11institutetext: SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94309, USA22institutetext: Physics Department, Stanford University
Stanford, CA 94309, USA
We study scattering amplitudes in massless non-abelian gauge theory
where all outgoing gluons have positive helicity. It has been argued
recently by Costello that for a particular fermion representation
(8 fundamentals plus one antisymmetric-tensor representation in )
the one-loop amplitudes vanish identically. We show that this vanishing
leads to previously-observed identities among one-loop color-ordered partial
amplitudes.
We then turn to two loops, where Costello has computed the all-plus
amplitudes for this theory, as rational functions of the kinematics
for any number of gluons using the celestial chiral algebra (CCA) bootstrap.
We show that in dimensional regularization, these two-loop
amplitudes are not rational, and they are not even finite as .
However, the finite remainder for four gluons agrees with the formula
by Costello.
In addition, we provide a mass regulator for the infrared-divergent
loop integrals; with this regulator, the CCA bootstrap formula
is recovered exactly.
Finally, we use the CCA bootstrap to compute the double-trace terms
in the theory at two loops for an arbitrary number of gluons.
††preprint: SLAC–PUB–17784††dedication: Dedicated to the memory of Stefano Catani
1 Introduction
The study of scattering amplitudes has seen great advances in recent years.
On the more applied side, computing higher-point and higher-loop amplitudes
in the Standard Model has allowed for more precise comparisons to data
collected at particle colliders
(see e.g. refs. Heinrich:2020ybq ; Andersen:2024czj and
references therein). On the more formal side, amplitudes are fascinating
theoretical objects in their own right. They provide insight into the
behavior and symmetries of a theory, as well as exhibiting previously
unforeseen mathematical structures. Having explicit analytic expressions
for amplitudes is paramount for finding such structures, and for better
understanding aspects of quantum field theory.
Often, direct calculation of amplitudes by evaluating Feynman diagrams
can be bypassed for more computationally efficient methods.
In particular, a general understanding of the singular behavior of
amplitudes can allow them to be “bootstrapped” to higher orders in
perturbation theory, or for a greater number of scattering particles.
This program has had remarkable success in supersymmetric
Yang-Mills in the planar limit (see
e.g. refs. Caron-Huot:2020bkp ; Dixon:2022rse
and references therein).
Amplitudes in ordinary, non-supersymmetric Yang-Mills (YM) theory
remain more challenging. There have been remarkable recent advances in
computing the full-color all-helicity massless QCD
amplitudes for scattering at two
loops Agarwal:2023suw ; DeLaurentis:2023nss ; DeLaurentis:2023izi
and for scattering at three
loops Caola:2021rqz ; Caola:2021izf ; Caola:2022dfa .
These amplitudes have a rather intricate analytic structure, and pushing
directly to one more loop or one more leg may be difficult.
Another avenue for progress, which we will pursue here, is to investigate
the simplest possible helicity configuration, called “all-plus”,
when all outgoing gluons have the same positive helicity.
Such amplitudes vanish for any in any supersymmetric massless gauge
theory Grisaru:1976vm ; Grisaru:1977px ; Parke:1985pn ,
and therefore they vanish at tree level in YM theory.
At one loop, in any massless gauge theory,
their unitarity cuts vanish in four dimensions,
and they are infrared (IR) and ultraviolet (UV) finite, rational
functions of the spinor products of the external momenta, which
are known for an arbitrary number of gluons Mahlon:1993si ; Bern:1993qk .
Self-dual Yang-Mills theory (sdYM) Yang:1977zf
involves path integrals over only self-dual gauge field configurations.
Classically, sdYM is
integrable Belavin:1978pa ; Tze:1982gf ; Chau:1982mn .
For free plane waves, such configurations include only the positive-helicity
gluons. Interactions between plane waves include a
vertex Parkes:1992rz ; Chalmers:1996rq , but not
the parity conjugate vertex. At tree level, one can build
the one-minus amplitude
by sewing together vertices, but this vanishes on shell.
At loop level, the same sewing leads to the one-loop all-plus
amplitudes Cangemi:1996rx ; Cangemi:1996pf , which validates
the suggestion that the non-vanishing of these amplitudes can be
considered an anomaly in the conservation of the currents associated
with integrability of sdYM Bardeen:1995gk ; Bittleston:2022nfr .
The connection between twistors, string theory,
and tree-level gluon scattering amplitudes of (mostly)
positive helicity goes back to Nair Nair:1988bq ,
Witten Witten:2003nn , the MHV rules of Cachazo, Svrček and
Witten Cachazo:2004kj , and the derivation of these rules from
the YM action by Mason Mason:2005zm . They have also been
derived from a twistor action Boels:2007qn . These works
clarify the relations between sdYM and tree level amplitudes.
The MHV rules were applied to compute tree-level form factors of operators
composed of anti-self-dual field strengths,
e.g. Dixon:2004za .
The all-plus and one-minus form factors for this operator were computed
at one loop in a non-supersymmetric theory in
ref. Berger:2006sh .
Recently, a novel bootstrap method for amplitudes in special theories
has been suggested in ref. Costello:2022wso . It stems from a
combination of ideas from celestial holography, twisted holography, and
twistor theory.
In some sense, it is a loop level generalization of the earlier
tree-level work Mason:2005zm ; Boels:2007qn .
In this method, the cancellation of an anomaly in a theory that lives
in twistor space allows for the existence of a chiral algebra,
the elements of which are in bijection with the states of the theory.
The correlators of the chiral algebra correspond to form factors of the
theory. The operator product expansions (OPEs) between the elements of
the chiral algebra are used to constrain the pole-structure of correlators,
the residues of these poles being lower-loop or lower-point correlators.
In this way, one can bootstrap the form factors of these theories.
In ref. Costello:2023vyy , this
celestial chiral algebra (CCA) bootstrap was used to compute
a two-loop -gluon all-plus-helicity form factor in sdYM
with Weyl fermions transforming in the representation
(1)
of the Lie algebra of . Here is the fundamental representation,
and is the antisymmetric tensor representation. In terms
of Dirac fermions, the representation has 8 fundamentals (quarks)
plus one antisymmetric tensor. It solves the anomaly cancellation condition
from the six-dimensional twistor-space theory Costello:2022wso ,
(2)
for any generator of the Lie algebra, where denotes
the adjoint representation. The form factor is for an operator
, involving an adjoint-valued,
antisymmetric, anti-self-dual tensor field ,
which is used to enforce self-duality of the gauge field.
The sdYM form factor computed in ref. Costello:2023vyy
should reproduce scattering amplitudes in YM for arbitrary .
Due to the anomaly cancellation condition, the one-loop amplitude
should vanish in this theory. As we will see, this condition
implies identities among the QCD all-plus partial amplitudes.
The identities include the “three-photon vanishing” relations
first noticed in ref. Bern:1993qk . A more general set of linear
relations was found in ref. Bjerrum-Bohr:2011jrh ;
we will show that these relations are all explained by the vanishing
of the one-loop all-plus amplitude for representation .
The relevant two-loop sdYM form factor was computed for all in
ref. Costello:2023vyy . The four-point result is
(3)
where
(4)
and and are the four-point
Mandelstam variables. We use the shorthand notation
(5)
which is the trace over the generators of the Lie algebra of
in an arbitrary representation .
Throughout this paper, traces without a subscript,
as in eq. (3), will mean the trace over
fundamental-representation generators.
The “” instructs one to add the two
non-trivial cyclic permutations of acting on the previous
expression.
In this paper, we wish to investigate the relation between the sdYM
form factor given in eq. (3) and all-plus amplitudes in
ordinary YM. The two-loop all-plus four-point amplitude in QCD
was computed in dimensional regularization in
refs. Bern:2000dn ; Bern:2002tk . Here we will replace the
fermion loops for QCD (i.e. for fermions in the fundamental
(+ antifundamental) representation only) with fermion loops
in the representation in eq. (1).
Then we can directly compare
the form factor in sdYM to the two-loop amplitude in YM.
The double-trace term is not provided in ref. Costello:2023vyy ,
so we compute it in Appendix B.
