arxiv:hep-ph/ v1 19 Dec 1997

Transcription

1 arxiv:hep-ph/972449v 9 Dec 997 A new method for the cacuation of massive mutioop diagrams K. Knecht, H. Verschede Department of Mathematica Physics and Astronomy, University of Ghent, Krijgsaan 28, 9 Ghent, Begium November 997 Abstract Starting from the parametric representation of a Feynman diagram, we obtain it s we defined vaue in dimensiona reguarisation by changing the integras over parameters into contour integras. That way we eventuay arrive at a representation consisting of we-defined compact integras. The resut is a simpe transformation of the integrand which gives the anaytic continuation of a wide cass of Feynmanintegras. The agorithm wi especiay be fit for numerica cacuation of genera massive muti-oop integras. An important advantage of this method is that it aows us to cacuate both infinite and finite parts independenty. Emai: Kenny.Knecht@rug.ac.be Emai: Henri.Verschede@rug.ac.be

2 Introduction In recent years there has been an increasing interest for the evauation of massive mutioop Feynman diagrams. High precision experiments force the theoretica predictions to reach an equa amount of accuracy. Over the years severa methods have been proposed to dea with the probem. The first succesfu attempt to cacuate Feynman-diagrams systematicay was based on the property that within the MS-scheme a UV-counterterms are poynomia in both externa momenta and masses. It is not fit though for cacuating finite parts of massive diagrams, athough it has ed to some quite impressive cacuations of beta-functions in different theories [2, ]. An exceent review of these methods is given in []. A first genera massive approach [3, 4, 5, 6] is anaytic by nature and is based on the foowing basic principe: by putting a certain number of masses in the diagram equa to zero a gamma-function ansatz in obtained, upon which the masses can be added again by means of the Mein-Barnes representation. This gives rise to hypergeometric series which have proven to be rather succesfu, e.g. for the asymptotic expansions in the two oop case [7]. These series have certain drawbacks however: they converge ony in certain kinematic regions and athough the ansatz needed for the appication of this method can easiy be found in the case of two oops, more oops wi give considerabe probems. Appications of these methods are therefore mainy confined to asymptotic 2-oops cases. Other agorithms avoid the use of Euer-gamma functions and therefore turn out to be numerica. An exceent exampe of such a method, which even avoids parametric representation and Wick-rotation, reies on the seperation 2

3 of an orthogona space of momenta and integrating out this space first. Athough this method has been succesfuy used for some specific cases [8, 9,, ], this method has not yet been expanded up to three oops or more. Another numerica aproach [2, 3] reies on the parametric representation of the diagram. These approaches aso differ mainy form ours in this respect that the actua appicabiity sti depends argey on the actua form of the diagram. Our method is without reservation appicabe in a vast number of cases and easiy impemented on a computer. The rest of the artice is organised as foows. Section two contains the basic formuas of the contour method and some adaptations desirabe for smooth numerica cacuations. Section three consists of some exampes and section four is a summary and concusion. 2 Contour method A scaar diagram D with L oops, I interna ines each abeed by number and a mass m, a tota externa momentum P j per vertex and a space-time dimension d has a parametric representation [4] where I D (P) = I dα exp [ i α im 2 i + Q D(P,α)] [(4π) 2L R D (α)] d/2 () R D (α) = α (2) T T Q D (P,α) = s R D (α) T 2 α (3) T 2 T 2 with T the set of a the trees of D and T 2 the set of a the two-trees of D and s T 2 the square of the momentum which passes through the cut. R D 3

