Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 4 minor 112 references

The Polarized Three-Loop Anomalous Dimensions from On-Shell Massive Operator Matrix Elements

T0 review · 1 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Polarized three-loop QCD splitting functions, computed by an independent massive-operator method, agree with the earlier result in every channel.

desk verdict A technically heavy independent recalculation that confirms the known polarized three-loop anomalous dimensions; the gamma_qg recurrence step is a real but bounded gap, and the missing ancillary files should be fixed. read the letter →

arxiv 1908.03779 v1 pith:L34WAE4L submitted 2019-08-10 hep-ph hep-th

A. Behring , J. Blümlein , A. De Freitas , A. Goedicke , S. Klein , A. von Manteuffel , C. Schneider , K. Schönwald This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phhep-th
keywords polarizeddeep-inelasticscatteringthree-loopanomalousdimensionsmassiveoperatormatrixelementssplittingfunctionsMellinmomentsLarinschemeNNLOQCDheavyflavor
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 tries to establish, by an independent route, the complete $T_F$-dependent part of the polarized three-loop QCD anomalous dimensions, the kernels that control how spin-dependent quark and gluon densities evolve with energy scale; $T_F$ is the color factor of a closed quark loop. Working from massive on-shell operator matrix elements rather than from the approach behind the earlier computation, the paper obtains closed forms in Mellin-$N$ space for the full $\gamma_{qq}^{(2),\mathrm{PS}}$ and $\gamma_{qg}^{(2)}$, plus the $T_F$ parts of $\gamma_{gq}^{(2)}$ and $\gamma_{gg}^{(2)}$, and reports complete agreement with the previous result. This matters because these kernels are the last ingredient needed to promote polarized deep-inelastic-scattering and collider spin analyses from next-to-leading to next-to-next-to-leading order, and because an independent confirmation protects precision spin and $\alpha_s$ measurements from a possible systematic error in the only earlier calculation. As byproducts, the paper independently recovers the two-loop polarized anomalous dimensions and the $T_F$ part of the three-loop QCD $\beta$-function.

What carries the argument

The carrying objects are the massive on-shell operator matrix elements (OMEs): Green functions with local operator insertions whose ultraviolet poles in $\varepsilon = D-4$ contain the anomalous dimensions, at order $1/\varepsilon^3$ for one loop, $1/\varepsilon^2$ for two loops, and $1/\varepsilon$ for the $T_F$ parts of the three-loop result. For most channels the master integrals are expanded by standard differential-equation and summation methods. The exception is $A_{Qg}^{(3)}$, where the needed deeper $\varepsilon$-expansion touches elliptic sectors; there the paper uses the method of arbitrarily high Mellin moments. The integration-by-parts relations are converted into recurrences for the master integrals, thousands of moments are generated exactly, a difference equation for the moments of the OME's $1/\varepsilon$ coefficient is obtained by a guessing algorithm, and the recurrence, which is first-order and factorizable, is solved in terms of nested harmonic sums. The Larin scheme fixes the treatment of $\gamma_5$, and a finite renormalization converts the Larin-scheme anomalous dimensions to the M-scheme where the comparison with the earlier result is made.

What would settle it

Generate one additional Mellin moment of the $1/\varepsilon$ pole of the unrenormalized massive OME $A_{Qg}^{(3)}$ at an $N$ beyond the 4000 moments used in the paper, by a direct fixed-$N$ evaluation of the master integrals that does not rely on the guessed recurrence, and test whether the published closed form for $\gamma_{qg}^{(2)}$ matches it; a single mismatch would disprove the all-$N$ claim, while agreement would add evidence but not proof.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the contributions proportional to $T_F$ to the polarized three-loop anomalous dimensions in the M-scheme can be computed from massive on-shell operator matrix elements, and that the resulting closed expressions agree with the earlier computation in every channel. For $\gamma_{qq}^{(2),\mathrm{PS}}$ and $\gamma_{qg}^{(2)}$ the paper gives complete results valid for all Mellin moments; for $\gamma_{gq}^{(2)}$ and $\gamma_{gg}^{(2)}$ it gives the full $T_F$-dependent parts. The derivation is not a rerun of standard methods: for $\gamma_{qg}^{(2)}$, deeper expansions of the master integrals in the dimensional parameter $\varepsilon = D-4$ would have introduced elliptic contributions, so the paper generates up to 4000 Mellin moments of the relevant operator matrix element, guesses a first-order factorizable recurrence from 2640 of them, solves that recurrence in closed form, and then transforms from the Larin scheme to the M-scheme by a finite renormalization. All obtained anomalous dimensions are stated to agree with the previous computation.