Our results agree only after UV renormalization and after
subtracting off the universal two-loop IR divergences given by
Catani Catani:1998bh . This statement does not
disprove eq. (3); rather,
the discrepancy most likely arises from
the fact that the CCA bootstrap technique keeps all momenta four-dimensional,
in contrast to dimensional regularization. We resolve the discrepancy
by using a different IR regularization scheme, namely a mass regularization
of the loop integrands. With this scheme, the two-loop
four-point sdYM form factor
equals the YM amplitude, and we suppose that the same will be true for
. We also argue that the -gluon sdYM result
gives the finite remainder of the YM amplitude
in dimensional regularization. This result could provide a check
of higher-point two-loop all-plus helicity amplitudes, once all the
fermionic and subleading-color terms become available.
2 An overview of the CCA bootstrap
In this section, we provide a non-rigorous overview of a method
used to bootstrap certain two-loop amplitudes Costello:2023vyy .
We will refer to this method as the
celestial chiral algebra (CCA) bootstrap.
Positive- and negative-helicity states of sdYM on
twistor space are in one-to-one correspondence with local operators
in an (extended) chiral algebra. The conformal blocks of this algebra
are the local operators in the self-dual theory. Therefore, correlation
functions of the chiral algebra in a given conformal block correspond to
form factors of the gauge theory. Moreover, the OPEs in the algebra are
collinear limits of states in the field theory. This suggests that one
can use the chiral algebra to “bootstrap” form factors of sdYM
by using the analytic properties of the OPEs.
A requirement for the existence of a chiral algebra is the associativity
of its OPEs. Associativity fails at the first loop correction
for pure gauge theory, due to a gauge anomaly arising from the all-plus
helicity amplitude on twistor space.
In order to remedy this, a fourth-order scalar field
that couples to the Yang-Mills topological term was introduced
in refs. Costello:2021bah ; Costello:2022upu ; Costello:2022wso .
However, the mechanism can only cancel double-trace contributions, and
so it is necessary for the gauge group to not have an independent
quartic Casimir structure. Alternatively, the anomaly can be cured by
introducing fermions in special representations of the gauge
group Costello:2023vyy . In particular, the requirement is that
the quartic Casimir in the adjoint representation is exactly that in the
(real) representation
(6)
For guage theory, one such example of this type of representation is
given in eq. (1).
With this choice of matter representation, the one-loop OPEs are
associative. Therefore, the chiral algebra exists for this theory and
can be used to compute form factors. In fact, associativity constrains
all form factors of self-dual Yang-Mills (plus matter) to be rational
functions, with poles only in the spinor products .
The chiral algebra OPEs determine all possible poles in the form factor,
and the residues of these poles are chiral algebra correlators that have
fewer external states or are at lower loop order. In this way, one can
determine the -point form factors inductively.
The form factor of most interest is the one with the operator
(7)
inserted at the origin,111
We mean the origin in position space . The -dependence
of the correlator is where
are the gluon momenta.
where is the adjoint-valued anti-self-dual
two-form appearing in the sdYM Lagrangian Chalmers:1996rq ,
(8)
Deforming the self-dual Lagrangian by
and integrating out yields the regular Yang-Mills Lagrangian,
up to a topological term which does not affect the perturbation theory.
So form factors of self-dual Yang-Mills with the operator
inserted at the origin are amplitudes of
ordinary Yang-Mills theory.
Using the CCA bootstrap, massless QCD amplitudes with matter in the
representation (1) were computed at
tree level Costello:2022wso , one loop Costello:2022upu ,
and two loops Costello:2023vyy for the two-minus, one-minus,
and all-plus helicity configurations, respectively.
The two-loop all-plus four-point sdYM form factor is111
The double-trace term was not provided in ref. Costello:2023vyy .
However, Appendix B of ref. Costello:2023vyy outlines the
computation of the color factors, so that one can keep track of
the double-trace terms if desired relatively easily;
see Appendix B.
(9)
where
(10)
and
(11)
This expression can be simplified using the Schouten spinor identity
and four-point momentum conservation,
which includes the result that is totally symmetric,222Our overall normalization of form factors and amplitudes differs
from ref. Costello:2023vyy by a factor of .
(12)
Then eqs. (10) and (11)
collapse to eq. (3).
However, when computing -point form factors based on lower-point ones,
one must remember not to use lower-point momentum conservation to
simplify the lower-point form factors, as it is the sum of the
gluon momenta that is conserved, not a subset of them.
With this in mind, the -point color-ordered amplitude is constructed
recursively, based on eqs. (10) and (11),
and is given by
(13)
where is the subgroup of consisting of permutations that
keep the double-trace structure invariant.
is the kinematic factor
that multiplies this double-trace structure for the form factor with
energy-level-1 insertions at
(as explained in Appendix B).
It is defined as
(14)
for and , and it is zero otherwise.
In Appendix B, we prove eq. (14) using the
CCA bootstrap.
Note that for fermionic matter in there is no triple trace contribution,
which would be present generically. The triple-trace cancellation is
a consequence of the recursive construction, and its absence for
since in .
We wish to check
eqs. (10)–(14) in the
simplest case, , via an alternative method.
We will use the fact that the two-loop four-gluon amplitudes
were computed in QCD in dimensional
regularization Bern:2000dn ; Bern:2002tk in a color-decomposed
form which makes it straightforward to modify the fermion representation
to .
Before doing the two-loop color algebra, we first warm up by computing
the one-loop all-plus -point amplitude, which vanishes (non-trivially)
in this theory due to the anomaly cancellation (2).
3 The One-loop Amplitude
Here, we compute the one-loop all-plus -point amplitude for massless QCD
with matter in the representation (1). Color-decomposition
plays a crucial role in this computation. We begin by reviewing the
color-decomposition of one-loop -gluon amplitudes in QCD for gauge
group with matter in the representation ,
where is the number of quark flavors.
3.1 One-loop in QCD
The one-loop -gluon QCD amplitude can be color-decomposed
as Bern:1990ux
(15)
where the are the subamplitudes.
The superscript denotes the spin of the particle circulating
in the loop, or . The subamplitudes are color-ordered.
The subleading subamplitudes are obtained from the leading ones
through the permutation sum Bern:1994zx ; DelDuca:1999rs
(16)
where and
are cyclicly ordered lists, and
is the reverse ordering, with the understanding that and
are actually equivalence classes under cyclic permutations of
their arguments, i.e.
(17)
(18)
The symbol denotes the cyclic shuffle product,
which is the set of all permutations up to cycles of
that preserve the cyclic ordering of and ,
while allowing all possible relative orderings of the elements of
with respect to the elements of . For example,
letting and , we have
(19)
Again, it is understood that the lists within this set are equivalence
classes under cyclic permutations of their arguments.
Another color decomposition also exists for the
gluon (adjoint) contribution, in terms of traces over generators in
the adjoint representation of DelDuca:1999rs
(20)
The factor of accounts for a reflection identity
,
which implies a reflection identity on the color-ordered subamplitude
(which also holds for ):
(21)
The sum in eq. (20) includes
for all , so the factor of is needed.
The equivalence of eqs. (15) and (16)
with eq. (20) can be
seen by representing the adjoint representation in terms of
fundamental representations, .
Evaluating the traces we have,
(22)
where is the complement of the sublist .
The notation means that is a sublist of
with respect to which is ordered.
(In , , so one can drop the cases with and
.)
This relation has a nice diagrammatic representation in terms of color
graphs using the double-line notation, as shown in fig. 1.
As a reminder, in the double-line notation the rule is to sum all
ways of attaching the external lines to either the inner or
outer ring of the annulus, with a minus sign for each attachment to
the inner () ring.
Figure 1: Graphical representation of the identity
. The diagram on the right is evaluated
by summing over all ways of attaching external legs to
either ring of the annulus, with a minus sign for each attachment
to the inner () ring.
When all external gluons have positive helicities, the color-ordered
subamplitudes are finite, rational functions of spinor products
and given by Mahlon:1993si ; Bern:1993qk
(23)
(24)
where we have taken for ,
where is the number of bosonic states minus fermionic states.
Eq. (24) is a supersymmetry
Ward identity (SWI) Grisaru:1976vm ; Grisaru:1977px ; Parke:1985pn
which holds in .
