WRONSKIAN´ ALGEBRA AND BROADHURST–ROBERTS QUADRATIC RELATIONS YAJUN ZHOU To the memory of Dr. W (1986–2020) ABSTRACT. Throughalgebraicmanipulationson Wronskian´ matrices whose entries are reducible to Bessel moments, we present a new analytic proof of the quadratic relations conjectured by Broadhurst and Roberts, along with some generalizations. In the Wronskian´ framework, we reinterpret the de Rham intersection pairing through polynomial coefficients in Vanhove’s differential operators, and compute the Betti inter- section pairing via linear sum rules for on-shell and off-shell Feynman diagrams at threshold momenta. From the ideal generated by Broadhurst–Roberts quadratic relations, we derive new non-linear sum rules for on-shell Feynman diagrams, including an infinite family of determinant identities that are compatible with Deligne’s conjectures for critical values of motivic L-functions. CONTENTS 1. Introduction 1 2. W algebra 5 2.1. Wronskian´ matrices and Vanhove operators 5 2.2. Block diagonalization of on-shell Wronskian´ matrices 8 2.3. Sumrulesforon-shellandoff-shellBesselmoments 11 3. W⋆ algebra 20 3.1. Cofactors of Wronskians´ 21 3.2. Threshold behavior of Wronskian´ cofactors 24 3.3. Quadratic relations for off-shell Bessel moments 30 4. Broadhurst–Roberts quadratic relations 37 4.1. Quadratic relations for on-shell Bessel moments 37 4.2. Arithmetic applications to Feynman diagrams 43 4.3. Alternative representations of de Rham matrices 49 References 53 arXiv:2012.03523v3 [math.NT] 16 May 2021 Date: May 18, 2021. Keywords: Bessel moments, Feynman integrals, Wronskian´ matrices, Bernoulli numbers Subject Classification (AMS 2020): 11B68, 33C10, 34M35 (Primary) 81T18, 81T40 (Secondary) * This research was supported in part by the Applied Mathematics Program within the Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Advanced Scientific Computing Research (ASCR) as part of the Collaboratory on Mathematics for Mesoscopic Modeling of Materials (CM4). i BROADHURST–ROBERTSQUADRATICRELATIONS 1 1. INTRODUCTION In perturbative quantum field theory, one frequently encounters Feynman diagrams in the form of on-shell Bessel moments [33, 29, 3, 32, 34, 9, 12, 10, 13, 14, 25] ∞ a b n IKM(a,b;n) := [I0(t)] [K0(t)] t dt (1.1) Z0 = 1 π t cosθ = t coshu for certain non-negative integers a,b,n Z 0, where I0(t) π 0 e dθ and K0(t) 0∞ e− du are modified Bessel functions of zeroth order.∈ These≥ Bessel moments satisfy a wealth of algebraic relations, R R which had been discovered by Broadhurst and collaborators through numerical experimentations [9, 12, 10, 13, 14], before becoming formally proven truths [50, 48, 49, 53, 54, 25]. The Broadhurst–Mellit determinant formulae [9, Conjectures 4 and 7] were among the earliest verified [49] non-linear algebraic relations for Bessel moments: the k k matrices Mk := (IKM(a,2k +1 a;2b × − − 1))1 a,b k and Nk := (IKM(a,2k + 2 a;2b 1))1 a,b k have determinants ≤ ≤ − − ≤ ≤ k k j j (k+1)2/2 k+1 k+1 j (2 j) − π 2π (2 j 1) − detMk = , detNk = − , (1.2) ∏ 2 j+1 Γ + ∏ j j=1 (2 j + 1) ((k 1)/2) j=1 (2 j) p Γ = x 1 t where (x) : 0∞ t − e− dt for x > 0. = T These determinant formulae are refined by the Broadhurst–Roberts quadratic relations Bm PmDmPm R + b 1 a m 3 [10, 13, 14] for the period matrix Pm := (( 1) − π − 2 IKM(a,m + 2 a;2b 1)) m+1 , in which 1 a,b 2 m+1 m+1 − m−+1 m+−1 ≤ ≤ the Betti matrix Bm Q 2 × 2 and the de Rham matrix