Load-bearing premise

That the recurrence for $\gamma_{qg}^{(2)}$ guessed from 2640 computed Mellin moments is the true recurrence for every $N$; the paper validates it by agreement with the earlier result rather than by proof.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The polarized NNLO evolution of quark and gluon spin densities can now be implemented with a cross-checked set of splitting functions, allowing existing NLO analyses of polarized deep-inelastic-scattering data to be promoted to NNLO.
  • The first-moment identities are reproduced, including $\gamma_{gg}^{(k)}(N=1)=-2\beta_k$ and $\gamma_{qg}^{(k)}(N=1)=0$, so the new expressions respect the axial anomaly and fermion-number conservation.
  • The large-$N_F$ predictions from the literature are recovered after a small identified finite-renormalization adjustment, with one term in the earlier pure-singlet prediction traced to a missing M-scheme conversion.
  • The two corrected operator Feynman rules from the two-loop literature do not change the earlier two-loop anomalous dimensions, which are confirmed as correct.
  • Because the Mellin-space results invert to $z$-space splitting functions given in the appendix, the expressions are in the form needed for convolution codes and global spin fits.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The unproven step is the guessed recurrence for $\gamma_{qg}^{(2)}$; if a future evaluation of a moment beyond the fitted range disagreed with it, only that anomalous dimension would be affected, since the other channels use direct methods.
  • The same high-moment pipeline is a natural tool for the next stage of the project, the $O(\varepsilon)$ terms of $A_{Qg}^{(3)}$ that enter the massive polarized Wilson coefficients at NNLO, because those terms are expected to carry the same elliptic complications.
  • The corrected quarkonic projector may have consequences beyond anomalous dimensions: earlier polarized massive OME results obtained with the alternative projector could deserve re-examination even where the final anomalous dimensions agree.
  • The small-$z$ analysis implies that the leading $1/N^5$ terms are not numerically dominant because the next-order terms largely cancel them, so using only the leading small-$x$ pole would misestimate NNLO spin evolution in phenomenological fits.
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

1 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper computes all contributions proportional to T_F to the polarized three-loop anomalous dimensions in the M-scheme, using on-shell massive operator matrix elements (OMEs) in the Larin scheme followed by a finite renormalization to the M-scheme. The complete anomalous dimensions γ_qq^{(2),PS} and γ_qg^{(2)} are obtained, together with the T_F parts of γ_gq^{(2)} and γ_gg^{(2)}, and the complete two-loop polarized anomalous dimensions are reproduced independently. Most master integrals are evaluated with the standard toolkit (hypergeometric representations, differential equations, Almkvist–Zeilberger, Sigma, HarmonicSums); for the OME A_Qg^{(3)} the method of arbitrarily high Mellin moments is used, with a difference equation for the moment sequence obtained by guessing and then solved with Sigma. The paper reports full agreement with the earlier massless computation of Ref. [6] and provides cross-checks against MATAD moments for N=1,3,5,7,9, the N=1 limits, the three-loop β-function, and large-N_F predictions. Splitting functions in z-space and corrected operator Feynman rules are given in the appendices.

Significance. If the results stand, this is a valuable independent confirmation of the polarized NNLO anomalous dimensions from a physically different calculational setup, which is important for polarized deep-inelastic phenomenology and for the EIC program. The paper's strengths are the multiple internal cross-checks (low Mellin moments from MATAD, N=1 sum rules, β-function consistency, large-N_F comparisons) and the final all-N agreement with Ref. [6]. No parameters are fitted to the target result; the comparison with Ref. [6] is an external benchmark. The main caveat is that the γ_qg^{(2)} result relies on an unproved guessed recurrence, so the strength of the claim of a 'fully independent' derivation is limited unless that recurrence is certified or validated on held-out moments.

major comments (1)
  1. [Section 3, Table 1; Section 6, Eq. (79)] The all-N expression for γ_qg^{(2)} is obtained by guessing a difference equation from 2640 Mellin moments and then solving that recurrence with Sigma. The manuscript does not prove that the guessed recurrence is the true recurrence of the moment sequence for all odd N. Since γ_qg^{(2)} is one of the two complete three-loop quantities claimed, this is a load-bearing step in the argument. Please either (i) supply a proof of the recurrence, or (ii) document that the remaining 1360 of the 4000 generated moments were held out and used as an independent validation, and state explicitly that the recurrence reproduces them; ideally both. The agreement with Ref. [6] is a strong external check of the final result, but it does not by itself close the formal gap in the claimed independent derivation.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Abstract and Section 3] The abstract states that 4000 moments were generated and 2640 turned out to be sufficient, while Section 3 says 2000 moments were generated for most projections and 4000 for the C_F C_A T_F and C_A^2 T_F projections. Please reconcile these statements and clarify whether the 1360 unused moments were employed as a validation set or only as part of the guessing input.
  2. [Section 8] The conclusions promise that the results are provided in Mathematica ancillary files, but the manuscript version made available for review does not include these files. Since they are the only way to inspect the guessing and validation protocol, please ensure the ancillary files are submitted with the revised version.
  3. [Appendix A, Eq. (144)] In the last term of the four-gluon operator vertex, the exponent 'm−j−4' contains an undefined symbol m; this should presumably be 'N−j−4' to match the other sums in the equation.
  4. [Section 7, Eqs. (132)-(136)] The statement that the next-to-leading 1/N^3 terms 'more than cancel' the leading 1/N^5 terms is qualitative. Consider displaying the subleading coefficients or giving a short numerical illustration to substantiate the claim.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the target anomalous dimensions are extracted from computed OME pole terms and benchmarked against Ref. [6] only after the fact; the guessed-recurrence step is an unproven inference but not an input-dependent reduction.

