could be tested by checking whether the same coefficient structure appears in other D=2 scalar integrals with different propagator powers.
  • Editorial inference: A direct numerical test near the convergence boundary |p²|=(Σm_i)² would probe whether the series can be analytically continued beyond the stated radius, which would indicate whether the exactness property extends by continuation or fails at the normal threshold.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper claims exact, convergent large-momentum expansions for the L-loop sunset integral in D=2, for arbitrary masses (Theorem 2.1, eq. (18)) and for equal masses (Theorem 4.1, eq. (50)), plus a dimension-raising relation to D+2 (Section 5). The generic-mass result is derived via a Mellin–Barnes representation and residue sums, leading to an expansion in symmetric polynomials of logarithms with coefficients c_k(n). The equal-mass result is expressed through a flat coordinate R^{(L)}(p^2), an instanton-type series, and a Frobenius basis, with the claimed boundary coefficients generated by eq. (51). The four-dimensional application combines these two-dimensional results with Tarasov-type dimension-shifting operators.

Significance. If the exactness and convergence claims hold, this is a substantial result: it gives the first all-order exact expansion of sunset-type Feynman integrals, connects the expansion to mirror-symmetric structures, and provides an operational route from D=2 to D=4. The paper ships SageMath/Maple code in a repository and benchmarks several low-loop cases against known differential equations and published results; these concrete checks are a genuine strength. The main theorems, however, rest on a contour-closing argument that is not fully proved and on a coefficient identity whose printed form has a sign discrepancy. Because the central claims are plausible and likely repairable, the appropriate outcome is a major revision rather than rejection.

major comments (4)
  1. [§2.2, eq. (14), Figure 2] The exactness of Theorem 2.1 depends on the vanishing of all arc contributions when the ζ- and z_i-contours are closed. The paper states that ‘the Γ-functions ensure exponential decay’, but no arc-bound estimate is given. The integrand contains factors (-p^2/m_{L+1}^2)^{-(1+ζ)} and (m_i^2/m_{L+1}^2)^{z_i}, which can grow exponentially in the relevant half-planes, and the poles are double poles whose residues require derivatives. If any arc contribution survives, eq. (18) is at best an asymptotic expansion, contradicting Remark 2.1. A rigorous estimate, or at least a precise statement of the integration contours and a dominated-convergence argument for the resulting series, is load-bearing for the paper’s central claim.
  2. [Eq. (25), proof of Theorem 2.1] The coefficient identity is printed as lim_{z→0} d^k/dz^k [Γ(1+n+z)/Γ(-n+z)] = n!^2 c_k(n). For n=1, k=1 the left-hand side evaluates to -1, while the right-hand side gives +1 if c_1(1)=1 as stated. This sign discrepancy affects eq. (19) and hence the coefficients in eq. (18). It may be a typographical sign in the denominator (e.g. Γ(-n-z) instead of Γ(-n+z)), but the error must be resolved and the corrected formula checked against the one- and two-loop cases before the theorem can be trusted.
  3. [§4.2, proof of Theorem 4.1] The proof of the all-equal-mass representation is a sketch. The step ‘changing variables from p^2 to the flat coordinate ... yields the representation in equation (50)’ is asserted without showing how the coefficients d_r^{(L)}(l) arise or why the resulting series has the stated convergence. The coefficients are supplied by code and by tables in Appendices A–B rather than by a closed formula or a recurrence; the generating function (51) is stated but not derived in enough detail to verify all orders. As written, the all-order claim of Theorem 4.1 is not fully proven. A complete derivation, or at least a precise combinatorial/algebraic construction of d_r^{(L)}(l), is needed.
  4. [§5, eqs. (66)–(78)] The dimension-raising relation is central to the paper’s four-dimensional application, but the all-order statement is again asserted rather than proved. The text says the operators are determined because their coefficients are polynomials of known degree and because differential equations up to 20 loops are known from [40]; this does not establish a theorem for arbitrary L. The uniqueness of the polynomial solution is not demonstrated, and the reduction modulo L^{D,(L)}_⊖ is described only schematically. If the paper’s claim is that this is a proof for all L, the missing step needs to be supplied; if instead it is an algorithm/conjecture supported by low-loop checks, that should be stated explicitly.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract vs. Section 5] The abstract says ‘dimension-lowering relation’, but Section 5 derives and consistently calls it a ‘dimension-raising’ formula. Please align the terminology.
  2. [§5.2, eq. (84)] The one-loop relation is labelled I^{D=4,(2)}_⊖, which conflicts with the L=1 context. This appears to be a typo, but it should be corrected to avoid confusion.
  3. [Throughout] There are several typos: ‘availaible’ in the introduction, and ‘and and’ in the acknowledgements. Please proofread.
  4. [§4, eq. (51)] The notation in the generating function for α_r^{(L)} is compressed: x, λ, and ζ(2k+1) enter without an explicit statement of the region of convergence or how the coefficient extraction is ordered. A short explanation would improve readability.
  5. [Eq. (19)] The formula for c_k(m) is hard to read because k, n, and m are all used nearby. At minimum, define m as the total degree r_1+...+r_{L+1} explicitly in the theorem statement, and avoid reusing n inside the sum.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No substantive circularity; the generic-mass Mellin/residue derivation is self-contained and the self-citations are supporting, not definitional.

