format: text

text:
# 1 Introduction

## 1 Introduction

The increasing precision of high-energy scattering experiments has reached the level that next-to-next-to-leading theoretical results for $`2\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}`$ scattering processes of massless particles are demanded . Several steps have already been taken towards this goal: in Refs.  the tensor reduction of two-loop planar boxes and the computation of the relevant master integrals have been given. Reference  dealt with the tensor reduction of the pentabox, while other simpler two-loop diagrams obtained by one-loop insertion into one-loop four-point functions have been treated in Ref. .

The final unresolved issue is the tensor reduction of two-loop crossed boxes of Fig. 1 and the evaluation of the corresponding master integrals. One of the master integrals, corresponding to the scalar integral with all powers of propagators equal to unity, was computed in Ref.  as an analytic expansion in $`ϵ=(4D)/2`$, where $`D`$ is the space-time dimension.

A first result of this paper is to present a method to reduce tensor integrals of crossed two-loop boxes to two crossed-box master integrals, plus master integrals for simpler-topology diagrams. We choose as first master integral the already evaluated  crossed box with all powers of propagators equal to one, and as second master integral the scalar integral where the power of the second propagator is equal to two, all the others being one.

As it is well known , tensor integrals can be related to scalar integrals with higher powers of the propagators in higher dimensions. We make use of recurrence relations obtained by integration-by-parts  and Lorentz-invariance identities  to connect integrals with different powers of the propagators and to derive a reduction algorithm that expresses the generic scalar integral as a function of the two master crossed boxes, plus simpler sub-topologies. We explicitly give the equations that connect the two master integrals in different dimensions (dimensional shift).

Quite in general, it has been shown that the master integrals for any Feynman graph topology satisfy a system of first-order differential equations on any of the Mandelstam variables on which they depend . We derive a system of two coupled differential equations for the crossed-box master integrals by two independent methods: first using the raising and lowering operators and second by taking the on-shell limit of the differential equations for the crossed box with one off-shell leg .

Inserting the analytic expression of the first master crossed box into the differential equation for the first master integral, we obtain an algebraic equation for the second master crossed box, that can be solved to give the analytic expansion in $`ϵ`$ of the second master integral. The differential equation for the second master integral provides an overall check of the calculation.

Our paper is organized as follows: in Section 2 we introduce the notation we are going to use. In Section 3 we briefly review how tensor integrals are related to scalar ones, and we give the reduction algorithm to express these integrals as a combination of the two master crossed boxes, plus simpler master integrals for topologies with fewer propagators. In Sections 4 and 5 we derive the differential equations that the two master integrals satisfy in arbitrary dimensions $`D`$, using the two different methods. The analytic expansion of the second master integral is given in Section 6. For completeness, in Appendix A we present the algorithm for the tensor reduction and for the dimensional shift of the crossed triangle, since this is one of the non-trivial sub-topologies produced by the reduction procedure. Finally we conclude with Section 7.

## 2 Notation

We denote the generic two-loop tensor crossed (or non-planar) four-point function in $`D`$ dimensions of Fig. 1 with seven propagators $`A_i`$ raised to arbitrary powers $`\nu _i`$ as

$`\mathrm{Xbox}^D(\nu _1,\nu _2,\nu _3,\nu _4,\nu _5,\nu _6,\nu _7;s,t)[1;k^\mu ;l^\mu ;k^\mu k^\nu ;k^\mu l^\nu ;\mathrm{}]`$
$`={\displaystyle \frac{d^Dk}{i\pi ^{D/2}}\frac{d^Dl}{i\pi ^{D/2}}\frac{[1;k^\mu ;l^\mu ;k^\mu k^\nu ;k^\mu l^\nu ;\mathrm{}]}{A_1^{\nu _1}A_2^{\nu _2}A_3^{\nu _3}A_4^{\nu _4}A_5^{\nu _5}A_6^{\nu _6}A_7^{\nu _7}}},`$ (2.1)
where the propagators are

$`A_1`$ $`=`$ $`(k+l+p_{34})^2+i0,`$
$`A_2`$ $`=`$ $`(k+l+p_{134})^2+i0,`$
$`A_3`$ $`=`$ $`(k+l)^2+i0,`$
$`A_4`$ $`=`$ $`l^2+i0,`$ (2.2)
$`A_5`$ $`=`$ $`(l+p_3)^2+i0,`$
$`A_6`$ $`=`$ $`k^2+i0,`$
$`A_7`$ $`=`$ $`(k+p_4)^2+i0.`$
The external momenta $`p_j`$ are in-going and light-like, $`p_j^2=0`$, $`j=1\mathrm{}4`$, so that the only momentum scales are the usual Mandelstam variables $`s=(p_1+p_2)^2`$ and $`t=(p_2+p_3)^2`$, together with $`u=st`$. For ease of notation, we define $`p_{ij}=p_i+p_j`$ and $`p_{ijk}=p_i+p_j+p_k`$. In the square brackets we keep trace of the tensor structure that may be present in the numerator of Eq. (2). When the numerator is unity we have the scalar integral

$$\mathrm{Xbox}^D(\nu _1,\nu _2,\nu _3,\nu _4,\nu _5,\nu _6,\nu _7;s,t)[1]\mathrm{Xbox}^D(\nu _1,\nu _2,\nu _3,\nu _4,\nu _5,\nu _6,\nu _7;s,t).$$
(2.3)
## 3 Tensor reduction using raising and lowering operators

Tensor integrals can be related to combinations of scalar integrals with higher powers of propagators and/or different values of $`D`$ . In fact, introducing the Schwinger parameters $`x_i`$, we can write the integrand of Eq. (2) in the form

$$\frac{1}{A_1^{\nu _1}\mathrm{}A_7^{\nu _7}}=𝒟x\mathrm{exp}\left(\underset{i=1}{\overset{7}{}}x_iA_i\right),$$
(3.1)
where

$`{\displaystyle 𝒟x}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{7}{}}}{\displaystyle \frac{(1)^{\nu _i}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\nu _i)}}{\displaystyle _0^{\mathrm{}}}𝑑x_ix_i^{\nu _i1},`$ (3.2)
$`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{7}{}}}x_iA_i`$ $`=`$ $`ak^2+bl^2+2ckl+2dk+2el+f,`$ (3.3)
and

$`a`$ $`=`$ $`x_1+x_2+x_3+x_6+x_7`$
$`b`$ $`=`$ $`x_1+x_2+x_3+x_5+x_4`$
$`c`$ $`=`$ $`x_1+x_2+x_3`$
$`d^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`x_1p_{34}^\mu +x_2p_{134}^\mu +x_7p_4^\mu `$
$`e^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`x_1p_{34}^\mu +x_2p_{134}^\mu +x_5p_3^\mu `$
$`f`$ $`=`$ $`x_1s.`$ (3.4)
We can diagonalize the exponent with the change of variables

$`k^\mu `$ $``$ $`\left(K{\displaystyle \frac{cL}{a}}+𝒳\right)^\mu ,`$ (3.5)
$`l^\mu `$ $``$ $`\left(L+𝒴\right)^\mu ,`$ (3.6)
where

$`𝒳^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{𝒫}}\{[(x_2+x_1)(x_7+x_5+x_4)+(x_5+x_4+x_3)x_7]p_4^\mu +[x_3x_5x_4(x_2+x_1)]p_3^\mu `$ (3.7)
$`x_2(x_5+x_4)p_1^\mu \},`$
$`𝒴^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{𝒫}}\{[x_3x_7x_6(x_2+x_1)]p_4^\mu [(x_2+x_1)(x_7+x_6+x_5)+(x_7+x_6+x_3)x_5)]p_3^\mu `$ (3.8)
$`x_2(x_7+x_6)p_1^\mu \},`$
and

$$𝒫=\left(x_7+x_6+x_5+x_4\right)\left(x_3+x_2+x_1\right)+\left(x_5+x_4\right)\left(x_7+x_6\right).$$
(3.9)
The generic tensor integral (dropping all the dependences on $`\nu _i`$ and on the external scales) becomes

$`\mathrm{Xbox}^D[k^{\mu _1}\mathrm{}k^{\mu _m}l^{\nu _1}\mathrm{}l^{\nu _n}]={\displaystyle 𝒟x\frac{d^DK}{i\pi ^{D/2}}\frac{d^DL}{i\pi ^{D/2}}}`$
$`\times \left(K{\displaystyle \frac{cL}{a}}+𝒳\right)^{\mu _1}\mathrm{}\left(K{\displaystyle \frac{cL}{a}}+𝒳\right)^{\mu _m}\left(L+𝒴\right)^{\nu _1}\mathrm{}\left(L+𝒴\right)^{\nu _n}`$
$`\times \mathrm{exp}\left(aK^2+{\displaystyle \frac{𝒫}{a}}L^2+{\displaystyle \frac{𝒬}{𝒫}}\right),`$ (3.10)
where

$$𝒬=x_2(x_5x_6x_4x_7)t+\left[x_1x_3(x_7+x_6+x_5+x_4)+x_3x_5x_7x_2x_4x_7+x_1x_4x_6\right]s.$$
(3.11)
The integration over the loop momenta $`K`$ and $`L`$ is now straightforward. For example, the scalar integral and the two one-index tensor integrals are given by

$`\mathrm{Xbox}^D(\nu _1,\nu _2,\nu _3,\nu _4,\nu _5,\nu _6,\nu _7;s,t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝒟x},`$ (3.12)
$`\mathrm{Xbox}^D(\nu _1,\nu _2,\nu _3,\nu _4,\nu _5,\nu _6,\nu _7;s,t)[k^\mu ]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝒟x𝒳^\mu },`$ (3.13)
$`\mathrm{Xbox}^D(\nu _1,\nu _2,\nu _3,\nu _4,\nu _5,\nu _6,\nu _7;s,t)[l^\mu ]`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle 𝒟x𝒴^\mu },`$ (3.14)
where

$$=\frac{1}{𝒫^{D/2}}\mathrm{exp}\left(\frac{𝒬}{𝒫}\right).$$
(3.15)
Recalling the definition (3.2), we see that we can absorb the factors $`x_i`$ of $`𝒳^\mu `$ and $`𝒴^\mu `$ into $`𝒟x`$, increasing the power of the $`i`$-th propagator by one

$$\frac{(1)^{\nu _i}x_i^{\nu _i1}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\nu _i)}x_i\nu _i\frac{(1)^{\nu _i+1}x_i^{\nu _i}}{\mathrm{\Gamma }(\nu _i+1)}\nu _i𝐢^\mathbf{+},$$
(3.16)
where

$$𝐢^\mathbf{\pm }\mathrm{Xbox}^D(\mathrm{},\nu _i,\mathrm{})=\mathrm{Xbox}^D(\mathrm{},\nu _i\pm 1,\mathrm{}),$$
(3.17)
while the factor $`𝒫`$ can be absorbed into $``$ (see Eq. (3.15))

$$\frac{1}{𝒫^{D/2}}\frac{1}{𝒫}\frac{1}{𝒫^{(D+2)/2}},$$
(3.18)
so that $`1/𝒫`$ acts as a dimension increaser

$$\frac{1}{𝒫}𝐝^\mathbf{+},𝒫𝐝^{\mathbf{}},$$
(3.19)
where

$$𝐝^\mathbf{\pm }\mathrm{Xbox}^D=\mathrm{Xbox}^{D\pm 2}.$$
(3.20)
For example, using the expression for $`𝒳^\mu `$ of Eq. (3.7), we can write

$`\mathrm{Xbox}^D[k^\mu ]`$ $`=`$ $`\{[\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}(\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _1\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+})]p_3^\mu \nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}(\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+})p_1^\mu `$ (3.21)
$`[(\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _1\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+})(\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+})`$
$`+(\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+})\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}]p_4^\mu \}\mathrm{Xbox}^{D+2}[1].`$
The task to compute tensor integrals has then been moved to the computation of scalar integrals with higher powers of the propagators in higher dimensions.