full rationale

The central claim is that the T_F contributions to the polarized three-loop anomalous dimensions are obtained from the pole terms of massive operator matrix elements and agree with the earlier computation in Ref. [6]. Walking the derivation chain: the target quantities gamma_qg^(2), gamma_qq^(2,PS), etc. appear as coefficients of O(1/epsilon) in the renormalization structure of Eq. (1) and are solved for from the computed OME pole terms together with lower-order anomalous dimensions; they are not fitted to Ref. [6]. The finite renormalization constants z_qq etc. are taken from Ref. [24], which predates Ref. [6] and is not derived from the target three-loop result. The main methodological subtlety is gamma_qg^(2): Section 3 obtains it by generating 4000 Mellin moments, guessing a difference equation from 2640 of them via the method of Ref. [20], and solving the recurrence with Sigma. This is an inferential step with no formal proof that the guessed recurrence is the true recurrence for all odd N, and the announced Mathematica ancillary files that would document the guessing/validation protocol are not visible in the manuscript. That is a verification/correctness risk, not circularity: the moments themselves are computed from the OME, the recurrence is not a parameter fitted to Ref. [6], and the final agreement with Ref. [6] is a genuine external check performed after the closed form was obtained. No load-bearing premise reduces to a self-citation; self-citations such as Refs. [16], [19], [20], and [21] supply computational machinery, and the master integrals taken from Ref. [16] are not the target anomalous dimensions. Accordingly no circular step is identified.

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

No free parameters are fitted to data. The inputs are standard QCD color factors, beta-function coefficients, and renormalization constants from prior literature. The main burden is the unproven finite-moment guessing step for gamma_qg and the Larin-scheme assumptions, both of which are validated by the final agreement with the external result Ref. [6].

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption Dimensional regularization with the Larin prescription for gamma_5 yields the correct polarized anomalous dimensions after finite renormalization.
    Used throughout Section 2; the paper argues this holds for massive OMEs and verifies it by agreement with Ref. [6] in Section 6.
  • domain assumption The 1/epsilon pole structure of massive on-shell operator matrix elements determines the massless QCD anomalous dimensions.
    Invoked in Section 2 and the Conclusions through the universality of anomalous dimensions; a standard QCD factorization and decoupling assumption.
  • ad hoc to paper A recurrence guessed from 2640 Mellin moments determines the exact all-N result for gamma_qg.
    Section 3 and Table 1; the finite-moment guessing is not accompanied by a proof that the guessed recurrence matches the infinite moment sequence.
  • domain assumption The finite renormalization constants of Ref. [24] correctly convert Larin-scheme results to the M-scheme at three-loop order.
    Section 4, Eqs. (20)-(29); taken from prior literature and validated by the final agreement with Ref. [6].

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of The Polarized Three-Loop Anomalous Dimensions from On-Shell Massive Operator Matrix Elements." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/L34WAE4L

@misc{pith2026190803779,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: The Polarized Three-Loop Anomalous Dimensions from On-Shell Massive Operator Matrix Elements},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/L34WAE4L}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:1908.03779}
}
abstract

We calculate all contributions $\propto T_F$ to the polarized three-loop anomalous dimensions in the M-scheme using massive operator matrix elements and compare to results in the literature. This includes the complete anomalous dimensions $\gamma_{qq}^{(2),\rm PS}$ and $\gamma_{qg}^{(2)}$. We also obtain the complete two-loop polarized anomalous dimensions in an independent calculation. While for most of the anomalous dimensions the usual direct computation methods in Mellin $N$-space can be applied since all recurrences factorize at first order, this is not the case for $\gamma_{qg}^{(2)}$. Due to the necessity of deeper expansions of the master integrals in the dimensional parameter $\varepsilon = D-4$, we had to use the method of arbitrary high moments to eliminate elliptic contributions in intermediate steps. 4000 moments were generated to determine this anomalous dimension and 2640 moments turned out to be sufficient. As an aside, we also recalculate the contributions $\propto T_F$ to the three-loop QCD $\beta$-function.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 1908.03779 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The four-leg polarized local operator vertices. Here all momenta are ingoing. The quark-quark-gluon-gluon operator reads, with N ∈ N 13We thank J. Smith for a corresponding communication related to Ref. [26] several years ago, with which we agree. 20 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_1.png] view at source ↗

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

112 extracted references · 26 canonical work pages

  1. [6]

    Moch, J.A.M

    S. Moch, J.A.M. Vermaseren and A. Vogt, Nucl. Phys. B 889 (2014) 351–400 [arXiv:1409.5131 [hep-ph]]

    arXiv 2014

  2. [1]

    Boer et al

    D. Boer et al. , Gluons and the quark sea at high energies: Distributions, polarization, to- mography, arXiv:1108.1713 [nucl-th]

    arXiv

  3. [2]

    Bethke et al., Workshop on Precision Measurements of αs, arXiv:1110.0016 [hep-ph]; S

    S. Bethke et al., Workshop on Precision Measurements of αs, arXiv:1110.0016 [hep-ph]; S. Moch et al. , High precision fundamental constants at the TeV scale , arXiv:1405.4781 [hep-ph]; S. Alekhin, J. Bl ¨umlein and S.O. Moch, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 31 (2016) no.25, 1630023

    arXiv 2016

  4. [3]