full rationale

The main generic-mass result (Theorem 2.1, eq. 18) is an independent residue computation: starting from the parametric/Mellin representations in eqs. (7)-(14), the double-pole residue formula (16) produces the derivative form (17) and the explicit coefficient formula (19); the coefficients are not fitted to sunset data. The equal-mass Theorem 4.1 is a reduction of (18) after the independently defined flat coordinate R (eq. 44) and Frobenius basis (eq. 48), with the boundary coefficients alpha_r generated by eqs. (51)/(53); L=2 is checked against Bloch-Kerr-Vanhove [14]. Section 5 uses the same-author algorithm [40] for the input differential operators, and [35] for the numerically known Frobenius basis; these are genuine self-citations but they are not the result being derived: the dimension-raising operator is determined algebraically (eqs. 67-69) and the D=4 outputs are matched to independent results [8,9,50]. Thus no step reduces by construction to its input. Two non-circular correctness risks remain: (i) the exactness claim in Theorem 2.1 relies on the unproved arc-decay assertion in Section 2.2/Figure 2 ('the Gamma-functions ensure exponential decay'), so if that estimate fails the series may be asymptotic only; (ii) eq. (25) appears to have a sign mismatch with the Gamma-ratio in eq. (17) and should be checked before eq. (19) is used. Remark 4.5 also explicitly defers the rigorous Gamma-class identification for L>=3. These affect correctness/rigor, not circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 5 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central generic-mass derivation uses standard Mellin/residue techniques; no free parameter is fitted to data. The all-order claims rest on unproven structural assumptions about the Picard-Fuchs order and source term, on numerically verified coefficients, and on code-generated dimension-shifting operators.

