Low-density limit of dynamical correlations in the Lieb-Liniger model

Extracted source text · arXiv 2010.11184

\documentclass[submission, Phys]{SciPost}
%\documentclass[article]
\pdfsuppresswarningpagegroup=1
\usepackage{hyperref}
\def\doi{http://dx.doi.org/}
\usepackage{amsmath,braket,mathdots,mathtools,amssymb,xcolor,calligra,color}
\usepackage{amsthm} % JJ
\usepackage{bbm}  
\usepackage{fancyhdr}
%\usepackage{fullpage}
\usepackage{float}
\usepackage{authblk}
\usepackage{color}
\usepackage{authblk}
\usepackage{cite} % JJ
%\usepackage{graphicx}
%\usepackage{qtree}

%tikz
\usepackage{tikz}
\usetikzlibrary{spy}
\usetikzlibrary{patterns}
\usetikzlibrary{calc,arrows,positioning}
\usetikzlibrary{arrows,shadows}
\usetikzlibrary{decorations.pathmorphing}	% For Feynman 
\usetikzlibrary{decorations.markings}
\usepackage{pgfplots}

\usepackage{pgfplotstable}
\usepackage{filecontents}
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}    


\newcommand{\be}{\begin{equation}}
\newcommand{\ee}{\end{equation}}
\newcommand{\bea}{\begin{eqnarray}}
\newcommand{\eea}{\end{eqnarray}}
\newcommand{\up}{\uparrow}
\newcommand{\down}{\downarrow}
\newcommand{\ws}{\color{red}}

\newcommand{\mergetables}[2]{
    \newif\iffirstrow
    \firstrowtrue

    \pgfplotsforeachungrouped \tablename in {#1}{
        \iffirstrow
            \pgfplotstableread{\tablename.dat}\temptable
            \pgfplotstabletranspose[input colnames to=colnames]{\temptabletransposed}{\temptable}
            \pgfplotstablemodifyeachcolumnelement{colnames}\of\temptabletransposed\as\cell{%
                \edef\cell{\tablename}%
            }
            \firstrowfalse
        \else
            \pgfplotstableread{\tablename.txt}\temptable
            \pgfplotstabletranspose[input colnames to=colnames]{\temptabletransposedcur}{\temptable}
            \pgfplotstablemodifyeachcolumnelement{colnames}\of\temptabletransposedcur\as\cell{%
                \edef\cell{\tablename}%
            }
            \pgfplotstablevertcat{\temptabletransposed}{\temptabletransposedcur}
        \fi
    }
    \pgfplotstabletranspose[colnames from=colnames, input colnames to=]{#2}{\temptabletransposed}
}
\def\trr{\text{tr}\,}
\def\tr{\thisrow}
\def\Xint#1{\mathchoice
   {\XXint\displaystyle\textstyle{#1}}%
   {\XXint\textstyle\scriptstyle{#1}}%
   {\XXint\scriptstyle\scriptscriptstyle{#1}}%
   {\XXint\scriptscriptstyle\scriptscriptstyle{#1}}%
   \!\int}
\def\Xiint#1{\mathchoice
   {\XXiint\displaystyle\textstyle{#1}}%
   {\XXiint\textstyle\scriptstyle{#1}}%
   {\XXiint\scriptstyle\scriptscriptstyle{#1}}%
   {\XXiint\scriptscriptstyle\scriptscriptstyle{#1}}%
   \!\iint}
\def\XXint#1#2#3{{\setbox0=\hbox{$#1{#2#3}{\int}$}
     \vcenter{\hbox{$#2#3$}}\kern-.5\wd0}}
\def\ddashint{\Xint=}
\def\dashint{\Xint-}
\def\dashiint{\Xiint-}
\def\nn{\nonumber\\}
\def\tt{\tilde{\theta}}
\def\fr#1{(\ref{#1})}
\def\ontop#1#2{\genfrac{}{}{0pt}{}{#1}{#2}}
\def\fn{f_{\vec{\nu}}}
\def\bl#1{{\color{blue}{#1}}}
\def\bell{\ell}
\def\orho#1{{{{\cal O}\big(\rho_\beta^{#1}\big)}}}
\let\OLDthebibliography\thebibliography
\renewcommand\thebibliography[1]{
  \OLDthebibliography{#1}
  \setlength{\parskip}{0pt}
  \setlength{\itemsep}{0pt plus 0.3ex}
}

\lhead{}
\rhead{}
\newcommand{\jesper}[1]{$\framebox{\tiny j}$\ \textbf{\texttt{{\color{red}\footnotesize#1}}}}

\newcommand{\arccot}{\,\text{arccot}\,}
\newcommand{\cotan}{\,\text{cotan}\,}
\newcommand{\sign}{\,\text{sgn}\,}
\newcommand{\Tr}{\,\text{tr}\,}
\newcommand{\argth}{\,\text{argth}\,}
\newcommand{\rvoid}{|0\rangle}
\newcommand{\argsh}{\,\text{argsh}\,}
\newcommand{\li}{\,\text{Li}\,}
\newcommand{\cl}{\,\text{Cl}_2\,}
\newcommand{\D}[1]{\text{d}#1}
\newcommand{\ld}{\underset{\text{l.d.}}{\sim}}
\newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}
\newtheorem{definition}{Definition}
\newtheorem{property}{Lemma}
\newtheorem{remark}{Remark}

\begin{document}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{center}
{\Large\bf Low-density limit of dynamical correlations in the Lieb-Liniger model}
\end{center}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begin{center}
Etienne Granet\textsuperscript{1$\star$},
\end{center}
\begin{center}
{\bf 1} The Rudolf Peierls Centre for Theoretical Physics, Oxford
University, Oxford OX1 3PU, UK\\
${}^\star$ {\small \sf etienne.granet@physics.ox.ac.uk}
\end{center}
\date{\today}

\section*{Abstract}
{\bf 
We derive explicit expressions for dynamical correlations of the field and density operators in the Lieb-Liniger model, within an arbitrary eigenstate with a small particle density ${\cal D}$. They are valid for all space and time and any interaction strength $c>0$, and are the leading order of an expansion in ${\cal D}$. This expansion is obtained by writing the correlation functions as sums over form factors when formally decomposed into partial fractions.

}
%
%\vspace{10pt}
%\noindent\rule{\textwidth}{1pt}
%\tableofcontents\thispagestyle{fancy}
%\noindent\rule{\textwidth}{1pt}
%\vspace{10pt}

\renewcommand\Affilfont{\fontsize{9}{10.8}\itshape}
%\renewcommand{\thesubsection}{\arabic{subsection}}

 
\tableofcontents
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\section{Introduction}
The Lieb-Liniger model is a key paradigm of many-particle systems\cite{LiebLiniger63a,Brezin64,korepin}. In the repulsive regime, it is  considered as one of the simplest interacting quantum integrable model, for having the simplifying feature of involving only real rapidities\cite{Lieb63,YangYang69}. The main objects of interest are the correlation functions of local observables in the thermodynamic limit, that are the macroscopic output of the model resulting from the short-range interactions between the bosons. Moreover their Fourier transform is directly measurable in cold-atoms experiments \cite{naegerl15,Bouchoule16,Fabbri15}. Although exactly solvable, the computation of correlation functions in quantum integrable models is a notoriously difficult problem. In particular the computation of dynamical correlations for an arbitrary interaction strength $c$ and within arbitrary eigenstate is an open problem.

Special cases of this problem were studied and solved in the past. The first of these special cases is the impenetrable bosons limit $c\to\infty$, that can be reformulated in terms of free fermions \cite{girardeau}. Here, both because of the free fermionic nature of the model and the simple structure of the form factor\footnote{The Transverse Field Ising Model, although also equivalent to free fermions, cannot be fully treated along the same lines because of its more complex form factors \cite{GFE20}.}, the Lehmann representation of dynamical correlations can be fully resummed into a Fredholm determinant\cite{KS90,slavnov90,izergin87,kojima97} and its asymptotics extracted with differential equations \cite{IIKS90,IIKV92}. Another important special case is the ground state static correlation at finite $c$, that was treated within the Algebraic Bethe ansatz framework\cite{kitanineetalg} and led to the first ab initio calculation of the critical exponents previously predicted by Conformal Field Theory and Luttinger Liquid theory\cite{BIK86,IKR87,haldane,cazalilla}. This approach was then generalized to static correlations within arbitrary eigenstates \cite{kozlowskimailletslvanov,kozlowskimailletslvanov2}. The particular case of static correlators within thermal eigenstates was also studied with quantum transfer matrix methods\cite{suzuki85,klumper92,patuklumper}. The full asymptotics of ground state dynamical correlations were derived in \cite{kitanineetcformfactor,kozlowskimaillet,kozlowski4} from form factor expansions, confirming predictions of Non-Linear Luttinger Liquid theory\cite{IG08,PAW09,ISG12,P12,shashipanfilcaux,Price17}.

%H
%
%The first works on the computation of dynamical correlation functions in the Lieb-Liniger model with interaction strength $c$ focused on the impenetrable limit $c\to\infty$, that is equivalent to free fermions \cite{Lenard64,Lenard66,VaidyaTracy79a,VaidyaTracy79b,JMMS80,Thacker81,IIK89,KS90,IIK90a,IIK90b,IIKS90,IIK91,IIKV92,Gangardt04}. In this case the full dynamical correlations within arbitrary macrostates can be written as Fredholm determinants and their asymptotics determined with Riemann-Hilbert problems. At finite interaction strength $c$ the earliest works studied the static ground-state correlations with techniques of Algebraic Bethe ansatz \cite{izerginkorepin84,korepin87,jimbomiwa92,jimbomiwa96}, culminating with the derivation of the critical exponents from an ab initio Bethe ansatz calculation for the first time \cite{kitanineetalg2,kitanineetalg}. Ground state dynamical correlations were also studied with form factor summations, leading to a complete understanding of the their late time expansion \cite{slavnov90,izergin87,kojima97,kitanineetcformfactor,kozlowskimaillet,kozlowski4}. Finite-temperature static correlations were studied with quantum transfer matrix methods \cite{suzuki85,klumper92,patuklumper}, and algebraic Bethe ansatz methods were generalized to static correlations within arbitrary eigenstates \cite{kozlowskimailletslvanov,kozlowskimailletslvanov2}.

Progress on the general case of dynamical correlations within arbitrary states at finite $c$ has been much more limited. This calculation is very different from the special cases of zero-temperature or static cases and poses important problems. The successful methods for static correlations such as the algebraic Bethe ansatz approach or the quantum transfer matrix methods do not apply to the dynamical case, and the form factor expansion used to compute ground state dynamical correlations  relied on combinatorial identities that are usable for zero-entropy states only. This general case has however been studied through several approaches. Firstly, Generalized HydroDynamics (GHD) provide predictions for the leading asymptotics of the dynamical correlations of conserved charges such as the density within arbitrary macrostates\cite{CADY16,BCDF16,Doyon18}. However the approach cannot a priori be applied to compute the next corrections, restricting the dynamical structure factor to small frequency and momentum, and does not apply neither to semi-local operators such as the field correlations. Secondly, numerical summations of dominant form factors proved very efficient and permitted to obtain numerical estimations of the dynamical structure factor on the full plane \cite{cauxcalabreseslavnov,PC14}. On the Bethe-ansatz calculations side, one-point functions within arbitrary eigenstates were studied in \cite{negrosmirovn,bastianellopiroli,bastianellopirolicalabrese}. An approach based on thermodynamic form factors was started \cite{deNP15,deNP16,DNP18,panfil20,cortescuberopanfil1,cortescuberopanfil2}, but still involves non-integrable singularities and so requires a particular understanding of this feature. A regularized form factor expansion was derived for the XXZ spin chain in \cite{kozlowski1}. In \cite{granetessler20} was computed the full spectral sum at order $c^{-2}$ for all root densities and all momentum and frequency, involving one- and two-particle-hole excitations. It showed the necessity for a fine-tuned treatment of the non-integrable singularities that is crucial for e.g. detailed balance to be satisfied in thermal states.


The objective of this paper is to derive the full dynamical correlations for all space and time and all interaction strength $c$, in the limit where the particle density ${\cal D}$ of the averaging state becomes small. This low-density limit is defined in terms of a partial fraction decomposition of the form factor, initially introduced in \cite{GFE20} in a model that can be reformulated into free fermions. This decomposition naturally organizes the spectral sum as an expansion in the particle density ${\cal D}$ of the averaging state, and the low-density limit is defined as the leading term of this expansion. 

This result provides another limiting case where the initial problem becomes solvable, namely the computation of dynamical correlations for all space and time and arbitrary $c$ within finite-entropy macrostates. Moreover the framework also enables to compute the subleading corrections in the particle density, as was explicitly shown in \cite{GFE20} for the Transverse Field Ising Model. The computation of these subleading corrections in the interacting case however comes with higher technical difficulties and should be the object of further work. Finally, this low-density limit calculation sheds light on the structure of the spectral sum and the nature of the states contributing in the thermodynamic limit.

In Section \ref{sec1} we introduce the Lieb-Liniger model and recall known results on its form factors. In Section \ref{ldd} we define what is meant by low-density limit of the dynamical correlations, taking the field correlations as an example. In Section \ref{fieldsection} we compute the low-density limit of the field two-point function \eqref{field}, and in Section \ref{densitysection} the low-density limit of the density two-point function \eqref{densityde}.


\section{\texorpdfstring{Lieb-Liniger model}{Lg}}
\label{sec1}
\subsection {Definition}

The Lieb-Liniger model \cite{LiebLiniger63a} is a non-relativistic
quantum field theory model with Hamiltonian
\begin{equation}
H=\int_0^L dx\left[-\psi^\dagger(x)\frac{d^2}{dx^2}\psi(x)+c\psi^\dagger(x)\psi^\dagger(x)\psi(x)\psi(x)
\right]\,,
\label{HLL}
\end{equation}
where the canonical Bose field $\psi(x)$ satisfies equal-time
commutation relations
\begin{equation}
[\psi(x),\psi^\dagger(y)]=\delta(x-y)\,.
\end{equation}
We will impose periodic boundary
  conditions.
%There is a one-to-one 
%correspondance between the eigenstates and energies of the delta-Bose
%gas and those of the Lieb-Liniger model, that is a quantum mechanics
%In first quantization \fr{HLL} corresponds to a quantum mechanical
%system of $N$ particles with positions $0\leq x_1,...,x_N \leq L$ and
%Hamiltonian
%\begin{equation}
%H=\sum_{k=1}^N-\left( \frac{\partial}{\partial x_k}\right)^2+2c \sum_{j<k}\delta(x_j-x_k)\,.
%\end{equation}
For later convenience we define the time-$t$ evolved version of the field $\psi(x,t)=e^{iHt}\psi(x)e^{-iHt}$. We also define the density operator at position $x$
\begin{equation}
\sigma(x)=\psi^\dagger(x)\psi(x)\,,
\end{equation}
and its time-$t$ evolved version $\sigma(x,t)=e^{iHt}\sigma(x)e^{-iHt}$.
%The objective of the paper is to compute the infinite-size limit $L\to\infty$ of the two-point function $\langle \sigma(x,t)\sigma(0,0)\rangle$ averaged between \textit{any} eigenstates and for \textit{all} $x,t$ at order $1/c^2$ when $c\to\infty$.