    Gl ¨uck, E

    M. Gl ¨uck, E. Reya, M. Stratmann and W. Vogelsang, Phys. Rev. D 63 (2001) 094005 [hep- ph/0011215]; J. Bl¨umlein and H. B¨ottcher, Nucl. Phys. B 841 (2010) 205–230 [arXiv:1005.3113 [hep-ph]]; E. Leader, A.V. Sidorov and D.B. Stamenov, Phys. Rev. D 82 (2010) 114018 33 [arXiv:1010.0574 [hep-ph]]; P. Jimenez-Delgado, W. Melnitchouk and J.F. Owens, J. Phys. ...

    work page arXiv 2001

  5. [4]

    Spin Physics and Polarized Structure Functions

    B. Lampe and E. Reya, Phys. Rept. 332 (2000) 1–163 [hep-ph/9810270]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2000

  6. [5]

    Deur, S.J

    A. Deur, S.J. Brodsky and G.F. De T´ eramond, The Spin Structure of the Nucleon , arXiv:1807.05250 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  7. [7]

    Mertig and W.L

    R. Mertig and W.L. van Neerven, Z. Phys. C 70 (1996) 637–654 [hep-ph/9506451v2]

    arXiv 1996

  8. [8]

    Vogelsang, Phys

    W. Vogelsang, Phys. Rev. D 54 (1996) 2023–2029 [hep-ph/9512218]; Nucl. Phys. B 475 (1996) 47–72 [hep-ph/9603366]

    arXiv 1996

Show all 112 references
  1. [9]

    Moch, J.A.M

    S. Moch, J.A.M. Vermaseren and A. Vogt, Nucl. Phys. B 688 (2004) 101–134 [hep- ph/0403192]

    2004

  2. [10]

    Ablinger, A

    J. Ablinger, A. Behring, J. Bl ¨umlein, A. De Freitas, A. Hasselhuhn, A. von Manteuf- fel, M. Round, C. Schneider, and F. Wißbrock, Nucl. Phys. B 886 (2014) 733–823 [arXiv:1406.4654 [hep-ph]]

    2014 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Bl ¨umlein, S

    J. Bl ¨umlein, S. Klein and B. T ¨odtli, Phys. Rev. D 80 (2009) 094010 [arXiv:0909.1547 [hep- ph]]

    2009 arXiv

  4. [12]

    A. Vogt, S. Moch and J.A.M. Vermaseren, Nucl. Phys. B 691 (2004) 129–181 [hep- ph/0404111]

    2004

  5. [13]

    Ablinger, J

    J. Ablinger, J. Bl ¨umlein, A. De Freitas, A. Hasselhuhn, A. von Manteuffel, M. Round, C. Schneider and F. Wißbrock, Nucl. Phys. B 882 (2014) 263–288 [arXiv:1402.0359 [hep- ph]]

    2014 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Ablinger, A

    J. Ablinger, A. Behring, J. Bl ¨umlein, A. De Freitas, A. von Manteuffel and C. Schneider, Nucl. Phys. B 890 (2014) 48–151 [arXiv:1409.1135 [hep-ph]]

    2014 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Ablinger, J

    J. Ablinger, J. Bl ¨umlein, S. Klein, C. Schneider and F. Wißbrock, Nucl. Phys. B 844 (2011) 26–54 [arXiv:1008.3347 [hep-ph]]

    2011 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Ablinger, A

    J. Ablinger, A. Behring, J. Bl ¨umlein, A. De Freitas, A. von Manteuffel and C. Schneider, Nucl. Phys. B 922 (2017) 1–40 [arXiv:1705.01508 [hep-ph]]

    2017 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Bl ¨umlein and C

    J. Bl ¨umlein and C. Schneider, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 33 (2018) no.17, 1830015 [arXiv:1809.02889 [hep-ph]]

    2018 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Ablinger, A

    J. Ablinger, A. Behring, J. Bl ¨umlein, A. De Freitas, A. von Manteuffel and C. Schneider, Comput. Phys. Commun. 202 (2016) 33–112 [arXiv:1509.08324 [hep-ph]]. 34

    2016 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Bl ¨umlein and C

    J. Bl ¨umlein and C. Schneider, Phys. Lett. B 771 (2017) 31–36 [arXiv:1701.04614 [hep-ph]]

    2017 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Kauers, Guessing Handbook, JKU Linz, Technical Report RISC 09-07

    M. Kauers, Guessing Handbook, JKU Linz, Technical Report RISC 09-07

  13. [21]

    Schneider, S´ em

    C. Schneider, S´ em. Lothar. Combin.56 (2007) 1–36 article B56b

    2007

  14. [22]

    C. Schneider, Simplifying Multiple Sums in Difference Fields, in: Computer Algebra in Quan- tum Field Theory: Integration, Summation and Special Functions Texts and Monographs in Symbolic Computation eds. C. Schneider and J. Bl ¨umlein (Springer, Wien, 2013) 325–360 [arXiv:1304...