In the next sections, we will follow the procedure already used in Ref. :

* we first reduce the powers of the propagators of the generic scalar diagram and we express it in terms of a finite set (basis) of master diagrams;
* then we relate the master integrals in higher dimensions to the master integrals in $`D`$ dimensions (dimensional shift).

### 3.1 The scalar crossed-box reduction

The strategy to reduce the generic scalar integral to a linear combination of master ones is based on identities that relate scalar integrals with different powers of propagators. Some of these identities can be obtained using the integration-by-parts method . Since there are three external independent momenta and two loop momenta, we can build ten identities, imposing that

$$\frac{d^Dk}{i\pi ^{D/2}}\frac{d^Dl}{i\pi ^{D/2}}\frac{}{a^\mu }\left[b^\mu f(k,l,p_i)\right]=0,$$
(3.22)
where

$`a^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`k^\mu ,l^\mu `$ (3.23)
$`b^\mu `$ $`=`$ $`k^\mu ,l^\mu ,p_1^\mu ,p_3^\mu ,p_4^\mu `$ (3.24)
$`f(k,l,p_i)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{A_1^{\nu _1}A_2^{\nu _2}A_3^{\nu _3}A_4^{\nu _4}A_5^{\nu _5}A_6^{\nu _6}A_7^{\nu _7}}}.`$ (3.25)
Not all the scalar products that appear in the application of the integration-by-parts identities can be written in terms of combinations of propagators: with the two loop momenta and with the three linearly independent external ones, we can form nine scalar products involving $`k`$ and $`l`$. Since we have seven linearly independent propagators, we are left with two irreducible scalar products in the numerator, that we choose to be $`\left(lp_1\right)`$ and $`\left(lp_4\right)`$.

Three more identities among the scalar integrals can be derived if we exploit the Lorentz invariance of the Feynman diagrams . In fact, since the Feynman integral is a function only of scalar products of the external momenta, it is invariant under the (infinitesimal) rotation

$$p_i^\mu =\mathrm{\Lambda }_\nu ^\mu p_i^\nu ,\mathrm{\Lambda }_{\mu \nu }=g_{\mu \nu }+\delta ϵ_{\mu \nu },ϵ_{\mu \nu }=ϵ_{\nu \mu }.$$
(3.26)
We can then write

$$\frac{d^Dk}{i\pi ^{D/2}}\frac{d^Dl}{i\pi ^{D/2}}f(k,l,p_i)=\frac{d^Dk}{i\pi ^{D/2}}\frac{d^Dl}{i\pi ^{D/2}}f(k,l,p_i^{}).$$
(3.27)
Expanding in a Taylor series in $`\delta `$ the right-hand side of Eq. (3.27), we obtain

$$\frac{d^Dk}{i\pi ^{D/2}}\frac{d^Dl}{i\pi ^{D/2}}\underset{j=1}{\overset{3}{}}\frac{f(k,l,p_i)}{p_j^\mu }ϵ_\nu ^\mu p_j^\nu =0.$$
(3.28)
Using the three independent external momenta, we can build three independent antisymmetric tensors

$`ϵ_1^{\mu \nu }`$ $`=`$ $`p_1^\mu p_2^\nu p_2^\mu p_1^\nu ,`$
$`ϵ_2^{\mu \nu }`$ $`=`$ $`p_1^\mu p_3^\nu p_3^\mu p_1^\nu ,`$
$`ϵ_3^{\mu \nu }`$ $`=`$ $`p_2^\mu p_3^\nu p_3^\mu p_2^\nu ,`$
that, once inserted into Eq. (3.28), give rise to three more identities.

Taking linear combinations of these thirteen equations, we can build the following system

$`s\nu _1\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}\left(\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _1\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\right)\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}\nu _{1257}2\nu _{346}+2D=0`$ (3.29)
$`s\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}}\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}\left(\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\right)\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}\nu _{2346}2\nu _{157}+2D=0`$ (3.30)
$`2\left(lp_4\right)\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\left(\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\right)\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}}+\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}+\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}\right)`$
$`\nu _{456}2\nu _7+D=0`$ (3.31)
$`2\left(lp_4\right)\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}+\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}+s\right)+\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}\right)`$
$`+\nu _{457}+2\nu _6D=0`$ (3.32)
$`2\left(lp_4\right)\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}\right)+\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}}+\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}+s\right)+\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}`$
$`+\nu _{47}+2\nu _5D=0`$ (3.33)
$`2\left(lp_4\right)\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}\right)\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}+\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}\right)\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}`$
$`\nu _{56}2\nu _4+D=0`$ (3.34)
$`2s\left(lp_4\right)\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}+4s\left(lp_4\right)\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\left[\left(t+s\right)\left(s+\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}\right)t\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}\right]`$
$`+s\left(2\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}+2\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\right)\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}}s\left(2\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\right)\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}`$
$`\left(2D2\nu _{13457}\nu _2\right)s=0`$ (3.35)
$`2s\left(lp_4\right)\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}2s\left(lp_4\right)\nu _1\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}+(t+s)\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}\right)+s\left(\nu _1\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\right)\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}`$
$`+s\left(\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\nu _1\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\right)\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}}s\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}s\nu _1\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}`$
$`\left(\nu _6\nu _{15}\right)s=0`$ (3.36)
$`2\left(lp_4\right)\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}2\left(lp_1\right)\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}+\left(t+s\right)\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}+\left(\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _1\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\right)\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}}`$
$`\left(\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _1\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\right)\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}+\nu _{1236}+2\nu _7D=0`$ (3.37)
$`2s\left(lp_4\right)\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}2s\left(lp_1\right)\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\left[\left(t+s\right)\left(s\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}\right)+t\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}+s\mathrm{𝟐}^{\mathbf{}}\right]`$
$`+\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\left(t\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}t\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}+s\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}}\right)+s\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}\right)+(t+s)\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}+s\nu _1\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟐}^{\mathbf{}}`$
$`+s\left(\nu _{126}+2\nu _{3457}2D\right)t\left(D\nu _{67}+\nu _22\nu _{45}\right)=0`$ (3.38)
$`2s\left(lp_4\right)\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}2s\left(lp_1\right)\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}+\left(t+s\right)\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}+s\right)+(t+s)\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}`$
$`+(t+s)\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}\right)+s\left(\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\right)\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}}s\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}s\nu _1\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟐}^{\mathbf{}}`$
$`+s\left(\nu _{1456}\nu _2+2\nu _7D\right)+t\left(2\nu _{67}+\nu _{45}\nu _2D\right)=0`$ (3.39)
$`2s\left(lp_4\right)\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}+2s\left(lp_1\right)\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\left[t\left(\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}\right)s\left(\mathrm{𝟐}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}+s\right)\right]s\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}`$
$`+s\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟐}^{\mathbf{}}\right)+t\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}\right)+(t+s)\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}`$
$`+s\left(\nu _{34}\nu _2\right)+t\left(\nu _{67}+2\nu _{45}\nu _2D\right)=0`$ (3.40)
$`2s\left(lp_4\right)\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}+2s\left(lp_1\right)\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\left[(t+s)\left(\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}\right)+s\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}\right]+2s\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}}`$
$`+(t+s)\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}\right)+(t+s)\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}+s\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}+\mathrm{𝟐}^{\mathbf{}}\right)`$
$`+s\left(\nu _{23}+2\nu _{146}+3\nu _5+4\nu _73D\right)+t\left(\nu _{45}\nu _2+2\nu _{67}D\right)=0,`$ (3.41)
where we have introduced the shorthand $`\nu _{ij}=\nu _i+\nu _j`$, $`\nu _{ijk}=\nu _i+\nu _j+\nu _k`$, etc. Each equation acts on the integrand of the generic crossed box before any loop integration has taken place.

Equations (3.29) and (3.30) of the system, being independent of the two irreducible scalar products, need no further manipulation, and can be rewritten in the form

$`s\nu _1\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}`$ $`=`$ $`\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}+\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}+\left(\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _1\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\right)\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}+\nu _{1257}+2\nu _{346}2D,`$ (3.42)
$`s\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}`$ $`=`$ $`\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}}+\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}+\left(\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\right)\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}+\nu _{2346}+2\nu _{157}2D.`$ (3.43)
By repeated application of these two identities, we can reduce $`\nu _1`$ and $`\nu _3`$ to one. During this process, the generic scalar box is expressed as a linear combination of crossed-box diagrams with $`\nu _1=\nu _3=1`$ and diagrams belonging to simpler topologies, that originate when powers of propagators are reduced (pinched) to zero by the decreasing operators. We will deal with the pinched diagrams later, concentrating now on the reduction of the remaining propagators.

In order to use the other equations of the system, we have to eliminate the irreducible scalar products in the numerator.

For example, applying the operator $`\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}`$ to Eq. (3.1) and $`\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}`$ to Eq. (3.1), and taking the difference, we get

$`\left(D2\nu _7\nu _{56}2\right)\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\left(D\nu _{56}2\nu _42\right)\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\left(\nu _7\nu _4\right)\left(\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\right)`$
$`+\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}=0.`$ (3.44)
In the same way, we can apply $`\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}`$ to Eq. (3.1) and $`\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}`$ to Eq. (3.1) and take the difference, to obtain

$`\left(D\nu _{47}2\nu _52\right)\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\left(D\nu _{47}2\nu _62\right)\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}+\left(\nu _6\nu _5\right)\left(\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\right)`$
$`+\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}=0.`$ (3.45)
Combining Eq. (3.1) and (3.1) to eliminate $`\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}`$, we have

$`\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\left(D2\nu _{57}2\right)}{\left(D2\nu _{45}2\right)}}\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}2{\displaystyle \frac{\left(\nu _7\nu _4\right)}{\left(D2\nu _{45}2\right)}}\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}`$ (3.46)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\left(D\nu _{4567}2\right)}}\left(\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}\right),`$
that can be used to reduce $`\nu _4`$ to one, at the expense of increasing $`\nu _6`$ and $`\nu _7`$. If, on the other hand, we eliminate $`\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}`$, we obtain the symmetric equation that can reduce $`\nu _5`$ to one. At this point, all the powers of the propagators except $`\nu _2`$, $`\nu _6`$ and $`\nu _7`$ have been reduced to one.