axioms (5)
  • domain assumption The Mellin-Barnes integrand in eq. (14) decays sufficiently at infinity so that closing the ζ- and z_i-contours picks only the displayed poles.
    Used in Section 2.2 and Figure 2 to turn the inverse Mellin representation into the exact series (18); no rigorous arc-bound is given.
  • standard math The parametric representation (7) and the Mellin transform (8) converge for Re(ζ)<0 and can be interchanged.
    Standard analytic regularization; the paper asserts the integral is UV/IR finite in D=2.
  • domain assumption In the all-equal-mass case the Picard-Fuchs operator has order L with constant source term -(L+1)! for every L.
    Stated as Prop 3.1/Remark 3.1 but verified only through five loops [13,14,18,36]; used to justify Theorem 4.1 at all L.
  • domain assumption The dimension-raising operator O^(L) in eq. (66) exists with polynomial coefficients and no apparent singularities, determined by algebraic equations.
    Section 5 relies on code and known differential equations up to 20 loops [40] rather than a proof for all L.
  • domain assumption The coefficients a_L(n) in Proposition 4.1 are integers with the stated growth; table values for L=2,3,4 are taken as evidence.
    Remark 4.3 defers the proof to mirror symmetry; no derivation is given in this paper.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 21003 in / 21831 out tokens · 182439 ms · 2026-08-02T19:09:14.848027+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We derive exact, convergent representations of multiloop sunset Feynman integrals in two dimensions for arbitrary mass configurations and all loop orders valid for large Euclidean momentum. The integrals are expressed as sums of symmetric polynomials in logarithmic mass ratios, normalized by the external momentum squared, with coefficients determined by analytic series expansions. For the equal-mass case, we establish a dimension-lowering relation expressing the $L$ loop sunset integrals in $D+2$ as the one in $D$ dimensions acted on a differential operator of order $L-1$. These representations are free of complicated transcendental functions, making them well-suited to both formal analysis and high-precision numerical evaluation. The two-dimensional results serve as boundary conditions for dimension-shifting relations, enabling systematic reconstruction of four-dimensional sunset integrals via analytic continuation to $D = 4 - 2\epsilon$.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2603.03183 by Pierre Vanhove.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Multiloop sunset graph. The expression for the multiloop sunset integral in D = 2 dimensions is I (L) ⊖ (p 2 ,m2 ) := 1 π L Z d 2 ℓ1 · · · d 2 ℓL (ℓ 2 1 − m2 1 + iε)· · ·(ℓ 2 L − m2 L + iε)((ℓ1 + · · · + ℓL − p) 2 − m2 L+1 + iε) (1) where m2 := (m2 1 , . . . , m2 L+1) denotes the vector of squared masses. This integral is both ultraviolet and infrared finite. Our main results are: • An exact, convergent ex… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Contour integration strategy for extracting the series expansion. Left panel: In the ζ-plane, we close the contour to the left (toward ℜe(ζ) → −∞), capturing poles at ζ = −1−z1−· · ·−zL−rL+1 for all rL+1 ∈ N. Each pole contributes a term in the final series. Right panel: In each zi-plane, we close the contour to the right (toward ℜe(zi) → +∞), capturing poles at zi = ri ∈ N. The (L + 1)-dimensional residue… view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

51 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Fourth order vacuum polarization,

    A. O. G. Kallen and A. Sabry, “Fourth order vacuum polarization,” Kong. Dan. Vid. Sel. Mat. Fys. Med.29(1955) no.17, 1-20 doi:10.1007/978-3-319-00627-7 93

    doi:10.1007/978-3-319-00627-7 1955

  2. [2]

    Two loop two point functions with masses: Asymptotic expansions and Taylor series, in any dimension,

    D. J. Broadhurst, J. Fleischer and O. V. Tarasov, “Two loop two point functions with masses: Asymptotic expansions and Taylor series, in any dimension,” Z. Phys. C60(1993), 287-302 doi:10.1007/BF01474625 [arXiv:hep-ph/9304303 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1993

  3. [3]

    The Master differential equations for the two loop sunrise selfmass amplitudes,

    M. Caffo, H. Czyz, S. Laporta and E. Remiddi, “The Master differential equations for the two loop sunrise selfmass amplitudes,” Nuovo Cim. A111(1998), 365-389 [arXiv:hep- th/9805118 [hep-th]]

    arXiv 1998

  4. [4]

    On the Evaluation of a Certain Class of Feynman Diagrams in X-Space: Sunrise-Type Topologies at Any Loop Order,

    S. Groote, J. G. Korner and A. A. Pivovarov, “On the Evaluation of a Certain Class of Feynman Diagrams in X-Space: Sunrise-Type Topologies at Any Loop Order,” Annals Phys.322(2007), 2374-2445 doi:10.1016/j.aop.2006.11.001 [arXiv:hep-ph/0506286 [hep- ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  5. [5]