At two loops, we will need to use dimensional regularization in
spacetime dimensions, and we will need the one-loop
result for to higher orders in . For this purpose,
a formula for the subamplitudes in terms of a dimensionally-regulated
box integral is given in section 5.
3.2 Including Matter in
According to ref. Costello:2023vyy , including matter in the
representation (1) should nullify the one-loop all-plus amplitude.
This vanishing implies linear relations among the subamplitudes,
which we wish to elucidate. To do so, we need to compute traces over
the antisymmetric tensor representation in terms of traces over
fundamental representation generators.
For this computation, we can simply replace the fermion loops in the
fundamental representation that appear in the one-loop color graphs
with loops in the representation (1). This replacement
is permitted for the following reason. Every Feynman diagram can be
written as the product of a color factor and a kinematic factor.
The Jacobi identity on the color factors can be used to remove color
graphs with nontrivial trees attached to the loop DelDuca:1999rs ,
and thereby rewrite the matter contribution as a sum of permutations of
the “ring” color diagram in fig. 2.
Because the Jacobi identity is independent of the choice of representation
of the fermion loop, we arrive at the same sum over color diagrams,
with the same choice of fermion representation with which we began,
without affecting the final kinematic factors. That is to say,
depends solely on the spin of the particle propagating in the
loop, not the representation of the Lie algebra in which it resides.
Figure 2: The one-loop color diagram for matter in an arbitrary
representation of .
In other words, the contribution from matter in the
representation (1) to the one-loop amplitude is
(25)
The color diagram
associated to for this specific choice
of representation is shown in fig. 3.
The rectangle covering the lines appearing in the diagrams
denotes antisymmetrization of those lines, as depicted in
fig. 4. The trace over in terms of traces
over the fundamental is worked out in Appendix A, and is
(26)
where means to concatenate the lists and .
Figure 3: The one-loop color diagram for matter in the representation
.
Figure 4: Graphical representation of the antisymmetric tensor
product of the fundamental representation in terms of
two fundamental lines.
Combining the decomposition (22) of the adjoint
pure-gluon contribution with the matter contribution (26)
yields
(27)
where we have used the SWI (24)
and the reflection identity (21) obeyed by the subamplitude.
The full amplitude is then given by the sum over all permutations
on letters, modulo permutations related by cycles and reflections.
We define the subamplitude to be the kinematic
factor multiplying the single-trace color factor
in eq. (27). It is given by
(28)
where and .
The first term comes from the trace over eight copies of the fundamental.
The remaining terms come from the exchange term in the trace over the
antisymmetric tensor representation,
(29)
where is the permutation operator that exchanges the two
representations.
In particular, the sum over appears since the list
appears in the sum in eq. (29)
for all . In Appendix C, we show
that the subamplitude is given by eq. (28).
Since the full amplitude vanishes for the fermion representation
and the traces over the generators are linearly independent in
(up to dihedral symmetries), eq. (28) must also vanish:
(30)
Remarkably, these relations are exactly the same all-plus relations
conjectured in ref. Bjerrum-Bohr:2011jrh .
Ref. Bjerrum-Bohr:2011jrh based their formula333
Note that the boundary terms
and have an empty set for and for ,
respectively, so they each just give . Removing
them from the sum over puts the formula into the precise
form in ref. Bjerrum-Bohr:2011jrh .
on a decomposition into kinematic diagrams containing a single totally symmetric
quartic vertex, and the remaining vertices are all cubic and
totally antisymmetric. If one accepts that the twistor-space
anomaly cancellation implies the vanishing of the one-loop all-plus amplitude,
then one obtains a proof of this conjecture.
In a forthcoming paper DMToAppear , we analyze these all-plus relations,
relations among one-loop one-minus amplitudes, as well as their
connections to the twistor-space anomaly cancellation mechanism
that uses a fourth-order
pseudoscalar Costello:2021bah ; Costello:2022upu ; Costello:2022wso .
We can verify eq. (30) for the case .
The all-plus partial amplitude is
(31)
This expression is totally symmetric, as shown in eq. (12).
For general , the number of terms appearing in the sum over
in eq. (30) is
(32)
counting multiplicities. So, for , there are terms,
all of which are equal, thanks to the total symmetry of the four-point
subamplitude. These eight copies come with the opposite sign of the
terms not in the sum over , resulting in a total of zero.
Because of the total kinematic symmetry of
eq. (31), the above verification of eq. (30)
for is equivalent to checking the anomaly cancellation
condition (2); both involve the same symmetrized
trace over four generators in the appropriate representations.
For , eq. (30) is not so easily verified from
the explicit formula (23).
We have checked DMToAppear
that it holds for by replacing all spinor
brackets with independent momentum-invariants, using
a momentum-twistor-based
parametrization Hodges:2009hk ; Badger:2013gxa .
So far we have discussed the consequence of the all-plus vanishing
for via the coefficient of the single trace .
However, eq. (27) also has a double-trace contribution,
which must vanish as well. The relations among color-ordered amplitudes
that follow from this vanishing imply the the vanishing of amplitudes with
three photons and gluons observed previously Bern:1993qk .
We will discuss these double-trace relations in a forthcoming
paper DMToAppear .
The vanishing of the one-loop amplitude in the theory suggests that
the two-loop amplitude should be finite and rational; indeed,
such behavior is found via the CCA bootstrap Costello:2023vyy .
However, we will see that eq. (30) only holds at order
in dimensional regularization; it fails at higher orders in ,
for the case (see section 5).
Consequently, the IR structure of the dimensionally-regulated
two-loop result is more intricate, and not even finite as .
4 The 2-loop 4-gluon amplitude
We now turn to the computation of the two-loop all-plus four-gluon
amplitude for fermions in the representation .
Our starting point is the two-loop four-gluon amplitude in QCD, which is
given in ref. Bern:2002zk as
(33)
where is the adjoint gluon contribution
and is the fundamental matter contribution.
Each particle contribution above can be decomposed into a sum of
“parent” diagrams,
(34)
where each corresponds to a parent diagram.
The subscript denotes either the pure-gluon contribution ,
or a fermion propagating in at least one of the two loops in the diagrams.
The quantities denote the color factors associated to the
kinematic factors , with “rep” signifying the gauge group
representation in which particle resides.
The parent diagrams
span the space of all independent four-gluon color-factors with a
fermion-loop contribution and a non-vanishing kinematic factor.
This result can be shown by applying the Jacobi identity suitably
to color diagrams containing triangle subdiagrams.
We want to compute the two-loop four-gluon amplitude with matter
in the representation ,
(35)
4.1 Pure gauge contribution
The color decomposition of the pure Yang-Mills two-loop four-point
amplitude is Bern:2000dn ; Bern:2002zk
(36)
where and are color factors given by the
planar and non-planar parent diagrams in fig. 5.
They are computed by dressing each vertex and each propagator with
the diagrammatic rules given in eq. (122).
Figure 5: The planar () and non-planar () parent
color diagrams for the pure-gauge two-loop amplitude.
The color factors evaluate to
(37)
(38)
These color factors have the following symmetries, which will prove
useful in section 5:
(39)
The planar and non-planar primitive amplitudes are given by
(40)
where we have only included non-vanishing terms at
in the integral.
The three two-loop momentum integrals that appear above are the
planar double box integral , the non-planar double
box integral , and the bow-tie integral
. They are shown in
fig. 6 and are defined by,
(41)
(42)
and
(43)
where the are the external momenta. The numerator factor
is a polynomial in the external and
loop momenta. The vectors and represent the
-dimensional components of the loop momenta and .
We use the notation and
.
The explicit values of these integrals, as a series in and
expressed in terms of polylogarithms, are given in appendix A of
ref. Bern:2000dn . We provide the bow-tie integrals in
eq. (55) and the remaining ones in appendix D
of this manuscript. The symmetries obeyed by the color
factors (39) carry over to the primitive
amplitudes (40).
Figure 6: The three scalar integral topologies appearing in the two-loop
all-plus amplitude, with the loop-momentum routings displayed:
(a) the planar double box; (b) the non-planar double box; (c) the bow-tie.