In the same spirit we can derive

$`st\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}`$ $`=`$ $`\left(2\nu _{1567}+\nu _2+22D\right)s\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}+\left(\nu _{467}+2\nu _5D\right)s\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}`$ (3.47)
$`2\left(D\nu _{467}2\nu _5\right)\left(\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}}+\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}+\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}+\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}\right)`$
$`+s\left(2\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\right)\left[\left(\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\right)\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}\right]`$
$`+t\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}\right)+2s\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}`$
$`+2\left(D\nu _{467}2\nu _5\right)\left(2D2\nu _{157}\nu _{2346}\right),`$
that, together with the symmetric one for $`\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}`$ and with

$`s\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}`$ $`=`$ $`\left(D\nu _{567}2\nu _41\right)\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}+\left(D\nu _{467}2\nu _51\right)\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}`$ (3.48)
$`+\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}+\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}\right)\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}`$
$`+\nu _7(\nu _7+1)\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{+}\mathbf{+}}\left(\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}\right)+\nu _6(\nu _6+1)\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{+}\mathbf{+}}\left(\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}\right),`$
reduces all powers except one ($`\nu _2`$ or $`\nu _6`$ or $`\nu _7`$) to unity.

We can decrease $`\nu _2`$ at the expense of increasing $`\nu _6`$ and $`\nu _7`$ using

$`\left[\left(\nu _4\nu _7+2\nu _{23}+2D\right)s+\left(\nu _{45}\nu _{67}\right)t\right]\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}=\left(\nu _5\nu _3\right)s\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}+\left(\nu _7\nu _3\right)s\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}`$
$`\left(D2\nu _7\nu _{16}2\right)s\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\left(D2\nu _5\nu _{14}2\right)s\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}`$
$`+(t+s)\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\left[\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}\right)+\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}\right)\right]`$
$`+t\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\left[\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}\right)+\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}\right)\right]`$
$`s\nu _1\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\left(\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}+\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}}\right)`$
$`+s\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\left[\left(2\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\right)\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}+\left(2\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\right)\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}\right]`$
$`\left(2D2\nu _{57}3\nu _{46}\right)\left[\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}}+\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}+\left(\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\right)\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}\right]`$
$`+\left(\nu _{57}2\nu _2\right)\left[\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}+\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}+\left(\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _1\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\right)\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}\right]`$
$`+4D^22\left(5\nu _{57}+4\nu _{46}+\nu _3\nu _2+2\nu _1\right)D+\nu _7\left(5\nu _{17}+10\nu _{456}+4\nu _3+\nu _2\right)`$
$`+\nu _6\left(3\nu _6+10\nu _5+6\nu _{14}+3\nu _3\nu _2\right)+\nu _5\left(5\nu _5+10\nu _4+4\nu _3+\nu _2+5\nu _1\right)`$
$`+\nu _4\left(3\nu _4+3\nu _3\nu _2+6\nu _1\right)2\nu _2\left(2\nu _3+\nu _{12}\right).`$ (3.49)
The power of the seventh propagator can be reduced with

$`s(t+s)\nu _7(\nu _7+1)\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{+}\mathbf{+}}=\sigma \nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}(\nu _71){\displaystyle \frac{\left(D6\right)t+\left(5D2\nu _726\right)s}{D2\nu _76}}\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}`$
$`+\rho {\displaystyle \frac{\left(2D\nu _711\right)t+\left(3D2\nu _715\right)s}{D\nu _75}}\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}`$
$`+\rho {\displaystyle \frac{\left(D2\nu _74\right)t+\left(5D\right)s}{D\nu _75}}\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}+\rho (t+s)\{\nu _7(\nu _7+1)\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{+}\mathbf{+}}\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}`$
$`+\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}\right)+\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\left[2\left(\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}\right)+\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}\right]`$
$`\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}(\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+})\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}+\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}2\mathbf{\hspace{0.17em}5}^{\mathbf{+}\mathbf{+}}\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}\}`$
$`2\nu _7{\displaystyle \frac{t+s}{D2\nu _76}}(\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}+\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}})+(t+s)[2\mathbf{\hspace{0.17em}6}^{\mathbf{+}\mathbf{+}}(\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}})`$
$`+\nu _7(\nu _7+1)\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{+}\mathbf{+}}(\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}})+\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}(\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}+\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}})]`$
$`+\rho s[\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}(\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}})\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}(\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}+\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}})\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}(\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}+\mathrm{𝟐}^{\mathbf{}})`$
$`\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}(\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟐}^{\mathbf{}}+\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}}+\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟐}^{\mathbf{}}+\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}})]`$
$`+(2D3\nu _77)\rho \left[\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}}+\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}+\left(\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\right)\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}2(D\nu _74)\right],`$ (3.50)
where we have introduced the shorthands

$`\rho `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{D6}{D2\nu _76}}`$
$`\sigma `$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{\left(5D^28\nu _7D50D+2\nu _7^2+42\nu _7+124\right)s+\left(2D^23\nu _7D21D+18\nu _7+54\right)t}{D2\nu _76}}.`$
Equation (3.1) is not as general as the previous ones since we have set all the powers of the other propagators to unity. In addition, since this equation contains $`\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{+}\mathbf{+}}`$, we cannot always reduce $`\nu _7`$ to one, but we also have integrals where $`\nu _7=2`$. A similar identity can be obtained by symmetry for $`\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{+}\mathbf{+}}`$, so that we are left with three integrals: $`\mathrm{Xbox}^D(1,1,1,1,1,1,1;s,t)`$, $`\mathrm{Xbox}^D(1,1,1,1,1,1,2;s,t)`$ and $`\mathrm{Xbox}^D(1,1,1,1,1,2,1;s,t)`$.

The last step is to write the integral with $`\nu _6=2`$ as a combination of the other two. This can be done with the identity that links $`\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}`$ with $`\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}`$. We derived such an identity, equating the expressions obtained by acting with $`\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}`$ on $`\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}`$ and by acting with $`\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}`$ on $`\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}`$

$`(D6)(D5){\displaystyle \frac{t}{t+s}}\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}=(D6)(D5)\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}4{\displaystyle \frac{(D5)^3}{t+s}}`$
$`\left(\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\right)\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}\left(\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\right)\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}`$
$`+\left(\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\right)\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}(D7)\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}+\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}+\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}+\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}\right)`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{t+s}{2}}\left[\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}+\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}\right)+2\left(\mathrm{𝟐}^{\mathbf{+}\mathbf{+}}\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟐}^{\mathbf{+}\mathbf{+}}\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\right)\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}\right]`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{s}{2}}\{\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}[\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}(\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+})\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}}+\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}}+\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}(\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+})\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}]`$
$`+\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}(2\mathbf{\hspace{0.17em}7}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+})\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}\}(D6){\displaystyle \frac{(t+2s)}{2(t+s)}}[\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}(\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}+\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}}+\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}})`$
$`+2(\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+})\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}2\mathbf{\hspace{0.17em}1}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}]{\displaystyle \frac{2(D5)t+s}{2s}}\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}`$
$`(D6)\left[\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}+\left(\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\right)\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}}\right]`$
$`+(D6){\displaystyle \frac{s}{t+s}}\left[\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}+\left(\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\right)\mathrm{𝟐}^{\mathbf{}}\right]+{\displaystyle \frac{2D13}{2}}\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}`$
$`+(D5){\displaystyle \frac{(D5)t+(2D11)s}{s(t+s)}}\left[\left(\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\right)\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}+\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}\right]`$
$`+(D5){\displaystyle \frac{t}{t+s}}\left[2\mathbf{\hspace{0.17em}3}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}+\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}}\right]+{\displaystyle \frac{t}{2s}}\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}`$
$`(D5){\displaystyle \frac{(D5)ts}{s(t+s)}}\left[\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}+\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}+\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}}+\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}\right]{\displaystyle \frac{2D15}{2}}\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}`$
$`+(D5)\left[\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}\left(\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}+2\mathbf{\hspace{0.17em}2}^{\mathbf{+}\mathbf{+}}+\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\right)\right]+{\displaystyle \frac{t}{2}}\left[\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}+\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}\right)\right]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{5t2(D7)s}{2(t+s)}}\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}{\displaystyle \frac{(2D9)t^2(D5)st2(D5)s^2}{2s(t+s)}}\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}`$
$`(D6){\displaystyle \frac{t+2s}{2s}}\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}{\displaystyle \frac{2(D5)t^2+(D6)st+2(D6)s^2}{2s(t+s)}}\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{(3D16)t+2(D5)s}{2s}}\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}+{\displaystyle \frac{(D4)t+2s}{2(t+s)}}\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{2(D5)t^2(D6)st2(D6)s^2}{2s(t+s)}}\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟕}^{\mathbf{}}(4D21){\displaystyle \frac{t}{2(t+s)}}\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{(D5)t+(D6)s}{t+s}}\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}{\displaystyle \frac{(D4)t2(D6)s}{2s}}\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{(2D11)t^2+(D7)st+2(D6)s^2}{2s(t+s)}}\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}+{\displaystyle \frac{t+2s}{2s}}\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{2(D5)t+(D6)s}{t+s}}\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}+(D5){\displaystyle \frac{(D5)t+(2D11)s}{s(t+s)}}\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{2D11}{2}}\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}{\displaystyle \frac{(D6)t2s}{2s}}\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}+{\displaystyle \frac{2(D5)ts}{2s}}\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}},`$ (3.51)
where we have set all the powers of the propagators to unity.