4 is a homogeneous poynomia in α of degree L and Q D of degree. If the diagram gives rise to tensor integras with irreducibe numerators we can change these to scaar integras using for exampe the genera expression in [2, 2]. The genera phiosophy of our method wi be as foows: we wi isoate the different poes in the integrand and then avoid them by changing the integra in a contour integra fung around the poe. This way we wi obtain a we-defined anaytic continuation of the Feynman integra. Our first goa wi be to isoate the poes in (). Since the poynomia R D of e.g. the setting-sun diagram has the form α α 2 + α 2 α 3 + α α 3 this is not aways obvious: no simpe poes are visibe. There is however a we-known substitution, used in the convergence theorem [4], which does the job. It invoves a separation of the integration domain into sectors α σ() α σ(2) α σ(i) with σ a permutation of (,2,...,I). Per sector we preform the foowing change of variabes α σ() = β I β I... β 2 β α σ(2) = β I β I... β 2. α σ(i) = β I (4) where β I β =,...,I 4

5 Now we can interpret each sector as a famiy of nested subsets of ines of the diagram D: these nested subsets S i S j are determined by the scaing behaviour of β i and β j, i > j. We can prove the foowing form for R D [4] R D (β) = β L βl β L I I [ + O(β)] (5) where L i is the number of independent oops in the subset of ines specified by the ines which disappear if the corresponding β i is put to zero (remember: each ine corresponds to a certain α). Agebraicay we have independent poes in the denominator and now we wi be abe to preform our contouration. The parametric representation () becomes dβ I β I I I ( dβ β I D (P) = σ exp [ Ij=i i β j m 2 σ(i) + Qσ D (P,β)] [RD σ (β,...,β I )] d/2 thus a sum over permutations σ, which means a maximum of I! terms. Thanks to the symmetry in the diagram a certain coecting of terms wi usuay be possibe. From now on we wi omit the sommation over σ and concentrate on one sector ony. For notationa convenience we take σ to be the identica permutation. Due to homogeneity of R D and Q D [4] we can immediatey preform integration over β I and get ) I D (P) = Γ(I Ld/2) (4π) 2L [ i I ( dβ β ) I j=i β jm 2 i + Q D(P,β,...,β I )] Ld/2 I [R D (β,...,β I )] d/2 (6) 5

6 We wi omit these independent factors in front of the integration in what foows. If we coect the factors β i in the integrand we see in (5) they emerge from different sources: the jacobian of the transformation, the factors from R D, possiby some factors which can emerge from the numerator (in the case of massess partices) and if we consider a more genera form than () where every propagator has a power ν i, than a factor α ν i i is to be added in the integrand. We see ony R D gives rise to possibe poes. Now we can write I D in the foowing form I D (P) = = β p dβ βp dβ βp + dβ βp I I dβ dβ + β p βp βp + βp I I dβ + ( f(β) dβ dβ I ) β p dβ I I () (7) where the function f(β,...,β I ) is written as as f(β) for convenience. It is chosen to contain nor poes nor roots at β i =, i =,...,I. and that it is anaytic In dimensiona reguarisation, i.e. d = 4 2ε, p i = n i q i ε, n i integer and q i rationa. From now on we wi omit the cases n i because in these cases the integration can be preformed without reguarisation. Now we concentrate on the integration of one specific β. In the function f(β) a other β i, i wi be considered to be parameters for the time being. We wi use the notation f(β ). The function f(β ) is anaytic at the origin by definition. In dimensiona reguarization (i.e. q ) the integrand 6

7 C O C Figure : The contour for obtaining anaytic continuation of β-integras as a whoe is anaytic in a region around the rea axis for Reβ minus the cut ine aong this positive axis. Indeed if we remember the defintion of R D, we find that a coefficients of this poynomia are positive, so that R D wi never become zero for β on the rea positive axis. This is true for every =,...,I. We wi obtain a meaningfu reguarized vaue for the integra I () if we change the integra into a contour-integra, which conincides with the origina integra in non-divergent cases. In concreto we define the U (unrenormaized) operator (e.g. [5]) to be U (I () ) = e 2πip C dβ f(β ) β p (8) where the contour C, as is showed in figure, indeed avoids the poe β = by a tiny contour C which is a circe with radius, im + and the integrand is anaytic in the region of the contour as shown before. In order to get rid of contours again, we preform integration over C expicity. We are abe to do so if we write f(β ) in a Tayor expansion (this is aowed due to anayticity of f at the origin). Since im + we keep the n first terms of the tayor expansion. Other terms vanish in this imit, 7