\subsection {The Bethe ansatz solution}
\subsubsection{The spectrum}
The Lieb-Liniger model is solvable by the Bethe ansatz: an eigenstate $|\pmb{\lambda}\rangle$ with $N$ bosons can be written as
\begin{equation}
|\pmb{\lambda}\rangle=B(\lambda_1)...B(\lambda_N)|0\rangle\,,
\end{equation}
with the $B(\lambda)$'s some creation operators, $|0\rangle$ the pseudo-vacuum and the $\lambda_i$'s some rapidities that satisfy the following set of 'Bethe equations'
\begin{equation}
e^{iL\lambda_k}=\prod_{\substack{j=1\\j\neq k}}^N\frac{\lambda_k-\lambda_j+ic}{\lambda_k-\lambda_j-ic}\,,
\quad k=1,\dots, N.
\end{equation}
The
energy $E$ and the momentum $P$ of this state read 
\begin{equation}
E(\pmb{\lambda})=\sum_{i=1}^N \lambda_i^2\,,\qquad P(\pmb{\lambda})=\sum_{i=1}^N\lambda_i\,.
\end{equation}
It is convenient to express the Bethe equations in logarithmic form
\begin{equation}
\label{belog}
\frac{\lambda_k}{2\pi}=\frac{I_k}{L}-\frac{1}{L}\sum_{j=1}^N \frac{1}{\pi}\arctan \frac{\lambda_k-\lambda_j}{c}\,,
\end{equation}
with $I_k$ an integer if $N$ is odd, a half-integer if $N$ is even. For $c>0$ all the solutions to this equation are real \cite{korepin}. We will denote
\begin{equation}
{\cal D}=\frac{N}{L}\,,
\end{equation}
the particle density of the eigenstate $|\pmb{\lambda}\rangle$.

%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\subsubsection{The field form factors}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Our aim is to calculate correlation functions in an eigenstate $|\pmb{\lambda}\rangle$ at low particle density ${\cal D}$. We will focus on the two-point function of the field operator
\begin{equation}
  \left\langle \psi^\dagger( x,t) \psi ( 0,0) \right\rangle =\frac {\left\langle \pmb{\lambda} \left|  \psi^\dagger( x,t) \psi ( 0,0) \right| \pmb{\lambda} \right\rangle } {\left\langle \pmb{\lambda}  |\pmb{\lambda}  \right\rangle }\,,
\end{equation}
and the two-point function of the density operator
\begin{equation}
  \left\langle \sigma( x,t) \sigma ( 0,0) \right\rangle =\frac {\left\langle \pmb{\lambda} \left| \sigma( x,t) \sigma ( 0,0) \right| \pmb{\lambda} \right\rangle } {\left\langle \pmb{\lambda}  |\pmb{\lambda}  \right\rangle }\,.
\end{equation}
Our strategy is to use a Lehman representation in terms of energy eigenstates
$|\pmb{\mu}\rangle =|\mu_1,...,\mu_{N'}\rangle$, where
$\{\mu_1,\dots,\mu_{N'}\}$ are solutions to the Bethe equations \fr{belog} to rewrite the correlation functions as sums of form factors over the full spectrum. For the two-point function of a generic operator ${\cal O}$ this representation reads
\begin{equation}
\label{bigsumfield}
\begin{aligned}
  \left\langle  {\cal O}^\dagger( x,t){\cal O}( 0,0)  \right\rangle &=\sum _{ \pmb{\mu}}\frac {\left| \left\langle \pmb{\mu} |{\cal O}( 0) |\pmb{\lambda}\right\rangle \right| ^{2}} {\left\langle \pmb{\lambda} \left| \pmb{\lambda} \right\rangle \left\langle \pmb{\mu}\right| \pmb{\mu}\right\rangle }e^{it\left( E\left( \pmb{\lambda}\right) -E\left( \pmb{\mu} \right) \right) +ix\left( P\left( \pmb{\mu}\right) -P\left( \pmb{\lambda}\right) \right) }\,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}

The (normalized) form factors of the field and density operators between two Bethe
states $|\pmb{\lambda}\rangle,|\pmb{\mu}\rangle$ with respective numbers of Bethe roots $N,N'$ have been computed previously \cite{Korepin82,Slavnov89,Slavnov90,KorepinSlavnov99,Oota04,KozlowskiForm11}. 

In the case of the field operator, it reads
\begin{equation}\label{FF}
\begin{aligned}
&\frac { \left\langle \pmb{\mu} |\psi ( 0) |\pmb{\lambda}\right\rangle  } {\sqrt{\left\langle \pmb{\lambda} \left| \pmb{\lambda} \right\rangle \left\langle \pmb{\mu}\right| \pmb{\mu}\right\rangle }}=\delta_{N,N'+1}\frac{i^{N+1}(-1)^{N(N-1)/2}}{L^{N-1/2}\sqrt{\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\lambda}}\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\mu}}}}\frac{\prod_{i< j}|\lambda_i-\lambda_j|\prod_{i< j}|\mu_i-\mu_j|}{\prod_{i, j}(\mu_j-\lambda_i)}\\
&\qquad\times\sqrt{\frac{\prod_{i\neq j}(\lambda_i-\lambda_j+ic)}{\prod_{i\neq j}(\mu_i-\mu_j+ic)}}\prod_{\substack{j=1\\j\neq p,s}}^N(V_j^+-V_j^-) \,\,\underset{i,j=1,...,N}{\det}\Bigg[\delta_{ij}+U_{ij}\Bigg]\,,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
%\begin{equation}
%\begin{aligned}
%&\frac {\left| \left\langle \pmb{\mu} |\psi \left( 0\right) |\pmb{\lambda}\right\rangle \right| ^{2}} {\left\langle \pmb{\lambda} \left| \pmb{\lambda} \right\rangle \left\langle \pmb{\mu}\right| \pmb{\mu}\right\rangle }=\frac{\delta_{N,N'+1}}{L^{2N-1}\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\lambda}}\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\mu}}}\frac{\prod_{i\neq j}(\lambda_i-\lambda_j)\prod_{i\neq j}(\mu_i-\mu_j)}{\prod_{i, j}(\lambda_i-\mu_j)^2}\\
%&\qquad\times\frac{\prod_{i\neq j}(\lambda_i-\lambda_j+ic)}{\prod_{i\neq j}(\mu_i-\mu_j+ic)}\frac{1}{(V_p^+-V_p^-)^2(V_s^+-V_s^-)^2} \,\,\underset{i,j=1,...,N}{\det}\Bigg[\delta_{ij}(V_i^+-V_i^-)\\
%&\qquad\qquad+i\frac{\prod_k (\mu_k-\lambda_i)}{\prod_{k\neq i}(\lambda_k-\lambda_i)}\left(\frac{2c}{c^2+(\lambda_i-\lambda_j)^2}-\frac{4c^2}{(c^2+(\lambda_p-\lambda_j)^2)(c^2+(\lambda_s-\lambda_i)^2)}\right)\Bigg]^2\,,
%\end{aligned}
%\end{equation}
for any $p,s=1,...,N$. The various terms entering this expression are
\begin{equation}
V_i^\pm=\frac{\prod_{k=1}^{N-1}(\mu_k-\lambda_i\pm ic)}{\prod_{k=1}^{N}(\lambda_k-\lambda_i\pm ic)}\,,
\end{equation}
and the $N\times N$ matrix
\begin{equation}
U_{jk}=\frac{i}{V_j^+-V_j^-}\left[\frac{2c}{c^2+(\lambda_j-\lambda_k)^2}-\frac{4c^2}{(c^2+(\lambda_p-\lambda_k)^2)(c^2+(\lambda_s-\lambda_j)^2)}\right]\frac{\prod_{m=1}^{N-1}(\mu_m-\lambda_j)}{\prod_{m\neq j}(\lambda_m-\lambda_j)}\,,
\end{equation}
and finally
\begin{equation}
\label{norm}
\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\lambda}}=\det G(\pmb{\lambda})\,,
\end{equation}
with the Gaudin matrix \cite{Gaudin71}
\begin{equation}\label{gaudin}
G_{ij}(\pmb{\lambda})= \delta_{ij} \left(1+\frac{1}{L}\sum_{k=1}^N \frac{2c}{c^2+(\lambda_i-\lambda_k)^2}\right)-\frac{1}{L}\frac{2c}{c^2+(\lambda_i-\lambda_j)^2}\,.
\end{equation}
The form factor of the density operator reads
\begin{equation}\label{desnityff}
\begin{aligned}
&\frac { \left\langle \pmb{\mu} |\sigma ( 0) |\pmb{\lambda}\right\rangle  } {\sqrt{\left\langle \pmb{\lambda} \left| \pmb{\lambda} \right\rangle \left\langle \pmb{\mu}\right| \pmb{\mu}\right\rangle }}=\delta_{N,N'}\frac{i^{N+1}(-1)^{N(N-1)/2}(\sum_{j=1}^N \lambda_j-\mu_j)}{L^{N}\sqrt{\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\lambda}}\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\mu}}}}\frac{\prod_{i< j}|\lambda_i-\lambda_j|\prod_{i< j}|\mu_i-\mu_j|}{\prod_{i, j}(\mu_j-\lambda_i)}\\
&\qquad\times\sqrt{\prod_{i, j}\frac{\lambda_i-\lambda_j+ic}{\mu_i-\mu_j+ic}}\prod_{j\neq p}(V_j^+-V_j^-) \,\,\underset{i,j=1,...,N}{\det}\Bigg[\delta_{ij}+U'_{ij}\Bigg]\,,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
for any $p=1,...,N$, with
\begin{equation}
U'_{jk}=i\frac{\mu_j-\lambda_j}{V_j^+-V_j^-}\left[\frac{2c}{(\lambda_j-\lambda_k)^2+c^2}-\frac{2c}{(\lambda_p-\lambda_k)^2+c^2}\right]\prod_{m\neq j}\frac{\mu_m-\lambda_j}{\lambda_m-\lambda_j}\,,
\end{equation}
and with now
\begin{equation}
V_j^\pm=\frac{\prod_{k=1}^{N}(\mu_k-\lambda_j\pm ic)}{\prod_{k=1}^{N}(\lambda_k-\lambda_j\pm ic)}\,.
\end{equation}
\subsubsection{Root densities}
In the thermodynamic limit, any sum of a non-singular function over the Bethe roots can be expressed in terms of a \textit{root density} that characterizes a macrostate as far as such quantities are concerned
\begin{equation}
\underset{L\to\infty}{\lim}\, \frac{1}{L^n}\sum_{i_1,...,i_n}f(\lambda_{i_1},...,\lambda_{i_n})=\int_{-\infty}^\infty \dots\int_{-\infty}^\infty f(\lambda_1,...,\lambda_n)\rho(\lambda_1)\dots\rho(\lambda_n)\D{\lambda_1}\dots\D{\lambda_n}\,.
\end{equation}
However if the function is singular the result will in general depend on the representative state of the macrostate, see \cite{granetessler20}.
It is customary to introduce the hole density $\rho_h(\lambda)$ defined by
\begin{equation}
\label{vartheta}
\rho(\lambda)+\rho_h(\lambda)=\frac{1}{2\pi}+\frac{1}{2\pi}\int_{-\infty}^\infty \frac{2c}{c^2+(\lambda-\mu)^2}\rho(\mu)\D{\mu}\,.
\end{equation}

\section {Definition of the low-density limit \label{ldd}}
The purpose of this section is to define what is meant by the \textit{low density limit} of correlation functions. It is defined as the \textit{leading order of an expansion} in ${\cal D}$, obtained by decomposing the form factor in partial fractions. As a consequence it is an expression valid for all $x,t$ and $c$, that becomes closer to the dynamical correlations as the particle density ${\cal D}$ of the averaging state becomes smaller.\\

This definition requires some technicalities, but is rigorous and allows for a computation of the next orders, as shown in \cite{GFE20} for a model that can be reformulated into free fermions. However, it a priori lacks some intuitive picture. For that reason we provide an interpretation of this low-density limit so defined as a Lehmann representation in terms of the \textit{low density limit of the form factor}. The reasoning is here rather different, and consists in first approximating the form factor by the thermodynamic limit value they take when one of the two states is a dilute state, i.e. such that for any pair $i,j$ we have  $L(\lambda_i-\lambda_j)\to\infty$. In this limit, the spectral sum of the dynamical correlations indeed matches the leading order of the expansion in ${\cal D}$, providing an interesting and intuitive consistency check. But it must be stressed that the right definition of the low-density limit is more general than this intuitive calculation, since it only requires ${\cal D}$ to be small, not the root density $\rho(\lambda)$ to be small everywhere.

  
%There are two possible definitions:
%\begin{itemize}
%\item One can define the low density limit 
%
%\item It can also be defined as the Lehmann representation in terms of the \textit{low density limit of the form factor}. 
%\end{itemize}
%The second definition is more intuitive and practical, but is less rigorous and cannot seemingly be generalized to the higher orders of the density. The first definition, although heavier, is perfectly well defined and allows for a computation of the next orders, as shown in \cite{GFE20} for a model that can be reformulated into free fermions. 

\subsection {Partial fraction decomposition}
\subsubsection{Recall \label{pfddefsec}}
We recall that the partial fraction decomposition (PFD) of a ratio of two polynomials $\frac{P(X)}{\prod_{i=1}^n(X-x_i)^{a_i}}$ with distinct $x_i$'s is the writing
\begin{equation}\label{pfddef}
\frac{P(X)}{\prod_{i=1}^n(X-x_i)^{a_i}}=P_0(X)+\sum_{i=1}^n \sum_{\nu=1}^{a_i}\frac{B_{i,\nu}}{(X-x_i)^\nu}\,,
\end{equation}
with $P_0(X)$ a polynomial, and $B_{i,\nu}$ coefficients given by
\begin{equation}
B_{i,\nu}=\frac{1}{(a_i-\nu)!}(\tfrac{d}{dX})^{a_i-\nu}[(X-x_i)^{a_i}P(X)]|_{X=x_i}\,.
\end{equation}
The polynomial $P_0(X)$ can be determined by studying e.g. the large $X$ behaviour of the ratio of the two polynomials on the left-hand side of \eqref{pfddef}.
\subsubsection{The poles of the normalized form factor}
We consider $ \pmb{\lambda}  $ and $ \pmb{\mu}  $ two sets of respectively $N$ and $N-1$ rapidities, and would like to apply a partial fraction decomposition to the square of the normalized field form factor, with respect to each of the $\mu_i$'s successively. The first task is to identify the poles of a $\mu_i$ at fixed other $\mu_j$'s. There are a priori three types of poles for $\mu_i$
\begin{enumerate}
\item Double poles in $\lambda_j$ for all $j$
\item Simple poles in $\mu_j \pm ic$ for all $j$
\item Poles corresponding to zeros of the determinant of the Gaudin matrix $\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\mu}}$
\end{enumerate}
We remark that the last two types of poles come from the fact that we consider normalized form factors. We also remark that since some of the entries of the Gaudin matrix diverge when $\mu_i-\mu_j\to \pm ic$, the second type of pole could happen to be absent from the full normalized form factor, but this possibility will not be relevant to our discussion. Lastly we notice that the last two types of poles are in fact never attained when all the roots $\mu_i$ are real, which is always the case if $c>0$. Indeed, when the roots are real, the Gaudin matrix is strictly dominant diagonal, i.e. satisfies $\forall i=1,...,N-1,\quad |G_{ii}|>\sum_{j\neq i}|G_{ij}|$, hence is invertible. However, when performing the PFD of the form factor it has to be considered as a mere fraction of polynomials in $\mu_i$'s that do not necessarily satisfy the Bethe equations, and these poles have to be taken into account indeed.

Among these three types of poles, the zeros of $\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\mu}}$ are the most problematic since their location is a complicated function of the other $\mu_j$'s. For this reason we are going to consider the PFD of the form factor without these factors.
%
%
%When all the roots are real, the only poles in the form factor are those in $\mu_i-\lambda_j$ for all $j$. Indeed, the only other possible source of poles for real roots is the determinant $\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\mu}}$, but for real roots it is always non-zero since the Gaudin matrix is a strictly dominant diagonal matrix, namely it satisfies
%\begin{equation}
%\forall i=1,...,N,\quad |G_{ii}|>\sum_{j\neq i}|G_{ij}|\,.
%\end{equation}
%However, when writing a partial fraction decomposition  there are also other poles whenever $\mu_i-\mu_j\pm ic=0$, and when one of the norms $\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\lambda}}$ vanish. 
Namely we define $F_\psi(\pmb{\lambda},\pmb{\mu})$ by
\begin{equation}\label{pfd}
\begin{aligned}
\frac {\left| \left\langle \pmb{\mu} |\psi \left( 0\right) |\pmb{\lambda}\right\rangle \right| ^{2}} {\left\langle \pmb{\lambda} \left| \pmb{\lambda} \right\rangle \left\langle \pmb{\mu}\right| \pmb{\mu}\right\rangle }= \frac{F_\psi(\pmb{\lambda},\pmb{\mu})}{\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\lambda}}\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\mu}}L^{2N-1}} \,,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
and consider the PFD of $F_\psi(\pmb{\lambda},\pmb{\mu})$ only, with respect to the $\mu_i$'s. 