At the end of this reduction program, we are left with the following two crossed-box integrals: $`\mathrm{Xbox}^D(1,1,1,1,1,1,1;s,t)`$ and $`\mathrm{Xbox}^D(1,1,1,1,1,1,2;s,t)`$, plus simpler diagrams that can always be expressed as a combination of:

* the master crossed triangle of Fig. 2 (a)

$$\mathrm{Xtri}^D\left(s\right)=\mathrm{Xbox}^D(1,0,1,1,1,1,1;s,t),$$
(3.52)
* the master diagonal box of Fig. 2 (b), produced by

$$\mathrm{Dbox}^D(s,t)=\mathrm{Xbox}^D(0,1,1,0,1,1,1;s,t)=\mathrm{Xbox}^D(1,1,0,1,1,1,0;s,t),$$
(3.53)
together with

$$\mathrm{Dbox}^D(s,u)=\mathrm{Xbox}^D(1,1,0,1,0,1,1;s,t)=\mathrm{Xbox}^D(0,1,1,1,1,0,1;s,t),$$
(3.54)
and

$$\mathrm{Dbox}^D(t,u)=\mathrm{Xbox}^D(0,1,0,1,1,1,1;s,t),$$
(3.55)
* the master box with a bubble insertion of Fig. 2 (c), produced by

$$\mathrm{Bbox}^D(s,t)=\mathrm{Xbox}^D(1,1,1,0,1,1,0;s,t),$$
(3.56)
together with

$$\mathrm{Bbox}^D(s,u)=\mathrm{Xbox}^D(1,1,1,1,0,0,1;s,t),$$
(3.57)
* the master triangle with a bubble insertion of Fig. 2 (d), produced by

$$\mathrm{Btri}^D\left(s\right)=\mathrm{Xbox}^D(1,0,1,0,1,1,0;s,t)=\mathrm{Xbox}^D(1,0,1,1,0,0,1;s,t),$$
(3.58)
* the master sunset diagram of Fig. 2 (e), produced by

$$\mathrm{Sset}^D\left(s\right)=\mathrm{Xbox}^D(0,0,1,0,1,0,1;s,t)=\mathrm{Xbox}^D(1,0,0,1,0,1,0;s,t),$$
(3.59)
together with

$$\mathrm{Sset}^D\left(t\right)=\mathrm{Xbox}^D(0,1,0,0,1,1,0;s,t),$$
(3.60)
and

$$\mathrm{Sset}^D\left(u\right)=\mathrm{Xbox}^D(0,1,0,1,0,0,1;s,t),$$
(3.61)

where we explicitly used the symmetry of the crossed box

$$\mathrm{Xbox}^D(\nu _1,\nu _2,\nu _3,\nu _4,\nu _5,\nu _6,\nu _7;s,t)=\mathrm{Xbox}^D(\nu _3,\nu _2,\nu _1,\nu _7,\nu _6,\nu _5,\nu _4;s,t).$$
(3.62)
The reduction and dimensional shift of the generic scalar diagonal box and of the box with a bubble insertion have been treated in Ref. . The tensor reduction and dimensional shift of the crossed triangle is treated in Appendix A. All the diagrams obtained from the pinchings of the other propagators can be easily reduced to the previous ones using the integration-by-parts identities for the crossed box and for the crossed triangle, with the corresponding powers of propagators set to zero.

Instead of keeping $`\mathrm{Xbox}^D(1,1,1,1,1,1,2;s,t)`$ as one of the two members of the basis, we prefer to switch to a more symmetric integral: $`\mathrm{Xbox}^D(1,2,1,1,1,1,1;s,t)`$. The expression for this one, in terms of the other two, can be easily obtained through the application of the reduction formalism outlined above

$`\mathrm{Xbox}^D(1,2,1,1,1,1,1;s,t)=c_1\mathrm{Xbox}^D(1,1,1,1,1,1,1;s,t)`$
$`+c_2\mathrm{Xbox}^D(1,1,1,1,1,1,2;s,t)+c_3\mathrm{Xtri}^D\left(s\right)+c_4\mathrm{Dbox}^D(s,t)`$
$`+c_5\mathrm{Dbox}^D(s,u)+c_6\mathrm{Dbox}^D(t,u)+c_7\mathrm{Bbox}^D(s,t)+c_8\mathrm{Bbox}^D(s,u)`$
$`+c_9\mathrm{Btri}^D\left(s\right)+c_{10}\mathrm{Sset}^D\left(s\right)+c_{11}\mathrm{Sset}^D\left(t\right)+c_{12}\mathrm{Sset}^D\left(u\right),`$ (3.63)
where the coefficients $`c_j`$ are collected in Appendix B. This allows us to define as master integrals

$`\mathrm{Xbox}_1^D(s,t)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{Xbox}^D(1,1,1,1,1,1,1;s,t)`$ (3.64)
$`\mathrm{Xbox}_2^D(s,t)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{Xbox}^D(1,2,1,1,1,1,1;s,t),`$ (3.65)
which are symmetric under the exchange $`tu`$. This will produce more compact results in the rest of the paper.

### 3.2 The dimensional shift for the two master integrals

Exploiting the equivalence between $`𝐝^{\mathbf{}}`$ and $`𝒫`$ of Eq. (3.19), we can rewrite Eq. (3.20) using (3.9)

$`\mathrm{Xbox}^D(\nu _1,\nu _2,\nu _3,\nu _4,\nu _5,\nu _6,\nu _7;s,t)`$
$`=[(\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+})(\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _1\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+})`$
$`+(\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+})(\nu _7\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+})\left]\mathrm{Xbox}^{D+2}\right(\nu _1,\nu _2,\nu _3,\nu _4,\nu _5,\nu _6,\nu _7;s,t),`$
and more specifically

$`\mathrm{Xbox}_1^D(s,t)`$ $`=`$ $`[(\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+})(\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+})`$ (3.67)
$`+(\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+})(\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+})\left]\mathrm{Xbox}_1^{D+2}\right(s,t),`$
$`\mathrm{Xbox}_2^D(s,t)`$ $`=`$ $`[(\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+})(\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}+2\mathbf{\hspace{0.17em}2}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+})`$ (3.68)
$`+(\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+})(\mathrm{𝟕}^\mathbf{+}+\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+})\left]\mathrm{Xbox}_2^{D+2}\right(s,t).`$
The right-hand side of the two equations can then be reduced to a linear combination of master integrals in $`D+2`$ dimensions, and the system can then be inverted to give $`\mathrm{Xbox}_1^{D+2}(s,t)`$ and $`\mathrm{Xbox}_2^{D+2}(s,t)`$ as a function of master integrals in $`D`$ dimensions

$`\mathrm{Xbox}_1^{D+2}(s,t)`$ $`=`$ $`A(t,u)+A(u,t),`$ (3.69)
$`\mathrm{Xbox}_2^{D+2}(s,t)`$ $`=`$ $`B(t,u)+B(u,t),`$ (3.70)
where

$`A(t,u)`$ $`=`$ $`a_1\mathrm{Xbox}_1^D(s,t)+a_2\mathrm{Xbox}_2^D(s,t)+a_3\mathrm{Xtri}^D\left(s\right)+a_4\mathrm{Dbox}^D(s,t)`$
$`+a_5\mathrm{Dbox}^D(t,u)+a_6\mathrm{Bbox}^D(s,t)+a_7\mathrm{Btri}^D\left(s\right)`$
$`+a_8\mathrm{Sset}^D\left(s\right)+a_9\mathrm{Sset}^D\left(t\right),`$
$`B(t,u)`$ $`=`$ $`b_1\mathrm{Xbox}_1^D(s,t)+b_2\mathrm{Xbox}_2^D(s,t)+b_3\mathrm{Xtri}^D\left(s\right)+b_4\mathrm{Dbox}^D(s,t)`$ (3.71)
$`+b_5\mathrm{Dbox}^D(t,u)+b_6\mathrm{Bbox}^D(s,t)+b_7\mathrm{Btri}^D\left(s\right)`$
$`+b_8\mathrm{Sset}^D\left(s\right)+b_9\mathrm{Sset}^D\left(t\right).`$
Some of the coefficients $`a_i`$ and $`b_i`$ of the system are collected in Appendix C.

## 4 Differential equations for the two master integrals

In the previous sections we showed how tensor integrals can be expressed in terms of the two master crossed boxes, $`\mathrm{Xbox}_1^D`$ and $`\mathrm{Xbox}_2^D`$ plus simpler master diagrams. The analytic expansion in $`ϵ=(4D)/2`$ of the first master integral was computed in Ref. . We can obtain the analytic form for the second one by writing the derivative of $`\mathrm{Xbox}_1^D`$ with respect to one of the two independent physical scales (that we choose to be $`t`$), as a combination of master integrals, and solving the equation for $`\mathrm{Xbox}_2^D`$.

Moreover we can verify the correctness of both the expressions of $`\mathrm{Xbox}_1^D(s,t)`$ and $`\mathrm{Xbox}_2^D(s,t)`$, by deriving an analogous differential equation for $`\mathrm{Xbox}_2^D`$, and checking that the obtained identity is satisfied.

Using the procedure outlined in Section 3, we differentiate with respect to $`t`$ the two master integrals written in the form of Eq. (3.12). In this way, the only $`t`$-dependence comes from $`𝒬`$ of Eq. (3.15) and the result is

$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}\mathrm{Xbox}_1^D(s,t)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{Xbox}^{D+2}(1,2,1,2,1,1,2;s,t)\mathrm{Xbox}^{D+2}(1,2,1,1,2,2,1;s,t),`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}\mathrm{Xbox}_2^D(s,t)`$ $`=`$ $`2\mathrm{Xbox}^{D+2}(1,3,1,2,1,1,2;s,t)2\mathrm{Xbox}^{D+2}(1,3,1,1,2,2,1;s,t).`$
Applying the reduction formulae of Section 3.1 and the dimensional-shift of Section 3.2 to the right-hand sides of the system, we can rewrite them as a combination of master crossed boxes and pinchings in $`D`$ dimensions.

The final system of differential equations in arbitrary $`D`$ is given by

$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}\mathrm{Xbox}_1^D(s,t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{tu}}[H(t,u)+H(u,t),]`$ (4.1)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}\mathrm{Xbox}_2^D(s,t)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{tu}}[K(t,u)+K(u,t),]`$ (4.2)
where

$`H(t,u)`$ $`=`$ $`h_1\mathrm{Xbox}_1^D(s,t)+h_2\mathrm{Xbox}_2^D(s,t)+h_3\mathrm{Xtri}^D\left(s\right)+h_4\mathrm{Dbox}^D(s,t)`$ (4.3)
$`+h_5\mathrm{Dbox}^D(t,u)+h_6\mathrm{Bbox}^D(s,t)+h_7\mathrm{Btri}^D\left(s\right)`$
$`+h_8\mathrm{Sset}^D\left(s\right)+h_9\mathrm{Sset}^D\left(t\right),`$
$`K(t,u)`$ $`=`$ $`k_1\mathrm{Xbox}_1^D(s,t)+k_2\mathrm{Xbox}_2^D(s,t)+k_3\mathrm{Xtri}^D\left(s\right)+k_4\mathrm{Dbox}^D(s,t)`$ (4.4)
$`+k_5\mathrm{Dbox}^D(t,u)+k_6\mathrm{Bbox}^D(s,t)+k_7\mathrm{Btri}^D\left(s\right)`$
$`+k_8\mathrm{Sset}^D\left(s\right)+k_9\mathrm{Sset}^D\left(t\right),`$
and the coefficients $`h_i`$ and $`k_i`$ are listed in Appendix D.

From the symmetry $`tu`$ of the two master integrals, we expect the two derivatives to be anti-symmetric with respect to the exchange $`tu`$, and this is a further check of the correctness of the system.

## 5 The off-shell method

An alternative way to derive the system of equations (4.1) and (4.2) is based on the construction of a set of differential equations for the crossed-box integrals with the momentum $`p_1`$ taken off-shell. This is done using the algorithms and computer programs described in , by means of which the differential equations for any massless two-loop four-point function with three light-like and one off-shell leg can be obtained. We then take the on-shell limit $`p_1^20`$.