8 they are namey O( p ε ) and higher. Finay we obtain U (I () ) = dβ f(β ) β p n j p + + j!(j p j= + ) j f(z ) j z z = This form sti contains expicity. If we use the identity for every p dβ β p = p p p and regroup the terms, we find for the case n U (I () ) = dβ f(β )β p n j! j= n ( + j! j= j p + β j p ) j f(z ) j z j f(z ) j z z = z = Noticing that the integrand under the first integra as a whoe is of the order β q ε, the integra wi be convergent in the imit. We wi use the foowing notation f ( ) () = f(β )β p n j= β j p j! j f(z ) j z and for the other terms f (j) () = ( ) j f(z ) j! j p + j z z = z = They are independent of β and can be manipuated individuay. We can write this resut as a simpe transformation of the integra f () = U (I () ) = U ( = f(β ) dβ β p ) dβ f ( ) () + j f (j) () (9) 8

9 The next difficuty we have to face, is whether or not this operation can be repeated, or is the resut of a U-operation again of the form (7)? This appears to be aways the case:we have done numerous tests on diagrams up to three oops under different circumstances (severa externa momenta, masses or massess,...) and have found no counter-exampes. A rigorous mathematica proof that this appies for every diagram is sti acking though. Here we wi assume that the diagrams we are deaing cause no probems. In that case if we have carried out the U -operation, we can re-estabish the other β i as true variabes. Then we choose another 2 to focus on, write I (, 2 ) = dβ 2 f ( ) β p 2 2 and appy the operator U 2 to I (, 2 ). We can maintain our notation by adding a number to the sub- and superscript of f, e.g. after U 2 U we wi get f (, 2 ) = f (, ) (, 2 ) + i f (i, ) (, 2 ) + j f (,j) (, 2 ) + i,j f (i,j) (, 2 ) We repeat this procedure unti no β-poes are eft, thus reguazing the feynman-integra I D (P) competey. Severa remarks are in order. It is not necessary to preform the integration of f ( ) () expicity before doing another contouration: it suffices to keep the different parts of f ( ) () together when repeating the procedure for another β k. This aows us to cacuate the different coefficients of the aurentexpansion in ε seperatey. Thus the T operation of [5] (isoating the divergent part) is easiy impemented. 9

10 The resut of the different operations U U 2... U n is independenty of their order, athough this may not be the case for particuar U i. If there are ony poes in β and β 2, so U U 2 competey reguarize the integra then: U U 2 = U 2 U This foows from the fact that the U-operators are in fact anaytic continuations (see our primary definition (8)): if Rep the contourintegras coincide with the ordinary integras which are convergent, so U U 2 = U 2 U in the area Rep. By the principe of anaytic continuation they must conicide for a compex d (which fixes a the p i s), for which U and U 2 exist. Of course this impies that for every variabe β i. this anaytic continuation has been carried through (if necessary). It is cear that an expression ike (9) wi be especiay usefu in numerica cacuations and therefore it might be usefu to examen it s numerica behaviour. Ony f ( ) () wi cause troube around zero. Athough the function as a whoe is finite, it is reay a subtraction of one or more infinite vaues. Moreover it is of the order β q ε which after expanding in ε gives +q εn(β )+ and is thus another threath to numerica stabiity. Therefore we wi approximate f ( ) () around the critica point, by the next term in the tayor expansion, i.e. () n f(z ) f ( ) n z z = Introducing this approximation in the interva [, δ], δ being a certain β q ε n!