\subsubsection{The shape of the PFD of the reduced form factor}
The reduced form factor $F_\psi(\pmb{\lambda},\pmb{\mu})$, seen as a function of $\mu_1$, is a ratio of two polynomials with double poles in each of the $\lambda_i$'s and simple poles in $\mu_j\pm ic$, so one can apply the decomposition written in Section \ref{pfddefsec}. Since the reduced form factor goes to zero when $\mu_1\to\infty$, we have $P_0(X)=0$ and so one can write
\begin{equation}\label{154}
F_\psi(\pmb{\lambda},\pmb{\mu})=h_{\mu_1}(\mu_2,...,\mu_{N-1})+\sum_{i=1}^N \sum_{\nu=1}^{2}\frac{B_{i,\nu}(\mu_2,...,\mu_{N-1})}{(\mu_1-\lambda_i)^\nu}\,,
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
h_{\mu_1}(\mu_2,...,\mu_{N-1})=\sum_{i=2}^{N-1} \frac{C^+_{i}(\mu_2,...,\mu_{N-1})}{\mu_1-\mu_i+ic}+\sum_{i=2}^{N-1} \frac{C^-_{i}(\mu_2,...,\mu_{N-1})}{\mu_1-\mu_i-ic}\,,
\end{equation}
where $B_{i,\nu}(\mu_2,...,\mu_{N-1})$, $C^\pm_{i}(\mu_2,...,\mu_{N-1})$ are 'coefficients' independent of $\mu_1$, but that still possess a dependence in the remaining $\mu_k$'s. They have the same pole structure, except that each $\mu_i$ for $i\neq 1$ does not anymore has a pole in $\mu_1\pm ic$. The function $h_{\mu_1}(\mu_2,...,\mu_{N-1})$ is a function of $\mu_1$ that has no poles in $\mu_1$ when all the $\mu_j$'s are real. 
%The relation \eqref{154} can equally be written as
%\begin{equation}
%F(\pmb{\lambda},\pmb{\mu})=\sum_{\nu=0}^2 \begin{cases}h_{\mu_1}(\mu_2,...,\mu_{N-1})\qquad \text{if }\nu=0\\
%\sum_{i=1}^N\frac{B_{i,1}(\mu_2,...,\mu_{N-1})}{\mu_1-\lambda_i}\qquad \text{if }\nu=1\\
%\sum_{i=1}^N\frac{B_{i,1}(\mu_2,...,\mu_{N-1})}{(\mu_1-\lambda_i)^2}\qquad \text{if }\nu=2\\
%\end{cases}
%\end{equation}
We now apply the same procedure to $B_{i,\nu}(\mu_2,...,\mu_{N-1})$ and $h_{\mu_1}(\mu_2,...,\mu_{N-1})$ with respect to $\mu_2$ to obtain the writing
\begin{equation}
F_\psi(\pmb{\lambda},\pmb{\mu})=h_{\mu_1,\mu_2}(\mu_3,...,\mu_{N-1})+\sum_{i=1}^N\sum_{j=1}^N\sum_{\nu_i=0}^2\sum_{\nu_j=1}^2\frac{B_{i,\nu_i,j,\nu_j}(\mu_3,...,\mu_{N-1})}{(\mu_1-\lambda_i)^{\nu_i}(\mu_2-\lambda_j)^{\nu_j}}\,,
\end{equation}
where $B_{i,\nu_i,j,\nu_j}(\mu_3,...,\mu_{N-1})$ is a 'coefficient' independent of $\mu_1,\mu_2$, and $h_{\mu_1,\mu_2}(\mu_3,...,\mu_{N-1})$ a  function of $\mu_1,\mu_2$ without singularities in real $\mu_1,\mu_2$. We note that the poles in $\mu_2$ arising from the function $h_{\mu_1}(\mu_2,...,\mu_{N-1})$ that has no poles in real $\mu_1$ are counted through the case $\nu_i=0$. Proceeding recursively, one obtains the writing

\begin{equation}\label{pfd}
F_\psi(\pmb{\lambda},\pmb{\mu})=\sum_{\{\nu\},f}\frac{A(\pmb{\lambda},\pmb{\mu},\{\nu\},f)}{\prod_{i=1}^{N-1}(\mu_i-\lambda_{f(i)})^{\nu_i}}\,,
\end{equation}
where each $\nu_i$ takes the value $0$, $1$ or $2$, and where $f$ are functions defined on the points $i\in\{1,...,N-1\}$ where $\nu_i>0$, namely
\begin{equation}
f:\{i\in\{1,...,N-1\} | \nu_i>0 \}\to \{1,...,N\}\,.
\end{equation}
The coefficients $A(\pmb{\lambda},\pmb{\mu},\{\nu\},f)$ crucially do not depend on any $\mu_i$ whenever $\nu_i>0$, and are bounded regular functions of real $\mu_i$ when $\nu_i=0$. 
%Again, the fact that the values $\nu_i=0$ are authorized in spite of the vanishing of $P_0(X)$ in \eqref{154} comes from the fact that they encapsulate the simple poles in $\mu_i-\mu_j\pm ic$ that we choose to not make explicit in \eqref{pfd}. Such a choice is motivated by the fact that these poles are never encountered for physical values of the roots. 

\subsubsection{Computing the coefficients}
In the special case where all $\nu_i>0$, the coefficients $A(\pmb{\lambda},\pmb{\mu},\{\nu\},f)=A(\pmb{\lambda},\{\nu\},f)$ do not depend on any $\mu_i$'s and can be computed according to the formula
\begin{equation}
\label{formulA}
A(\pmb{\lambda},\{\nu\},f)=\prod_{i=1}^{N-1}\left[\left(\frac{d}{d\mu_i}\right)^{2-\nu_i} (\mu_i-\lambda_{f(i)})^2 \right]F_\psi(\pmb{\lambda},\pmb{\mu})|_{\mu_i=\lambda_{f(i)}}\,.
\end{equation}
If now there is a subset $K\subset\{1,...,N-1\}$ such that $\nu_i=0$ for $i\in K$, one first defines the following function of the $\mu_i$'s for $i\in K$
\begin{equation}
\label{formulA2}
\bar{A}(\{\mu_i\}_{i\in K}|\pmb{\lambda},\{\nu\},f)=\prod_{\substack{i=1\\ i\notin K}}^{N-1}\left[\left(\frac{d}{d\mu_i}\right)^{2-\nu_i} (\mu_i-\lambda_{f(i)})^2 \right]F_\psi(\pmb{\lambda},\pmb{\mu})|_{\mu_i=\lambda_{f(i)},\, i\notin K}\,.
\end{equation}
The function $\bar{A}(\{\mu_i\}_{i\in K}|\pmb{\lambda},\{\nu\},f)$ still has poles in $\mu_i$ for $i\in K$ since it also contains all the cases when $\nu_i>0$. To compute the coefficient $A(\pmb{\lambda},\pmb{\mu},\{\nu\},f)$ one has to remove from this function any pole in real $\mu_i$ for $i\in K$. Although these formulas are not very explicit, they are still of practical use to compute the simplest terms in the PFD, as we will see below.\\



The functions $f$ over which we sum in \eqref{pfd} are actually rather constrained. First, since the form factor vanishes whenever two $\mu_i$'s or two $\lambda_i$'s coincide, we see from \eqref{formulA} and  \eqref{formulA2} that if $\nu_i=2$ or $\nu_j=2$ and $f(i)=f(j)$, then the corresponding coefficient vanishes (namely, $A(\pmb{\lambda},\{\nu\},f)=0$ if all $\nu_k>0$ are non-zero, and $\bar{A}(\{\mu_i\}_{i\in K}|\pmb{\lambda},\{\nu\},f)=0$ if there is a vanishing $\nu_k$). If we have $\nu_i=\nu_j=2$ it directly follows from the absence of derivative in \eqref{formulA}; if $\nu_i$ or $\nu_j$ is equal to $1$, then it follows from the fact that there is a zero of order $2$ in the numerator with only one derivative. Similarly, if $k$ indices have a $\nu_i=1$ and take the same value through $f$, then there is a zero of order $k(k-1)$ in the numerator, with only $k$ derivatives. Hence this imposes $k=2$. Thus one can impose in \eqref{pfd} the two following constrains: (i) that $f(i)\neq f(j)$ whenever $\nu_i=2$ or $\nu_j=2$, and (ii) that $f$ can take at most twice the same value.\\

In the following we will denote the number of elements of a set $E$ by
\begin{equation}
|E|\qquad \text{or}\qquad \# E\,,
\end{equation}
according to the most readable choice in the context.

\subsection {A density expansion}

Let us now rewrite the Lehmann representation \eqref{bigsumfield} in the following way. Instead of summing over the Bethe roots $\mu_i$, we sum over their Bethe numbers $J_i$, and trade the ordering of the Bethe numbers for a non-ordered sum with a $\frac{1}{(N-1)!}$ factor. Whenever two Bethe numbers coincide, the form factor is zero so that the two representations are indeed equivalent. Using \eqref{pfd}, we obtain
\begin{equation}\label{pfdbeg}
\begin{aligned}
 \left\langle  \psi^\dagger\left( x,t\right) \psi \left( 0,0\right)  \right\rangle =&\frac{1}{L^{2N-1}(N-1)!}\\
 &\sum_{\{\nu\},f}\sum_{J_1,...,J_{N-1}}\frac{A(\pmb{\lambda},\pmb{\mu},\{\nu\},f)}{\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\lambda}}\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\mu}}}\frac{e^{it\left( E( \pmb{\lambda}) -E( \pmb{\mu}) \right) +ix\left( P( \pmb{\mu}) -P( \pmb{\lambda}) \right) }}{\prod_{i=1}^{N-1}(\mu_i-\lambda_{f(i)})^{\nu_i}}\,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The sum over $J_1,...,J_{N-1}$ is invariant under any change $\tilde{f}=f \circ (i \,j)$ with $(i \,j)$ the permutation of indices $i,j$, whenever $\nu_i=\nu_j>0$ and $f(i)$ and $f(j)$ are attained the same number of times by $f$. Hence this sum only depends on the \textit{set of points attained a given number of times} by $f$, not on the particular realization of the function $f$. 



To rewrite the sum without these functions $f$, let us define $I_k$ for $k=0,1,2$ the set of points $i$ in $\{1,...,N\}$ that are attained $k$ times by $f$ from points where $\nu_j=1$, namely
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
I_k&=\Bigg\{i\in\{1,...,N\} \left| \# \{j\in \{1,...,N-1\}| \nu_j=1\text{ and }f(j)=i\}=k\Bigg\}\right.\,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
As a consequence the points in $\{1,...,N\}$ attained by $f$ from points where $\nu_j=2$ are $\{1,...,N\}-(I_0\cup I_1\cup I_2)$. These subsets $I_0,I_1,I_2\subset \{1,...,N\}$ have to be disjoint and to satisfy $|I_0|=|I_2|+1+p$ with $p=|\{i|\nu_i=0\}|$ the number of points with $\nu_i=0$, because  $f$ can take at most twice the same value. 

We will denote
\begin{equation}
n=|I_2|\,,\qquad m=|I_1|\,,
\end{equation}
and parametrize
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
I_2&=\{j_{1},...,j_{n}\}\\
I_0&=\{j_{n+1},...,j_{2n+p+1}\}\\
I_1&=\{j_{2n+p+2},...,j_{2n+p+m+1}\}\\
\{1,...,N\}-(I_0\cup I_1 \cup I_2)&=\{j_{2n+p+m+2},...,j_{N}\}\,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
When rewriting \eqref{pfdbeg} in terms of these subsets, one picks  a combinatorial factor corresponding to the number of functions $f$ with such an output. Choosing the set of points where $\nu_i=0$ yields a factor ${N-1\choose p}$, those where $\nu_i=2$ a factor $(N-2n-p-m-1)!{N-1-p\choose N-2n-p-m-1}$, those attained only once by $f$ and where $\nu_i=1$ a factor $m!{2n+m\choose m}$. Finally those attained twice by $f$ yield a factor $(2n)!!n!$. Writing $(2n)!!=\tfrac{(2n)!}{n!2^n}$ yields a total combinatorial factor
\begin{equation}
\frac{(N-1)!}{2^{n}p!}\,.
\end{equation}
We conclude that we can write
\begin{equation}\label{expdensity}
\left\langle  \psi^\dagger\left( x,t\right) \psi \left( 0,0\right)  \right\rangle =\sum_{n,m,p\geq 0}S_{n,m,p}\,,
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
&S_{n,m,p}=\frac{1}{2^np!L^{2N-1}}\sum_{\substack{I_{0,1,2}\subset \{1,...,N\}\\|I_0|=n+p+1\\|I_1|=m\\|I_2|=n \\\text{all disjoint}}}\sum_{J_1,...,J_{N-1}}\frac{{\cal A}(I_0,I_1,I_2|\{\mu_i\}_{i=2n+1}^{2n+p})}{\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\lambda}}\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\mu}}}\\
  &\qquad\qquad\times\frac{e^{it\left( E\left( \pmb{\lambda}\right) -E\left( \pmb{\mu} \right) \right) +ix\left( P\left( \pmb{\mu}\right) -P\left( \pmb{\lambda}\right) \right) }}{\prod_{i=1}^{n}(\mu_{2i-1}-\lambda_{j_i})(\mu_{2i}-\lambda_{j_i})\prod_{i=2n+1+p}^{2n+m+p}(\mu_i-\lambda_{j_{i+1}})\prod_{i=2n+m+p+1}^{N-1}(\mu_i-\lambda_{j_{i+1}})^{2}}\,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The specific ordering of the $\mu_i$'s in this expression is irrelevant. 

Here we have ${\cal A}(I_0,I_1,I_2|\{\mu_i\}_{i=2n+1}^{2n+p})=A(\pmb{\lambda},\pmb{\mu},\{\nu\},f)$ with $\nu_i=1$ for $i=1,...,m+2n$, $\nu_i=0$ for $i=m+2n+1,...,m+2n+p$ and $\nu_i=2$ for $i=m+2n+p+1,...,N-1$, and with the function $f$ taking the values in $I_1$ over $1,...,m$, twice the values in $I_2$ over $m+1,...,m+2n$, and the values in $\{1,...,N\}-(I_0\cup I_1\cup I_2)$ over $m+2n+p+1,...,N-1$.

Since each choice of an index in $\{1,...,N\}$ comes with a factor ${\cal D}$, the term $S_{n,m,p}$ is of order ${\cal O}({\cal D}^{1+2n+m+p})$. Hence expression \eqref{expdensity} is \textit{an expansion in the particle density} ${\cal D}$ of the averaging state. 