To derive the differential equations for the diagrams with one leg off-shell, we take $`p_2`$, $`p_3`$ and $`p_4`$, all massless and on-shell, as independent momenta, and form the derivatives with respect to the external invariants $`s_{23}`$, $`s_{24}`$, $`s_{34}`$, where $`s_{ij}=p_{ij}^2`$

$`s_{23}{\displaystyle \frac{}{s_{23}}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(+p_2^\mu {\displaystyle \frac{}{p_2^\mu }}+p_3^\mu {\displaystyle \frac{}{p_3^\mu }}p_4^\mu {\displaystyle \frac{}{p_4^\mu }}\right),`$
$`s_{24}{\displaystyle \frac{}{s_{24}}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(+p_2^\mu {\displaystyle \frac{}{p_2^\mu }}p_3^\mu {\displaystyle \frac{}{p_3^\mu }}+p_4^\mu {\displaystyle \frac{}{p_4^\mu }}\right),`$ (5.1)
$`s_{34}{\displaystyle \frac{}{s_{34}}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}\left(p_2^\mu {\displaystyle \frac{}{p_2^\mu }}+p_3^\mu {\displaystyle \frac{}{p_3^\mu }}+p_4^\mu {\displaystyle \frac{}{p_4^\mu }}\right).`$
The derivatives with respect to $`p_i^\mu `$ act on the propagators in the Feynman integrand of Eq. (2) and give rise to a number of different integrals with increased powers of the propagators. Using integration-by-parts and Lorentz-invariance identities, all these different integrals can be reduced to a small number of master integrals. In particular, any crossed-box topology integral can be reduced to a linear combination of two master crossed-box integrals, which we can choose to be the off-shell versions of $`\mathrm{Xbox}_1^D`$ and $`\mathrm{Xbox}_2^D`$, plus a number of pinched master integrals. Thus, we obtain a system of two coupled linear first-order differential equations for the two master crossed-box integrals.

Since, in the on-shell limit, we are interested in the derivatives at fixed $`p_1^2=0`$, we rewrite the system of equations in terms of the variables $`p_1^2=s_{23}+s_{24}+s_{34}`$, $`s=s_{34}`$, $`t=s_{23}`$, and the corresponding derivative operators:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{s}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{}{s_{34}}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{s_{24}}},`$
$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{t}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{}{s_{23}}}{\displaystyle \frac{}{s_{24}}},`$ (5.2)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{}{p_1^2}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{}{s_{24}}}.`$
The next step is to take the on-shell limit $`p_1^20`$. A complication here is the fact that factors of $`1/p_1^2`$ and $`1/(p_1^2)^2`$ appear in some of the coefficients of the pinched master integrals. It is also important to realize that several of the off-shell master integrals with less than seven propagators become reducible in the on-shell limit (an example of such a case will be given below). When these reductions are taken into account, all the terms proportional to $`1/p_1^2`$ and $`1/(p_1^2)^2`$ cancel out, so that the on-shell limit of the system of equations for the two master crossed-box integrals is indeed well defined.

However, because of these factors of $`p_1^2`$ in the denominator, it is not sufficient merely to replace all pinched master integrals by their limit $`p_1^20`$: subleading terms in $`p_1^2`$ also have to be included. The Taylor series around $`p_1^2=0`$ for the pinched diagrams can be obtained in a straightforward manner by using the differential equation in $`p_1^2`$. As an example, we consider the propagator diagram $`\mathrm{Sset}^D\left(p_1^2st\right)`$, which fulfills the homogeneous differential equation

$$\frac{}{p_1^2}\mathrm{Sset}^D\left(p_1^2st\right)=\frac{D3}{p_1^2st}\mathrm{Sset}^D\left(p_1^2st\right).$$
(5.3)
Iterating this equation, we obtain

$`\mathrm{Sset}^D\left(p_1^2st\right)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{Sset}^D\left(st\right)+p_1^2{\displaystyle \frac{D3}{st}}\mathrm{Sset}^D\left(st\right)`$ (5.4)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}p_1^4{\displaystyle \frac{(D3)(D4)}{(st)^2}}\mathrm{Sset}^D\left(st\right)+𝒪\left(p_1^6\right).`$
If a factor of $`1/p_1^2`$ appears in the homogeneous term of the differential equations for an off-shell master integral, this integral becomes reducible in the limit $`p_1^20`$.

An example of a reducible master integral is the vertex diagram $`\mathrm{Rtri}(p_1^2,s)`$ of Fig. 3, which fulfils the differential equation

$$\frac{}{p_1^2}\mathrm{Rtri}(p_1^2,s)=\frac{D4}{2}\frac{2p_1^2s}{p_1^2(p_1^2s)}\mathrm{Rtri}(p_1^2,s)\frac{3D8}{2}\frac{1}{p_1^2(p_1^2s)}\mathrm{Sset}^D\left(s\right).$$
(5.5)
Multiplying by $`p_1^2`$, one can immediately read off the limit

$$\mathrm{Rtri}\left(p_1^20,s\right)=\frac{3D8}{D4}\frac{1}{s}\mathrm{Sset}^D\left(s\right)+𝒪\left(p_1^2\right).$$
(5.6)
Subleading terms in $`p_1^2`$ are again obtained by successive iteration of the differential equation (5.5).

All the information required to derive the massless limit of the system of equations for the master crossed-box diagrams is contained in the differential equations for the pinched master integrals.

The differential equations obtained with this method are in perfect agreement with (4.1) and (4.2), giving an independent confirmation of the correctness of the two methods.

In addition, we checked that the two methods give the same results for the crossed boxes with the powers of propagators equal to unity and with one scalar product in the numerator, of the type $`p_ik`$ or $`p_il`$. This was done computing Eq.(3.21) with the method described in Section 3 and then contracting the result with one of the external momenta.

## 6 Analytic expansion of the second master integral

Inserting the $`ϵ`$ expansion of $`\mathrm{Xbox}_1^D(s,t)`$ computed in Ref.  and the $`ϵ`$ expansions of the sub-topologies listed in Refs.  into Eq. (4.1), and solving it with respect to $`\mathrm{Xbox}_2^D(s,t)`$, we obtain, in the physical region $`s>0`$, $`t,u<0`$,

$$\mathrm{Xbox}_2^D(s,t)=\mathrm{\Gamma }^2(1+ϵ)\left\{\frac{G_1(t,u)}{s^3t}+\frac{G_2(t,u)}{s^2t^2}+\frac{G_1(u,t)}{s^3u}+\frac{G_2(u,t)}{s^2u^2}\right\},$$
(6.1)
where

$`G_1(t,u)=s^{2ϵ}\{{\displaystyle \frac{6}{ϵ^3}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ^2}}(326T6U)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ}}\left(112\pi ^224T+T^224U+16TU+U^2\right)4318T+13T^2+{\displaystyle \frac{8}{3}}T^3`$
$`18U+16TU+11T^2U+13U^220TU^2+{\displaystyle \frac{8}{3}}U^3+\pi ^2\left(17T+17U{\displaystyle \frac{112}{3}}\right)`$
$`122\zeta (3)+62T\text{Li}_2\left({\displaystyle \frac{t}{s}}\right)62\text{Li}_3\left({\displaystyle \frac{t}{s}}\right)+62\text{S}_{1,2}\left({\displaystyle \frac{t}{s}}\right)`$
$`+i\pi [{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ}}(16+6T+6U)349\pi ^26T10T^26U+14TU10U^2]\},`$
$`G_2(t,u)=s^{2ϵ}\{{\displaystyle \frac{2}{ϵ^4}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ^3}}(8+{\displaystyle \frac{5}{2}}T+{\displaystyle \frac{7}{2}}U)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ^2}}\left({\displaystyle \frac{29}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{5}{12}}\pi ^2+7TT^2+20U4TUU^2\right)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ}}[{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2}}+17T+2T^2{\displaystyle \frac{T^3}{3}}+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2}{6}}(14+5T29U)+13U28TU4U^2`$
$`+3TU^2U^3+{\displaystyle \frac{19}{2}}\zeta (3)2T\text{Li}_2({\displaystyle \frac{t}{s}})+2\text{Li}_3({\displaystyle \frac{t}{s}})2\text{S}_{1,2}({\displaystyle \frac{t}{s}})]`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{37}{2}}+{\displaystyle \frac{37}{40}}\pi ^4+7T5T^2{\displaystyle \frac{22}{3}}T^3+{\displaystyle \frac{2}{3}}T^4+5U20TU+{\displaystyle \frac{8}{3}}T^3U2U^2`$
$`+24TU^2T^2U^28U^3{\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}TU^3+{\displaystyle \frac{4}{3}}U^4`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2}{6}}\left(7922T5T^2200U+76TU+25U^2\right)+\left(6813T33U\right)\zeta (3)`$
$`+\left(10\pi ^232T+17T^2+12TU\right)\text{Li}_2\left({\displaystyle \frac{t}{s}}\right)+\left(3260T12U\right)\text{Li}_3\left({\displaystyle \frac{t}{s}}\right)`$
$`+\left(28T6U32\right)\text{S}_{1,2}\left({\displaystyle \frac{t}{s}}\right)26\text{S}_{1,3}\left({\displaystyle \frac{t}{s}}\right)36\text{S}_{2,2}\left({\displaystyle \frac{t}{s}}\right)+86\text{Li}_4\left({\displaystyle \frac{t}{s}}\right)`$
$`+i\pi [{\displaystyle \frac{2}{ϵ^3}}+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ^2}}(11T+U)+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{ϵ}}(1{\displaystyle \frac{31}{6}}\pi ^210T2T^2+4U2TU2U^2)`$
$`+11+4T2T^2+{\displaystyle \frac{10}{3}}T^3+{\displaystyle \frac{\pi ^2}{3}}\left(65+28TU\right)+2U8TU8U^2`$
$`+2U^389\zeta (3)+(14T+18U)\text{Li}_2({\displaystyle \frac{t}{s}})32\text{Li}_3({\displaystyle \frac{t}{s}})+44\text{S}_{1,2}({\displaystyle \frac{t}{s}})]\},`$
and $`T=\mathrm{log}(t/s)`$, $`U=\mathrm{log}(u/s)`$. We used Nielsen’s generalized polylogarithms $`\text{S}_{n,p}`$ , defined by

$$\text{S}_{n,p}\left(x\right)=\frac{(1)^{n+p1}}{(n1)!p!}_0^1\text{d}t\frac{\mathrm{log}^{n1}(t)\mathrm{log}^p(1xt)}{t},n,p1,x1,$$
(6.4)
where the usual polylogarithms are given by

$$\mathrm{Li}_n(x)=\text{S}_{n1,1}\left(x\right).$$
(6.5)
The three kinematically accessible regions of the phase-space are depicted in Fig. 4.

* $`𝒔\mathbf{>}\mathrm{𝟎}\mathbf{,}𝒕\mathbf{,}𝒖\mathbf{<}\mathrm{𝟎}`$. All logarithms and polylogarithms occurring in Eqs. (6) and (6) are real in this region.