4.2 Matter Contribution
In order to compute the color factors for the fermionic matter contribution
in the representation , one can simply replace the
fundamental loops appearing in the parent diagrams with a loop in .
This replacement is allowed, because one can rewrite any color diagram
in terms of parent diagrams using only Jacobi identities, which
are independent of the fermion representation.
We denote the color factor given by a diagram with matter
representation by . The color decomposition
for the amplitude is then
(44)
where the seven parent diagrams are given in fig. 7.
The full color factor also has the addition of the same diagram
but with the matter representation arrows pointing in the opposite direction.
The color factors are then evaluated in terms of traces in the fundamental
with no contracted indices,
using the rules given in eq. (122).
Figure 7: Parent diagrams for the fermion loop contributions.
Figure 8: The total contribution to . Notice that the
terms and
with partially-reversed arrows do not contribute to its value.
There is an exception to the evaluation procedure for ,
since we follow the conventions of ref. Bern:2002zk .
In that reference, the color factors were evaluated by adding to
the diagram the contribution of the anti-fundamental representation
only, i.e. they reverse the direction of the two arrows simultaneously.
In particular, the full diagrammatic color factor for is
in fig. 8. Notice that the and
cross terms are not to be included;
their contributions are already included in the definition of
the kinematic factor .
We must account for this convention by not including any terms of the form
, , , and their
conjugates in . Thus, is given by
(45)
With some help from trace identities provided in Appendix A,
the results are
(46)
(47)
(48)
(49)
(50)
(51)
(52)
The color factors and also have the same
symmetries as and , respectively, in eq. (39):
(53)
Again, this is evident directly from the diagrams by applying rotations
and reflections to them, as well as using .
The primitive amplitudes associated to each diagram are given in
ref. Bern:2002zk ; however many of the integrals that compose them
vanish. Removing the integrals that vanish at ,
the primitive amplitudes are
(54)
The bow-tie integrals are quite simple, as they are products of one-loop
triangle integrals, and are given by Bern:2000dn
(55)
We provide the results for the remaining integrals from
ref. Bern:2000dn in appendix D.
The primitive amplitudes , , and obey the
same relations as their corresponding color factors in eq. (53).
For later use, notice that these amplitudes are the only ones out of the
matter contribution that contain poles.
4.3 The full amplitude
The two-loop four-gluon amplitude with fermionic matter in the
representation is the sum of eqs. (44) and (36).
Using the values of the color factors given above, we have
(56)
where the ,
are the two-loop color-ordered subamplitudes.
The contain various powers of , so we separate them
into these different powers as
(57)
Of course, the are linear combinations of the primitive
amplitudes and , which are given by
(58)
(59)
(60)
(61)
(62)
(63)
(64)
(65)
where ,
the sum of all 9 primitive amplitudes, and
(66)
The term “” means to add all non-trivial permutations
(67)
of the preceding terms inside the parentheses.
4.4 Dimensional regularization scheme
The primitive amplitudes are evaluated in
refs. Bern:2000dn ; Bern:2002zk using dimensional regularization
with the loop momentum being in dimensions.
The dimension of the “unobserved” internal gluonic states is left
explicit in their results, with in intermediate steps of their
calculation. The unobserved states include virtual states in loops
and virtual intermediate states in trees. Setting corresponds to
the standard ’t Hooft-Veltman (HV) scheme. In the four-dimensional
helicity (FDH) scheme, one would set .
The choice of affects the compliance of the amplitudes with
supersymmetry Ward identities
(SWI) Grisaru:1976vm ; Grisaru:1977px ; Parke:1985pn .
In particular, preserving the
number of bosonic states relative to the fermionic states is necessary
for preserving the SWI, and the choice achieves
this Bern:2002zk . The SWI manifest themselves in terms of the
primitive amplitudes as
(68)
in the limit. These identities do not hold in the HV scheme.
Applying the constraints in eq. (68) simplifies the
considerably, and we get agreement with eq. (3) at order .
Moreover, the choice forces the one-loop partial amplitudes
and to be equal with opposite signs to all orders
in . For these reasons, we take when evaluating the linear
combinations of primitive amplitudes.
When eq. (68) is applied, the expressions for the in
terms of the primitive amplitudes simplify to
(69)
(70)
(71)
(72)
(73)
(74)
(75)
(76)
where we also made use of the fact that ,
which follows from the reflection identity of the associated color
factor, .
4.5 Evaluating the
The vanishing of , , and agrees with
eq. (3). Using the expressions given
in eqs. (54) and (55), we see that
, , and are finite and rational.
They evaluate to
(77)
(78)
(79)
agreeing with eq. (3) at the corresponding powers of .
The two remaining linear combinations of the primitive amplitudes,
and , do not simplify further using the SWI,
and they explicitly contain non-finite and non-rational primitive
amplitudes (see appendix D).
Schematically, they are of the form
(80)
and
(81)
where transcendental refers to terms that
(after multiplying by ) contain products of
, , and , which have as their arguments
, , and
and which have rational coefficients in .
These expressions clearly do not agree with eq. (3),
because they have transcendental terms and/or poles,
along with the rational terms shown explicitly, which
do appear in eq. (3).
This might at first seem to invalidate eq. (3).
However, a comparison of the whole amplitude with the expected universal
IR behavior of two-loop amplitudes given by Catani:1998bh sheds
light on the matter. We carry out this comparison next.
5 IR subtraction
In this section, we compare the IR behavior of eqs. (80)
and (81) to that predicted on general principles.
We follow closely the analysis in section 5 of ref. Bern:2000dn .
The principal issue is that the IR behavior of a two-loop amplitude
in dimensional regularization involves poles multiplying
the one-loop amplitude, so that higher order terms in are required.
And while the one-loop amplitude in our case vanishes at ,
it does not vanish at higher orders in , because the
box integrals that enter it do not have the same symmetry properties
beyond leading order in .
Catani provides a universal factorization formula for dimensionally regulated,
UV-renormalized two-loop amplitudes Catani:1998bh .
In the color-space operator formalism, the renormalized two-loop -point
amplitude is given by
(82)
where is the vector in
color space that represents the renormalized -loop amplitude.
The subscript R.S. signifies a dependence on the renormalization scheme,
and is the renormalization mass scale.
For notational simplicity, we set . The amplitudes are recovered by
(83)
where the is the color index of the -th external parton.
The operators and encode the IR
divergences of . For all-plus helicity external gluons,
the tree-level amplitude vanishes,
meaning that only contributes to the divergences.
This operator is given by
(84)
where if and are both incoming or outgoing partons
and otherwise. The factor is
(85)
The color charge is a vector with respect to the
generator label and an matrix with respect to the color indices
of the outgoing parton . For the adjoint representation ,
so .
For external gluons, ,
where is the one-loop -function coefficient.
For QCD with quark flavors,
(86)
and for fermions in the representation (see eq. (138)),
(87)
Note that eq. (84) differs slightly from Catani’s original formula.
We have defined our structure constants such that they are greater by a
factor of , and we have included a factor of instead of
due to a different normalization convention
for the coupling expansion parameter
( vs. Catani’s ).
For external gluons of positive helicity only, we can rewrite the
predicted divergent part of the renormalized two-loop amplitude
in our notation as
(88)
where
(89)
acts on the colors of legs and .
Specializing to four points, we only need to evaluate the case ,
(90)
as the other five cases are obtained by relabeling and .
It should be noted that there are two conventions for the placement of
in eq. (84). The other convention is
to have it multiplying both powers of rather than just the
as in eq. (84). With our choice of the matter representation,
the two choices are equivalent up to and including
,
since the one-loop amplitude vanishes identically at , i.e.
(91)
The one-loop amplitude with matter in the representation decomposes as
(92)
Here, the with are given by ring graphs
with the loop being in the representation . They are depicted in the
left-hand side of fig. 1 for and
in fig. 3 for .
The kinematic factors are the familiar one-loop color-ordered
all-plus amplitudes for a particle of spin propagating in the loop.
However, unlike in eq. (23), here we will need the
result to higher orders in :
(93)
(94)
with
(95)
and represents the -dimensional components
of the loop momentum .
The box integral is finite
as so that
(96)
in this limit, or when .