\subsection {Definition of the low-density limit of the correlation function}
The low density limit of the dynamical correlations is defined as retaining only the leading term $S_{0,0,0}$ in \eqref{expdensity}. It is obtained with $p=0$ and $I_1=I_2=\varnothing$, and so $I_0=\{a\}$ for $a=1,...,N$. Namely, reparametrising $\pmb{\mu}=\{\mu_1,...,\mu_{a-1},\mu_{a+1},...,\mu_N\}$ for convenience
\begin{equation}\label{S00}
\begin{aligned}
  &S_{0,0,0}=\frac{1}{L}\sum_{a=1}^N\sum_{J_i,\, i\neq a}\frac{{\cal A}(\{a\},\varnothing,\varnothing|\varnothing)}{\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\lambda}}\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\mu}}}\frac{e^{it\left( E\left( \pmb{\lambda}\right) -E\left( \pmb{\mu} \right) \right) +ix\left( P\left( \pmb{\mu}\right) -P\left( \pmb{\lambda}\right) \right) }}{\prod_{i\neq a}L^2(\mu_i-\lambda_{i})^{2}}\,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Since all the other terms in \eqref{expdensity} have at least a multiplying factor ${\cal D}$, we have
\begin{equation}\label{psipsild2}
\begin{aligned}
  &\left\langle  \psi^\dagger\left( x,t\right) \psi \left( 0,0\right)  \right\rangle =S_{0,0,0}(1+{\cal O}({\cal D}))\,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
In the rest of paper, we will use the sign $\ld$ to indicate a low-density limit. Namely
\begin{equation}
X\ld Y\qquad \text{means}\qquad X=Y(1+{\cal O}({\cal D}))\,.
\end{equation}
Using formula \eqref{formulA}, one finds
\begin{equation}
{\cal A}(\{a\},\varnothing,\varnothing|\varnothing)=\prod_{i\neq a}\frac{4c^2}{(\lambda_i-\lambda_a)^2+c^2}\,.
\end{equation}
%and at leading order in ${\cal D}$ one has
%\begin{equation}
%\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\mu}}\ld 1\,,\qquad \mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\lambda}}\ld 1\,.
%\end{equation}
Hence the low-density limit
\begin{equation}\label{psipsild2}
\begin{aligned}
  &\left\langle  \psi^\dagger\left( x,t\right) \psi \left( 0,0\right)  \right\rangle \ld\frac{1}{L}\sum_{a=1}^Ne^{it\lambda_a^2-ix\lambda_a}\sum_{J_i,\, i\neq a}\frac{1}{\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\lambda}}\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\mu}}}\prod_{i\neq a}\left(\frac{4c^2}{(\lambda_i-\lambda_a)^2+c^2}\frac{e^{it\left( \lambda_i-\mu_i \right) +ix\left( \mu_i-\lambda_i \right) }}{L^2(\mu_i-\lambda_{i})^{2}}\right)\,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
A few comments are in order. Up to now, nothing has been said of the Bethe equations, and in principle the $\mu_i$'s in this expression should satisfy exactly the Bethe equations \eqref{belog}. If one wishes to determine the dynamical correlations at leading order in ${\cal D}$, there remains only the term \eqref{psipsild2} in the full expansion \eqref{expdensity}; but one can also satisfy the Bethe equations  \eqref{belog} only at leading order in ${\cal D}$, since their exact solution will involve higher orders in ${\cal D}$ that are of the same order as the terms discarded in \eqref{expdensity}. Stated differently, the leading order in ${\cal D}$ of the dynamical correlations is obtained by both retaining only \eqref{psipsild2} \textit{and} satisfying \eqref{belog} at leading order in ${\cal D}$, while the higher orders in ${\cal D}$ will require both taking into account higher terms in \eqref{expdensity}  \textit{and} satisfying \eqref{belog} at higher orders in ${\cal D}$ in \eqref{psipsild2}.


\subsection {Interpretation: low-density limit of the field form factor\label{intuitive}}
The low-density limit is defined above as the leading term in an expansion of the correlation functions obtained by decomposing the form factors in partial fractions, that turns out to be an expansion in the density of the averaging state ${\cal D}$. 
%Effectively, it consists in replacing the square of the form factor by
%\begin{equation}\label{approx}
%\frac {\left| \left\langle \pmb{\mu} |\psi \left( 0\right) |\pmb{\lambda}\right\rangle \right| ^{2}} {\left\langle \pmb{\lambda} \left| \pmb{\lambda} \right\rangle \left\langle \pmb{\mu}\right| \pmb{\mu}\right\rangle }\ld \frac{1}{L^{2N-1}}\sum_{a=1}^N \sum_{\sigma\in\mathfrak{S}_{N-1}}\prod_{i\neq a}\frac{4c^2}{(\lambda_i-\lambda_a)^2+c^2}\prod_{i=1}^{N-1}\frac{1}{(\mu_i-\lambda_{\sigma(i)})^2}\,,
%\end{equation}
%where $\sigma$ is a permutation of $\{1,...,N\}-\{a\}$.
This definition allows for a systematic calculation of the next corrections in the density by taking into account more terms in \eqref{expdensity}.\\

The low-density limit of the correlation functions can however be recovered more intuitively but less rigorously with the following reasoning. If the root density $\rho(\lambda)$ of the averaging state is small, then the distance between two consecutive roots $L(\lambda_i-\lambda_j)$ is 'typically'\footnote{This cannot be true for any representative state of the density, but is true for a 'typical state' whose roots are regularly spaced according to the value of the density, see \cite{granetessler20}.} large in front of $1$, and in the limit of vanishingly low density becomes infinite. We will say that a sequence of states satisfying this property is \textit{dilute}, namely
\begin{equation}
(\pmb{\lambda}^{(L)})_{L\in\mathbb{N}}\text{ dilute}\iff \forall i\neq j,\, \underset{L\to\infty}{\lim}\, L|\lambda^{(L)}_i-\lambda^{(L)}_j|=\infty\,.
\end{equation}
For notational convenience we will drop the $L$ dependence of the sequence of states. Let us consider a dilute state $\pmb{\lambda}$ and investigate the consequences it has on the form factors between $\pmb{\lambda}$ and another state $\pmb{\mu}$.

Let us first note that because of the assumption of diluteness, a Bethe number $J_i$ of $\pmb{\mu}$ can be at a distance ${\cal O}(1)$ of at most one Bethe number $I_j$ of $\pmb{\lambda}$. Hence given a root $\mu_i$, the quantity $L(\mu_i-\lambda_j)$ can be of order $1$ for at most one $\lambda_j$. Consequently, 
%since in all the terms of \eqref{approx} the roots $\mu_i$ are set in a one-to-one correspondance with a subset of $N-1$ roots of $\pmb{\lambda}$, 
it is seen from the expression \eqref{FF} that 
in the low density limit the form factor \eqref{FF} is non-zero only if each Bethe number $J_i$ of $\pmb{\mu}$ is at a distance of order $1$ from exactly one Bethe number $I_j$ of $\pmb{\lambda}$, and reciprocally if these $N-1$ Bethe numbers $I_j$ are each at a distance of order $1$ from  exactly one Bethe number $J_k$ of $\pmb{\mu}$. Since there are $N$ roots in $\pmb{\lambda}$, there is one remaining root $\lambda_a$ that is not close to any $\mu_i$'s. We can re-label the roots $\pmb{\mu}=\{\mu_1,...,\mu_{a-1},\mu_{a+1},...,\mu_N\}$ so that $L(\mu_i-\lambda_i)$ is of order $1$ for all $i\neq a$. Let us then investigate the value taken by the normalized form factor \eqref{FF} in this regime.

Let us first study the determinant $\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\lambda}}$ in the low-density limit. We have
\begin{equation}\label{gaudin2}
G_{ij}(\pmb{\lambda})= \delta_{ij}-\frac{1}{L}\frac{2c}{c^2+(\lambda_i-\lambda_j)^2}+{\cal O}({\cal D})\,,
\end{equation}
so that
\begin{equation}\label{det1det1}
\begin{aligned}
\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\lambda}}&=\exp \Tr \log G(\pmb{\lambda})\\
&=\exp\left( -\sum_{n=1}^\infty \frac{1}{n}\Tr g^n+{\cal O}({\cal D})\right)\\
&=1+{\cal O}({\cal D})\,,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
with $g_{ij}=\frac{1}{L}\frac{2c}{c^2+(\lambda_i-\lambda_j)^2}$, since $\Tr g^n={\cal O}({\cal D}^n)$. Here, we did not use the diluteness of $\pmb{\lambda}$, but only evaluated the leading order in ${\cal D}$ of the determinant.

Second, again because $\pmb{\lambda}$ is dilute, all the $L(\mu_i-\lambda_i)$ are negligible in front of any $\lambda_a-\lambda_j$. It follows that
\begin{equation}
V_j^+-V_j^-\ld\frac{-2ic}{(\lambda_a-\lambda_j)^2+c^2}\,.
\end{equation}
We also have
\begin{equation}
\sqrt{\frac{\prod_{i\neq j}(\lambda_i-\lambda_j+ic)}{\prod_{i\neq j}(\mu_i-\mu_j+ic)}}\ld i^{N-1}\prod_{j\neq a}\sqrt{(\lambda_j-\lambda_a)^2+c^2}\,,
\end{equation}
and
\begin{equation}
\frac{\prod_{i< j}|\lambda_i-\lambda_j|\prod_{i< j}|\mu_i-\mu_j|}{\prod_{i, j}(\mu_j-\lambda_i)}\ld (-1)^{(N-1)(N-2)/2}\prod_{j\neq a}\sign(\lambda_j-\lambda_a)\frac{1}{\prod_{j\neq a}(\mu_j-\lambda_j)}\,.
\end{equation}
As for the matrix $U$, setting $\lambda_p=\lambda_s=\lambda_a$, the dominant entries are
\begin{equation}
U_{aj}\ld-1+\frac{2}{c}\,,
\end{equation}
while the other entries are of order ${\cal O}(L^{-1})$. Hence
\begin{equation}
\underset{i,j}{\det}(\delta_{ij}+U_{ij})\ld\frac{2}{c}\,.
\end{equation}
We obtain the following low-density limit of the form factor
\begin{equation}\label{ldff}
\frac { \left\langle \pmb{\mu} |\psi \left( 0\right) |\pmb{\lambda}\right\rangle  } {\sqrt{\left\langle \pmb{\lambda} \left| \pmb{\lambda} \right\rangle \left\langle \pmb{\mu}\right| \pmb{\mu}\right\rangle }}\ld
\frac{\phi}{\sqrt{L}}\prod_{j\neq a}\frac{2c}{\sqrt{(\lambda_j-\lambda_a)^2+c^2}}\frac{1}{L(\mu_j-\lambda_j)}\,,
\end{equation}
with the phase
\begin{equation}
\phi=(-i)^N \prod_{j\neq a}\sign(\lambda_j-\lambda_a)\,.
\end{equation}

%\begin{equation}\label{ldff}
%\frac { \left\langle \pmb{\mu} |\psi \left( 0\right) |\pmb{\lambda}\right\rangle  } {\sqrt{\left\langle \pmb{\lambda} \left| \pmb{\lambda} \right\rangle \left\langle \pmb{\mu}\right| \pmb{\mu}\right\rangle }}\ld\begin{cases}
%\frac{-i}{\sqrt{L}}\prod_{j\neq a}\frac{2c}{\sqrt{(\lambda_j-\lambda_a)^2+c^2}}\frac{1}{L(\mu_j-\lambda_j)}\quad\text{if }\exists a\in\{1,...,N\}\, \text{ s.t. $(\mathcal{P}_a)$ is true}\\
%0\qquad\text{otherwise}
%\end{cases}\,,
%\end{equation}
Let us reformulate the meaning of this approximation. We consider $\pmb{\lambda}$ and $\pmb{\mu}$ two Bethe states with $N$ and $N-1$ particles respectively, and denote $\iota:\{1,...,N-1\}\to \{1,...,N\}$ the function such that the element of $\{\lambda_1,...,\lambda_N\}$ that is the closest to $\mu_i$ is $\lambda_{\iota(i)}$. For a dilute $\pmb{\lambda}$, the form factor $\frac { \left\langle \pmb{\mu} |\psi \left( 0\right) |\pmb{\lambda}\right\rangle  } {\sqrt{\left\langle \pmb{\lambda} \left| \pmb{\lambda} \right\rangle \left\langle \pmb{\mu}\right| \pmb{\mu}\right\rangle }}$ is non-negligible in the thermodynamic limit only if $\iota$ is one-to-one from $\{1,...,N-1\}$ to $\{1,...,N\}-\{a\}$ for some $a=1,...,N$. In this case, the form factor reads
\begin{equation}\label{ldff2}
\frac { \left\langle \pmb{\mu} |\psi \left( 0\right) |\pmb{\lambda}\right\rangle  } {\sqrt{\left\langle \pmb{\lambda} \left| \pmb{\lambda} \right\rangle \left\langle \pmb{\mu}\right| \pmb{\mu}\right\rangle }}\ld
\frac{\phi}{\sqrt{L}}\prod_{j=1}^{N-1}\frac{2c}{\sqrt{(\lambda_{\iota(j)}-\lambda_a)^2+c^2}}\frac{1}{L(\mu_j-\lambda_{\iota(j)})}\,.
\end{equation}
Equation \eqref{ldff} corresponds to relabelling $\mu_{\iota^{-1}(j)}$ into $\mu_j$ for $j=1,...,N,\, j\neq a$.\\

%with $(\mathcal{P}_a)$ the following property
%\begin{equation}\label{P}
%(\mathcal{P})_a:\quad \forall i\neq a,\, L(\mu_i-\lambda_i)={\cal O}(L^0)\quad \text{up to a permutation of the $\mu_i$'s}\,.
%\end{equation}
%In \eqref{ldff} the ordering of the $\mu_i$'s is assumed to be that retained in \eqref{P}.

Such an expression implies an ordering of the roots $\mu_1,...,\mu_{N-1}$ according to the ordering of the $\lambda_i$'s. Hence in the spectral sum \eqref{bigsumfield}, there is no factor $1/(N-1)!$ once expressed in terms of the Bethe numbers of the $\mu_j$'s. Using this expression for the form factor, one indeed recovers the low-density correlation function \eqref{psipsild2} properly defined  from the partial fraction decomposition, with  ${\cal N}_{\pmb{\lambda}}, {\cal N}_{\pmb{\mu}}=1+{\cal O}(\cal D)$ already imposed at leading order in ${\cal D}$.

%\subsection {Dilute states}
%\subsubsection {Definition}
%A sequence of states $(\pmb{\lambda}_L)_{L\in \mathbb{N}}$, with $\pmb{\lambda}_L=\{\lambda_{1,L},...,\lambda_{N_L,L}\}$ is said to be \textit{dilute} if the separation between any pairs of roots is larger than $L^{-1}$, namely
%\begin{equation}
%\forall i\neq j,\, \underset{L\to\infty}{\lim}\, L|\lambda_{i,L}-\lambda_{j,L}|=\infty\,.
%\end{equation}
%For such states, the root density necessarily vanishes everywhere in the thermodynamic limit.\\
%
%\subsubsection {Lehman representation for dilute states}
%We consider a dilute state $\pmb{\lambda}$ (we drop the $L$ dependence for notational convenience) and an arbitrary state $\pmb{\mu}$ with number of roots $N,N'$ respectively, with $N=N'+1$. Let us denote
%\begin{equation}
%\nu(\pmb{\lambda}|\pmb{\mu})=\# \left\{i=1,...,N \left| \forall j=1,...,N',\,  \underset{L\to\infty}{\lim}\, L|\lambda_{i}-\mu_{j}|=\infty\right.\right\}\,,
%\end{equation}
%the number of roots $\lambda_i$ that are farther than $L^{-1}$ from any root $\mu_j$. Because of the diluteness and $N=N'+1$, we necessarily have $\nu(\pmb{\lambda}|\pmb{\mu})\geq 1$. However we may have $\nu(\pmb{\mu}|\pmb{\lambda})=0$ since $\pmb{\mu}$ is not necessarily dilute.
%
%\subsubsection {Low density limit of form factors}
%Based on the previous arguments, we now consider a state $\pmb{\mu}$ such that
%\begin{equation}
%\forall i=1,...,N-1,\, \lambda_i-\mu_i={\cal O}(L^{-1})\equiv \frac{2\pi \epsilon_i}{L}\,.
%\end{equation}
%Since the $\lambda_i$'s are not necessarily ordered, the value of $\lambda_N$ is arbitrary. Let us determine the value taken by the normalized form factor between $\pmb{\mu}$ and $\pmb{\lambda}$ in the thermodynamic limit.
%
%First, since $N/L\to 0$ because of the diluteness of $\pmb{\lambda}$, we have
%\begin{equation}
%\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\lambda}}\ld 1\,.
%\end{equation}
%Second, again because $\pmb{\lambda}$ is dilute, the $\epsilon_i$'s are negligible in front of any $\lambda_N-\lambda_j$. It follows that
%\begin{equation}
%V_j^+-V_j^-\ld\frac{-2ic}{(\lambda_N-\lambda_j)^2+c^2}\,.
%\end{equation}
%As for the matrix $U$, setting $\lambda_p=\lambda_s=\lambda_N$, the dominant entries are
%\begin{equation}
%U_{Nj}\ld\frac{-c^2+2c}{(\lambda_N-\lambda_k)^2+c^2}\,,
%\end{equation}
%while the other entries are of order ${\cal O}(L^{-1})$. Hence
%\begin{equation}
%\underset{i,j}{\det}(\delta_{ij}+U_{ij})\ld\frac{2}{c}\,.
%\end{equation}
%We obtain
%\begin{equation}\label{ldff}
%\frac { \left\langle \pmb{\mu} |\psi \left( 0\right) |\pmb{\lambda}\right\rangle  } {\sqrt{\left\langle \pmb{\lambda} \left| \pmb{\lambda} \right\rangle \left\langle \pmb{\mu}\right| \pmb{\mu}\right\rangle }}\ld\frac{-i}{\sqrt{L}}\left( \frac{c}{\pi}\right)^{N-1}\prod_{j=1}^{N-1}\frac{1}{\sqrt{(\lambda_j-\lambda_N)^2+c^2}}\prod_{j=1}^{N-1}\frac{1}{\epsilon_j}\,.
%\end{equation}




\section {Field two-point function\label{fieldsection}}
In this section we compute $S_{0,0,0}$ in \eqref{S00} in the low-density limit.