Formulae for the other two regions, (ii) and (iii), can be derived by analytic continuation, starting from region (i) and following the paths indicated in the figure.

The analytic continuation can be performed through a few simple steps.
* $`𝒕\mathbf{>}\mathrm{𝟎}\mathbf{,}𝒔\mathbf{,}𝒖\mathbf{<}\mathrm{𝟎}`$. Going from region (i) to region (ii), we have to pass through two branches: $`t=0`$ and $`s=0`$. We can then split the analytic continuation into two steps:

+ we first split the logarithm $`T=\mathrm{log}(t)\mathrm{log}(s)`$. At $`t=0`$, nothing happens to the polylogarithms $`\text{S}_{n,p}\left(t/s\right)`$, but $`\mathrm{log}(t)`$ gets an imaginary part: $`\mathrm{log}(t)\mathrm{log}(t)i\pi `$.

    We are now in an unphysical region, where both $`s`$ and $`t`$ are positive and $`u`$ is negative. Using the transformation formulae for $`x\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}/x`$ (see, eg. Refs. ), we can express $`\text{S}_{n,p}\left(t/s\right)`$ in terms of $`\text{S}_{n,p}\left(s/t\right)`$ and $`\mathrm{log}(t/s)`$.
    + To enter region (ii), we have to pass now the branch point at $`s=0`$. We split $`\mathrm{log}(t/s)=\mathrm{log}(t)\mathrm{log}(s)`$ and $`U=\mathrm{log}(s+t)\mathrm{log}(s)`$ and we analytically continue $`\mathrm{log}(s)\mathrm{log}(s)+i\pi `$.

In this way, for example, the logarithms in Eqs. (6) and (6) undergo the transformation

$`\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{t}{s}}\right)`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{t}{s}}\right)2i\pi ,`$ (6.6)
$`\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{u}{s}}\right)`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{u}{s}}\right)i\pi .`$ (6.7)
* $`𝒖\mathbf{>}\mathrm{𝟎}\mathbf{,}𝒔\mathbf{,}𝒕\mathbf{<}\mathrm{𝟎}`$. The procedure to go from region (i) to region (iii) is similar to the previous one, but it requires an additional step.

+ We rewrite $`\text{S}_{n,p}\left(t/s\right)`$ in terms of $`\text{S}_{n,p}\left((s+t)/s\right)`$, $`\mathrm{log}(t/s)`$ and $`\mathrm{log}((s+t)/s)`$, using the transformation $`x\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}1}x`$, and we split the logarithms as before. In passing the first branch point at $`u=0`$, the polylogarithms are well defined while $`\mathrm{log}(s+t)\mathrm{log}(st)i\pi `$.
    + We invert now the argument of the polylogarithms, expressing $`\text{S}_{n,p}\left((s+t)/s\right)`$ in terms of $`\text{S}_{n,p}\left(s/(s+t)\right)`$ and $`\mathrm{log}((st)/s)=\mathrm{log}(st)\mathrm{log}(s)`$. Finally, $`\mathrm{log}(s)\mathrm{log}(s)+i\pi `$, as we pass the branch point at $`s=0`$ and enter region (iii).

The logarithms in Eqs. (6) and (6) undergo the transformation

$`\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{t}{s}}\right)`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{t}{s}}\right)i\pi ,`$ (6.8)
$`\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{u}{s}}\right)`$ $``$ $`\mathrm{log}\left({\displaystyle \frac{u}{s}}\right)2i\pi .`$ (6.9)
The expression for $`G_1(t,u)`$ and $`G_2(t,u)`$ in this region can also be obtained directly from the expressions in region (ii), using the symmetry $`tu`$.

A non-trivial check of the correctness of the expressions of $`\mathrm{Xbox}_1^D(s,t)`$ and $`\mathrm{Xbox}_2^D(s,t)`$ comes from Eq. (4.2), that must be identically satisfied, once the respective $`ϵ`$ expansions are used.

## 7 Conclusions

High-energy scattering processes are one of the most important sources of information on short-distance physics. Recent improvements of experimental measurements demand nowadays the knowledge of $`2\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}`$ scattering rates at two-loop order.

Two non-trivial topologies characterize these processes: planar two-loop boxes , and crossed two-loop boxes.

The crossed boxes constituted the last barrier towards the completion of this goal. In this paper we presented an algorithm to reduce tensor two-loop massless crossed boxes with light-like external legs to two master crossed boxes (the first one with all powers of propagators equal to one, and the second one with the power of the second propagator of Fig. 1 equal to two), plus simpler diagrams.

We derived the equations that connect the two master integrals in dimensions $`D`$ and $`D+2`$ and the system of first-order coupled differential equations satisfied by the two master integrals.

This last part was done following two different methods: using the raising and lowering operators, and using the on-shell limit of the differential equations for the crossed box with one off-shell leg . The agreement between the results of the two methods is a strong support for the validity of the two different procedures.

The differential equation for the first master integral allowed us to derive an $`ϵ`$ expansion for the second master integral, once the known  expression of the first master integral is inserted. The differential equation for the second master integral then provided us a non-trivial way to check the obtained expansion.

### Acknowledgement

We thank E.W.N. Glover, M.E. Tejeda-Yeomans and J.J. van der Bij for assistance and useful suggestions. C.A. acknowledges the financial support of the Greek Government, C.O. acknowledges the financial support of the INFN, E.R. thanks the Alexander-von-Humboldt Stiftung for supporting his stay at the Institut für Theoretische Teilchenphysik of the University of Karlsruhe and J.B.T. acknowledges the financial support of the DFG-Forschergruppe “Quantenfeldtheorie, Computeralgebra und Monte-Carlo-Simulation”. We gratefully acknowledge the support of the British Council and German Academic Exchange Service under ARC project 1050.

## A Tensor reduction and dimensional shift of the crossed two-loop triangle

For completeness, we give here the reduction formulae for the crossed two-loop triangle that appears as a sub-topology in the scalar reduction of the crossed box. We make use of integration-by-parts and Lorentz-invariance identities to reduce the generic scalar triangle to one master integral which has all powers of propagators equal to one , plus pinchings. For an alternative solution to this reduction problem, exploiting a connection with massless three-loop propagator integrals, see Ref. .

The generic two-loop scalar crossed triangle of Fig. 5 is given by

$$\mathrm{Xtri}^D(\nu _1,\nu _2,\nu _3,\nu _4,\nu _5,\nu _6;s)=\frac{d^Dk}{i\pi ^{D/2}}\frac{d^Dl}{i\pi ^{D/2}}\frac{1}{A_1^{\nu _1}A_2^{\nu _2}A_3^{\nu _3}A_4^{\nu _4}A_5^{\nu _5}A_6^{\nu _6}},$$
(A.1)
where the propagators are

$`A_1`$ $`=`$ $`(k+l+p_3+p_4)^2+i0,`$ (A.2)
$`A_2`$ $`=`$ $`(k+l)^2+i0,`$
$`A_3`$ $`=`$ $`l^2+i0,`$
$`A_4`$ $`=`$ $`(l+p_3)^2+i0,`$
$`A_5`$ $`=`$ $`k^2+i0,`$
$`A_6`$ $`=`$ $`(k+p_4)^2+i0.`$
The external momenta are in-going, two of them being light-like, $`p_3^2=p_4^2=0`$, while $`p_{12}^2=s`$ is the only physical scale.

Repeating the reasoning of Section 3.1, we can build eight integration-by-parts identities and a single Lorentz-invariance identity. They depend upon one irreducible scalar product in the numerator, that we choose to be $`(lp_4)`$:

$`s\nu _1\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}+\left(2D2\nu _{235}\nu _{146}\right)\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}\nu _1\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟐}^{\mathbf{}}\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}=0`$ (A.3)
$`s\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}+\left(2D2\nu _{146}\nu _{235}\right)\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}=0`$ (A.11)
$`2\left(lp_4\right)\nu _1\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\left(D\nu _{24}2\nu _3\right)+\nu _1\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟐}^{\mathbf{}}+\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}\right)`$
$`+\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}\right)+\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}=0`$
$`2\left(lp_4\right)\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\left(D\nu _{125}2\nu _6\right)+\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}\right)`$
$`\nu _1\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}\right)\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}=0`$
$`2\left(lp_4\right)\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}+\left(D\nu _{345}\nu _6\right)+\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟐}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}\right)+\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}\right)`$
$`\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}=0`$
$`2\left(lp_4\right)\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}+s\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}(D\nu _{346}2\nu _5)+\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟐}^{\mathbf{}}\right)`$
$`+\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}\right)+\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}=0`$
$`2\left(lp_4\right)\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}+s\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\left(D\nu _{36}2\nu _4\right)+\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}+\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}\right)`$
$`+\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}\right)+\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}=0`$
$`2\left(lp_4\right)\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\left(D\nu _{45}2\nu _3\right)\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}+\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟐}^{\mathbf{}}\right)`$
$`+\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟐}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}\right)+\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}=0`$
$`2\left(lp_4\right)\nu _1\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\left(D\nu _{2356}\right)+\nu _1\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟐}^{\mathbf{}}+\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}\right)+\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}=0.`$
By eliminating the irreducible scalar product in the numerator, we obtain

$$s\nu _1\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}=\left(2D2\nu _{235}\nu _{146}\right)+\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}+\nu _1\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟐}^{\mathbf{}}+\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}},$$
(A.12)
which, together with the symmetric one for $`\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}`$, can reduce $`\nu _1`$ and $`\nu _2`$ to unity. Using

$`\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{D2\nu _{3456}}}\left(\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟏}^{\mathbf{}}\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\mathrm{𝟐}^{\mathbf{}}\right)`$ (A.13)
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{1}{D22\nu _{34}}}\left[\left(D22\nu _{46}\right)\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}+2\left(\nu _3\nu _6\right)\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\right],`$
and the symmetric one for $`\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}`$, we can reduce $`\nu _3`$ and $`\nu _4`$ to one. To complete the reduction, we use

$$\left(\nu _{56}\nu _{34}\right)=\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟑}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟓}^{\mathbf{}}\right)+\nu _1\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\left(\mathrm{𝟒}^{\mathbf{}}\mathrm{𝟔}^{\mathbf{}}\right),$$
(A.14)
that can be re-iterated until $`\left(\nu _{56}\nu _{34}\right)=0`$. Since we are applying this identity to scalar integrals where $`\nu _3`$ and $`\nu _4`$ have already been reduced to one, the reduction procedure will stop when $`\nu _5=\nu _6=1`$. This integral cannot be reduced any further, and we choose the crossed master triangle to be

$$\mathrm{Xtri}^D(s)=\mathrm{Xtri}^D(1,1,1,1,1,1;s).$$
(A.15)
The application of the identity

$$𝐝^{\mathbf{}}=\left(\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\right)\left(\nu _2\mathrm{𝟐}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _1\mathrm{𝟏}^\mathbf{+}\right)+\left(\nu _4\mathrm{𝟒}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _3\mathrm{𝟑}^\mathbf{+}\right)\left(\nu _6\mathrm{𝟔}^\mathbf{+}+\nu _5\mathrm{𝟓}^\mathbf{+}\right)$$
(A.16)
to $`\mathrm{Xtri}^{D+2}(s)`$ and its further reduction, gives rise to the dimensional-shift formula

$`\mathrm{Xtri}^{D+2}\left(s\right)`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(D4)s^2}{4(D2)(2D7)(2D5)}}\mathrm{Xtri}^D\left(s\right)`$ (A.17)
$`{\displaystyle \frac{37D^3313D^2+858D752}{2(D4)(D2)(2D7)(2D5)(3D8)}}\mathrm{Btri}^D\left(s\right)`$
$`+{\displaystyle \frac{43D^4478D^3+1963D^23530D+2352}{2(D4)^2(D3)(D2)(2D7)(2D5)s}}\mathrm{Sset}^D\left(s\right).`$
The expression of the master integral of Eq. (A.15) has been computed in Refs. .