We will keep and distinct for now.
After inserting eq. (92) into eq. (90),
the two structure constants from the operator
will be contracted with the different one-loop color coefficients,
and these contractions give rise to two-loop color diagrams,
(97)
These relations allow us to write as
(98)
Now we insert eq. (98) into eq. (88) and perform the sum
over and by first adding the term with .
We arrive at
(99)
Let us compare the predicted two-loop divergences for matter in the
representation eq. (99) to those appearing in the
actual two-loop amplitude. There are two divergent integrals contributing
to the this amplitude, namely
and Bern:2000dn .
The divergent parts of these integrals are proportional to the
one-loop box integral,
(100)
as expected if eq. (99) is to be recovered.
A heuristic reason for this factorization is given in ref. Bern:2000dn ,
but we briefly summarize it here. When loop momenta are simultaneously
soft and collinear with two adjacent external legs,
three consecutive propagators can go on shell. When they go on shell,
the remaining propagators become exactly that of the finite box integral
with external momenta in the planar case and
in the nonplanar case. The -dimensional numerator
in both cases becomes the numerator in
eq. (95).
The spacetime picture is then a small finite box
times an enlarged divergent triangle.
The divergences of the primitive amplitudes in terms of the one-loop
amplitudes are given by
(101)
where for the last equality.
Plugging these formulae
into the sum of (44) and (36) yields
(102)
where we used the fact that .
This matches eq. (99) at the level of the
term, i.e. except for the term
proportional to .
Now the expression (102) is for the unrenormalized two-loop
amplitude, whereas the Catani formula (99) predicts the UV
renormalized one. The renormalized amplitude
is given by adding the
counterterm
(103)
No other terms are needed due to the vanishing of the all-plus helicity
amplitude at tree level.
To arrive at the term proportional to in eq. (99),
we use the color conservation identity
(104)
to write
(105)
This identity allows us to write the counterterm (103)
in our notation as
(106)
Now it matches precisely the -containing term of eq. (99),
in the form of eqs. (88) and (89).
Thus, once the UV counterterm is included, we have exact agreement
between the infrared divergences of the renormalized two-loop amplitude
and the ones predicted by eq. (99).
In other words, the non-, term
of eq. (99) precisely matches the divergences of the
unrenormalized two-loop amplitude.
Next we evaluate eq. (99), but including also the
terms. We subtract the result from the UV renormalized two-loop amplitude,
in order to obtain the Catani finite remainder,
.
This result exactly yields the CCA bootstrap formula (3).
In other words, eq. (3) gives the IR-subtracted two-loop
amplitude. In the next section, we explore how to avoid an explicit
IR divergence and subtraction.
6 Mass regularization
The requirement to subtract the IR divergences is unsatisfactory for the
following reasons. Firstly, the CCA bootstrap requires no such subtraction;
it is a completely finite procedure. Secondly, there is no dimensional
regularization prescription for sdYM, since its definition requires
the four-dimensional Levi-Civita tensor.
In some sense, the IR subtraction remedies a problem that is introduced
by our lack of understanding of how to regulate Feynman integrals in sdYM.
We remedy this by regulating the internal propagators that give rise to
IR divergences of the loop momenta with a particle mass. Then we can
take without encountering any poles in .
There is a fundamental difference between mass regularization and
dimensional regularization in when small terms can be neglected.
In dimensional regularization, divergences are powers of ,
whose degree rises with the loop order. Therefore terms suppressed
by powers of in lower-loop amplitudes generally have to be retained.
On the other hand, when regulating with a particle mass , divergences
are logarithmic in . Hence power-suppressed contributions can
always be dropped, because any positive power of vanishes much faster
than (any power of) increases, in the limit .
Mass regularization has previously been used in planar
supersymmetric
YM Alday:2009zm ; Henn:2010bk ; Bourjaily:2013mma ; Bourjaily:2019jrk ; Arkani-Hamed:2023epq .
Our method for assigning a mass to the propagators differs from these
examples. Indeed, planar supersymmetric YM
has dual conformal symmetry, which is closely related to these
regularization schemes. It is not clear whether one can find a fully
consistent massive regulator of nonplanar YM theory, given that
the number of helicity states for massive vector bosons does not match
the massless case.
Hence, we do not claim that our method can consistently reproduce
the correct IR divergences in the massless limit for more complicated
amplitudes or integrals. We are merely regulating the few divergent
integrals that appear in the all-plus four-point case.
In our scheme, a propagator is given a mass when a limit of
the loop momentum that puts it on shell also results in one or more
of its neighboring propagators going on shell.
The mass prevents the other propagators from diverging when the initial
one does. For example, in the case of diagram (a) of
fig. 6, when the loop momentum ,
all three of , , and approach zero.
So the mass is added to the first propagator
. Now, no two or more neighboring propagators
can simultaneously diverge. We could have achieved the same result
by adding a mass to both the and propagators;
however, adding the mass to is the minimal solution and leads
to very simple integrals.
It is unnecessary to add a mass to propagators containing loop momentum
if the integral has a numerator factor of
for some positive integer . This purely -component of
vanishes when is purely four-dimensional, which in turn
prevents the appearance of the soft or collinear IR singularity associated
with the divergence of a propagator.
This argument includes cases where is a sum (or difference)
of loop momenta.
For the integrals appearing in eqs. (40) and (54)
and depicted in fig. 6,
only the following replacements are necessary:
(107)
These new integrals can be evaluated directly using Feynman parameters, giving
(108)
(109)
where .
The bow-tie integrals remain unchanged and are given in eq. (55).
In the limit, eq. (108) has the asymptotic behavior
(110)
The divergent log term agrees with the leading-order divergent term in
the dimensionally-regulated integrals eqs. (180)
and (183), i.e. the coefficient of the leading-order
equals the coefficient of .
Although it is necessary to take to make apparent the
IR divergence, we will continue to work with the expression for
generic , eq. (108), as it will not affect our analysis below.
These mass-regulated integrals are much simpler than their purely
dimensionally-regulated counterparts. We can understand these results
heuristically by considering the IR divergences appearing in the original
integrals.
First consider eq. (108). When , the divergent terms
in are given by eq. (100), the massless triangle
times the massless box. The mass-regulated planar integral in
eq. (108) should factorize similarly when .
The mass-regulated triangle is
(111)
and the box to zeroth order in is
(112)
So, eq. (108) indeed agrees with the divergence statement
when . Surprisingly though, these mass-regulated
two-loop integrals are exactly the product of the mass-regulated
triangle and the massless box, even for generic mass .
As a check on the results, consider the -channel cut in four dimensions
of , where we cut the
propagators neighboring the massive one, which corresponds to cutting
the right box vertically in fig. 6(a).
Indeed, the unitarity cuts can be performed in four dimensions since the
mass-regulated double box is finite a priori. This produces a
factor of the massless box within the phase-space integral,
which is constant in four dimensions. So, the massless box can be
factored out of the phase-space integral, and what remains within the
integral is nothing more than the -channel cut of the mass-regulated
triangle. In other words,
(113)
This is the only non-vanishing four-dimensional cut of the double-box,
since all other cuts vanish due to the vanishing of the
numerator factors in four dimensions. The discontinuity of the
mass-regulated triangle is easily computed from eq. (111)
to be
(114)
Since sufficiently fast
as , we can use a dispersion relation to compute the
triangle integral from its discontinuity along . In other words,
(115)
We can understand the vanishing of the integrals in eq. (109)
by again understanding the IR divergences when . Consider the
divergences of .
The only propagators that are not suppressed by a -component
of the loop momenta are and . When the latter goes on shell,
the former does as well. This gives a divergent term,
since they are neighboring propagators, multiplied by a box with a
doubled propagator, denoted by
,
which is because it is related to an UV finite integral in
six dimensions. The result is an integral that begins at .
Following our procedure for mass regularizing, the only propagator given a
mass is . This replaces the
term by a one,
but it is still multiplied by a box of .
Thus, the mass-regulated integral is . Notice also
that there is no four-dimensional unitarity cut of this integral,
so its vanishing is consistent with the vanishing of its cuts.