    Two-loop master integrals for mixed QCD- electroweak corrections togg→HthroughO(ϵ 2),

    R. Marzucca, A. J. McLeod, and C. Nega, “Two-loop master integrals for mixed QCD- electroweak corrections togg→HthroughO(ϵ 2),”Phys. Rev. D112, 113007 (2025), arXiv:2501.14435 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  6. [6]

    Analytic two-loop ampli- tudes forq¯q→γγandgg→γγmediated by a heavy-quark loop,

    M. Becchetti, F. Coro, C. Nega, L. Tancredi, and F. J. Wagner, “Analytic two-loop ampli- tudes forq¯q→γγandgg→γγmediated by a heavy-quark loop,”JHEP06, 033 (2025), arXiv:2502.00118 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  7. [7]

    On the photon self-energy to three loops in QED,

    F. Forner, C. Nega, and L. Tancredi, “On the photon self-energy to three loops in QED,” JHEP03, 148 (2025), arXiv:2411.19042 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2025

  8. [8]

    Hadronic Vacuum Po- larization to Three Loops in Chiral Perturbation Theory,

    L. Lellouch, A. Lupo, M. Sj¨ o, K. Szabo and P. Vanhove, “Hadronic Vacuum Po- larization to Three Loops in Chiral Perturbation Theory,” JHEP02(2026), 154 doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2026)154 [arXiv:2510.12885 [hep-ph]]

    arXiv 2026

  9. [9]

    Analytic Treatment of the Two Loop Equal Mass Sun- rise Graph,

    S. Laporta and E. Remiddi, “Analytic Treatment of the Two Loop Equal Mass Sun- rise Graph,” Nucl. Phys. B704(2005), 349-386 doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2004.10.044 [arXiv:hep-ph/0406160 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  10. [10]

    A Feynman Integral via Higher Normal Functions,

    S. Bloch, M. Kerr and P. Vanhove, “A Feynman Integral via Higher Normal Functions,” Compos. Math.151(2015) no.12, 2329-2375 [arXiv:1406.2664 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  11. [11]

    The two-loop sunrise graph with arbitrary masses,

    L. Adams, C. Bogner and S. Weinzierl, “The two-loop sunrise graph with arbitrary masses,” J. Math. Phys.54(2013), 052303 doi:10.1063/1.4804996 [arXiv:1302.7004 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  12. [12]

    Schouten identities for Feynman graph amplitudes; The Master Integrals for the two-loop massive sunrise graph,

    E. Remiddi and L. Tancredi, “Schouten identities for Feynman graph amplitudes; The Master Integrals for the two-loop massive sunrise graph,” Nucl. Phys. B880(2014), 343- 377 doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2014.01.009 [arXiv:1311.3342 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  13. [13]

    Differential Equations and Dispersion Relations for Feynman Amplitudes. the Two-Loop Massive Sunrise and the Kite Integral,

    E. Remiddi and L. Tancredi, “Differential Equations and Dispersion Relations for Feynman Amplitudes. the Two-Loop Massive Sunrise and the Kite Integral,” Nucl. Phys. B907 (2016), 400-444 doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2016.04.013 [arXiv:1602.01481 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  14. [14]

    Local Mirror Symmetry and the Sunset Feynman In- tegral,

    S. Bloch, M. Kerr and P. Vanhove, “Local Mirror Symmetry and the Sunset Feynman In- tegral,” Adv. Theor. Math. Phys.21(2017), 1373-1453 doi:10.4310/ATMP.2017.v21.n6.a1 [arXiv:1601.08181 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  15. [15]

    Elliptic polylogarithms and iterated integrals on elliptic curves II: an application to the sunrise integral,

    J. Broedel, C. Duhr, F. Dulat and L. Tancredi, “Elliptic polylogarithms and iterated integrals on elliptic curves II: an application to the sunrise integral,” Phys. Rev. D97 (2018) no.11, 116009 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.97.116009 [arXiv:1712.07095 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  16. [16]