    2013 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Larin, Phys

    S.A. Larin, Phys. Lett. B 303 (1993) 113–118 [hep-ph/9302240]

    1993 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Matiounine, J

    Y. Matiounine, J. Smith and W.L. van Neerven, Phys. Rev. D 58 (1998) 076002 [hep- ph/9803439]

    1998

  17. [25]

    Bierenbaum, J

    I. Bierenbaum, J. Bl¨umlein and S. Klein, Nucl. Phys. B820 (2009) 417–482 [arXiv:0904.3563 [hep-ph]]

    2009 arXiv

  18. [26]

    M. Buza, Y. Matiounine, J. Smith and W.L. van Neerven, Nucl. Phys. B485 (1997) 420–456 [hep-ph/9608342]

    1997 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Klein, Mellin Moments of Heavy Flavor Contributions to F2(x,Q 2) at NNLO , arXiv:0910.3101 [hep-ph]

    S.W.G. Klein, Mellin Moments of Heavy Flavor Contributions to F2(x,Q 2) at NNLO , arXiv:0910.3101 [hep-ph]

    arXiv

  20. [28]

    Bl ¨umlein, C

    J. Bl ¨umlein, C. Raab and K. Sch ¨onwald, The Polarized Two-Loop Massive Pure Singlet Wilson Coefficient for Deep-Inelastic Scattering , arXiv:1904.08911 [hep-ph]

    1904 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Bierenbaum J

    I. Bierenbaum J. Bl ¨umlein, A. De Freitas, S. Klein, and K. Sch ¨onwald, DESY 15–004, DO–TH 15/01

  22. [30]

    Hasselhuhn, 3-Loop Contributions to Heavy Flavor Wilson Coefficients of Neutral and Charged Current DIS , DESY-THESIS-2013-050

    A. Hasselhuhn, 3-Loop Contributions to Heavy Flavor Wilson Coefficients of Neutral and Charged Current DIS , DESY-THESIS-2013-050

    2013

  23. [31]

    Bl ¨umlein, A

    J. Bl ¨umlein, A. De Freitas, A. Goedicke, C. Schneider, and K. Sch ¨onwald, The Polarized Variable Flavor Number Scheme at Next-to-Leading Order , DESY 19–061, DO–TH 19/05

  24. [32]

    M. Buza, Y. Matiounine, J. Smith, R. Migneron and W.L. van Neerven, Nucl. Phys. B 472 (1996) 611–658 [hep-ph/9601302]

    1996 arXiv

  25. [33]

    M. Buza, Y. Matiounine, J. Smith and W. L. van Neerven, Eur. Phys. J. C 1 (1998) 301–320 [hep-ph/9612398]

    1998 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Bl ¨umlein, D.J

    J. Bl ¨umlein, D.J. Broadhurst, and J.A.M. Vermaseren, Comput. Phys. Commun.181 (2010) 582–625, [arXiv:0907.2557 [math-ph]]

    2010 arXiv

  27. [35]

    ’t Hooft and M.J.G

    G. ’t Hooft and M.J.G. Veltman, Nucl. Phys. B 44 (1972) 189–213; D.A. Akyeampong and R. Delbourgo, Nuovo Cim. A 17 (1973) 578–586; A 18 (1973) 94– 104; A 19 (1974) 219–224; P. Breitenlohner and D. Maison, Commun. Math. Phys. 52 (1977) 39–54; 55–75. 35

    1972

  28. [36]

    Kreimer, Phys

    D. Kreimer, Phys. Lett. B 237 (1990) 59–62; J.G. K¨orner, D. Kreimer and K. Schilcher, Z. Phys. C 54 (1992) 503–512; D. Kreimer, Dimensionale Regularisierung im Standardmodell , PhD Thesis, U. Mainz (1992). D. Kreimer, The Role of γ5 in dimensional regularization, hep-ph/94013...

    1990 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Bierenbaum, J

    I. Bierenbaum, J. Bl ¨umlein and S. Klein, Proc. DIS 2007, Munich, arXiv:0706.2738 [hep-ph]

    2007 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Zijlstra and W.L

    E.B. Zijlstra and W.L. van Neerven, Nucl. Phys. B 417 (1994) 61–100 Erratum: [Nucl. Phys. B 426 (1994) 245] Erratum: [Nucl. Phys. B 773 (2007) 105–106] Erratum: [Nucl. Phys. B 501 (1997) 599]

    1994

  31. [39]

    A. Vogt, S. Moch, M. Rogal and J.A.M. Vermaseren, Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 183 (2008) 155–161 [arXiv:0807.1238 [hep-ph]]

    2008 arXiv

  32. [40]

    van Neerven, FORTRAN-code disnew.f, unpublished

    W.L. van Neerven, FORTRAN-code disnew.f, unpublished

  33. [41]

    Steinhauser, Comput

    M. Steinhauser, Comput. Phys. Commun. 134 (2001) 335–364 [arXiv:hep-ph/0009029]

    2001 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Nogueira, J

    P. Nogueira, J. Comput. Phys. 105 (1993) 279–289

    1993

  35. [43]

    Vermaseren, New features of FORM , math-ph/0010025; M

    J.A.M. Vermaseren, New features of FORM , math-ph/0010025; M. Tentyukov and J. A. M. Vermaseren, Comput. Phys. Commun. 181 (2010) 1419–1427 [hep-ph/0702279]

    2010 arXiv

  36. [44]

    van Ritbergen, A.N

    T. van Ritbergen, A.N. Schellekens and J.A.M. Vermaseren, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 14 (1999) 41–96 [hep-ph/9802376]

    1999 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Lagrange, Nouvelles recherches sur la nature et la propagation du son , Miscellanea Tauri- nensis, t

    J. Lagrange, Nouvelles recherches sur la nature et la propagation du son , Miscellanea Tauri- nensis, t. II, 1760-61; Oeuvres t. I, p. 263; C.F. Gauß, Theoria attractionis corporum sphaeroidicorum ellipticorum homogeneorum methodo novo tractate, Commentationes societas scienti...