Mass regularization of the integrals renders the primitive
amplitudes (40) and (54) much simpler.
Substituting eqs. (108) and (109)
into eq. (54) yields
(116)
The above primitive amplitudes are now a sum of rational terms and
terms of uniform transcendental weight two, which contain the mass
regulator . In particular, and now vanish at
, and and share the same
transcendental terms. Inspection of eqs. (70) and (75)
shows that no transcendental terms remain in and
when eq. (116) is used,
(117)
and
(118)
and we now obtain complete agreement with eq. (3).
Notice that this is true even without taking the limit .
7 Conclusions and outlook
In this paper, we used previously-derived
results Bern:2000dn ; Bern:2002zk and color algebra to perform
a check in dimensional regularization
of the two-loop four-point all-plus result (3)
from the CCA bootstrap. The primitive amplitudes of
refs. Bern:2000dn ; Bern:2002zk begin at and
contain transcendental functions. By placing the matter in the
representation , we found that the color-ordered two-loop amplitudes
in this theory contain both poles and transcendental terms.
At first sight, this might seem to contradict eq. (3).
However, Catani’s universal factorization formula (82) exactly
predicts these terms, and our computation agrees with (3)
after we subtract the universal IR divergences.
The discrepancy arises due to the non-vanishing of the one-loop amplitude
in this theory at . We remedy this by mass-regulating the
already dimensionally-regulated integrals comprising the primitive
amplitudes (40) and (54).
All appearances of the dimension regulator are replaced by
expressions involving the mass regulator , resulting in finite quantities
when . The new mass-regulated amplitudes give exact agreement with
eq. (9), even for generic mass .
Removing the dependence on is essential for comparing the YM and
sdYM results. The self-dual equations explicitly depend on the Levi-Civita
tensor, which does not have a sensible definition for non-integer dimensions.
So, the CCA bootstrap must implicitly use a different IR regularization scheme
that involves keeping all momenta in four dimensions. Mass regularization
appears to be such a scheme, at least at four points, and a suitable
mass regularization for higher-point all-plus amplitudes seems likely
to lead to agreement with eq. (13) as well.
Despite the discrepancy between the sdYM form factor and the YM amplitude
in dimensional regularization, we are confident in the validity of
eq. (13) when using a suitable mass regulator. Taking all possible
four-dimensional unitarity cuts of the two-loop all-plus sdYM form factor
shows that it cannot have any branch cuts in the theory.
Moreover, the vanishing of the one-loop form factor forces the two-loop
one to behave like a tree-level form factor in collinear limits,
suggesting that the two-loop one is finite.
We believe that eq. (13) predicts the finite remainder of the
YM amplitude in dimensional regularization. In particular, we predict that
(119)
where is the predicted
IR divergence of Catani given by eqs. (88) and (89),
including its parts,
and is the two-loop result
computed from the CCA bootstrap given by eq. (13).
Evaluating
to requires
knowing the one-loop all-plus -point amplitude to .
A closed-form formula is not known for this, but in principle it can be
computed for each by using a basis of scalar integrals.
The complete basis to all-orders in includes pentagons, boxes,
bubbles and triangles Bern:1992em ; Bern:1993kr ; Giele:2008ve ; Ellis:2008ir ; Badger:2008cm ,
the coefficients of which can be computed using -dimensional
unitarity Bern:1996ja ; Britto:2020crg .
The combination of the single-trace term computed in
ref. Costello:2023vyy and the double-trace term that we have computed,
eq. (13), is a complete two-loop -point result for
a non-supersymmetric gauge theory with matter. We have conjectured that
the YM amplitude has the form given by (119) with dimensional
regularization as the IR regulator. Mass regularization of the four-point
integrals allows for complete agreement between the YM amplitudes and the
sdYM form factor. We further conjecture that this scheme, and perhaps
other IR regularization schemes which do not change the dimensions of
spacetime, give complete agreement between the two approaches at higher points.
In light of the simple behavior of the two-loop all-plus four-point
amplitudes when dimensional regularization is combined with suitable
mass regularization, it may be worth investigating similar mass regularization
for other types of gauge theory amplitudes.
Although the two-loop all-plus -point
amplitude was not computed in QCD, where the fermions are in
the representation ,
methods similar to the CCA bootstrap, perhaps when combined with other
bootstrap methods, may lead to analytic progress in the computation of
higher-order corrections in more realistic theories.
Acknowledgements.
We thank Kevin Costello, Roland Bittleston, Song He, Henrik Johansson,
and Oliver Schlotterer for helpful discussions, and Kevin Costello
for useful comments on the draft. We are particularly grateful
to Kevin Costello for hosting us at the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical
Physics (PI), where part of this work was completed.
This research was supported by the US Department of Energy under contracts
DE–AC02–76SF00515 and DE–FOA–0002705, KA/OR55/22 (AIHEP),
and was also supported in part by PI.
Research at PI is supported by the Government of Canada through the
Department of Innovation, Science and Economic Development and by the
Province of Ontario through the Ministry of Colleges and Universities.
Appendix A Colorful identities
In order to evaluate the color factors in terms of traces over the
fundamental representation
without any contracted indices, we make use of various
identities. In this appendix, we let be an arbitrary
irreducible representation of . The fundamental (defining)
representation is denoted by , and denotes the adjoint
representation.
In the main text, we normalize the generators such that the Dynkin index
of the fundamental representation is unity, i.e.
(120)
Furthermore, we define the the structure constants to
be real and normalized such that
(121)
We will make use of color diagrams to describe one- and two-loop
color factors. The rules for evaluating color diagrams are
(122)
where is an generator in a representation .
If the “” is omitted, then it is implied that the generators are
in the fundamental/anti-fundamental representation. The graphical
depiction of the antisymmetric tensor product of the fundamental
is given in fig. 4.
In this appendix, we will keep the Dynkin index of the fundamental
representation arbitrary. It is set to 1 outside this appendix.
Recall that the quadratic Casimir in is defined by
(123)
Two other contractions of generators that appear in the computations are
(124)
(125)
The Fierz identity,
(126)
when in the presence of other matrices and inside traces is given by
(127)
(128)
(129)
The trace over the exterior square of the fundamental has a
realization as traces over . Letting
be the permutation operator, the exterior square is the image of the
projector . Thus, the trace over is given by
(130)
The generators of are related to the generators of by
(131)
which implies that there are contributions to the trace
over generators , according to the choice
of first or second term in eq. (131).
In other words,
(132)
where denotes the product for
with the ordering inherited from the
ordered list , and is the complement of ,
again with the inherited ordering. Similarly,
(133)
so that
(134)
Note that
(135)
with this notation, so
(136)
The associated color diagram for the trace over is shown in
fig. 9. It uses the diagramatic rules for
antisymmetrizing two lines shown in fig. 4.
Figure 9: Color diagram for the trace over the representation
in terms of traces over the fundamental .
The Dynkin index of is read off from
(137)
i.e.
(138)
The quadratic Casimir is then
(139)
Appendix B Computation of the double-trace kinematic terms in eq. (13)
The color factors computed in ref. Costello:2023vyy leave out the
double-trace terms. Here, we recompute these color factors while
keeping track of the double-trace structure. Afterwards, we use the
CCA bootstrap to prove eq. (14). In order to do this,
we first introduce some notation from ref. Costello:2023vyy .
The momenta for massless states satisfy
(140)
where are two-component Weyl spinors.
We can scale while keeping the momentum fixed
such that
(141)
The parameter is then the coordinate on the where
the chiral algebra lives. A massless state of energy is
described by a function of and . For a set of
outgoing momenta , the familiar spinor brackets are defined by
(142)
(143)
Positive- and negative-helicity states of a gauge theory are denoted by
(144)
respectively, where is the color index. The states can be expanded in
a series in as
(145)
where are homogeneous polynomials of order in
. These quantities are expanded further as
(146)
The states generate the (extended) chiral algebra
for pure sdYM living on the -plane. These states should be thought
of as soft modes, since they result from an expansion in .
The OPEs in the chiral algebra correspond to collinear limits of states
in sdYM. At tree-level, the OPEs are
(147)
(148)
We have redefined the normalization of the
in order to remove the appearance of the energy .