## B Coefficients $`𝒄_𝒊`$

We collect here the coefficients $`c_i`$ of Eq. (3.1).

$`c_1`$ $`=`$ $`4{\displaystyle \frac{(D5)^2u}{(D6)st}}`$
$`c_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{tu}{t}}`$
$`c_3`$ $`=`$ $`2{\displaystyle \frac{(D4)(2D9)}{(D6)st}}`$
$`c_4`$ $`=`$ $`3{\displaystyle \frac{(D4)(3D14)u^2}{(D6)^2(2D11)s^3t^3}}\left[2\left(7D^276D+206\right)t+(D5)(5D28)s\right]`$
$`c_5`$ $`=`$ $`3{\displaystyle \frac{(D4)(3D14)t}{(D6)^2(2D11)s^3u^2}}\left[2\left(7D^276D+206\right)t+(D5)(5D28)s\right]`$
$`c_6`$ $`=`$ $`3{\displaystyle \frac{(D5)(D4)(3D14)s\left[2(D5)t(D6)s\right]}{(D6)^2(2D11)t^3u^2}}`$
$`c_7`$ $`=`$ $`6{\displaystyle \frac{(D3)(3D14)\left[(5D26)t+2(D5)s\right]}{(D6)^2st^3}}`$
$`c_8`$ $`=`$ $`6{\displaystyle \frac{(D3)(3D14)\left[(5D26)t+2(D5)s\right]}{(D6)^2stu^2}}`$
$`c_9`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{(D3)(3D10)}{(D6)^2(D5)(D4)s^3t^3u^2}}[(41D^3620D^2+3124D5248)st^3`$
$`+2(D6)^2(D4)t^4\left(61D^3922D^2+4640D7776\right)s^2t^2`$
$`4(D5)(3D14)(4D21)s^3t4(D5)^2(3D14)s^4]`$
$`c_{10}`$ $`=`$ $`3{\displaystyle \frac{(D3)(3D10)(3D8)}{(D6)^2(D5)(D4)^2(2D11)s^4t^3u^2}}`$
$`\times [2(D6)(D4)(2D11)(5D22)t^4`$
$`2\left(64D^41305D^3+9978D^233902D+43180\right)st^3`$
$`\left(208D^44209D^3+31899D^2107314D+135216\right)s^2t^2`$
$`(D5)(3D14)(34D^2359D+944)s^3t(D5)^2(3D14)(5D28)s^4]`$
$`c_{11}`$ $`=`$ $`3{\displaystyle \frac{(D3)(3D14)(3D10)(3D8)}{(D6)^2(D5)(D4)^2(2D11)s^3t^4u^2}}`$
$`\times [2(D5)(7D^276D+206)t^4+(61D^3952D^2+4941D8528)st^3`$
$`+\left(92D^31417D^2+7253D12336\right)s^2t^2`$
$`+(56D^3853D^2+4317D7258)s^3t+2(D5)(2D11)(2D9)s^4]`$
$`c_{12}`$ $`=`$ $`3{\displaystyle \frac{(D3)(3D14)(3D10)(3D8)}{(D6)^2(D5)(D4)^2(2D11)s^3t^3u^3}}[2(D5)(7D^276D+206)t^4`$ (B.1)
$`\left(9D^3130D^2+615D948\right)st^33(D6)(D5)(D4)s^2t^2`$
$`(D5)(3D^230D+74)s^3t+(D6)(D5)^2s^4]`$
## C Coefficients of the dimensional-shift system

We give here only the first three coefficients of the system (3.71). The whole list can be obtained from the authors (C.A. and C.O.).

$`a_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{512}}{\displaystyle \frac{(D4)s^2\left[(3D14)(3D10)s^24(5D^239D+74)tu\right]}{(D3)^3(2D9)(2D7)tu}}`$
$`a_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(D6)(D4)s\left[4(D3)tu3(3D10)s^2\right]}{512(D5)(D3)^3(2D9)(2D7)}}`$
$`a_3`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(D4)s\left[4(D6)(D3)tu+3(3D14)(3D10)s^2\right]}{512(D5)(D3)^3(2D7)tu}}`$
$`b_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{s\left[3(D4)(3D14)s^24(D6)(D5)tu\right]}{128(D3)(2D9)(2D7)tu}}`$
$`b_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(D6)\left[4(D3)tu+3(D4)s^2\right]}{128(D5)(D3)(2D9)(2D7)}}`$
$`b_3`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3(D4)(3D14)s^24(D6)(D3)tu}{128(D5)(D3)(2D7)tu}}`$ (C.1)
## D Coefficients of the differential equations for the two master <br>integrals

The coefficients of the system of differential equations (4.1) and (4.2) for the two master integrals are given by

$`h_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(D4)s^24tu}{4tu}}`$
$`h_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(D6)s}{4(D5)}}`$
$`h_3`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(D4)(2D9)s}{4(D5)tu}}`$
$`h_4`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{(D4)(3D14)u}{(D5)st^2}}`$
$`h_5`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{(D4)(3D14)s^2}{(D6)t^2u^2}}`$
$`h_6`$ $`=`$ $`3{\displaystyle \frac{(D3)(3D14)}{(D5)t^2}}`$
$`h_7`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{4}}{\displaystyle \frac{(D3)(3D10)\left[(3D14)\left(u^2+t^2\right)+2(D4)tu\right]}{(D5)(D4)st^2u^2}}`$
$`h_8`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{4}}{\displaystyle \frac{(D3)(3D10)(3D8)\left[(D5)(3D14)\left(u^2+t^2\right)(D6)(D4)tu\right]}{(D5)^2(D4)^2s^2t^2u^2}}`$
$`h_9`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{(D3)(3D14)(3D10)(3D8)}{(D6)(D5)^2(D4)^2st^3u^2}}[(2D9)(3D16)u^2`$ (D.1)
$`+(7D^268D+164)tu+2(D5)^2t^2],`$
and by

$`k_1`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(D5)^2s}{tu}}`$
$`k_2`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(D6)(u^2+t^2)}{2tu}}`$
$`k_3`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(D4)(2D9)}{tu}}`$
$`k_4`$ $`=`$ $`6{\displaystyle \frac{(D4)(3D14)u\left[(5D)u+(2D11)t\right]}{(D6)s^2t^3}}`$
$`k_5`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{(D5)(D4)(3D14)s^3}{(D6)t^3u^3}}`$
$`k_6`$ $`=`$ $`3{\displaystyle \frac{(D3)(3D14)}{(D6)st^3u}}\left[(5D28)tu+(D6)t^22(D5)u^2\right]`$
$`k_7`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{3}{2}}{\displaystyle \frac{(D3)(3D10)}{(D6)(D4)s^2t^3u^3}}[2(D6)(3D14)tu(u^2+t^2)`$
$`(D5)(3D14)(u^4+t^4)+2(5D^249D+118)t^2u^2]`$
$`k_8`$ $`=`$ $`3{\displaystyle \frac{(D3)(3D10)(3D8)}{(D6)(D5)(D4)^2s^3t^3u^3}}[3(D5)^2(3D14)tu(u^2+t^2)`$
$`(D5)^2(3D14)(u^4+t^4)(D4)(7D^270D+176)t^2u^2]`$
$`k_9`$ $`=`$ $`3{\displaystyle \frac{(D3)(3D14)(3D10)(3D8)}{(D6)^2(D5)(D4)^2s^2t^4u^3}}[(D5)^2(D2)u^4`$ (D.2)
$`+(D6)\left(13D^2129D+318\right)tu^3+2\left(5D^380D^2+422D734\right)t^2u^2`$
$`+(D6)(D5)(5D24)t^3u+(D6)(D5)^2t^4].`$


text:
# References

Introduction

The conclusions of this paper, that electrons are particles, will not surprise our experimental colleagues. What may come as a surprise to them is the fact that the hitherto accepted wisdom  in the theoretical community was that there does not exist any relativistic description of the electron as a particle!

The root of the problem  lies in the masslessness of the photon. This generates long range interactions and it is well known that these fall off so slowly that they cannot be neglected even for widely separated charges a long time before or after scattering processes. This is seen in $`S`$-matrix calculations as the lack of a pole for fermionic external legs.

This lack of a particle interpretation of an electron presents a radical departure from the usual view of particle physics which we find highly unsatisfactory. We want to show that it is also unnecessary. We note that an understanding of how particles can arise in gauge theories is important to improve our insight into the physical structures of gauge theories, to help with QCD phenomenology and it may well have spin offs for the vexed question of how to describe unstable particles.

In the context of QED this lack of any particle language has not hindered progress. Our knowledge of the classical limit of QED acts as a guide to the extraction of physical predictions from suitably defined cross-sections via the Bloch-Nordsieck framework. In theories such as QCD such intuition is still greatly lacking. In particular we do not understand hadronisation which relies on coloured particles metamorphosing into jets. The route which leads from partons to effective quarks and glue is essentially uncharted.

In this letter we will show that a relativistic particle description of the electron (or any other charged particle) immediately follows once a correct physical identification of the electron has been made. Having first recalled the standard statement of the problem , we will show that the effects which prevent the identification of a charged particle structure in QED disappear if the right fields are used. We stress that this identification only holds in the asymptotic region a long time before or after scattering occurs. We then demonstrate that a particle structure is also asymptotically present for photons in full QED. Finally we discuss how these results have been verified in perturbative calculations and present some conclusions.