11 numerica vaue, we obtain f ( ) () dβ β p n f(z ) n z δ +q ε z = ( + q ε)n! + δ f ( ) () dβ β p () The intrinsic error of this approximation if of order δ 2 and shoud be chosen to be smaer than the accuracy of the integration package. Typica vaues are e.g. δ =.. In order to obtain arger vaues for δ without osing accuracy one coud incude more terms of the tayor expansion. 3 Exampes As an expicit exampe we choose the famous setting-sun diagram in scaar λφ 4. Foowing [4] we put momentum p equa to zero and in order to be abe to compare easiy we put aso put the masses equa. This makes the diagram is very symmetrica: topoogicay every eg is equivaent and this wi simpifie the expicit cacuation. Starting from the we-known parametric representation of the settingsun diagram, we get ony one β-sector (a masses are equa). Appying formua (6)), we get Iss = (m2 ) d 3 (4π) d Γ(3 d) dβ dβ 2 ( + β 2 + β β 2 ) d 3 ( + β + β β 2 ) d/2 β d/2 2 () The diagram is gobay divergent in d 3 whence the factor Γ(3 d). At this stage we see a simpe poe in β 2 emerging. This corresponds to the two-egged subdivergence present in the diagram (renormaization of the couping constant). With the notations of section 2, we have f(β 2 ) = ( + β 2 + β β 2 ) d 3 ( + β + β β 2 ) d/2

12 and p 2 = n 2 q 2 ε = ε. Appying formua (9) we get ( ( + β 2 + β β 2 ) d 3 ) U (2) dβ 2 ( + β + β β 2 ) d/2 β d/2 2 ( ( + β2 + β β 2 ) d 3 ) = dβ 2 ( + β + β β 2 ) d/2 ( + β ) d/2 + (2 d/2)( + β ) d/2 β d/2 2 These integras are finite, as expected. If we restrict ourseves to the divergent part (without expanding the Γ(3 d) though, thus f ( ) (2) up to ε ) we get and the f(j) (2) s f ( ) (2) = f () (2) = ( ) + β2 + β β 2 dβ 2 ( + β + β β 2 ) 2 ( + β ) 2 β2 ε( + β ) 2 + n( + β ) ( + β ) 2 We can preform this integration anayticay dβ 2 dβ f ( ) (2) = n 2 2 dβ f () (2) = 2ε + n 2 2 A strange thing happens here: whie the resut is very simpe (merey rationa numbers), the intermediate parts contain a number of a more compicated cass (in casu a n 2) which cances exactey. We can concude that the contour-method ends itsef more for numerica evauations. If we expand in ε and preform the numerica cacuations we obtain the finite part as we: Iss = (m2 ) d 3 (4π) d Γ(3 d)3! ( 2ε ε ) (2) where 3! comes from the equivaent contributions of the seperate subsets. This resut was aso obtained by numerica evauation of resuts in [4]. 2

13 Another, ess trivia test for our method was the so-caed basketbadiagram, a vacuümdiagram in λφ 4 with 3 oops and 4 egs. We aso assumed equa masses here. In order to compare our resuts with the Mein-Barnes method, we have cacuated the diagram in four cases: with one, two, three and four massive egs. Thanks to interna symmetry we ony had to evauate 4, 6, 4 and integra(s) respectivey instead of the fu 4! = 24. We managed to cacuate the infinite parts of first two cases of the basketba-diagram (one and two massive egs) anayticay. This was cumbersome but a good test for numerica evauations. In this case the seperate anaytica pieces were aso consideraby more difficut (they contained n s and PoyLog s) than the eventua sum (which ony contained the expected ζ(2)). The numerica procedure as given by formua () in section two, was impemented in MATHEMATICA [6]: the diagram, expressed in it s origina for is automatiacay transformed into it s most simpe form, then cast into the parametric α-form and β-form, is automaticay changed into the expression () and numericay evauated. Detais of this agorithm wi appear in a seperate pubication. This cacuation comes down to 3-fod integras. But since a system ike MATHEMATICA is abe to preform one anaytic cacuation most of the times, we were abe to get our resuts quite rapidy. These were the resut we obtained up to order ε : I mass = (m2 ) 4 3d/2 (4π) 3d/2 Γ(4 3d/2) [ ] 2ε ε I 2mass = (m2 ) 4 3d/2 (4π) 3d/2 Γ(4 3d/2) [ 2 ε 2 2 ] ε ε 3