    Elliptic symbol calculus: from elliptic polylogarithms to iterated integrals of Eisenstein series,

    J. Broedel, C. Duhr, F. Dulat, B. Penante and L. Tancredi, “Elliptic symbol calculus: from elliptic polylogarithms to iterated integrals of Eisenstein series,” JHEP08(2018), 014 doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2018)014 [arXiv:1803.10256 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  17. [17]

    Maximal Cuts and Differential Equations for Feynman In- tegrals. an Application to the Three-Loop Massive Banana Graph,

    A. Primo and L. Tancredi, “Maximal Cuts and Differential Equations for Feynman In- tegrals. an Application to the Three-Loop Massive Banana Graph,” Nucl. Phys. B921 (2017), 316-356 doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2017.05.018 [arXiv:1704.05465 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  18. [18]

    A Second-Order Differential Equation for the Two-Loop Sunrise Graph with Arbitrary Masses,

    S. M¨ uller-Stach, S. Weinzierl and R. Zayadeh, “A Second-Order Differential Equation for the Two-Loop Sunrise Graph with Arbitrary Masses,” Commun. Num. Theor. Phys.6 (2012), 203-222 doi:10.4310/CNTP.2012.v6.n1.a5 [arXiv:1112.4360 [hep-ph]]. THE MULTILOOP SUNSET TO ALL ORDERS27

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  19. [19]

    Two-loop sun- set diagrams with three massive lines,

    B. A. Kniehl, A. V. Kotikov, A. Onishchenko and O. Veretin, “Two-loop sun- set diagrams with three massive lines,” Nucl. Phys. B738(2006), 306-316 doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2006.01.013 [arXiv:hep-ph/0510235 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  20. [20]

    High-energy behavior in quantum field theory,

    S. Weinberg, “High-energy behavior in quantum field theory,” Phys. Rev.118(1960), 838-849 doi:10.1103/PhysRev.118.838

    doi:10.1103/physrev.118.838 1960

  21. [21]

    A Theorem on Asymptotic Ex- pansion of Feynman Amplitudes,

    M. C. Bergere, C. de Calan and A. P. C. Malbouisson, “A Theorem on Asymptotic Ex- pansion of Feynman Amplitudes,” Commun. Math. Phys.62(1978), 137

    1978

  22. [22]

    Thel-loop Banana Amplitude from GKZ Systems and relative Calabi-Yau Periods,

    A. Klemm, C. Nega and R. Safari, “Thel-loop Banana Amplitude from GKZ Systems and relative Calabi-Yau Periods,” JHEP04(2020), 088 doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2020)088 [arXiv:1912.06201 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  23. [23]

    Analytic structure of all loop banana integrals,

    K. B¨ onisch, F. Fischbach, A. Klemm, C. Nega and R. Safari, “Analytic structure of all loop banana integrals,” JHEP05(2021), 066 doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2021)066 [arXiv:2008.10574 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  24. [24]

    Unipotent extensions and differential equations (after Bloch-Vlasenko)

    M. Kerr, “Unipotent extensions and differential equations (after Bloch-Vlasenko)”, Communications in Number Theory and Physics Volume 16, Number 4, 1–47, 2022, [arXiv:2008.03618 [math.AG]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  25. [25]

    Asymptotics Of The Banana Feynman Amplitudes At The Large Complex Structure Limit

    H. Iritani, “Asymptotics Of The Banana Feynman Amplitudes At The Large Complex Structure Limit”, Advances in Theoretical and Mathematical Physics Volume 26 (2022) Number 5 pp.1239-1245 [arxiv: 2011.05901 [math.AG]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  26. [26]

    SageMath, the Sage Mathematics Software System (Version 10.7), The Sage Developers, 2025, https://www.sagemath.org

    2025

  27. [27]

    Vanhove, Repository for representation of the multiloop sunset Feynman integrals https://github.com/pierrevanhove/AllLoopSunset

    P. Vanhove, Repository for representation of the multiloop sunset Feynman integrals https://github.com/pierrevanhove/AllLoopSunset