Dm Q 2 × 2 are filled with rational numbers. Fresán, Sabbah∈ and Yu have recently proved an equiv∈alent form [25, Theorem 1.4] of the Broadhurst–Roberts quadratic relations, with an algebro-geometric tour de force that draws on their profound insights into certain exponential motives [22], whose associated Galois representations are intimately related to moments of Kloosterman sums [23, 24] (analogs of on-shell Bessel moments in positive characterisitic). In this paper, we present an analytic proof of the Broadhurst–Roberts quadratic relations, by revis- iting the Wronskian´ method in our verification of the Broadhurst–Mellit determinant formulae [49]. Our Wronskian-based´ proof also produces a new family of quadratic relations, which embody the Broadhurst–Roberts relations for on-shell Bessel moments as special cases. n n n 0 In §2, writing D f (u) := d f (u)/du for n Z>0, and D f (u) := f (u), we will consider a Wronskian´ i 1 ∈ matrix W[ f1(u),..., fm(u)] = (D − f j(u))1 i, j m whose entries are reducible to on-shell Bessel moments ≤ ≤ (more precisely, entries of Pm and Pm 2) as u 1−, and whose determinant detW := W[ f1(u),..., fm(u)] = i 1 − → det(D − f j(u))1 i, j m is explicitly computable through our proof of the Broadhurst–Mellit determinant ≤ ≤ ⋆ ⋆ formulae [49]. In §3, our key observation is the adjugate relation W W = WW = WIm, where the ⋆ ⋆ T m m matrix adjugate W := adjW of W[ f1(u),..., fm(u)] factorizes into W = SW U, with S Q × and m m T ∈ U/W Q(u) × . In §4, we explore the u 1− limit of the matrix equation SW UW = WIm, and establish∈ quadratic relations among on-shell Bessel→ moments. For a generic parameter u (0,1), the individual elements of the Wronskian´ matrix W[ f1(u),..., fm(u)] in §2 will be representable by∈ off-shell Bessel moments [49, Definition 2.1] ∞ a b n IKM(a + 1,b;n u) := I0(√ut)[I0(t)] [K0(t)] t dt, (1.3) | Z0 ∞ a b n eIKM(a,b + 1;n u) := K0(√ut)[I0(t)] [K0(t)] t dt, (1.4) | 0 Z e 2 YAJUN ZHOU and differentiated Bessel moments [49, Definition 2.3] ∞ a b n+1 IKM´ (a + 1,b;n u) := + I1(√ut)[I0(t)] [K0(t)] t dt, (1.5) | Z0 ∞ a b n+1 IKM´ (a,b + 1;n u) := K1(√ut)[I0(t)] [K0(t)] t dt, (1.6) | − Z0 where I1(x) = +d I0(x)/d x and K1(x) = d K0(x)/d x. Accordingly, our efforts in §3 will culminate in a quadratic relation involving these generalized− Bessel moments and some explicitly computable rational functions (in lieu of the rational numbers in the Betti matrix B and the de Rham matrix D of the Broadhurst–Roberts formulation), as stated below. 5 3( 1)m Theorem 1.1 (Wronskian´ algebra). For m Z>0,u 0, − 2− , normalize off-shell Feynman diagrams as ∈ ∈ IKM(1,m+1;1 u)+(m+1)IKM(1,m+1;1 u) = (|m+2)π(m+1)/2 | , j 1, (u) := eIKM( j,m+2 j;1 u) e m + (1.7) m, j (m+1)/2+−1 j | , j Z 2, 2 1 , F π − ∈ ∩ IKM( j m ,m+2+ m j;1 u) e − 2 2 − | m + (m⌊+1)⌋/2+ m/2⌊+1 ⌋j , j Z 2 2,m , π ⌊ ⌋ − ∈ ∩ e and define a polynomial + m 1 2 m(u) := u 2 ∏ (u n ), (1.8) L n Z [1,m+1] − n ∈m+∩1 (mod 2) ≡ 5 3( 1)m where x is the greatest integer less than or equal to x. For u 0, − − , the Wro´nskian matrix ⌊ ⌋ ∈ 2 Wm(u) := W[ m,1(u),..., m,m(u)] has determinant F F m + 1 ( 1) m/4 [(m + 1)!]m 1 := = ⌊ ⌋ Wm(u) detWm(u) −m(m 1)/2 m+1 m/2 (1.9) m + 2 2 ∏ nn m(u) − n=1 |L | and satisfies a quadratic relation 1 T = [Vm(u)]− Wm(u)SmWm(u) (1.10) m(u) |L | for matrices V (u) = ( 1)m+1VT (u) Q(u)m m and S = ( 1)m+1ST Qm m. m − m ∈ × m − m ∈ × Explicitly, the Vanhove