14 I 3mass = (m2 ) 4 3d/2 [ 6 (4π) 3d/2 Γ(4 3d/2) ε 2 9 ] 2ε ε I 4mass = (m2 ) 4 3d/2 (4π) 3d/2 Γ(4 3d/2) [ 2 ε 2 8 ε ε ] As a test we evauated the same diagram with the Mein-Barnes method. Starting from an exact expression for the basketba-diagram with one massive eg, we were abe to write the Feynman-diagram as hypergeometric series. Comparing the two methods we see -as expected- that the contour method pays off more as the number of massive egs increases. 4 Summary and concusion The main merit of our contour-method as introduced here, ies evidenty in its genera character. Indeed it is appicabe for a wide cass of Feymandiagrams scaar and tensoria (athough the borders of this cass or not yet quite cear). The computer-agorithm based on expression () is easy to impement and virtuay independent of the actua diagram fed to the system. As remarked our contour-method is a numerica method in the first pace. The necessary cacuations invove especiay a ot of numerica integrations, which are known not to be an easy probem. Though even at this point our method has some advantages: the integration intervas are compact at a time (9) and -thanks to our numerica adjustment ()- a integrands are finite. Such cacuations can best be done by some adaptive Monte- Caro method. The method wi aso give rise to a arge number of integras, but this drawback can partiay be met using the recursion agoritms in 4

15 [9, 2, 2], forcing us ony to cacuate a sma number of so-caed masterintegras. This is a common practice: such techniques have to be used in any method invoving higher-order Feynman-diagrams in order to reduce the number of cacuations. To sum up, we have a method which is easy the impement and appicabe in a vast number of cases, even those where tradiona methods fai, such as finite parts of compicated diagrams. Furthermore we are abe to cacuate the different coefficients of the aurent-expansion in ε indepenty. Therefore it is a usefu too for high-precision cacuation of genera massive Feynmandiagrams. References [] K. Chetyrkin, M. Misiak and M. Münz, hep-ph/97266 (997). [2] K.G. Chetyrkin, A.L. Kataev and F.V. Tkachov, Nuc. Phys. B74 (98) 345; F.V. Tkachov Phys. Lett. B (98) 65; T. van Ritbergen, J.A.M. Vermaseren and S.A. Larin, Phys. Lett. B4 (997) 379; [3] F.A. Berends, M. Böhm, M Buza, R. Scharf. Z. Phys C63 (994) 227. [4] A.I. Davydychev, J.B. Tausk. Nuc. Phys. B 397 (993) 23. [5] A.I. Davydychev J. Phys. 25 (992) [6] A.I. Davydychev, J.B. Tausk., University of Bergen Report No 995-7, MZ-TH 95-4, hep-ph/

16 [7] V.A. Smirnov, Ringberg Caste workshop, MPI-PhT/94-82 (994). [8] D. Kreimer, Phys Lett B273 (99) 277. [9] D. Kreimer, Phys Lett B292 (992) 34. [] Czarnecki, Kiian and Kreimer, Phys Lett B433 (995) 259. [] Brücher, Franzkowski and Kreimer, Compt Phys Commun 85 (995) 53. [2] Fujimoto et a, Prop Theo Phys 87 (992) 233. [3] Fujimoto et a, KEK Preprint (995). [4] C. Itzykson & J-B Zuber, Quantum fied theory. McGraw-Hi, 98. [5] J. Coins, Renormaization, Cambridge University Press, 984. [6] S. Wofram, Mathematica, Addison-Wesey Pub. Comp., N.Y [7] A.I. Davydychev, Phys. ett. B 263 (99) 7. [8] A.I. Davydychev. and J.B. Tausk, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 9 (994) [9] A.I. Davydychev. J. Phys. A 25 (992) [2] O.V Tarasov, Preprint DESY (996). [2] O.V Tarasov, hep-ph/97339 (997). 6