  28. [28]

    Asymptotic Expansion of Feynman Amplitudes. Part 1: the Convergent Case,

    M. C. Bergere and Y. M. P. Lam, “Asymptotic Expansion of Feynman Amplitudes. Part 1: the Convergent Case,” Commun. Math. Phys.39(1974), 1 doi:10.1007/BF01609168

    work page doi:10.1007/bf01609168 1974

  29. [29]

    Evaluating Feynman integrals,

    V. A. Smirnov, “Evaluating Feynman integrals,” Springer Tracts Mod. Phys.211(2004), 1-244

    2004

  30. [30]

    Feynman Integrals. a Comprehensive Treatment for Students and Re- searchers,

    S. Weinzierl, “Feynman Integrals. a Comprehensive Treatment for Students and Re- searchers,” Springer, 2022, ISBN 978-3-030-99557-7, 978-3-030-99560-7, 978-3-030-99558-4 doi:10.1007/978-3-030-99558-4 [arXiv:2201.03593 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  31. [31]

    The Physics and the Mixed Hodge Structure of Feynman Integrals,

    P. Vanhove, “The Physics and the Mixed Hodge Structure of Feynman Integrals,” Proc. Symp. Pure Math.88(2014), 161-194 doi:10.1090/pspum/088/01455 [arXiv:1401.6438 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  32. [32]

    :Table of integrals, series, and products, New York: Aca- demic Press 1965

    Gradshteyn, I.S., Ryzhik, I.M. :Table of integrals, series, and products, New York: Aca- demic Press 1965

    1965

  33. [33]

    Advanced Combinatorics: The Art of Finite and Infinite Expansions,

    Louis Comtet, “Advanced Combinatorics: The Art of Finite and Infinite Expansions,” Revised and Enlarged Edition, D. Reidel Publishing Company, Dordrecht, 1974

    1974

  34. [34]

    Algebraic characterization of differential operators of Calabi-Yau type,

    M. Bogner, “Algebraic characterization of differential operators of Calabi-Yau type,” [arXiv: 1304.5434 [math.AG]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  35. [35]

    Feynman Integrals in Di- mensional Regularization and Extensions of Calabi-Yau Motives,

    K. B¨ onisch, C. Duhr, F. Fischbach, A. Klemm and C. Nega, “Feynman Integrals in Di- mensional Regularization and Extensions of Calabi-Yau Motives,” JHEP09(2022), 156 doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2022)156 [arXiv:2108.05310 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  36. [36]

    Algorithms for Minimal Picard-Fuchs Operators of Feyn- man Integrals,

    P. Lairez and P. Vanhove, “Algorithms for Minimal Picard-Fuchs Operators of Feyn- man Integrals,” Lett. Math. Phys.113(2023) no.2, 37 doi:10.1007/s11005-023-01661-3 [arXiv:2209.10962 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  37. [37]

    The ice cone family and iterated in- tegrals for Calabi-Yau varieties,

    C. Duhr, A. Klemm, C. Nega and L. Tancredi, “The ice cone family and iterated in- tegrals for Calabi-Yau varieties,” JHEP02(2023), 228 doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2023)228 [arXiv:2212.09550 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  38. [38]

    On Canonical Differential Equations for Calabi-Yau Multi-Scale Feynman Integrals,

    S. Maggio and Y. Sohnle, “On Canonical Differential Equations for Calabi-Yau Multi-Scale Feynman Integrals,” JHEP10(2025), 202 doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2025)202 [arXiv:2504.17757 [hep-th]]. 28PIERRE V ANHOVE

    arXiv 2025

  39. [39]

    Integration by Parts Identities in Integer Numbers of Dimensions. a Criterion for Decoupling Systems of Differential Equations,

    L. Tancredi, “Integration by Parts Identities in Integer Numbers of Dimensions. a Criterion for Decoupling Systems of Differential Equations,” Nucl. Phys. B901(2015), 282-317 doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2015.10.015 [arXiv:1509.03330 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  40. [40]