    1981 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Studerus, Comput

    C. Studerus, Comput. Phys. Commun. 181 (2010) 1293–1300 [arXiv:0912.2546 [physics.comp-ph]]

    2010 arXiv

  39. [47]

    von Manteuffel and C

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

    arXiv

  40. [48]

    Lewis, Computer Algebra System Fermat, http://home.bway.net/lewis

    R.H. Lewis, Computer Algebra System Fermat, http://home.bway.net/lewis

  41. [49]

    Bauer, A

    C.W. Bauer, A. Frink and R. Kreckel, J. Symb. Comput.33 (2002) 1–12 [cs/0004015 [cs-sc]]. 36

    2002 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Klein, Vorlesungen ¨uber die hypergeometrische Funktion , Wintersemester 1893/94, Die Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften 39, (Springer, Berlin, 1933); W.N

    F. Klein, Vorlesungen ¨uber die hypergeometrische Funktion , Wintersemester 1893/94, Die Grundlehren der Mathematischen Wissenschaften 39, (Springer, Berlin, 1933); W.N. Bailey, Generalized Hypergeometric Series , (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1935); P. Appell and J....

    1933 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Slater, Generalized hypergeometric functions , (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1966)

    L.J. Slater, Generalized hypergeometric functions , (Cambridge, Cambridge University Press, 1966)

    1966

  44. [52]

    Brown, Commun

    F. Brown, Commun. Math. Phys. 287 (2009) 925–958 [arXiv:0804.1660 [math.AG]]

    2009 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Ablinger, J

    J. Ablinger, J. Bl ¨umlein, C. Raab, C. Schneider and F. Wißbrock, Nucl. Phys. B 885 (2014) 409–447 [arXiv:1403.1137 [hep-ph]]

    2014 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Panzer, Comput

    E. Panzer, Comput. Phys. Commun. 188 (2015) 148–166 [arXiv:1403.3385 [hep-th]]

    2015 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Kotikov, Phys

    A.V. Kotikov, Phys. Lett. B 254 (1991) 158–164; M. Caffo, H. Czyz, S. Laporta and E. Remiddi, Acta Phys. Polon. B 29 (1998) 2627–2635 [hep-th/9807119]; Nuovo Cim. A 111 (1998) 365–389 [hep-th/9805118]; T. Gehrmann and E. Remiddi, Nucl. Phys. B 580 (2000) 485–518 [hep-ph/9912329...

    1991 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Ablinger, J

    J. Ablinger, J. Bl ¨umlein, P. Marquard, N. Rana and C. Schneider, Nucl. Phys. B939 (2019) 253–291 [arXiv:1810.12261 [hep-ph]]

    2019 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Almkvist and D

    G. Almkvist and D. Zeilberger, J. Symb. Comp. 10 (1990) 571–591; M. Apagodu and D. Zeilberger, Adv. Appl. Math. (Special Regev Issue), 37 (2006) 139–152

    1990

  50. [58]

    Ablinger, Computer Algebra Algorithms for Special Functions in Particle Physics , Ph.D

    J. Ablinger, Computer Algebra Algorithms for Special Functions in Particle Physics , Ph.D. Thesis, J. Kepler University Linz (2012) arXiv:1305.0687 [math-ph]

    2012 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Czakon, Comput

    M. Czakon, Comput. Phys. Commun. 175 (2006) 559–571 [hep-ph/0511200]; A.V. Smirnov and V.A. Smirnov, Eur. Phys. J. C 62 (2009) 445–449 [arXiv:0901.0386 [hep- ph]]

    2006 arXiv

  52. [60]

    M. Karr, J. ACM 28 (1981) 305–350. 37

    1981

  53. [61]

    Schneider, Symbolic Summation in Difference Fields Ph.D

    C. Schneider, Symbolic Summation in Difference Fields Ph.D. Thesis RISC, Johannes Kepler University, Linz technical report 01-17 (2001)

    2001

  54. [62]

    Schneider, Difference Equations in ΠΣ-Extensions

    C. Schneider, Difference Equations in ΠΣ-Extensions. An. Univ. Timisoara Ser. Mat.- Inform. 42 (2004) 163; J. Differ. Equations Appl. 11 (2005) 799–821; Appl. Algebra Engrg. Comm. Comput. 16(2005) 1–32

    2004

  55. [63]

    Schneider, J

    C. Schneider, J. Algebra Appl. 6 (2007) 415–441

    2007

  56. [64]

    Schneider, Motives, Quantum Field Theory, and Pseudodifferential Operators (Clay Mathe- matics Proceedings Vol

    C. Schneider, Motives, Quantum Field Theory, and Pseudodifferential Operators (Clay Mathe- matics Proceedings Vol. 12 ed. A. Carey, D. Ellwood, S. Paycha and S. Rosenberg,(Amer. Math. Soc) (2010), 285–308 [arXiv:0904.2323]