The Interaction

We have already noted that in theories like QED we have long range interactions due to the masslessness of the photon. It has been shown by various authors that such interactions cannot be neglected even at large times before or after scattering. In particular, Kulish and Faddeev  showed that the annihilation operator of the matter fields of QED which is defined as the large time limit of the operator

$$b(q,s,t):=d^3x\frac{1}{\sqrt{2E_q}}u^s(q)\psi (x)\mathrm{e}^{iqx},$$
(1)
does not become just the usual free particle mode, but rather takes on the form444There is also a distortion contribution to the non-observable phase of $`S`$-matrix elements which we will ignore in this letter.

$$b(q,s,t)=D_{\mathrm{soft}}(q,t)b(q,s),$$
(2)
where

$$D_{\mathrm{soft}}(q,t)=\mathrm{exp}\left\{e\underset{\mathrm{soft}}{}\frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{1}{2\omega _k}\left(\frac{qa(k)}{qk}\mathrm{e}^{itkq/E_q}\frac{qa^{}(k)}{qk}\mathrm{e}^{itkq/E_q}\right)\right\},$$
(3)
is called a *distortion operator* . The creation and annihilation operators for the photonic variables enter into this expression and, as long as $`D_{\mathrm{soft}}1`$, a particle mode for the electron will not be recovered. Of course, we should only expect to regain a particle description at asymptotic times and, for large $`t`$, the integral in (3) only receives contributions from soft photons, but it still does not reduce to the unit operator. This important observation has lead to the conclusion  that it is *not* possible to describe the electron as a particle.

However, since the interaction does not switch off, the matter field $`\psi `$ *never* becomes gauge invariant and thus we should not expect to identify it with physical particles via Equation 1! We now construct the fields which do have a particle description at large times.

The Electron

We recall that physical fields must be invariant under the local gauge transformations, $`A_\mu (x)A_\mu (x)+_\mu \theta (x)`$ and $`\psi (x)\mathrm{e}^{ie\theta (x)}\psi (x)`$. A physical matter field must then be given by a product of the form $`h^1(x)\psi (x)`$ where, under a gauge transformation, $`h^1(x)h^1(x)\mathrm{e}^{ie\theta (x)}`$. We call such a field with this gauge transformation property a dressing.

Of course there are a multiplicity of such dressing fields which satisfy this minimal requirement . To describe a charged particle we need to further demand  that the dressing satisfies the dressing equation

$$uh^1(x)=ieh^1(x)uA(x),$$
(4)
where $`u^\mu =\gamma (\eta +v)^\mu `$ is the four velocity of the charged particle, $`\eta `$ is the unit time-like vector, $`v=(0,𝒗)`$ is the velocity and $`\gamma =(1|𝒗|^2)^{1/2}`$. It is important to note the velocity dependence here: we can only expect to have a particle interpretation of a charge at asymptotic times and in that regime the velocity is a well defined quantum number. Our dressed charges will, therefore, only correspond to particles at the appropriate point on the mass shell characterised by the velocity in the dressing.

In QED we have been able to solve these two requirements  and have found the following description of a charged field moving with a given velocity:

$$h^1(x)\psi (x)=\mathrm{e}^{ieK(x)}\mathrm{e}^{ie\chi (x)}\psi (x).$$
(5)
The $`K`$ term is separately gauge invariant and contributes to the unobservable phase. We ignore it in this letter. The $`\chi `$ part of the dressing may be written as

$$\chi (x)=\frac{𝒢A}{𝒢},$$
(6)
where $`𝒢^\mu =(\eta +v)^\mu (\eta v)^\mu `$.

We now define an annihilation operator for the gauge invariant, dressed field

$$b(q,s,v,t):=d^3x\frac{1}{\sqrt{2E_q}}u^s(q)\mathrm{e}^{ie\chi (x)}\psi (x)\mathrm{e}^{iqx}.$$
(7)
Note that this has an explicit velocity dependence coming from the form of the dressing. To find its asymptotic form we proceed in the same manner as Kulish and Faddeev . The annihilation operator now picks up two distortion factors: the original one associated with the unphysical matter field and a further correction from the dressing. We find

$$b(q,s,t,v)h_{\mathrm{soft}}^1(q,t,v)D_{\mathrm{soft}}(q,t)b(q,s),$$
(8)
where $`D_{\mathrm{soft}}(q,t)`$ is given in (3). The distortion from the soft part of the dressing is

$$h_{\mathrm{soft}}^1(q,t,v)=\mathrm{exp}\left\{e\underset{\mathrm{soft}}{}\frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{1}{2\omega _k}\left(\frac{Va(k)}{Vk}\mathrm{e}^{itkq/E_q}\frac{Va^{}(k)}{Vk}\mathrm{e}^{itkq/E_q}\right)\right\},$$
(9)
where $`V^\mu =(\eta +v)^\mu (\eta v)kk^\mu `$, which is essentially the Fourier transform of $`𝒢^\mu `$. Combining these distortions we find the overall distortion factor

$`h_{\mathrm{soft}}^1(q,t,v)D_{\mathrm{soft}}(q,t)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{exp}(e{\displaystyle \underset{\mathrm{soft}}{}}{\displaystyle \frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{2\omega _k}}[({\displaystyle \frac{Va(k)}{Vk}}{\displaystyle \frac{qa(k)}{qk}})\mathrm{e}^{itkq/E_q}`$ (10)
$`({\displaystyle \frac{Va^{}(k)}{Vk}}{\displaystyle \frac{qa^{}(k)}{qk}})\mathrm{e}^{itkq/E_q}]).`$
We now note that we can write (recall that $`k`$ is on-shell)

$`{\displaystyle \frac{V^\mu }{Vk}}{\displaystyle \frac{q^\mu }{qk}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(\eta +v)^\mu (\eta v)kk^\mu }{(\eta +v)k(\eta v)k}}{\displaystyle \frac{q^\mu }{qk}}`$ (11)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{(\eta +v)^\mu }{(\eta +v)k}}{\displaystyle \frac{q^\mu }{qk}}{\displaystyle \frac{k^\mu }{Vk}}.`$
Hence, at the point in the mass-shell where $`q^\mu =m\gamma (\eta +v)^\mu `$, the distortion operator becomes a trivial operator since the argument of the exponential becomes

$$e\frac{d^3k}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{1}{2\omega _k}\left(\frac{ka(k)}{Vk}\mathrm{e}^{it\omega _k}\frac{ka^{}(k)}{Vk}\mathrm{e}^{it\omega _k}\right),$$
(12)
which vanishes between physical states due to the Gupta-Bleuler subsidiary condition (it only contains unphysical photon degrees of freedom which correspond to the Nakanishi-Lautrup $`B`$ field). We thus see that the modes of the dressed field, at the appropriate place in the mass shell, are free particle modes at large times. There is no distortion and we have recovered a particle picture for charged matter in QED.

The Photon

In the usual framework it is assumed that the coupling switches off asymptotically. There are then many ways to show that the physical components of the non-interacting vector potential are the transverse degrees of freedom (see, e.g., Chap. 19 of ). However, we have seen that in the true asymptotic domain the coupling does not vanish due to the masslessness of the photon. This means that previous arguments are incomplete. We will now show that, although we still have an interaction, the physical photonic degrees of freedom do decouple and a particle description for the photon can be recovered in full QED.

The asymptotic form of the (interaction picture) vector boson can be readily obtained once the form of the asymptotic interaction Hamiltonian, $`H_{\mathrm{int}}^{\mathrm{as}}`$, has been identified . Using this result we can straightforwardly transform from the free vector boson, $`A^\mathrm{f}`$, to the asymptotic Heisenberg field, $`A^{\mathrm{as}}`$, as follows:

$`A_\mu ^{\mathrm{as}}(x)`$ $`=`$ $`\mathrm{exp}\left(i{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^t}𝑑\tau H_{\mathrm{int}}^{\mathrm{as}}(\tau )\right)A_\mu ^\mathrm{f}(x)\mathrm{exp}\left(i{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^t}𝑑\tau H_{\mathrm{int}}^{\mathrm{as}}(\tau )\right)`$ (13)
$`=`$ $`A_\mu ^\mathrm{f}(x)e{\displaystyle _{\mathrm{}}^t}𝑑\tau d^3yD(\tau t,𝒚𝒙)J_\mu ^{\mathrm{as}}(\tau ,𝒚),`$
where the asymptotic current is given by

$$J_{\mathrm{as}}^\mu (t,𝒙)=\frac{d^3p}{(2\pi )^3}\frac{p^\mu }{E_p}\rho (p)\delta ^3\left(𝒙t𝒑/E_p\right).$$
(14)
This shows, as expected, that the vector boson field is also not free at large times. In the spirit of our discussions above, we can, though, straightforwardly recover a particle picture for photons by showing that the second term in (13) vanishes for the transverse, physical components, $`(\delta _{ij}_i_j/^2)A_j^{\mathrm{as}}`$. This shows that in the far field domain, where the potential takes on the asymptotic form (13), a particle description emerges even in the interacting theory.

Conclusions

In this letter we have shown how a particle description for the electron and the photon emerges from QED. The essential observation in this construction is that a particle cannot be identified with the raw matter field that enters into the QED Lagrangian. Rather, a physical particle corresponds to an appropriately dressed, gauge invariant field. The dressing for a charged asymptotic particle with a specific velocity depends explicitly on that velocity. A particle description for the electron is only recovered at that point in the mass shell corresponding to the velocity.

For a photon it is not surprising that not all the components of the vector potential are physical. What is new in our discussion of the photon is that we have seen how the free photon emerges in the asymptotic regime even though there is still a residual interaction with matter for the non-physical components.

The formal arguments presented in this letter have been checked in a wide variety of detailed calculations. We have shown  for both scalar and fermionic QED that the on-shell propagator and other Green’s functions of the dressed matter fields have, to all orders in perturbation theory, a good pole structure. This is in contrast to the Lagrangian matter fields whose on-shell Green’s functions are plagued by infra-red singularities. This means  that for our fields the $`S`$-matrix elements can be constructed via the traditional LSZ-formalism.

We should also point out that these charged fields have good ultra-violet behaviour . Multiplicative renormalisation is possible and the dressed field operators do not mix under renormalisation . In addition, there is an ultra-violet logarithm in scattering processes  which is just the universal Isgur-Wise (or equivalently the Wilson line kink) renormalisation constant. This logarithm structure is just the one that appears in the Bloch-Nordsieck formalism.

This programme is currently being extended to the non-abelian domain where the theoretical problems are more severe  and the experimental situation in identifying physical quarks and gluons, e.g., in jets, is much more subtle. The essential new ingredient found there that further obstructs a particle interpretation is the gluonic self-interaction. Such massless charges spawn a new class of asymptotic dynamics which is no longer spin independent and generates collinear singularities. This can be studied in massless QED and early indications  are that the appropriate dressed massless charges are indeed free. Furthermore, we have already seen  that the minimal, non-abelian component of the dressing is responsible for the anti-screening interaction that drives asymptotic freedom in both three and four dimensional QCD. These results give us a great deal of confidence that we can regain a particle picture of quarks and gluons in the pre-hadronisation regime.

Acknowledgements: This work was supported by the British Council/Spanish Education Ministry Acciones Integradas grant no. 1801/HB1997-0141. We thank Robin Horan, Tom Steele, Shogo Tanimura and Izumi Tsutsui for discussions.