Notice that the structure constants used here differ from that of
ref. Costello:2023vyy by a factor of . The higher loop-order OPEs
(including those with matter) are found in ref. Costello:2023vyy ,
but they are not necessary for our purposes here.
As mentioned in the main body of the paper, correlation functions of the
chiral algebra in a given conformal block are form factors of sdYM with
an operator insertion at a point in spacetime
corresponding to the
conformal block. We denote these correlators as
(149)
Expanding the external states as a sum of soft modes, we are left with
computing correlators of the form
(150)
Since correlators on twistor space must not scale with dilations of
, the scaling dimensions of the external states must sum
to minus the scaling dimension of the operator. Positive-helicity states
contribute dimension , while negative-helicity states
contribute .
The OPEs constrain the poles of the correlators. In order to compute the
two-loop amplitude eq. (13), only knowledge of tree-level and
one-loop OPEs are needed. In particular, poles that involve and
insertions are dictated by tree-level and one-loop OPEs, respectively.
The chiral algebra also places constraints on terms which are regular in a
given limit. The algebra can be derived directly via Koszul
duality Costello:2022wso . This involves coupling and
to the gauge field and the auxiliary field of sdYM on
twistor space, which requires to have a zero of order at
and to have a pole of order at
in order for the coupling to be well-defined.
Form factors of sdYM with the operator
inserted at the origin give YM amplitudes when the sum of
the gluon momenta vanishes.
However, at two loops, the operator is chosen to be
(151)
where is some constant. The term is added as a two-loop
counterterm, with to remind us that the term is added at two loops.
This term is added in order to remove an all-plus-helicity two-loop
two-point correlator that can only be determined up to an overall constant ;
this addition also forces the two-loop three-point correlators to vanish.
The operator is a total derivative,
which means that form factors with this operator vanish
when we impose that the momenta of the gluons add up to zero,
which we do when we pass to a scattering amplitude. So in practice
we can neglect the second term in eq. (151).
Since has dimension four, and dimension ,
we consider the scale-invariant four-point correlator
(152)
where means eq. (151) from now on.
Eq. (152) is determined by one-loop OPEs between any two
’s; hence we get a two-loop result.
It evaluates to (see ref. Costello:2023vyy for how this is computed)
(153)
where the last line adds two more permutations,
and the color factor is given by
(154)
The parentheses around color indices means to symmetrize on said indices.
Recall that
are the generators of in the adjoint representation defined by
(155)
Writing eq. (154) as traces over the fundamental without
contracted indices requires the use of the identities in
Appendix A. Doing so results in
(156)
With this formula, eq. (B) can now be expressed as a sum over
permutations of different trace structures, resulting in
eqs. (9)–(11).
We now prove the formula (14) for the -point double-trace
term by induction. Eq. (14) clearly reproduces the case.
For the case, the correlator giving rise to
is
(157)
where ellipses indicate insertions. Assume the -th insertion is
a . Viewing eq. (157) as a function of , the poles
with respect to are dictated by the OPEs of with
the other insertions. The OPEs are
(158)
(159)
The OPEs dictate that the residues at the simple poles
will be -point correlators.
The double-trace structures in eq. (157) for points with
the ordering are
(160)
Since we are only concerned with the ordering in the trace
structures for points, to determine the dependence on
we only need to consider two OPEs, where the
point is near and where it is near ,
for a given .
Then the double-trace structure of eq. (157) at a given has
the form
(161)
In the first equality, we performed the contractions between the structure
constants and the generators within the traces and kept only the
double-trace terms with the ordering . In the second equality,
we used the definition of the angle spinor brackets in terms of the
variables, eq. (142). The last equality follows
by induction from the definition (14).
Summing over then yields
(162)
where we added in the second line,
which agrees with eq. (14), since the condition
is incompatible with , which
holds because a is inserted at the -th position.
In the above, we ignored the terms regular in and ;
however, these terms are null since they would not allow
to have a second-order zero at . Eq. (162)
shows that the dependence on is compatible inductively
with eq. (14).
Next we consider the dependence on , when there is a inserted
into eq. (157) at for .
The computation goes very similarly for the three cases:
, , and .
The vanishing conditions for eq. (14) mean that the
contributes to only one of the two traces in the double-trace
structure when only considering the ordering .
The case differs slightly.
Taking , the OPEs involving dictate
that there are simple poles at for
, and their residues are
-point correlators with removed.
The double-trace structure in the ordering of the
-point correlator with this operator removed is
(163)
where is the -th element of the ordered list
. We can ignore terms with , since
vanishes with this condition.
For , the insertion only contributes
to the right trace in the double-trace structure. So the computation is
very similar to the case described above.
For , must contribute
to both traces in the double-trace structure, since the generator
can be inserted in either of the traces in
(164)
while preserving the ordering .
Correspondingly, there are four poles instead of two,
at , with residues
dictated by the OPEs:
(165)
The first equality follows from taking only the double-traces with the
ordering after removing the index contraction.
The second equality follows from the definition (14).
This exhausts all cases, and the result follows by induction.
In this section, we prove that the single-trace color-ordered one-loop
subamplitude when matter lives in the representation (1)
is given by eq. (28), which we repeat here for convenience:
(166)
where and .
The first term immediately follows from the eight copies
of the fundamental representation for the fermions, together with the
sign flip associated with the SWI (24).
The second term must then come from the single copy of the antisymmetric
tensor representation, in particular from the exchange graph shown in
figure 9.
(The gluon loop only generates double traces, and single traces with a
factor of which cancel against non-exchange contributions
from .)
Figure 10 provides an example, for ,
of how a particular shuffle of and , i.e. an element of
for , can contribute to the trace
ordering .
Figure 10: An example for which illustrates
how the color-ordered sub-amplitude
can contribute to the color factor
via the exchange term .
The ordering corresponds to a shuffle of
and .
We now provide a rigorous argument for the validity of eq. (28).
That is, we will show that the contributing color-orderings
for the exchange terms are in
bijection with the shuffles for some .
Recall that the single-trace terms of the one-loop amplitude with matter
in the representation (1) is given by
(167)
The sum is over the group , allowing us
to choose an element from which can be fixed by all
. We choose to be this fixed element.
After summing over and collecting on the traces,
the color-ordered term multiplying is generically
(168)
where is
(169)
where is is an equivalence class containing all cycles of
. Here is written as a set, but we are
counting multiplicities, meaning that is included in the sum
the same number of times there is an instance of a sublist
with .
The set can be written as a disjoint union over subsets
which require the sublist to be of size , allowing for the sum
over to be written as a sum over ,
(170)
where the collection of permutations is
(171)
Notice that if then ,
which follows from the fact that if
then , since is related to
by a cyclic transformation.
We can use this pairing between and to require that
. This restriction removes the overall
factor of and the sum becomes
(172)
where the new subset is
(173)
for all .
We will show that ,
which will complete the proof of eq. (28).
As a reminder, and .
Consider an element ,
and set .
The permutation is generically of the form
(174)
where represents some sublist of such that
.
Since , we can identify with .
So the -th element of is in the -th position in .
Letting be the position of in for ,
we then have that
(175)
Also, for , since and
the shuffle product preserves the ordering of . This means that
is ordered with respect to .
It follows that the complement of is
(176)
Thus,
(177)
which implies that ,
i.e. .
The shuffle product has size
(178)
The size of is at most the number of size- sublists
of containing , i.e.
(179)
It cannot be larger, because if and only if there
exists containing such that
. Since has
as a fixed point, it must be that .
By uniqueness, this means there is only one such for a given .
So the size of is bounded by eq. (179).
Given that ,
and eq. (178), the bound must be saturated,
and then follows.
This proves the equality.
Appendix D Integrals
In this section, we reproduce the evaluated integrals from
ref. Bern:2000dn that enter the two-loop primitive amplitudes
in eqs. (40) and (54). The results for the
two-loop integrals are given in the Euclidean region and ,
for which . They can be analytically continued to other
regions by substituting
and
.
