**Next message:**Vladyslav Shtabovenko: "Re: Oneloop Bug? OneLoop on a combination of loop and non-loop terms"**Previous message:**Vladyslav Shtabovenko: "Re: Oneloop Bug? OneLoop on a combination of loop and non-loop terms"**In reply to:**manuel J. Vicente: "Re: OneLoop gets different results with/without OneLoopSimplify"**Next in thread:**Vladyslav Shtabovenko: "Re: OneLoop gets different results with/without OneLoopSimplify"**Reply:**Vladyslav Shtabovenko: "Re: OneLoop gets different results with/without OneLoopSimplify"**Messages sorted by:**[ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]**Mail actions:**[ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

Dear Manuel,

I found the reason for the problem. Effectively, it was because

ScalarProductCancel was not cancelling a z^2 in the denominator

which allowed it to slip into the tensor decomposition routine,

where it lead to an additional factor of four in one of the terms.

I improved SPC when working with sums of different integrals and added

a cross-check in OneLoop to ensure that this would not happen again.

<https://github.com/FeynCalc/feyncalc/commit/4f1d8fd12f2ebe57215b39a69be38994b0f8a71d>

<https://github.com/FeynCalc/feyncalc/commit/a96bb2028faf8841ddda9f1d6246f9a27d0814ee>

Now the result is zero in both cases you mentioned (see attachment).

The changes are already in the nightly version.

If you are curious, you can also see the explicit cancellation using

the new option "UsePaVeBasis" in TID, which makes TID return output in

terms of PaVe coefficient functions (well, some pieces are still FAD's,

but I'll improve on that soon)

Those PaVe functions can then e.g. evaluated using H. Patel's PackageX.

Again, the integral gives 0.

P.S. Note that PaVe functions of FeynCalc and Package X are actually

differently normalized, but in this case it is just an overall prefactor

that I ignored.

Cheers,

Vladyslav

Am 06.05.2015 um 14:38 schrieb manuel J.Vicente:

*> Dear Vladyslav,
*

*> thanks for your prompt answer. I've also found another problem with OneLoop. It fails in the 8.2.0 and in today's nightly version. Results from default options and OneLoopSimplify->True differ.
*

*>
*

*> Notice the first line: bb=k. It corresponds to an external momentum. Changing its name to anything alphabetically after p (e.g. bb=x) seems to solve the problem??
*

*>
*

*> ===================================================================
*

*> << FeynCalc`
*

*> bb = k;
*

*> ScalarProduct[bb, p1] = 0; ScalarProduct[bb, bb] = 0;
*

*> ScalarProduct[p1, p1] = m^2; ScalarProduct[p2, p2] = m^2;
*

*> ScalarProduct[p1, r] = 0; ScalarProduct[bb, r] = 0;
*

*> ScalarProduct[bb, p2] = 0; ScalarProduct[r, p2] = 1;
*

*> ScalarProduct[p1, p2] = 0;
*

*>
*

*> amp = SPD[r, z] SPD[bb, z] SPD[p2, z] SPD[p1,
*

*> z] FAD[{z, 0}, {p1 + bb - z, m}, {p2 - z, m}, {p1 - z, m}];
*

*>
*

*> FI; OneLoop[z, amp] // PaVeReduce
*

*>
*

*> (-I/24)*m^2*Pi^2
*

*>
*

*> OneLoop[z, amp, OneLoopSimplify -> True]
*

*>
*

*> 0
*

*> ======================================
*

*>
*

*> best regards and thanks again!
*

*>
*

*> M.J. Vicente
*

*>
*

- application/mathematica attachment: Manuel2.nb

**Next message:**Vladyslav Shtabovenko: "Re: Oneloop Bug? OneLoop on a combination of loop and non-loop terms"**Previous message:**Vladyslav Shtabovenko: "Re: Oneloop Bug? OneLoop on a combination of loop and non-loop terms"**In reply to:**manuel J. Vicente: "Re: OneLoop gets different results with/without OneLoopSimplify"**Next in thread:**Vladyslav Shtabovenko: "Re: OneLoop gets different results with/without OneLoopSimplify"**Reply:**Vladyslav Shtabovenko: "Re: OneLoop gets different results with/without OneLoopSimplify"**Messages sorted by:**[ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]**Mail actions:**[ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

*
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29
: 05/27/17-03:40:02 PM Z CEST
*