A. D. Kennedy
ABSTRACT
We give an overview of state-of-the-art multi-loop Feynman diagram computations, and explain how we use symbolic manipulation to generate renormalized integrals that are then evaluated numerically. We explain how we automate BPHZ renormalization using "henges" and "sectors", and give a brief description of the symbolic tensor and Dirac γ-matrix manipulation that is required. We shall compare the use of general computer algebra systems such as Maple with domain-specific languages such as FORM highlighting in particular memory management issues.
- C. Anastasiou, S. Beerli, and A. Daleo. Evaluating multi-loop Feynman diagrams with infrared and threshold singularities numerically. arXiv:hep-ph/0703282, 2007.Google Scholar
- S. A. Anikin and O. I. Zav'yalov. Counterterms in the formalism of normal products. Teor. Mat. Fiz 26:162, 1976. {Theor. Math. Phys., 26, 105 (1976) }.Google ScholarCross Ref
- S. A. Anikin, O. I. Zav 'yalov, andM. K. Polivanov. A simple proof of the Bogolyubov . Parasyuk theorem. Teor. Mat. Fiz. 17:189, 1973. {Theor. Math. Phys. 17, 1082 (1973) }.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. Bedford, A. Brandhuber, B. J. Spence, and G. Travaglini. Non-supersymmetric loop amplitudes and MHV vertices. Nucl. Phys. B712:59--85, 2005. arXiv:hep-th/0412108.Google ScholarCross Ref
- C. F. Berger, Z. Bern, L. J. Dixon, D. Forde, and D. A. Kosower. Bootstrapping one-loop QCD amplitudes with general helicities. Phys. Rev. D74:036009, 2006. arXiv:hep-ph/0604195.Google Scholar
- Z. Bern, L. J. Dixon, and D. A. Kosower. On-shell methods in perturbative QCD. arXiv:hep-ph/0704. 2798, 2007.Google Scholar
- T. Binoth and G. Heinrich. An automatized algorithm to compute infrared divergent multi-loop integrals. Nucl. Phys. B585:741--759, 2000. arXiv:hep-ph/0004013.Google ScholarCross Ref
- T. Binoth and G. Heinrich. Numerical evaluation of multi-loop integrals by sector decomposition. Nucl. Phys. B680:375--388, 2004. arXiv:hep-ph/0305234.Google ScholarCross Ref
- T. Binoth and G. Heinrich. Numerical evaluation of phase space integrals by sector decomposition. Nucl. Phys. B693:134--148, 2004. arXiv:hep-ph/0402265.Google ScholarCross Ref
- T. Binoth, G. Heinrich, T. Gehrmann, and P. Mastrolia. Six-photon amplitudes. arXiv:hep-ph/0703311, 2007.Google Scholar
- N. N. Bogoliubov and O. S. Parasiuk. Über die multiplikation der kausalfunktionen in der quantentheorie der felder. Acta Math. 97:227, 1957.Google ScholarCross Ref
- C. G. Bollini and J. J. Giambiagi. Dimensional renormalization:The number of dimensions as a regularizing parameter. Nuovo Cim. B12:20--25, 1972.Google Scholar
- R. Britto, B. Feng, and P. Mastrolia. The cut-constructible part of QCD amplitudes. Phys. Rev. D73:105004, 2006. arXiv:hep-ph/0602178.Google Scholar
- W. E. Caswell and A. D. Kennedy. A simple approach to renormalization theory. Phys. Rev. D25:392, 1982.Google Scholar
- W. E. Caswell and A. D. Kennedy. The asymptotic behaviour of Feynman integrals. Phys. Rev. D26:3073, 1983.Google Scholar
- K. G. Chetyrkin. Four-loop renormalization of QCD: Full set of renormalization constants and anomalous dimensions. Nucl. Phys. B710:499--510, 2005. arXiv:hep-ph/0405193.Google ScholarCross Ref
- K. G. Chetyrkin and F. V. Tkachov. Integration by parts: The algorithm to calculate β functions in 4 loops. Nucl. Phys. B192:159--204, 1981.Google ScholarCross Ref
- G. M. Cicuta and E. Montaldi. Narrow-resonance saturation of current algebra sum rules and evidence for the singlet nature of Λ. Lett. Nuovo Cimento 4:329, 1972.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. Collins. Renormalization Cambridge University Press, 1984.Google Scholar
- P. Cvitanović and A. D. Kennedy. Spinors in negative dimensions. Physica Scripta 26:5--14, 1982.Google ScholarCross Ref
- M. Czakon. The four-loop QCD β-function and anomalous dimensions. Nucl. Phys. B710:485--498, 2005. arXiv:hep-ph/0411261.Google ScholarCross Ref
- M. Czakon. Automatized analytic continuation of Mellin--Barnes integrals. Comput. Phys. Commun. 175:559--571, 2006. arXiv:hep-ph/0511200.Google ScholarCross Ref
- A. Denner, S. Dittmaier, M. Roth, and L. H. Wieders. Complete electroweak O(α) corrections to charged-current ε+ε→4 fermion processes. Phys. Lett. B612:223--232, 2005.Google ScholarCross Ref
- R. K. Ellis, W. T. Giele, and G. Zanderighi. The one-loop amplitude for six-gluon scattering. JHEP 05:027, 2006. arXiv:hep-ph/0602185.Google ScholarCross Ref
- B. A. Galler and M. J. Fisher. An improved equivalence algorithm. Commun. ACM 7(5) :301--303, May 1964. Google ScholarDigital Library
- T. Gehrmann and E. Remiddi. Differential equations for two-loop four-point functions. Nucl. Phys. B580:485, 2000. arXiv:hep-ph/9912329.Google ScholarCross Ref