The planar double-box integral, expressed in terms of the one-loop box
integral, is
(180)
The one-loop box integral to is
(181)
The planar finite remainder is
(182)
The divergent non-planar integral in terms of the one-loop box integral is
(183)
where the finite remainder is
(184)
The finite non-planar integral
is
(185)
Finally, we provide parts of the explicit expressions for
eqs. (80) and (81). They are
(186)
and
(187)
We only give the lowest order in term for due to the
complexity of the term. It is already evident at this order
that the dimensionally-regulated YM amplitude does not agree with
eq. (9), the sdYM form-factor result. The predicted
answer from the CCA bootstrap for
is merely the term in eq. (187).
(2)
J. Andersen et al., Les Houches 2023: Physics at TeV Colliders: Standard
Model Working Group Report, in Physics of the TeV Scale and Beyond
the Standard Model: Intensifying the Quest for New Physics, 6, 2024
[2406.00708].
(3)
S. Caron-Huot, L.J. Dixon, J.M. Drummond, F. Dulat, J. Foster,
O. Gürdoğan et al., The Steinmann Cluster Bootstrap for = 4
Super Yang-Mills Amplitudes,
PoSCORFU2019
(2020) 003 [2005.06735].
(4)
L.J. Dixon, O. Gürdoğan, A.J. McLeod and M. Wilhelm, Bootstrapping
a stress-tensor form factor through eight loops,
JHEP07
(2022) 153 [2204.11901].
(5)
B. Agarwal, F. Buccioni, F. Devoto, G. Gambuti, A. von Manteuffel and
L. Tancredi, Five-parton scattering in QCD at two loops,
Phys. Rev. D109 (2024) 094025
[2311.09870].
(6)
G. De Laurentis, H. Ita, M. Klinkert and V. Sotnikov, Double-virtual
NNLO QCD corrections for five-parton scattering. I. The gluon channel,
Phys. Rev. D109 (2024) 094023
[2311.10086].
(7)
G. De Laurentis, H. Ita and V. Sotnikov, Double-virtual NNLO QCD
corrections for five-parton scattering. II. The quark channels,
Phys. Rev. D109 (2024) 094024
[2311.18752].
(8)
F. Caola, A. Chakraborty, G. Gambuti, A. von Manteuffel and L. Tancredi,
Three-loop helicity amplitudes for four-quark scattering in massless
QCD, JHEP10 (2021) 206 [2108.00055].
(9)
F. Caola, A. Chakraborty, G. Gambuti, A. von Manteuffel and L. Tancredi,
Three-Loop Gluon Scattering in QCD and the Gluon Regge Trajectory,
Phys. Rev. Lett.128 (2022) 212001
[2112.11097].
(10)
F. Caola, A. Chakraborty, G. Gambuti, A. von Manteuffel and L. Tancredi,
Three-loop helicity amplitudes for quark-gluon scattering in QCD,
JHEP12
(2022) 082 [2207.03503].
(11)
M.T. Grisaru, H.N. Pendleton and P. van Nieuwenhuizen, Supergravity and
the S Matrix, Phys.
Rev. D15 (1977) 996.
(12)
M.T. Grisaru and H.N. Pendleton, Some Properties of Scattering
Amplitudes in Supersymmetric Theories,
Nucl. Phys. B124 (1977) 81.
(13)
S.J. Parke and T.R. Taylor, Perturbative QCD Utilizing Extended
Supersymmetry,
Phys. Lett. B157 (1985) 81.
(15)
Z. Bern, G. Chalmers, L.J. Dixon and D.A. Kosower, One loop gluon
amplitudes with maximal helicity violation via collinear limits,
Phys. Rev. Lett.72 (1994) 2134
[hep-ph/9312333].
(16)
C.N. Yang, Condition of Selfduality for SU(2) Gauge Fields on Euclidean
Four-Dimensional Space,
Phys. Rev. Lett.38 (1977) 1377.
(17)
A.A. Belavin and V.E. Zakharov, Yang-Mills Equations as Inverse
Scattering Problem,
Phys. Lett. B73 (1978) 53.
(18)
H.C. Tze and Y.-s. Wu, Infinite Number of Local Conservation Laws for
the Selfdual SU(2) Yang-Mills System,
Nucl. Phys. B204 (1982) 118.
(19)
L.-L. Chau and Y.-S. Wu, More About Hidden Symmetry Algebra for the
Selfdual Yang-Mills System,
Phys. Rev. D26 (1982) 3581.
(26)
Z. Bern, L.J. Dixon and D.A. Kosower, A Two loop four gluon helicity
amplitude in QCD,
JHEP01 (2000) 027 [hep-ph/0001001].
(27)
Z. Bern, A. De Freitas and L.J. Dixon, Two loop helicity amplitudes for
gluon-gluon scattering in QCD and supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory,
JHEP03 (2002) 018 [hep-ph/0201161].
(28)
S. Badger, H. Frellesvig and Y. Zhang, A Two-Loop Five-Gluon Helicity
Amplitude in QCD,
JHEP12
(2013) 045 [1310.1051].
(29)
T. Gehrmann, J.M. Henn and N.A. Lo Presti, Analytic form of the two-loop
planar five-gluon all-plus-helicity amplitude in QCD,
Phys. Rev. Lett.116 (2016) 062001
[1511.05409].
(31)
S. Badger, G. Mogull, A. Ochirov and D. O’Connell, A Complete Two-Loop,
Five-Gluon Helicity Amplitude in Yang-Mills Theory,
JHEP10
(2015) 064 [1507.08797].
(46)
L.J. Dixon, E.W.N. Glover and V.V. Khoze, MHV rules for Higgs plus
multi-gluon amplitudes,
JHEP12 (2004) 015 [hep-th/0411092].
(47)
C.F. Berger, V. Del Duca and L.J. Dixon, Recursive Construction of
Higgs-Plus-Multiparton Loop Amplitudes: The Last of the Phi-nite Loop
Amplitudes, Phys.
Rev. D74 (2006) 094021
[hep-ph/0608180].
(48)
K. Costello and N.M. Paquette, Celestial holography meets twisted
holography: 4d amplitudes from chiral correlators,
JHEP10
(2022) 193 [2201.02595].
(50)
N.E.J. Bjerrum-Bohr, P.H. Damgaard, H. Johansson and T. Sondergaard,
Monodromy-like Relations for Finite Loop Amplitudes,
JHEP05
(2011) 039 [1103.6190].
(54)
Z. Bern and D.A. Kosower, Color decomposition of one loop amplitudes in
gauge theories,
Nucl. Phys. B362 (1991) 389.
(55)
Z. Bern, L.J. Dixon, D.C. Dunbar and D.A. Kosower, One loop n point
gauge theory amplitudes, unitarity and collinear limits,
Nucl. Phys. B425 (1994) 217
[hep-ph/9403226].
(57)
L. Dixon and A. Morales, “Rational QCD Loop Amplitudes and Quantum Theories
on Twistor Space.” to appear.
(58)
A. Hodges, Eliminating spurious poles from gauge-theoretic amplitudes,
JHEP05
(2013) 135 [0905.1473].
(59)
Z. Bern, A. De Freitas, L.J. Dixon and H.L. Wong, Supersymmetric
regularization, two loop QCD amplitudes and coupling shifts,
Phys. Rev. D66 (2002) 085002
[hep-ph/0202271].
(60)
L.F. Alday, J.M. Henn, J. Plefka and T. Schuster, Scattering into the
fifth dimension of N=4 super Yang-Mills,
JHEP01
(2010) 077 [0908.0684].
(61)
J.M. Henn, S.G. Naculich, H.J. Schnitzer and M. Spradlin,
Higgs-regularized three-loop four-gluon amplitude in N=4 SYM:
exponentiation and Regge limits,
JHEP04
(2010) 038 [1001.1358].
(62)
J.L. Bourjaily, S. Caron-Huot and J. Trnka, Dual-Conformal
Regularization of Infrared Loop Divergences and the Chiral Box Expansion,
JHEP01
(2015) 001 [1303.4734].
(64)
N. Arkani-Hamed, W. Flieger, J.M. Henn, A. Schreiber and J. Trnka,
Coulomb Branch Amplitudes from a Deformed Amplituhedron Geometry,
Phys. Rev. Lett.132 (2024) 211601
[2311.10814].