\subsection{States contributing to the thermodynamic limit}
In order to carry out the sum over the Bethe numbers in \eqref{S00}, let us first investigate which values of Bethe numbers give a non-zero contribution in the thermodynamic limit.

Let us consider Bethe number configurations such that $\mu_i-\lambda_i=\mathcal{O}(L^{-b_i})$ for $i\neq a$ with $ b_i\geq 0$. Since the parity of the number of roots $\lambda_i$ and $\mu_i$ is different, the Bethe numbers of $\lambda_i$ are integers (resp. half-odd integers) if those of $\mu_i$ are half-odd integers (resp. integers). Hence from the Bethe equations it follows that one has $b_i\leq 1$.

Now, since the Bethe number $J_i$ can take $\mathcal{O}(L^{1-b_i})$ values (for $\mu_i-\lambda_i=\mathcal{O}(L^{-b_i})$ to be satisfied), and since $a$ in \eqref{S00} can take $\mathcal{O}(L)$ values, one has $\mathcal{O}(L^{N-\sum_{i\neq a}b_i})$ many such configurations. Besides, each summand in \eqref{S00} is $\mathcal{O}(L^{-2N+1+2\sum_{i\neq a}b_i})$. Hence the contribution of these configurations is $\mathcal{O}(L^{-N+1+\sum_{i\neq a}b_i})$. Given that $0\leq b_i\leq 1$, the only possibility to have a non-vanishing result in the thermodynamic limit is to have $\forall i,\, b_i=1$. Hence the only non-vanishing configurations in \eqref{S00} are those for which the Bethe numbers of $\mu_i$ differ from that of $\lambda_i$ by $\mathcal{O}(L^{0})$. We will denote
\begin{equation}
n_i+\frac{1}{2}=J_i-I_i\qquad \text{for }i\neq a\,,
\end{equation}
the difference between the Bethe numbers of $\mu_i$ and $\lambda_i$, with $n_i$ an integer of order ${\cal O}(L^0)$.

\subsection{Decoupling of the spectral sum in the low-density limit}
The Bethe roots $\mu_i$ involved in \eqref{S00} depend on the difference of Bethe numbers $n_i$ and are all coupled through the Bethe equations. Taking the difference of the Bethe equations \eqref{belog} for $\mu_k$ and $\lambda_k$, one obtains
\begin{equation}
\mu_k-\lambda_k=\frac{2\pi}{L}(G^{-1}\tilde{n})_k+{\cal O}(L^{-2})\,,
\end{equation}
with $G=G(\pmb{\mu})$ introduced in \eqref{gaudin}, and the vector
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\tilde{n}_k&=n_k+\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{\pi}\arctan \frac{\lambda_k-\lambda_a}{c}\,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
In the low-density limit, one has $Gx \ld x$ for all vectors $x$, so that the roots decouple and are expressed as
\begin{equation}
\mu_k-\lambda_k\ld \frac{2\pi}{L}(n_k+\alpha_k(\lambda_a))+{\cal O}(L^{-2})\,,
\end{equation}
where we introduced
\begin{equation}\label{alpha}
\alpha_i(\nu)=\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{\pi}\arctan \frac{\lambda_i-\nu}{c}\,.
\end{equation}
Finally, at leading order in ${\cal D}$, the determinants ${\cal N}_{\pmb{\lambda}},{\cal N}_{\pmb{\mu}}$ are equal to $1$ according to \eqref{det1det1}. The spectral sum \eqref{S00} can thus be expressed as a product of $N$ one-dimensional sums
\begin{equation}\label{S001}
\begin{aligned}
S_{0,0,0}\ld\frac{1}{L}&\sum_{a=1}^Ne^{it \lambda_a^2-ix\lambda_a}\\
&\times\prod_{j\neq a}\left(\frac{1}{\pi^2}\frac{c^2}{(\lambda_j-\lambda_a)^2+c^2}\sum_{\substack{n=-\infty}}^{\infty}\frac{e^{i\tfrac{2\pi}{L} (n+\alpha_{j}(\lambda_a))(x-2\lambda_j t)-it\left(\tfrac{2\pi}{L}\right)^2(n+\alpha_j(\lambda_a))^2}}{(n+\alpha_j(\lambda_a))^2}\right)\,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}

\subsection{Thermodynamic limit of the spectral sum}
In order to proceed we need to determine the thermodynamic limit of each of the one-dimensional sums, that are of the type
\begin{equation}
\sum_{n\in\mathbb{Z}}\frac{e^{i\frac{w}{L}(n+\alpha)+i\frac{\tau}{L^2}(n+\alpha)^2}}{(n+\alpha)^2}\,,
\end{equation}
for $\alpha,w,\tau$ reals, $\alpha$ non integer. Let us first consider the case $\tau=0$. The quantity $\sum_{n\in\mathbb{Z}}\frac{e^{iWn}}{(n+\alpha)^2}$ is exactly the Fourier series of a certain $2\pi$-periodic function of $W$. Noticing that for $n$ integer
\begin{equation}
\int_{-\pi}^{\pi}\left[\left(\frac{\pi}{\sin \pi\alpha}\right)^2e^{-iW\alpha} +\frac{i\pi}{\sin\pi\alpha}W e^{i\pi\alpha\sign(W)-iW\alpha} \right]e^{-iWn}\D{W}=\frac{2\pi}{(n+\alpha)^2}\,,
\end{equation}
we conclude that
\begin{equation}
\sum_{n\in\mathbb{Z}}\frac{e^{iW(n+\alpha)}}{(n+\alpha)^2}=\left(\frac{\pi}{\sin \pi\alpha}\right)^2 +\frac{i\pi}{\sin\pi\alpha}W e^{i\pi\alpha\sign(W)}\,,\qquad\text{for }-\pi<W\leq\pi\,.
\end{equation}
To treat the case $\tau\neq 0$, we write
\begin{equation}
\sum_{n\in\mathbb{Z}}\frac{e^{i\frac{w}{L}(n+\alpha)+i\frac{\tau}{L^2}(n+\alpha)^2}}{(n+\alpha)^2}=\sum_{n\in\mathbb{Z}}\frac{e^{i\frac{w}{L}(n+\alpha)}}{(n+\alpha)^2}+\frac{1}{L^2}\sum_{n\in\mathbb{Z}}e^{i\frac{w}{L}(n+\alpha)}\frac{e^{i\tau\frac{(n+\alpha)^2}{L^2}}-1}{\tfrac{(n+\alpha)^2}{L^2}}\,.
\end{equation}
The first term was computed previously, and the second one is $1/L$ times the Riemann sum of a regular function, hence in the thermodynamic limit converges to its integral. This yields
\begin{equation}\label{s2s2}
\sum_{n\in\mathbb{Z}}\frac{e^{i\frac{w}{L}(n+\alpha)+i\frac{\tau}{L^2}(n+\alpha)^2}}{(n+\alpha)^2}=\left(\frac{\pi}{\sin \pi\alpha}\right)^2 +\frac{i\pi w}{L\tan(\pi\alpha)}-\frac{\pi|w|}{L}+\frac{\sqrt{|\tau|}}{L}\chi_\pm\left(\tfrac{w}{\sqrt{|\tau|}}\right)+{\cal O}(L^{-2})\,,
\end{equation}
with $\pm=\sign(\tau)$ and
\begin{equation}\label{chi}
\chi_\pm(x)=\int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{ixu}\frac{e^{\pm i u^2}-1}{u^2}\D{u}\,.
\end{equation}
Hence we obtain with $\pm=\sign(t)$, using the expression \eqref{alpha} and trigonometric relations
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
&\sum_{\substack{-\infty<n<\infty}}\frac{e^{\frac{2i\pi}{L} (n+\alpha_{j}(\lambda_a))(x-2\lambda_j t)-\frac{i(2\pi)^2t}{L^2}(n+\alpha_j(\lambda_a))^2}}{(n+\alpha_j(\lambda_a))^2}=\pi^2\frac{(\lambda_j-\lambda_a)^2+c^2}{c^2}\\
&\qquad\times \Bigg[1-\frac{1}{L}\frac {2c^{2}} {\left( \lambda _{j}-\lambda _{a}\right) ^{2}+c^{2}}|x-2\lambda_jt|+\frac{1}{L}\frac {2c^{2}} {\left( \lambda _{j}-\lambda _{a}\right) ^{2}+c^{2}}\frac{\sqrt{|t|}}{\pi}\chi_\mp(\tfrac{x-2\lambda_jt}{\sqrt{|t|}})\\
&\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad+\frac {2ic(\lambda _{j}-\lambda _{a})} {\left( \lambda _{j}-\lambda _{a}\right) ^{2}+c^{2}}\frac{2\lambda _{j}t-x}{L} \Bigg]+{\cal O}(L^{-2})\,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Plugging this expression in \eqref{S001}, we use
\begin{equation}\label{expint}
\underset{L\to\infty}{\lim}\, \prod_{i=1}^L (1+\frac{f(i/L)}{L})=\exp\left( \int_0^1 f(x)\D{x}\right)\,,
\end{equation}
to obtain in the thermodynamic limit
\begin{equation}\label{field}
\begin {aligned}
 \left\langle \psi ^{\dagger}\left( x,t\right) \psi \left( 0,0\right) \right\rangle\ld\int _{-\infty }^\infty &e^{-it\lambda ^{2}+ix\lambda } \rho \left( \lambda \right)\exp \left (i\int_{-\infty}^\infty \frac {2c(\nu -\lambda )} {\left( \nu -\lambda \right) ^{2}+c^{2}}(2t\nu -x) \rho \left( \nu  \right) \D{\nu}\right)  \\
 &\exp \left (-\int_{-\infty}^\infty \frac {2c^{2}} {\left( \nu -\lambda \right) ^{2}+c^{2}}|x-2\nu t|\rho \left( \nu  \right) \D{\nu}\right) \\
 &\exp \left (\frac{\sqrt{|t|}}{\pi}\int_{-\infty}^\infty \frac {2c^{2}} {\left( \nu -\lambda \right) ^{2}+c^{2}}\chi_\mp(\tfrac{x-2\nu t}{\sqrt{|t|}})\rho \left( \nu  \right) \D{\nu}\right)\D{\lambda} 
  \end {aligned}
\end{equation}
This expression is valid for all space $x$ and time $t$, and all interaction strength $c>0$. It is the leading term in the expansion \eqref{expdensity}, and constitutes the low-density limit of the dynamical correlations of the field.

%\subsection{Limiting cases}
%\subsubsection*{Static correlators}
%Equation \eqref{field} can be used to calculate the static correlators by setting $t=0$. One has in this limit $\sqrt{|t|}\chi_\mp(\tfrac{x-2\lambda t}{\sqrt{|t|}})=0$, so that one obtains the low-density limit
%\begin{equation}\label{field}
%\begin {aligned}
% \left\langle \psi ^{\dagger}\left( x,0\right) \psi \left( 0,0\right) \right\rangle\ld\int _{-\infty }^\infty &e^{ix\varphi(\lambda) }e^{-|x| \kappa(\lambda)} \rho \left( \lambda \right)\D{\lambda}\,,
%  \end {aligned}
%\end{equation}
%with
%\begin{equation}
%\begin{aligned}
%\varphi(\lambda)&=\lambda-\int_{-\infty}^\infty \frac{2c(\nu-\lambda)}{(\nu-\lambda)^2+c^2}\rho(\nu)\D{\nu}\\
%\kappa(\lambda)&=\int_{-\infty}^\infty \frac{2c^2}{(\nu-\lambda)^2+c^2}\rho(\nu)\D{\nu}\,.
%\end{aligned}
%\end{equation}
%
%\subsubsection*{Leading asymptotics at late time}
%For large $x,t$ at fixed
%\begin{equation}
%\alpha=\frac{x}{2t}\,,
%\end{equation}
%one finds the leading asymptotic behaviour
%\begin{equation}
%\begin{aligned}
% \left\langle \psi ^{\dagger}\left( x,t\right) \psi \left( 0,0\right) \right\rangle\ld \sqrt{\frac{\pi}{|t|}}e^{-i\sign(t)\pi/4}\rho(\alpha)e^{it\omega}e^{-|t|/\tau}
%\end{aligned}
%\end{equation}
%with
%\begin{equation}
%\begin{aligned}
%\omega&=\alpha^2+\int_{-\infty}^\infty \frac{4c(\nu-\alpha)^2}{(\nu-\alpha)^2+c^2}\rho(\nu)\D{\nu}\\
%\frac{1}{\tau}&=\int_{-\infty}^\infty \frac{4c^2|\nu-\alpha|}{(\nu-\alpha)^2+c^2}\rho(\nu)\D{\nu}\,.
%\end{aligned}
%\end{equation}
%
%\subsubsection*{Free fermion limit}
%In the free fermion limit $c\to\infty$ we have
%\begin{equation}
%\begin {aligned}
% \left\langle \psi ^{\dagger}\left( x,t\right) \psi \left( 0,0\right) \right\rangle\ld\left(\int _{-\infty }^\infty e^{-it\lambda ^{2}+ix\lambda } \rho \left( \lambda \right)\D{\lambda} \right)&\exp \left (-2\int_{-\infty}^\infty|x-2\nu t|\rho \left( \nu  \right) \D{\nu}\right) \\
% &\exp \left (-\frac{2\sqrt{|t|}}{\pi}\int_{-\infty}^\infty\chi_\mp(\tfrac{x-2\nu t}{\sqrt{|t|}})\rho \left( \nu  \right) \D{\nu}\right) 
%  \end {aligned}
%\end{equation}