    2010 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Schneider, Ann

    C. Schneider, Ann. Comb. 14 (2010) 533–552 [arXiv:0808.2596]

    2010 arXiv

  58. [66]

    Schneider, in: Computer Algebra and Polynomials, Applications of Algebra and Number Theory, J

    C. Schneider, in: Computer Algebra and Polynomials, Applications of Algebra and Number Theory, J. Gutierrez, J. Schicho, M. Weimann (ed.), Lecture Notes in Computer Science (LNCS) 8942 (2015), 157–191 [arXiv:13077887 [cs.SC]]

    2015

  59. [67]

    Schneider, J

    C. Schneider, J. Symbolic Comput. 43 (2008) 611–644 [arXiv:0808.2543v1]; J. Symb. Com- put. 72 (2016) 82–127 [arXiv:1408.2776 [cs.SC]]; J. Symb. Comput. 80 (2017) 616–664 [arXiv:1603.04285 [cs.SC]]

    2008 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Ablinger, J

    J. Ablinger, J. Bl ¨umlein, S. Klein and C. Schneider, Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 205-206 (2010) 110–115 [arXiv:1006.4797 [math-ph]]; J. Bl¨umlein, A. Hasselhuhn and C. Schneider, PoS (RADCOR 2011) 032 [arXiv:1202.4303 [math-ph]]; C. Schneider,Computer Algebra Rundbrief 53 (2013...

    2010 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Vermaseren, Int

    J.A.M. Vermaseren, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 14 (1999) 2037–2076 [hep-ph/9806280]

    1999 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Bl ¨umlein and S

    J. Bl ¨umlein and S. Kurth, Phys. Rev. D 60 (1999) 014018 [hep-ph/9810241]

    1999 arXiv

  63. [71]

    Kepler University Linz, 2009, arXiv:1011.1176 [math-ph]

    PoS (LL2014) 019 [arXiv:1407.6180 [cs.SC]]; A Computer Algebra Toolbox for Harmonic Sums Related to Particle Physics , Diploma Thesis, J. Kepler University Linz, 2009, arXiv:1011.1176 [math-ph]

    2009 arXiv

  64. [72]

    Ablinger, J

    J. Ablinger, J. Bl¨umlein and C. Schneider, J. Math. Phys.52 (2011) 102301 [arXiv:1105.6063 [math-ph]]

    2011 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Ablinger, J

    J. Ablinger, J. Bl¨umlein and C. Schneider, J. Math. Phys.54 (2013) 082301 [arXiv:1302.0378 [math-ph]]

    2013 arXiv

  66. [74]

    Ablinger, J

    J. Ablinger, J. Bl ¨umlein, C.G. Raab and C. Schneider, J. Math. Phys. 55 (2014) 112301 [arXiv:1407.1822 [hep-th]]

    2014 arXiv

  67. [75]

    Ablinger, J

    J. Ablinger, J. Bl ¨umlein, A. De Freitas, M. van Hoeij, E. Imamoglu, C.G. Raab, C.S. Radu and C. Schneider, J. Math. Phys. 59 (2018) no.6, 062305 [arXiv:1706.01299 [hep-th]]

    2018 arXiv

  68. [76]

    Bl ¨umlein, A

    J. Bl ¨umlein, A. De Freitas, M. Van Hoeij, E. Imamoglu, P. Marquard and C. Schneider, PoS (LL2018) 017 [arXiv:1807.05287 [hep-ph]]. 38

    arXiv

  69. [77]

    Bl ¨umlein, J

    J. Bl ¨umlein, J. Ablinger, A. Behring, A. De Freitas, A. von Manteuffel, C. Schneider and C. Schneider, PoS (QCDEV2017) 031 [arXiv:1711.07957 [hep-ph]]; J. Bl¨umlein, P. Marquard, N. Rana and C. Schneider, The Heavy Fermion Contributions to the Massive Three Loop Form Factors ...

    1908 arXiv

  70. [78]

    Bl ¨umlein, M

    J. Bl ¨umlein, M. Kauers, S. Klein and C. Schneider, Comput. Phys. Commun. 180 (2009) 2143–2165 [arXiv:0902.4091 [hep-ph]]

    2009 arXiv

  71. [79]

    Sage, http://www.sagemath.org/

  72. [80]

    Kauers, M

    M. Kauers, M. Jaroschek, and F. Johansson, in: Computer Algebra and Polynomials, Editors: J. Gutierrez, J. Schicho, Josef, M. Weimann, Eds.. Lecture Notes in Computer Science8942 (Springer, Berlin, 2015) 105–125 [arXiv:1306.4263 [cs.SC]]

    2015 arXiv

  73. [81]

    Bl ¨umlein, Comput

    J. Bl ¨umlein, Comput. Phys. Commun. 159 (2004) 19–54 [hep-ph/0311046]

    2004 arXiv

  74. [82]

    Gross and F

    D.J. Gross and F. Wilczek, Phys. Rev. D 8 (1973) 3633–3652

    1973

  75. [83]

    Georgi and H.D

    H. Georgi and H.D. Politzer, Phys. Rev. D 9 (1974) 416–420

    1974

  76. [84]