matrix V (u) Q(u)m m is upper-left triangular, with entries1 m ∈ × m n a b+1 = a+n+m+1 n a D − − ℓm,n(u) (Vm(u))a,b : ∑ ( 1) − , (1.11) n=a+b 1 − b 1 m(u) − − L 2 where the polynomials ℓm, j(u) Z[u] are defined through the Vanhove–Verrill relation (cf. [43, §3.6.1] and [44, §3.6.1]): ∈ m m +1 k 2 + j = m + 1 k m 1 α1 + αn αn+1 ∑ ℓm, j(u)D : uϑ ∑ u − ∑ (ϑ k) − ∏ αn(αn m 2)(ϑ k n) − , − − − − j=0 k=1 n Z [1,k],αk+1=1 n=1 ∈αn∩Z [1,m+1] b α∈n+1∩ αn 2 b b ≤ − (1.12) 1 n n! Throughout this article, we write := for the standard binomial coefficient with n Z 0,m Z [0,n]. By m m!(n m)! ∈ ≥ ∈ ∩ n = − B convention, we also define 0 when n Z 0,k Zr [0,n]. Empty sums like ∑n=A( ) with A > B are treated as zero. k ∈ ≥ ∈ ··· 2These polynomials can be constructed by a finite enumeration over integer parameters α ,...,α in (1.12). See Table I 1 n for a partial list of the Vanhove–Verrill polynomials. BROADHURST–ROBERTSQUADRATICRELATIONS 3 = m j TABLE I. A partial list of Vanhove’s operators Lm ∑ j=0 ℓm, j(u)D m Lm e 1 (u 4)uD1 + (u 2)D0 − − 2 (eu 9)(u 1)uD2 + (3u2 20u + 9)D1 + (u 3)D0 − − − − 3 (u 16)(u 4)u2 D3 + 6u(u2 15u + 32)D2 + (7u2 68u + 64)D1 + (u 4)D0 − − − − − 4 (u 25)(u 9)(u 1)u2 D4 + 2u(5u3 140u2 + 777u 450)D3 + (25u3 518u2 + 1839u 450)D2 + (3u 5)(5u 57)D1 + (u 5)D0 − − − − − − − − − − 5 (u 36)(u 16)(u 4)u3 D5 + 5u2(3u3 140u2 + 1568u 3456)D4 + u(65u3 2408u2 + 19836u 27648)D3 − − − − − − − +6(15u3 406u2 + 2078u 1152)D2 + (31u2 516u + 1020)D1 + (u 6)D0 − − − − 6 (u 49)(u 25)(u 9)(u 1)u3 D6 + 3u2(7u4 504u3 + 9870u2 51664u + 33075)D5 − − − − − − +2u(70u4 4179u3 + 64749u2 247993u + 99225)D4 + 2(175u4 8232u3 + 92394u2 217012u + 33075)D3 − − − − +(301u3 10218u2 + 69561u 62020)D2 + 3(21u2 428u + 1071)D1 + (u 7)D0 − − − − 7 (u 64)(u 36)(u 16)(u 4)u4 D7 + 28u3(u4 105u3 + 3276u2 32800u + 73728)D6 − − − − − − +2u2(133u4 11928u3 + 307950u2 2432512u + 3981312)D5 + 30u(35u4 2590u3 + 52420u2 297856u + 294912)D4 − − − − +3(567u4 32820u3 + 474944u2 1616896u + 589824)D3 + 6(161u3 6645u2 + 57096u 70912)D2 − − − − +(127u2 3076u + 9312)D1 + (u 8)D0 − − 8 (u 81)(u 49)(u 25)(u 9)(u 1)u4 D8 + 12u3(3u5 440u4 + 20482u3 345620u2 + 1762035u 1190700)D7 − − − − − − − − +6u2(77u5 9856u4 + 391358u3 5455164u2 + 21884733u 10716300)D6 − − − +6u(441u5 48048u4 + 1569150u3 17075168u2 + 48951657u 14288400)D5 − − − +3(2317u5 207295u4 + 5264259u3 40651797u2 + 68940108u 7144200)D4 − − − +6(1295u4 89980u3 + 1614657u2 7325514u + 4441878)D3 + (3025u3 148126u2 + 1547883u 2474334)D2 − − − − +(255u2 7172u + 25461)D1 + (u 9)D0 − − A B = 1 m m = Sm Sm 3 for (ϑ f )(u) D [uf (u)]; the matrix Sm Q × can be partitioned into Sm C D for ∈ Sm Sm m +2 a 2 − + m + b + + + + ⌊ ⌋ s m 2 a 2 1 s a+b+m+1 [1 (m 1)δa,1][1 (m 1)δb,1] ∑ ( 1) m+1 −+s ⌊ ⌋ − 1 + ( 1) = − 2 b 1 (SA ) := − s 1 − (1.13) m a,b 1 m a b 1+( 1)m m 2 − + − 1 ( 1) 2 2 − 4 −⌊ 2 ⌋− (a 1)!(m + 2 a)! − j k − − where a,b Z 1, m + 1 , ∈ ∩ 2 B m+1 C (S )a,b = (1) (S )b ,a m ′ − m ′ m +2 a 2 − + m + s m+1 +s + + ⌊ ⌋ s m 2 a 2 1 + b′ 2 a+b +m [1 (m 1)δa,1] ∑ ( 1) m+1 −+s ⌊ ⌋+ − ( 1) + 1 + ( 1) ′ = − 2 b′ 1 − b′ 1 := − s 1 (1.14) 1 m a 1+( 1)m b 1+(1)m h m+1 i 2 (a 1)m+ − + ′ + − − ( 1) − 2 − 4 2 4 − 2 (a 1)!(m + 2 a)! − j k j k − − m m 1 where a Z 1, + 1 ,b Z 1, − , and ∈ ∩ 2 ′ ∈ ∩ 2 + m+1 + + + m 1 2 1 + a′ + b′ m 1 m 1 D 1 ( 1) ( 4) − [1 ( 1) ][1 ( 1) ] 2 2 (S )a ,b := − − − − (1.15) m ′ ′ + 2 a′ + b′ + + 2 m 1 ! ( 1) 2 2 a′ 1 b′ 1 2 − m 1 where a′,b′ Z 1, − .