%\subsection {Numerical evaluation}
%In this section we evaluate the correlation function \eqref{field} for a root density corresponding to a thermal state\cite{YangYang69}.  These are parametrized by the inverse temperature $\beta$ and the particle density ${\cal D}$. Defining the so-called dressed energy 
%$\varepsilon_{\rm dr}(\lambda)$ by 
%\begin{equation}
%\frac{\rho(\lambda)}{\rho(\lambda)+\rho_h(\lambda)}=\frac{1}{1+e^{\beta\varepsilon_{\rm dr}(\lambda)}}\,,
%\label{dresseden}
%\end{equation}
%the filling function $n(\lambda)$ of a thermal state is such that
%\begin{equation}
%\varepsilon_{\rm dr}(\lambda)=\lambda^2-h-\frac{1}{2\pi\beta}\int_{-\infty}^\infty \frac{2c}{c^2+(\lambda-\mu)^2}\log(1+e^{-\beta\varepsilon_{\rm dr}(\mu)})\D{\mu}\,.
%\label{dresseden2}
%\end{equation}
%Here $h$ is a chemical potential that is used to fix the desired particle density ${\cal D}$. In Figure \ref{fieldfigure} we evaluate \eqref{field} as a function of $t$ at fixed $x$, for several values of $c$, and for a thermal state with ${\cal D}=0.055$ and $\beta=1$. For these parameters there is at most $1$ particle for $5$ vacancies.
%
%
%\begin{figure}[H]
%\begin{center}
%\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.9]
%\begin{axis}[
%    enlargelimits=false,
%    xlabel = $t$,
%    xmax=30,
%     y tick label style={
%        /pgf/number format/.cd,
%            fixed,
%            fixed zerofill,
%            precision=1,
%        /tikz/.cd
%    }
%]
%\addplot[
%    line width=1pt,
%    color=blue,
%    opacity=1]
%table[
%           x expr=\thisrowno{0}, 
%           y expr=\thisrowno{1},
%         ]{lowdensity_data_c0v25_x0.dat};
%\addplot[
%    line width=1pt,
%    color=blue,
%    opacity=0.75]
%table[
%           x expr=\thisrowno{0}, 
%           y expr=\thisrowno{1},
%         ]{lowdensity_data_c1_x0.dat};
%\addplot[
%    line width=1pt,
%    color=blue,
%    opacity=0.5]
%table[
%           x expr=\thisrowno{0}, 
%           y expr=\thisrowno{1},
%         ]{lowdensity_data_c5_x0.dat};
%%\addplot[
%%    line width=1pt,
%%    color=blue,
%%    opacity=0.25]
%%table[
%%           x expr=\thisrowno{0}, 
%%           y expr=\thisrowno{1},
%%         ]{lowdensity_data_cinf_x0.dat};
%\end{axis}
%\end{tikzpicture}
%\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.9]
%\begin{axis}[
%    enlargelimits=false,
%    xlabel = $t$,
%    xmax=30,
%     y tick label style={
%        /pgf/number format/.cd,
%            fixed,
%            fixed zerofill,
%            precision=1,
%        /tikz/.cd
%    }
%]
%%\addplot[
%%    line width=1pt,
%%    color=blue,
%%    opacity=0.25]
%%table[
%%           x expr=\thisrowno{0}, 
%%           y expr=\thisrowno{1},
%%         ]{lowdensity_data_cinf_x2.dat};
%\addplot[
%    line width=1pt,
%    color=blue,
%    opacity=0.5]
%table[
%           x expr=\thisrowno{0}, 
%           y expr=\thisrowno{1},
%         ]{lowdensity_data_c5_x2.dat};
%\addplot[
%    line width=1pt,
%    color=blue,
%    opacity=0.75]
%table[
%           x expr=\thisrowno{0}, 
%           y expr=\thisrowno{1},
%         ]{lowdensity_data_c1_x2.dat};
%\addplot[
%    line width=1pt,
%    color=blue,
%    opacity=1]
%table[
%           x expr=\thisrowno{0}, 
%           y expr=\thisrowno{1},
%         ]{lowdensity_data_c0v25_x2.dat};
%\end{axis}
%\end{tikzpicture}\\
%\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.9]
%\begin{axis}[
%    enlargelimits=false,
%    xlabel = $t$,
%    xmax=50,
%     y tick label style={
%        /pgf/number format/.cd,
%            fixed,
%            fixed zerofill,
%            precision=1,
%        /tikz/.cd
%    }
%]
%%\addplot[
%%    line width=1pt,
%%    color=blue,
%%    opacity=0.25]
%%table[
%%           x expr=\thisrowno{0}, 
%%           y expr=\thisrowno{1},
%%         ]{lowdensity_data_cinf_x5.dat};
%\addplot[
%    line width=1pt,
%    color=blue,
%    opacity=0.5]
%table[
%           x expr=\thisrowno{0}, 
%           y expr=\thisrowno{1},
%         ]{lowdensity_data_c5_x5.dat};
%\addplot[
%    line width=1pt,
%    color=blue,
%    opacity=0.75]
%table[
%           x expr=\thisrowno{0}, 
%           y expr=\thisrowno{1},
%         ]{lowdensity_data_c1_x5.dat};
%\addplot[
%    line width=1pt,
%    color=blue,
%    opacity=1]
%table[
%           x expr=\thisrowno{0}, 
%           y expr=\thisrowno{1},
%         ]{lowdensity_data_c0v25_x5.dat};
%\end{axis}
%\end{tikzpicture}
%\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=0.9]
%\begin{axis}[
%    enlargelimits=false,
%    xlabel = $t$,
%    xmax=50,
%     y tick label style={
%        /pgf/number format/.cd,
%            fixed,
%            fixed zerofill,
%            precision=1,
%        /tikz/.cd
%    }
%]
%%\addplot[
%%    line width=1pt,
%%    color=blue,
%%    opacity=0.25]
%%table[
%%           x expr=\thisrowno{0}, 
%%           y expr=\thisrowno{1},
%%         ]{lowdensity_data_cinf_x20.dat};
%\addplot[
%    line width=1pt,
%    color=blue,
%    opacity=0.5]
%table[
%           x expr=\thisrowno{0}, 
%           y expr=\thisrowno{1},
%         ]{lowdensity_data_c5_x20.dat};
%\addplot[
%    line width=1pt,
%    color=blue,
%    opacity=0.75]
%table[
%           x expr=\thisrowno{0}, 
%           y expr=\thisrowno{1},
%         ]{lowdensity_data_c1_x20.dat};
%\end{axis}
%\end{tikzpicture}
%\caption{Real part of the field two-point function $\Re \left\langle \psi ^{\dagger}\left( x,t\right) \psi \left( 0,0\right) \right\rangle$ as a function of $t$, for $x=0,2,5,20$ (in reading direction), and for $c= 5, 1, \tfrac{1}{4}$ (from light to dark blue).}  
%\label {fieldfigure}
%\end{center}
%\end {figure}

\section {Density two-point function\label{densitysection}}
In this Section we apply the same reasoning as in Sections \ref{ldd} and \ref{fieldsection} but to the density two-point function.

\subsection{Partial fraction decomposition}
We consider $ |\pmb{\lambda} \rangle $ and $ |\pmb{\mu} \rangle $ eigenstates of the Lieb-Liniger Hamiltonian with $N$ rapidities, and define $F_\sigma(\pmb{\lambda},\pmb{\mu})$ by
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\frac {\left| \left\langle \pmb{\mu} |\sigma \left( 0\right) |\pmb{\lambda}\right\rangle \right| ^{2}} {\left\langle \pmb{\lambda} \left| \pmb{\lambda} \right\rangle \left\langle \pmb{\mu}\right| \pmb{\mu}\right\rangle }= \frac{F_\sigma(\pmb{\lambda},\pmb{\mu})}{L^{2N}\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\lambda}}\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\mu}}} \,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Similarly to the field case $F_\psi$, the reduced form factor $F_\sigma(\pmb{\lambda},\pmb{\mu})$ is a ratio of two polynomials in the Bethe roots so that it can be decomposed into partial fractions. Repeating the arguments that apply to the field case, we similarly obtain the writing
\begin{equation}\label{pfdsigma}
F_\sigma(\pmb{\lambda},\pmb{\mu})=\sum_{\{\nu\},f}\frac{A(\pmb{\lambda},\pmb{\mu},\{\nu\},f)}{\prod_{i=1}^{N-1}(\mu_i-\lambda_{f(i)})^{\nu_i}}\,,
\end{equation}
where each $\nu_i$ takes the value $0,1$ or $2$, and where $f$ are functions $\{i\in\{1,...,N\}| \nu_i\neq 0\}\to \{1,...,N\}$. The coefficients $A(\pmb{\lambda},\pmb{\mu},\{\nu\},f)$ crucially do not depend on any $\mu_i$ whenever $\nu_i>0$, and are bounded functions of real $\mu_i$ if $\nu_i=0$. The function $f$ has the same constraints as in the field case, namely it can take at most twice the same value, and takes only once a value on points with $\nu_i=2$.

This decomposition also leads to an expansion in the particle density ${\cal D}$. Namely, with the parametrization $m=|I_1|$, $n=|I_2|$, $p=|\{i| \nu_i=0\}|$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
I_2&=\{j_{1},...,j_{n}\}\\
I_0&=\{j_{n+1},...,j_{2n+p}\}\\
I_1&=\{j_{2n+p+1},...,j_{2n+p+m}\}\\
\{1,...,N\}-(I_0\cup I_1 \cup I_2)&=\{j_{2n+p+m+1},...,j_{N}\}\,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
we have
\begin{equation}\label{expdensitysigma}
\left\langle  \sigma\left( x,t\right) \sigma \left( 0,0\right)  \right\rangle =\sum_{n,m,p\geq 0}S_{n,m,p}\,,
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
&S_{n,m,p}=\frac{1}{2^np!L^{2N}}\sum_{\substack{I_{0,1,2}\subset \{1,...,N\}\\|I_0|=n+p\\|I_1|=m\\|I_2|=n \\\text{all disjoint}}}\sum_{J_1,...,J_{N}}\frac{{\cal A}(I_0,I_1,I_2|\{\mu_i\}_{i=2n+1}^{2n+p})}{\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\lambda}}\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\mu}}}\\
  &\qquad\qquad\times\frac{e^{it\left( E\left( \pmb{\lambda}\right) -E\left( \pmb{\mu} \right) \right) +ix\left( P\left( \pmb{\mu}\right) -P\left( \pmb{\lambda}\right) \right) }}{\prod_{i=1}^{n}(\mu_{2i-1}-\lambda_{j_i})(\mu_{2i}-\lambda_{j_i})\prod_{i=2n+1+p}^{2n+m+p}(\mu_i-\lambda_{j_{i}})\prod_{i=2n+m+p+1}^{N}(\mu_i-\lambda_{j_{i}})^{2}}\,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
 The leading term is a priori obtained with $\nu_i=2$, and the next terms by replacing some of the $\nu_i$'s by $1$ or $0$, each time picking a factor ${\cal D}$. However, in contrast to the field case, the coefficient of the a priori leading term is actually found to vanish, using the analogue of \eqref{formulA} for the density operator case
 \begin{equation}
{\cal A}(\varnothing,\varnothing,\varnothing|\varnothing)=0\,.
\end{equation}
If one $\nu_i$ is set to $1$, the coefficient still vanishes
 \begin{equation}
{\cal A}(\varnothing,\{a\},\varnothing|\varnothing)=0\,.
\end{equation}
However, if it is set to $0$, the coefficient is non-zero and reads
 \begin{equation}
{\cal A}(\{a\},\varnothing,\varnothing|\mu_a)=\prod_{j\neq a}\frac{4c^2(\lambda_a-\mu_a)^2}{[(\lambda_j-\lambda_a)^2+c^2][(\lambda_j-\mu_a)^2+c^2]}\,.
\end{equation}
Hence the leading order in the density expansion, i.e. the low-density limit, is obtained with
\begin{equation}
\left\langle  \sigma( x,t) \sigma( 0,0)  \right\rangle\ld S_{0,0,1}\,.
\end{equation}
It yields the following low-density limit of the density two-point function
\begin{equation}\label{2pfdensityld}
\begin{aligned}
 & \left\langle  \sigma( x,t) \sigma( 0,0)  \right\rangle \ld \frac{1}{L^2}\sum_{\lambda_a,\mu_a}e^{ix(\mu_a-\lambda_a)+it(\lambda_a^2-\mu_a^2)}\\&\times\sum _{J_i,\, i\neq a}\frac{1}{\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\lambda}}\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\mu}}}\prod_{j\neq a}\frac{c^2}{(\lambda_j-\lambda_a)^2+c^2}\frac{c^2}{(\lambda_j-\mu_a)^2+c^2}\cdot
  \frac{4(\lambda_a-\mu_a)^2}{c^2L^2(\mu_j-\lambda_j)^2}e^{ix(\mu_j-\lambda_j)+it(\lambda_j^2-\mu_j^2)}\,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}


%\subsection {Outline of the approach}
%The density two-point function can clearly be expressed as a spectral sum \eqref{bigsumfield}, similarly to the field two-point function
%\begin{equation}
%\label{bigsumdensity}
%\begin{aligned}
%  \left\langle  \sigma( x,t) \sigma( 0,0)  \right\rangle &=\sum _{ \pmb{\mu}}\frac {\left| \left\langle \pmb{\mu} |\sigma \left( 0\right) |\pmb{\lambda}\right\rangle \right| ^{2}} {\left\langle \pmb{\lambda} \left| \pmb{\lambda} \right\rangle \left\langle \pmb{\mu}\right| \pmb{\mu}\right\rangle }e^{it\left( E\left( \pmb{\lambda}\right) -E\left( \pmb{\mu} \right) \right) +ix\left( P\left( \pmb{\mu}\right) -P\left( \pmb{\lambda}\right) \right) }\,.
%\end{aligned}
%\end{equation}
%Similarly to the field operator, there exists a compact determinant expression for the density form factor and one could also write a partial fraction decomposition formally similar to \eqref{pfd}. However, form factors of \textit{local} operators (such as the density) have a completely different structure of poles than \textit{semi-local} operators (such as the field), and as a consequence the amplitudes entering the partial fraction decomposition differ fundamentally. In particular the leading orders with only double poles all vanish, and those obtained by replacing some of the double poles by simple poles exhibit high-order zeros (that scale like $L$) in the numerator. Hence it is a priori \textit{not} possible to define a low-density limit of correlation functions from the partial fraction decomposition. 
%
%One could still try to pursue the more intuitive and less rigorous approach of Section \ref{intuitive}, where a low-density limit of the form factor itself is derived from the assumption that one of the two states is dilute. However, a similar approach for the density form factor is seen to rapidly fail, again because of its very different analytic structure.
%
% Hence the whole approach developed for the field operator fails for the density operator. Instead, density correlations are more naturally expanded in $1/c$, or, somehow equivalently, in the number of particle-hole excitations involved in the intermediate states entering the spectral sum.
%
%To circumvent the obstacle, we observe that the density two-point function can be obtained as a limit of a four-point function of the field operator 
%\begin{equation}\label{lim}
%  \left\langle \sigma( x,t) \sigma ( 0,0) \right\rangle =\underset{\substack{x_2 \to x\\ x_1 \to 0}}{\lim}\left\langle \psi^\dagger( x_2,t) \psi ( x,t) \psi^\dagger( x_1,0) \psi ( 0,0)\right\rangle\,,
%\end{equation}
%that allows for a low-density limit since it is a semi-local operator. The derivation goes along the same lines as for the two-point function, starting with a Lehmann representation
%\begin{equation}
%\label{bigsumfield4}
%\begin{aligned}
%&\left\langle \psi^\dagger( x_2,t) \psi ( x,t) \psi^\dagger( x_1,0) \psi ( 0,0)\right\rangle \\
%&=\sum _{ \pmb{\mu}_1,\,  \pmb{\mu}_2,\,  \pmb{\mu}_3}\frac { \left\langle \pmb{\mu}_3 |\psi \left( 0\right) |\pmb{\lambda}\right\rangle^* \left\langle \pmb{\mu}_3 |\psi \left( 0\right) |\pmb{\mu}_2\right\rangle \left\langle \pmb{\mu}_1 |\psi \left( 0\right) |\pmb{\mu}_2\right\rangle^* \left\langle \pmb{\mu}_1 |\psi \left( 0\right) |\pmb{\lambda}\right\rangle} {\left\langle \pmb{\lambda} \left| \pmb{\lambda} \right\rangle \left\langle \pmb{\mu}_3\right| \pmb{\mu}_3\right\rangle  \left\langle \pmb{\mu}_2| \pmb{\mu}_2\right\rangle  \left\langle \pmb{\mu}_1| \pmb{\mu}_1\right\rangle}\\
%&\qquad\qquad\times e^{it[E( \pmb{\lambda}) -E( \pmb{\mu}_2 ) ]}\\
%&\qquad\qquad\times e^{-ix_2[P( \pmb{\lambda}) -P( \pmb{\mu}_3 ) ]-ix[P( \pmb{\mu}_3) -P( \pmb{\mu}_2 ) ] -ix_1[P( \pmb{\mu}_2) -P( \pmb{\mu}_1 ) ] }\,,
%\end{aligned}
%\end{equation}
%and using the low-density limit of the form factor \eqref{ldff}. This approach crucially relies on the fact that the low-density limit is valid for arbitrary $x,t$. 