    Sasaki, Prog

    K. Sasaki, Prog. Theor. Phys. 54 (1975) 1816–1827

    1975

  77. [85]

    Ahmed and G.G

    M.A. Ahmed and G.G. Ross, Phys. Lett. B 56 (1975) 385–390

    1975

  78. [86]

    Altarelli and G

    G. Altarelli and G. Parisi, Nucl. Phys. B 126 (1977) 298–318

    1977

  79. [87]

    Ito, Prog

    H. Ito, Prog. Theor. Phys. 54 (1975) 555–562

    1975

  80. [88]

    Bl ¨umlein, Prog

    J. Bl ¨umlein, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 69 (2013) 28–84 [arXiv:1208.6087 [hep-ph]]

    2013 arXiv

  81. [89]

    Floratos, D

    E.G. Floratos, D. A.Ross and C.T. Sachrajda, Nucl. Phys. B 129 (1977) 66–88 Erratum: [Nucl. Phys. B 139 (1978) 545–546]

    1977

  82. [90]

    Curci, W

    G. Curci, W. Furmanski and R. Petronzio, Nucl. Phys. B 175 (1980) 27–92

    1980

  83. [91]

    Gonzalez-Arroyo, C

    A. Gonzalez-Arroyo, C. Lopez and F. J. Yndurain, Nucl. Phys. B 153 (1979) 161–186

    1979

  84. [92]

    Moch and J.A.M

    S. Moch and J.A.M. Vermaseren, Nucl. Phys. B 573 (2000) 853–907 [hep-ph/9912355]

    2000 arXiv

  85. [93]

    Gross and F

    D.J. Gross and F. Wilczek, Phys. Rev. Lett. 30 (1973) 1343–1346

    1973

  86. [94]

    Politzer, Phys

    H.D. Politzer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 30 (1973) 1346–1349

    1973

  87. [95]

    Caswell, Phys

    W.E. Caswell, Phys. Rev. Lett. 33 (1974) 244–246

    1974

  88. [96]

    Jones, Nucl

    D.R.T. Jones, Nucl. Phys. B 75 (1974) 531–538

    1974

  89. [97]

    Tarasov, A.A

    O.V. Tarasov, A.A. Vladimirov and A.Y. Zharkov, Phys. Lett. 93B (1980) 429–432

    1980

  90. [98]

    Larin and J.A.M

    S.A. Larin and J.A.M. Vermaseren, Phys. Lett. B 303 (1993) 334–336 [hep-ph/9302208]

    1993 arXiv

  91. [99]

    Fadin, E.A

    V.S. Fadin, E.A. Kuraev and L.N. Lipatov, Phys. Lett. 60B (1975) 50–52

    1975

  92. [100]

    Fadin and L.N

    V.S. Fadin and L.N. Lipatov, Phys. Lett. B 429 (1998) 127–134 [hep-ph/9802290]

    1998 arXiv

  93. [101]

    Kirschner and L.N

    R. Kirschner and L.N. Lipatov, Nucl. Phys. B 213 (1983) 122–148. 39

    1983

  94. [102]

    Bl ¨umlein and A

    J. Bl ¨umlein and A. Vogt, Phys. Lett. B 370 (1996) 149–155 [hep-ph/9510410]

    1996 arXiv

  95. [103]

    Bartels, B.I

    J. Bartels, B.I. Ermolaev and M.G. Ryskin, Z. Phys. C 70 (1996) 273–280 [hep- ph/9507271]

    1996

  96. [104]

    Bl ¨umlein and A

    J. Bl ¨umlein and A. Vogt, Phys. Lett. B 386 (1996) 350–358 [hep-ph/9606254]

    1996 arXiv

  97. [105]

    Y. Kiyo, J. Kodaira and H. Tochimura, Z. Phys. C 74 (1997) 631–639 [hep-ph/9701365]

    1997 arXiv

  98. [106]

    Bl ¨umlein and A

    J. Bl ¨umlein and A. Vogt, Acta Phys. Polon. B 27 (1996) 1309–1322 [hep-ph/9603450]

    1996 arXiv

  99. [107]

    Bl ¨umlein, V

    J. Bl ¨umlein, V. Ravindran, W.L. van Neerven and A. Vogt, Proceedings, DIS98, Brussels, eds. Gh. Coremans and R. Rosen, (World Scientific, Singapore, 1998), p. 211–216 [hep- ph/9806368]

    1998

  100. [108]

    Bl ¨umlein and A

    J. Bl ¨umlein and A. Vogt, Phys. Rev. D 58 (1998) 014020 [hep-ph/9712546]

    1998 arXiv

  101. [109]

    Gracey, Nucl

    J.A. Gracey, Nucl. Phys. B 480 (1996) 73–98 [hep-ph/9609301]

    1996 arXiv

  102. [110]

    Bennett and J.A

    J.F. Bennett and J.A. Gracey, Phys. Lett. B 432 (1998) 209–214 [hep-ph/9803446]

    1998 arXiv

  103. [111]

    Remiddi and J.A.M

    E. Remiddi and J.A.M. Vermaseren, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 15 (2000) 725–754 [hep- ph/9905237]

    2000

  104. [112]

    Vermaseren, Comput

    J.A.M. Vermaseren, Comput. Phys. Commun. 83 (1994) 45–58. 40

    1994

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.