    Algorithm for Differential Equations for Feynman Integrals in General Dimensions,

    L. de la Cruz and P. Vanhove, “Algorithm for Differential Equations for Feynman Integrals in General Dimensions,” Lett. Math. Phys.114(2024) no.3, 89 doi:10.1007/s11005-024- 01832-w [arXiv:2401.09908 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  41. [41]

    Feynman Integrals, Toric Geometry and Mirror Symmetry,

    P. Vanhove, “Feynman Integrals, Toric Geometry and Mirror Symmetry,” [arXiv:1807.11466 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  42. [42]

    On the Maximal Cut of Feynman Integrals and the Solution of Their Differential Equations,

    A. Primo and L. Tancredi, “On the Maximal Cut of Feynman Integrals and the Solution of Their Differential Equations,” Nucl. Phys. B916(2017), 94-116 doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2016.12.021 [arXiv:1610.08397 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  43. [43]

    Cuts of Feynman Integrals in Baikov Representa- tion,

    H. Frellesvig and C. G. Papadopoulos, “Cuts of Feynman Integrals in Baikov Representa- tion,” JHEP04(2017), 083 doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2017)083 [arXiv:1701.07356 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  44. [44]

    Baikov-Lee Representations Of Cut Feyn- man Integrals,

    M. Harley, F. Moriello and R. M. Schabinger, “Baikov-Lee Representations Of Cut Feyn- man Integrals,” JHEP06(2017), 049 doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2017)049 [arXiv:1705.03478 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  45. [45]

    Sums of squares of binomial coefficients, with applications to Picard–Fuchs equations,

    H. A. Verrill, “Sums of squares of binomial coefficients, with applications to Picard–Fuchs equations,” [arXiv:math/0407327 [math.CO]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  46. [46]

    Vanhove, Repository of Picard-Fuchs equations for Feynman integrals https://github.com/pierrevanhove/PicardFuchs

    P. Vanhove, Repository of Picard-Fuchs equations for Feynman integrals https://github.com/pierrevanhove/PicardFuchs

  47. [47]

    Connection Between Feynman Integrals Having Different Values of the Space-Time Dimension,

    O. V. Tarasov, “Connection Between Feynman Integrals Having Different Values of the Space-Time Dimension,” Phys. Rev. D54(1996), 6479-6490 doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.54.6479 [arXiv:hep-th/9606018 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1996

  48. [48]

    Generalized Recurrence Relations for Two Loop Propagator Integrals with Arbitrary Masses,

    O. V. Tarasov, “Generalized Recurrence Relations for Two Loop Propagator Integrals with Arbitrary Masses,” Nucl. Phys. B502(1997), 455-482 doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(97)00376-3 [arXiv:hep-ph/9703319 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  49. [49]

    Space-Time Dimensionality D as Complex Variable: Calculating Loop Integrals Using Dimensional Recurrence Relation and Analytical Properties with Respect to D,

    R. N. Lee, “Space-Time Dimensionality D as Complex Variable: Calculating Loop Integrals Using Dimensional Recurrence Relation and Analytical Properties with Respect to D,” Nucl. Phys. B830(2010), 474-492 doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2009.12.025 [arXiv:0911.0252 [hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  50. [50]

    The Elliptic Dilogarithm for the Sunset Graph,

    S. Bloch and P. Vanhove, “The Elliptic Dilogarithm for the Sunset Graph,” J. Number Theor.148(2015), 328-364 doi:10.1016/j.jnt.2014.09.032 [arXiv:1309.5865 [hep-th]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  51. [51]

    Three-loop banana integrals with three equal masses,

    C. Duhr and S. Maggio, “Three-loop banana integrals with three equal masses,” [arXiv:2511.19245 [hep-th]]. March 4, 2026 Pierre V anhove, Institut de Physique Th´ eorique, Universit´ e Paris Saclay, CNRS, CEA, F-91191 Gif- sur-Yvette, France

    arXiv 2026