\subsection {Interpretation: low-density limit of the density form factor}
Similarly to the field operator, the low-density limit of the density two-point function is defined in terms of a partial fraction decomposition of the form factor. In the field case, one was also able to obtain a low-density limit of the field form factor by considering dilute states, see Section \ref{intuitive}. In the density case, we are going to follow a different route in order to show the usefulness of \eqref{ldff}, by recovering the low-density limit of the density correlation \eqref{2pfdensityld} from the low-density approximation of the field form factor  \eqref{ldff}.
%In the case of the density operator, there is an important difference that renders difficult an analogous reasoning. Indeed in this case both Bethe states appearing in the form factor have the same number of roots, so that their Bethe numbers are either both integers or bothhalf-integers. The quantity $\lambda_i-\mu_j$ can thus vanish faster than $L^{-1}$ if the Bethe numbers associated to the roots are the same.
%
%Nevertheless, one can still derive a low-density approximation of the density form factor the following way.
 The rationale is that  the density form factor can be obtained as a limit of a field two-point function between different eigenstates $\pmb{\lambda}$ and $\pmb{\mu}$ with $N$ roots
\begin{equation}
\frac{\langle \pmb{\mu}|\sigma(0)|\pmb{\lambda}\rangle}{\sqrt{\langle \pmb{\mu}|\pmb{\mu}\rangle \langle \pmb{\lambda}|\pmb{\lambda}\rangle}}=\underset{x\to 0}{\lim}\, \frac{\langle \pmb{\mu}|\psi^\dagger( x,0) \psi ( 0,0)|\pmb{\lambda}\rangle}{\sqrt{\langle \pmb{\mu}|\pmb{\mu}\rangle \langle \pmb{\lambda}|\pmb{\lambda}\rangle}}\,.
\end{equation}
This two-point function can itself be expressed as a Lehmann representation
\begin{equation}
\frac{\langle \pmb{\mu}|\psi^\dagger( x,0) \psi ( 0,0)|\pmb{\lambda}\rangle}{\sqrt{\langle \pmb{\mu}|\pmb{\mu}\rangle \langle \pmb{\lambda}|\pmb{\lambda}\rangle}}=\sum_{\pmb{\nu}}\frac{\langle \pmb{\nu}|\psi(0)|\pmb{\mu}\rangle^* \langle \pmb{\nu}|\psi(0)|\pmb{\lambda}\rangle}{\sqrt{\langle \pmb{\mu}|\pmb{\mu}\rangle \langle \pmb{\lambda}|\pmb{\lambda}\rangle}\langle \pmb{\nu}|\pmb{\nu}\rangle}e^{ix(P(\pmb{\nu})-P(\pmb{\mu}))}\,,
\end{equation}
where $\pmb{\nu}$ is a state with $N-1$ roots. In the low-density limit, according to \eqref{ldff}, for the field form factors not to vanish one has to have $N-1$ roots $\lambda_i$ with exactly one $\nu_j$ around at a distance ${\cal O}(L^{-1})$, leaving a $\lambda_a$ without $\nu_j$'s around. The same holds for the $\mu_i$'s with respect to the $\nu_j$'s. This implies that in the low-density limit, there is also exactly one $\mu_i$ around each $\lambda_j$ at a distance ${\cal O}(L^{-1})$ for $j\neq a$, leaving a $\mu_a$ without $\nu_j$'s nor $\lambda_j$'s around. Since $\pmb{\mu}$ and $\pmb{\lambda}$ are an input of the problem, these $\mu_a$ and $\lambda_a$ are fixed by the choices of $\pmb{\lambda}$ and $\pmb{\mu}$ (they are not free parameters like in the two-point function case with $\pmb{\lambda}=\pmb{\mu}$). Then using  \eqref{ldff} we obtain the following low-density limit
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
&\frac{\langle \pmb{\mu}|\psi^\dagger( x,0) \psi ( 0,0)|\pmb{\lambda}\rangle}{\sqrt{\langle \pmb{\mu}|\pmb{\mu}\rangle \langle \pmb{\lambda}|\pmb{\lambda}\rangle}}\ld \\
&\qquad\qquad\frac{e^{-ix\mu_a}}{L}\sum_{\pmb{\nu}}\prod_{j\neq a}\frac{2c}{\sqrt{(\lambda_j-\lambda_a)^2+c^2}}\frac{2c}{\sqrt{(\mu_j-\mu_a)^2+c^2}} \frac{1}{L(\nu_j-\lambda_j)}\frac{e^{ix(\nu_j-\mu_j)}}{L(\nu_j-\mu_j)}\,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The Bethe equations allow us to write
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\nu_j-\lambda_j&\ld \frac{2\pi}{L}(n_j+\alpha_j(\lambda_a))\\
\nu_j-\mu_j&\ld \frac{2\pi}{L}(n_j+\alpha_j(\mu_a)-p_j)\,,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
with $n_j,p_j$ integers. The integer $p_j$ is related to $\mu_j$ and $\lambda_j$ through
\begin{equation}
\mu_j-\lambda_j\ld \frac{2\pi}{L}(p_j+\alpha_j(\lambda_a)-\alpha_j(\mu_a))\,,
\end{equation}
which is a parameter of the problem that is not to be summed over. We obtain the following factorization
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{\langle \pmb{\mu}|\psi^\dagger( x,0) \psi ( 0,0)|\pmb{\lambda}\rangle}{\sqrt{\langle \pmb{\mu}|\pmb{\mu}\rangle \langle \pmb{\lambda}|\pmb{\lambda}\rangle}}\ld \frac{e^{-ix\mu_a}}{L}&\prod_{j\neq a}\frac{c^2}{\pi^2}\frac{1}{\sqrt{(\lambda_j-\lambda_a)^2+c^2}}\frac{1}{\sqrt{(\lambda_j-\mu_a+{\cal O}(L^{-1}))^2+c^2}} \\
&\times\sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty\frac{e^{\frac{2i \pi x}{L}(n+\alpha_j(\mu_a)-p_j)}}{(n+\alpha_j(\lambda_a))(n+\alpha_j(\mu_a)-p_j)}\,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
In order to determine the thermodynamic limit of the field four-point function we need to carry out the sums over the integers, that reduces to sums of the type
\begin{equation}
\sum_{n\in\mathbb{Z}}\frac{e^{i\tfrac{w}{L}(n+\alpha)}}{n+\alpha}\,.
\end{equation}
We notice that $\sum_{n\in\mathbb{Z}}\frac{e^{iWn}}{n+\alpha}$ is the Fourier series of a $2\pi$-periodic function of $W$, and
\begin{equation}
\int_{-\pi}^\pi \frac{\pi}{\sin \pi\alpha}e^{i\pi\alpha\sign(W)-iW\alpha} e^{-iWn}\D{W}=\frac{2\pi}{n+\alpha}\,.
\end{equation}
Hence
\begin{equation}
\sum_{n\in\mathbb{Z}}\frac{e^{iW(n+\alpha)}}{n+\alpha}=\frac{\pi}{\sin \pi\alpha}e^{i\pi\alpha\sign(W)}\,,\qquad\text{for }-\pi<W\leq\pi\,.
\end{equation}
To use this formula we write
\begin{equation}
\frac{1}{(n+\alpha_j(\lambda_a))(n+\alpha_j(\mu_a)-p_j)}=\frac{1}{p_j+\alpha_j(\lambda_a)-\alpha_j(\mu_a)}\left(\frac{1}{n+\alpha_j(\mu_a)-p_j} -\frac{1}{n+\alpha_j(\lambda_a)}\right)\,.
\end{equation}
It yields
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{\langle \pmb{\mu}|\psi^\dagger( x,0) \psi ( 0,0)|\pmb{\lambda}\rangle}{\sqrt{\langle \pmb{\mu}|\pmb{\mu}\rangle \langle \pmb{\lambda}|\pmb{\lambda}\rangle}}\ld &\frac{e^{-ix\mu_a}}{L}\prod_{j\neq a}\frac{c^2}{\pi}\frac{1}{\sqrt{(\lambda_j-\lambda_a)^2+c^2}}\frac{1}{\sqrt{(\lambda_j-\mu_a)^2+c^2}} \\
&\times\frac{1}{p+\alpha_j(\lambda_a)-\alpha_j(\mu_a)}\Bigg[\frac{1}{\tan \pi\alpha_j(\mu_a)}-\frac{e^{\frac{2i\pi x}{L}(\alpha_j(\mu_a)-\alpha_j(\lambda_a)-p_j)}}{\tan \pi\alpha_j(\lambda_a)} \\
&\qquad+i\sign(x) \left( 1-e^{\frac{2i\pi x}{L}(\alpha_j(\mu_a)-\alpha_j(\lambda_a)-p_j)}\right)\Bigg]\,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
We observe that the limit $x\to 0$ is regular. Using the expression for $\alpha_j(\nu)$ \eqref{alpha}, we obtain the following low-density limit of the form factor
\begin{equation}\label{lddensity}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{\langle \pmb{\mu}|\sigma(0)|\pmb{\lambda}\rangle}{\sqrt{\langle \pmb{\mu}|\pmb{\mu}\rangle \langle \pmb{\lambda}|\pmb{\lambda}\rangle}}\ld \frac{1}{L}&\prod_{j\neq a}\frac{c}{\sqrt{(\lambda_j-\lambda_a)^2+c^2}}\frac{c}{\sqrt{(\lambda_j-\mu_a)^2+c^2}}\frac{2(\mu_a-\lambda_a)}{cL(\mu_j-\lambda_j)}\,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Plugging this expression into the Lehmann representation for the density two-point function \eqref{bigsumfield}, one obtains exactly the low-density limit \eqref{2pfdensityld} previously obtained from the partial fraction decomposition. This provides an interesting consistency check of the interpretations of the low-density limit as obtained from low-density approximations of form factors.

\subsection {The thermodynamic limit of the spectral sum}
%We now write the density two-point function as a sum over density form factors as in \eqref{bigsumdensity}, and use the expression \eqref{lddensity} for the low-density form factors. For the form factor to be non-zero, there has to be $N-1$ roots $\mu_i$ each a distance ${\cal O}(L^{-1})$ from exactly one $\lambda_j$, and reciprocally these have to be each a distance ${\cal O}(L^{-1})$ from exactly one $\mu_i$. This leaves a $\lambda_a$ that is not close from an $\mu_i$, and a $\mu_a$ that is not close from any $\lambda_j$. The root $\lambda_a$ by construction belongs to the averaging state root distribution, whereas $\mu_a$ has to be different from any root of the averaging state root distribution. They are both free parameters of the form factor expansion that has to be summed over. We took the same index $a$ for both of them only for notational convenience, as it may be chosen upon permuting the roots. We obtain
%\begin{equation}
%\begin{aligned}
%  \left\langle  \sigma( x,t) \sigma( 0,0)  \right\rangle &\ld \frac{1}{L^2}\sum_{\lambda_a,\mu_a}e^{ix(\mu_a-\lambda_a)+it(\lambda_a^2-\mu_a^2)}\sum _{J_i,\, i\neq a}\prod_{j\neq a}\frac{c^2}{(\lambda_j-\lambda_a)^2+c^2}\frac{c^2}{(\lambda_j-\mu_a)^2+c^2}\\
%  &\frac{4(\lambda_a-\mu_a)^2}{c^2L^2(\mu_j-\lambda_j)^2}e^{ix(\mu_j-\lambda_j)+it(\lambda_j^2-\mu_j^2)}\,.
%\end{aligned}
%\end{equation}
We now wish to compute the spectral sum \eqref{2pfdensityld} in the low-density limit. Repeating the arguments performed for the field case, in the thermodynamic limit only the states with $\mu_j-\lambda_j={\cal O}(L^{-1})$ contribute in \eqref{2pfdensityld}. Besides, like for the field correlations, the Bethe equations decouple in the low-density limit. By taking the difference of the Bethe equations, we have for $j\neq a$
\begin{equation}
\mu_j-\lambda_j\ld \frac{2\pi}{L}(p_j+\alpha_j(\lambda_a)-\alpha_j(\mu_a))\,,
\end{equation}
with $p_j$ an integer. Using ${\cal N}_{\pmb{\lambda}},{\cal N}_{\pmb{\mu}}\ld 1$, we obtain the following factorization of the spectral sum
\begin{equation}\label{specsum}
\begin{aligned}
  \left\langle  \sigma( x,t) \sigma( 0,0)  \right\rangle &\ld \frac{1}{L^2}\sum_{\lambda_a,\mu_a}e^{ix(\mu_a-\lambda_a)+it(\lambda_a^2-\mu_a^2)}\prod_{j\neq a}\frac{c^2}{(\lambda_j-\lambda_a)^2+c^2}\frac{c^2}{(\lambda_j-\mu_a)^2+c^2}\\
  &\frac{(\lambda_a-\mu_a)^2}{\pi^2c^2}\sum_{p=-\infty}^\infty\frac{e^{\frac{2i\pi (x-2\lambda_j t)}{L}(p+\alpha_j(\lambda_a)-\alpha_j(\mu_a))-\frac{it(2\pi)^2}{L^2}(p+\alpha_j(\lambda_a)-\alpha_j(\mu_a))^2}}{(p+\alpha_j(\lambda_a)-\alpha_j(\mu_a))^2}\,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
We now use \eqref{s2s2} to compute the sum over the integers $p$. We find
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
&\sum_{p=-\infty}^\infty\frac{e^{\frac{2i\pi (x-2\lambda_j t)}{L}(p+\alpha_j(\lambda_a)-\alpha_j(\mu_a))-\frac{it(2\pi)^2}{L^2}(p+\alpha_j(\lambda_a)-\alpha_j(\mu_a))^2}}{(p+\alpha_j(\lambda_a)-\alpha_j(\mu_a))^2}=\\
&\frac{\pi^2 c^2 (1+\tfrac{(\lambda_a-\lambda_j)^2}{c^2})(1+\tfrac{(\mu_a-\lambda_j)^2}{c^2})}{(\lambda_a-\mu_a)^2}\Bigg[1+\frac{2i(x-2\lambda_j t)}{Lc} (\mu_a-\lambda_a)\frac{1+\tfrac{(\mu_a-\lambda_j)(\lambda_a-\lambda_j)}{c^2}}{(1+\tfrac{(\lambda_a-\lambda_j)^2}{c^2})(1+\tfrac{(\mu_a-\lambda_j)^2}{c^2})}\\
&\qquad\qquad\qquad-\frac{2|x-2\lambda_j t|}{Lc^2}\frac{(\lambda_a-\mu_a)^2}{(1+\tfrac{(\lambda_a-\lambda_j)^2}{c^2})(1+\tfrac{(\mu_a-\lambda_j)^2}{c^2})}\\
&\qquad\qquad\qquad+\frac{2\sqrt{|t|}}{\pi Lc^2}\frac{(\lambda_a-\mu_a)^2}{(1+\tfrac{(\lambda_a-\lambda_j)^2}{c^2})(1+\tfrac{(\mu_a-\lambda_j)^2}{c^2})} \chi_\mp\left(\tfrac{x-2\lambda_j t}{\sqrt{|t|}}\right)\Bigg]+{\cal O}(L^{-2})
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
Plugging this relation in \eqref{specsum}, the product over $j$ becomes an exponential in the thermodynamic limit, according to \eqref{expint}. The sum over the roots of the representative state $\lambda_a$ becomes an integral over the root density $\rho(\lambda)$, while the sum over $\nu_a$ that has to differ from any $\lambda_j$ becomes an integral over the hole density $\rho_h(\lambda)$ defined in \eqref{vartheta}. Hence one obtains
\begin{equation}\label{densityde}
\begin{aligned}
 \left\langle  \sigma( x,t) \sigma( 0,0)  \right\rangle& \ld \int_{-\infty}^\infty  \int_{-\infty}^\infty e^{it(\lambda^2-\mu^2)+ix(\mu-\lambda)}\rho(\lambda)\rho_h(\mu)\\
 &\exp \left(2ic(\mu-\lambda)\int_{-\infty}^\infty \frac{(c^2+(\mu-\nu)(\lambda-\nu))}{(c^2+(\lambda-\nu)^2)(c^2+(\mu-\nu)^2)}(x-2\nu t)\rho(\nu)\D{\nu} \right)\\
 &\exp \left(-2c^2(\mu-\lambda)^2\int_{-\infty}^\infty \frac{|x-2\nu t|}{(c^2+(\lambda-\nu)^2)(c^2+(\mu-\nu)^2)} \rho(\nu)\D{\nu} \right)\\
 &\exp \left(\frac{2c^2\sqrt{|t|}}{\pi}(\mu-\lambda)^2\int_{-\infty}^\infty \frac{\chi_\mp(\tfrac{x-2\nu t}{\sqrt{|t|}})}{(c^2+(\lambda-\nu)^2)(c^2+(\mu-\nu)^2)} \rho(\nu)\D{\nu} \right)\D{\lambda} \D{\mu}\,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
This expression is valid for all space $x$ and time $t$, and all interaction strength $c>0$. It is the leading term in the expansion \eqref{expdensitysigma}, and is the low-density limit of the dynamical correlations of the density.