- G. Heinrich and V. A. Smirnov. Analytical evaluation of dimensionally regularized massive on-shell double boxes. Phys. Lett. B598:55--66, 2004. arXiv:hep-ph/0406053.Google ScholarCross Ref
- K. Hepp. Proof of the Bogolyubov . Parasiuk theorem on renormalization. Commun. Math. Phys. 2:301, 1966.Google ScholarCross Ref
- V. A. Ilyin, A. P. Kryukov, A. Y. Rodionov, and A. Y. Taranov. Fast algorithm for calculation of Dirac γ-matrix traces. SIGSAM Bull. 23(4):15--24, 1989. Google ScholarDigital Library
- A. D. Kennedy. Clifford algebras in 2w dimensions. J. Math. Phys. 22:1330--1337, 1981.Google ScholarCross Ref
- A. D. Kennedy. Spinography: Diagrammatic methods for spinors in Feynman diagrams. Phys. Rev. D26:1936, 1982.Google Scholar
- A. D. Kennedy. A simple proof of the BPH theorem. In High energy physics and quantum field theory pages 331--338, 1996. Proceedings of 11th International Workshop on High-Energy Physics and Quantum Field Theory (QFTHEP 96), St. Petersburg.Google Scholar
- T. Kinoshita and M. Nio. The tenth-order QED contribution to the lepton g - 2:Evaluation of dominant α5 terms of muon g - 2. Phys. Rev. D73:053007, 2006. arXiv:hep-ph/0512330.Google Scholar
- D. E. Knuth. The Art of Computer Programming volume 1. Addison. Wesley, 1997. Google ScholarDigital Library
- S. Laporta and E. Remiddi. The analytical value of the electron g - 2atorder α3 in QED. Phys. Lett. B379:283.291, 1996. arXiv:hep-ph/9602417.Google ScholarCross Ref
- S. Moch, J. A. M. Vermaseren, and A. Vogt. The three-loop splitting functions in QCD:The non-singlet case. Nucl. Phys. B688:101--134, 2004. arXiv:hep-ph/0403192.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Z. Nagy and D. E. Soper. Numerical integration of one-loop Feynman diagrams for n-photon amplitudes. Phys. Rev. D74:093006, 2006. arXiv:hep-ph/0610028.Google Scholar
- G. Ossola, C. G. Papadopoulos, and R. Pittau. Numerical evaluation of six-photon amplitudes. arXiv:arXiv:0704. 1271 {hep-ph}, 2007.Google Scholar
- O. S. Parasiuk. K teopnn R-onepacnn Borogolbova. Ukr. Math. Z. 12:287, 1960.Google Scholar
- G. Passarino. An approach toward the numerical evaluation of multiloop Feynman diagrams. Nucl. Phys. B619:257--312, 2001. arXiv:hep-ph/0108252.Google ScholarCross Ref
- V. A. Smirnov. Analytical evaluation of double boxes. arXiv:hep-ph/0209177, 2002.Google Scholar
- H. Strubbe. Manual for SCHOONSCHIP: a CDC 6000/7000 program for symbolic evaluation of algebraic expressions. Comp. Phys. Commun. 8:1--30, 1974.Google ScholarCross Ref
- G. 't Hooft. Dimensional regularization and the renormalization group. Nucl. Phys. B61:455--468, 1973.Google ScholarCross Ref
- G. 't Hooft and M. J. G. Veltman. Regularization and renormalization of gauge fields. Nucl. Phys. B44:189--213, 1972.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. B. Tausk. Non-planar massless two-loop Feynman diagrams with four on-shell legs. Phys. Lett. B469:225--234, 1999. arXiv:hep-ph/9909506.Google ScholarCross Ref
- T. vanRitbergen, J. A. M. Vermaseren, and S. A. Larin. The four-loop β function in quantum chromodynamics. Phys. Lett. B400:379--384, 1997. arXiv:hep-ph/9701390.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. A. Vermaseren. Harmonic sums, Mellin transforms and integrals. Int. J. Mod. Phys. A14(13):2037, 1999.Google ScholarCross Ref
- J. A. Vermaseren. New features of FORM. http://arXiv:math-ph/0010025, 2000.Google Scholar
- A. Vogt, S. Moch, and J. A. M. Vermaseren. The three-loop splitting functions in QCD: The singlet case. Nucl. Phys. B691:129--181, 2004. arXiv:hep-ph/0404111.Google ScholarCross Ref
- Z. Xiao, G. Yang, and C.-J. Zhu. The rational part of QCD amplitude. III:The six-gluon. Nucl. Phys. B758:53--89, 2006. arXiv:hep-ph/0607017.Google ScholarCross Ref
- W. Zimmermann. Local operator products and renormalization in quantum . eld theory. In S. Deser, M. Grisaru, and H. Pendleton, editors, Lectures on Elementary Particles and Quantum Field Theory volume 1, Cambridge, MA, 1971. MIT Press.Google Scholar
Index Terms
- Automating renormalization of quantum field theories
Recommendations
Quantum computation of scattering in scalar quantum field theories
Quantum field theory provides the framework for the most fundamental physical theories to be confirmed experimentally and has enabled predictions of unprecedented precision. However, calculations of physical observables often require great computational ...
Entanglement, Quantum Phase Transitions, and Density Matrix Renormalization
We investigate the role of entanglement in quantum phase transitions, and show that the success of the density matrix renormalization group (DMRG) in understanding such phase transitions is due to the way it preserves entanglement under renormalization. ...
Comments