\subsection{Bare particle-hole excitations\label{which}}
In the spectral sum \eqref{bigsumfield} the intermediate states $\pmb{\mu}$ can be seen as excited states above the averaging state $\pmb{\lambda}$. In this picture it is natural to \textit{expand} the spectral sum \eqref{bigsumfield} in terms of the number of \textit{particle-hole excitations} that $\pmb{\mu}$ has over $\pmb{\lambda}$. Such an expansion consists in writing
\begin{equation}
\left\langle  \sigma( x,t) \sigma( 0,0)  \right\rangle={\cal D}^2+\sum_{n\geq 1}\mathfrak{S}_n
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}\label{bare}
\mathfrak{S}_n=\sum _{ \substack{\pmb{\mu}\\ |\{I_a\}\cap \{J_a\}|=N-n}}\frac {\left| \left\langle \pmb{\mu} |\sigma( 0) |\pmb{\lambda}\right\rangle \right| ^{2}} {\left\langle \pmb{\lambda} \left| \pmb{\lambda} \right\rangle \left\langle \pmb{\mu}\right| \pmb{\mu}\right\rangle }e^{it\left( E\left( \pmb{\lambda}\right) -E\left( \pmb{\mu} \right) \right) +ix\left( P\left( \pmb{\mu}\right) -P\left( \pmb{\lambda}\right) \right) }\,,
\end{equation}
which is the spectral sum restricted to intermediate states $\pmb{\mu}$ that share $N-n$ Bethe numbers $J_a$ with the Bethe numbers $I_a$ of $\pmb{\lambda}$. Ideally, each individual $\mathfrak{S}_n$ would have a well-defined and finite thermodynamic limit $L\to\infty$ that could be represented as a multiple integral over root densities and hole densities
\begin{equation}\label{multip}
\begin{aligned}
\underbrace{\int_{-\infty}^\infty...\int_{-\infty}^\infty}_{2n}&F_n(\lambda_1,\mu_1,...,\lambda_n,\mu_n)e^{it(E(\pmb{\lambda})-E(\pmb{\mu}))+ix(P(\pmb{\mu})-P(\pmb{\lambda}))}\\
&\qquad\qquad\qquad\times\rho(\lambda_1)\rho_h(\mu_1)...\rho(\lambda_n)\rho_h(\mu_n)\D{\lambda_1}\D{\mu_1}...\D{\lambda_n}\D{\mu_n}\,.
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
The function $F_n(\lambda_1,\mu_1,...,\lambda_n,\mu_n)$ appearing in this expression would thus be identified as a \textit{thermodynamic form factor} for $n$ particle-hole excitations\cite{deNP15,deNP16,DNP18,panfil20}. This idea was backed by calculations of
\begin{equation}
\underset{\mu\to\lambda}{\lim}\,F_1(\lambda,\mu)\,,
\end{equation}
that is finite and well-defined in the thermodynamic limit, by various means \cite{deNP16,cortescuberopanfil2}.

However, this picture seems to be a priori contradicted by results of \cite{granetessler20}, where the thermodynamic limit of the spectral sum \eqref{bigsumfield} was computed exactly at order $c^{-2}$. At this order, the spectral sum \textit{exactly} truncates to one- and two-particle-hole excitations, hence to $\mathfrak{S}_1$ and $\mathfrak{S}_2$. But it was found that these two separate sums in the thermodynamic limit individually \textit{diverge} and \textit{depend on the representative state} $\pmb{\lambda}$ of the root density, at order $c^{-2}$. Namely we have
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}\label{s1s2}
&\mathfrak{S}_1=LA_1+f_1(\rho,\gamma_{-2})+{\cal O}(L^{-1})+{\cal O}(c^{-3})\\
&\mathfrak{S}_2=LA_2+f_2(\rho,\gamma_{-2})+{\cal O}(L^{-1})+{\cal O}(c^{-3})\,,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
with $A_{1,2}$ some reals of order $c^{-2}$ and $f_{1,2}(\rho,\gamma_{-2})$ functions of the root density and the pair distribution function (see \cite{granetessler20} for a precise definition). However, their sum $\mathfrak{S}_1+\mathfrak{S}_2$ is not divergent and depends only on $\rho$, as we expect. To fit in the general picture \eqref{multip}, the only solution would be that these divergences in $L$ are an artefact of the $1/c$ expansion, i.e. that the finite-size corrections to $\mathfrak{S}_{1,2}$ in the thermodynamic limit would be e.g. of the form $\varphi(L/c)$ with a function $\varphi(x)\to 0$ when $x\to \pm\infty$. In the framework of the low-density expansion, one can investigate this issue since the calculations are performed non-perturbatively in $1/c$, and compute the thermodynamic limit of $\mathfrak{S}_{1}$ for a finite fixed $c$, in the low-density limit.\\


To that end, let us use the expression \eqref{lddensity} for the low-density limit of the form factor to write
\begin{equation}\label{lowdensquare}
\begin{aligned}
\frac{|\langle \pmb{\mu}|\sigma(0)|\pmb{\lambda}\rangle|^2}{\langle \pmb{\mu}|\pmb{\mu}\rangle \langle \pmb{\lambda}|\pmb{\lambda}\rangle}\ld \frac{1}{L^2}&\prod_{j\neq a}\frac{c^2}{(\lambda_j-\lambda_a)^2+c^2}\frac{c^2}{(\lambda_j-\mu_a)^2+c^2}\frac{4(\mu_a-\lambda_a)^2}{c^2L^2(\mu_j-\lambda_j)^2}\,,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
and assume that $\pmb{\mu}$ only involves one particle-hole excitation above $\pmb{\lambda}$. Hence for all $j\neq a$, the Bethe numbers $J_j$ of $\pmb{\mu}$ are equal to the Bethe numbers $I_j$ of $\pmb{\lambda}$. In the low-density limit we have then
\begin{equation}
\forall j\neq a,\qquad\mu_j-\lambda_j\ld \frac{2\pi}{L}(\alpha_j(\lambda_a)-\alpha_j(\mu_a))\,.
\end{equation}
It follows that in the thermodynamic limit, the low-density form factor squared \eqref{lowdensquare} becomes
\begin{equation}
\frac{|\langle \pmb{\mu}|\sigma(0)|\pmb{\lambda}\rangle|^2}{\langle \pmb{\mu}|\pmb{\mu}\rangle \langle \pmb{\lambda}|\pmb{\lambda}\rangle}\ld \frac{1}{L^2}\exp[L\phi(\lambda_a,\mu_a)+{\cal O}(L^0)]\,,
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}\label{phi}
\phi(\lambda,\mu)=\int_{-\infty}^\infty \log \left[\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{1}{1+\tfrac{(\nu-\lambda)^2}{c^2}} \frac{1}{1+\tfrac{(\nu-\mu)^2}{c^2}}\left( \frac{\mu-\lambda}{\arctan \tfrac{\mu-\nu}{c}-\arctan \tfrac{\lambda-\nu}{c}}\right)^2\right] \rho(\nu)\D{\nu}\,.
\end{equation}
The sign of the logarithm can be determined by applying the following inequality that is valid for all real $u$
\begin{equation}\label{ineq}
u^2\geq \sin^2 u\,,
\end{equation}
to the value
\begin{equation}
u=\arctan x-\arctan y\,,
\end{equation}
for $x,y$ reals. Indeed, using trigonometric relations, Eq \eqref{ineq} is exactly
\begin{equation}
\left( \frac{\arctan x-\arctan y}{x-y}\right)^2\geq \arctan'(x)\arctan'(y)\,,
\end{equation}
with equality only for $x=y$. This permits to deduce that the logarithm in \eqref{phi} is always negative whenever $\lambda\neq \mu$. One concludes that we always have if $\lambda\neq \mu$
\begin{equation}
\phi(\lambda,\mu)<0\,,
\end{equation}
and if $\lambda=\mu$ we have
\begin{equation}
\phi(\lambda,\lambda)=0\,.
\end{equation}
It follows that in the framework of a multiple integral representation in terms of bare particle-hole excitations in the thermodynamic limit \eqref{multip}, the function $F_1(\lambda,\mu)$  would be in fact zero everywhere except if $\mu=\lambda$ where it takes the value $1$ as deduced from \eqref{lowdensquare}. Namely we would have
\begin{equation}
F_1(\lambda,\mu)= \begin{cases}0\qquad \text{if }\lambda\neq \mu\\
1\qquad \text{if }\lambda= \mu
\end{cases}+{\cal O}({\cal D})\,.
\end{equation}


This analysis shows that the integral representation \eqref{multip} in terms of 'bare' particle-hole excitations \eqref{bare} is singular. If the leading behaviour at large space and time of \eqref{multip} is indeed obtained when $\lambda_1=\mu_1$ in \eqref{multip} for $n=1$, where the function $F_1(\lambda,\mu)$ takes a finite value, the singular behaviour of this representation should be an obstacle to the computation of the subleading orders.


\subsection{Dressed particle-hole excitations\label{which2}}
Let us now investigate the nature of the states summed over to obtain the expression \eqref{densityde} in the low-density limit. The double integral over the root density and hole density are one-particle-hole excitations with a \textit{macroscopic} amplitude (i.e. the difference between the Bethe numbers is ${\cal O}(L)$). The exponentials however arise from the product of a macroscopic number of one-dimensional sums over all the other remaining roots of the averaging states. These take into account an \textit{arbitrary} number of particle-hole excitations, but with only a \textit{microscopic} or  \textit{mesoscopic} amplitude (i.e. the difference between the Bethe numbers can be ${\cal O}(L^\nu)$ for any $\nu<1$). These configurations are represented in Figure \ref{exfnp1k0}. They correspond to what is called a \textit{dressed one-particle-hole excitation}. They entail expanding the spectral sum \eqref{bigsumfield} according to
\begin{equation}\label{dressedexp}
\left\langle  \sigma( x,t) \sigma( 0,0)  \right\rangle={\cal D}^2+\sum_{n\geq 1}\mathfrak{S}^{\rm dr}_n\,,
\end{equation}
with
\begin{equation}\label{sdr}
\sum_{m=1}^n\mathfrak{S}^{\rm dr}_m=\sum _{ \substack{\pmb{\mu}\\ \exists \tau\text{ permutation of }\{1,...,N\},\\\,\# \{a\text{ s.t. }|I_a-J_{\tau(a)}|={\cal O}(L)\} \leq n}}\frac {\left| \left\langle \pmb{\mu} |\sigma( 0) |\pmb{\lambda}\right\rangle \right| ^{2}} {\left\langle \pmb{\lambda} \left| \pmb{\lambda} \right\rangle \left\langle \pmb{\mu}\right| \pmb{\mu}\right\rangle }e^{it\left( E\left( \pmb{\lambda}\right) -E\left( \pmb{\mu} \right) \right) +ix\left( P\left( \pmb{\mu}\right) -P\left( \pmb{\lambda}\right) \right) }\,.
\end{equation}


\begin{figure}[H]
\begin{center}
\begin{tikzpicture}[scale=1]
\draw[->,blue]     (3.5,0.25) arc (180: 0:2.5);
\draw[->,red]     (0.5,0.25) arc (180: 0:0.25);
\draw[->,red]     (5.,0.25) arc (180: 0:0.25);
\draw[->,red]     (10.5,0.25) arc (0: 180:0.5);
\node at (-1,0) {.};
\draw[black] (-0.5,0) circle (3pt);
\node at (0,0) {.};
\draw[black] (0.5,0) circle (3pt);
\node at (1,0) {.};
\draw[black] (1.5,0) circle (3pt);
\draw[black] (2,0) circle (3pt);
\node at (2.5,0) {.};
\node at (3,0) {.};
\draw[black] (3.5,0) circle (3pt);
\draw[black] (4,0) circle (3pt);
\draw[black] (4.5,0) circle (3pt);
\draw[black] (5,0) circle (3pt);
\node at (5.5,0) {.};
\draw[black] (6,0) circle (3pt);
\node at (6.5,0) {.};
\node at (7,0) {.};
\draw[black] (7.5,0) circle (3pt);
\node at (8,0) {.};
\node at (8.5,0) {.};
\draw[black] (9,0) circle (3pt);
\node at (9.5,0) {.};
\draw[black] (10,0) circle (3pt);
\draw[black] (10.5,0) circle (3pt);
\draw[black] (11,0) circle (3pt);
\node at (11.5,0) {.};
\draw[black] (12,0) circle (3pt);
\node at (12.5,0) {.};
\filldraw[black] (-0.5,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[black] (1.,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[black] (1.5,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[black] (2,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[black] (8.5,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[black] (4,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[black] (4.5,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[black] (5.5,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[black] (6,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[black] (9,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[black] (7.5,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[black] (10,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[black] (9.5,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[black] (11,0) circle (2pt);
\filldraw[black] (12,0) circle (2pt);
\end{tikzpicture}
\end{center}
\caption{Sketch of a dressed one-particle-hole excitation: positions of the
momenta of the averaging state $\pmb{\lambda}$ (empty circles) and the
intermediate state $\pmb{\mu}$  (filled circles) respectively, and position of 
the holes (dots). In red is indicated the 'soft modes' corresponding to microscopic excitations, and in blue the only macroscopic excitation.} 
\label{exfnp1k0}
\end{figure}

Loosely speaking, $\mathfrak{S}^{\rm dr}_n$ includes $n$ macroscopic particle-hole excitations and any number of microscopic particle-hole excitations. Since these configurations are not disjoint, one requires the expression \eqref{sdr} for a precise definition. In the low-density limit the full spectral sum truncates to $\mathfrak{S}^{\rm dr}_1$, and this expression is found to be finite and well-defined in the thermodynamic.


We note that these dressed particle-hole excitations are actually in principle what is computed in \cite{deNP15,deNP16,DNP18}. But therein the 'soft modes' contribute as a numerical factor that multiplies the form factor. Here, within the low density expansion, it is seen in \eqref{densityde} that these soft modes actually carry an $x$ and $t$ dependence as well. Namely we have a representation for $\mathfrak{S}_n^{\rm dr}$
\begin{equation}
\begin{aligned}
\underbrace{\int_{-\infty}^\infty...\int_{-\infty}^\infty}_{2n}&F_n^{x,t}(\lambda_1,\mu_1,...,\lambda_n,\mu_n)e^{it(E(\pmb{\lambda})-E(\pmb{\mu}))+ix(P(\pmb{\mu})-P(\pmb{\lambda}))}\\
&\qquad\qquad\qquad\times\rho(\lambda_1)\rho_h(\mu_1)...\rho(\lambda_n)\rho_h(\mu_n)\D{\lambda_1}\D{\mu_1}...\D{\lambda_n}\D{\mu_n}\,,
\end{aligned}
\end{equation}
where the 'dressed thermodynamic form factor' $F_n^{x,t}(\lambda_1,\mu_1,...,\lambda_n,\mu_n)$ carries a $x,t$ dependence coming from the soft modes summation, although the soft modes do not modify the energy and momentum of the state in the thermodynamic limit. This dependence emerges from the double poles that  lift to order $L^0$ some finite-size corrections. The function $F_1^{x,t}(\lambda,\mu)$ can be directly deduced from \eqref{densityde}.
%It should also be noted that at zero temperature the dynamical correlations are also organized into dressed particle-hole excitations \cite{kitanineetcformfactor}, but for however a priori different reasons. At zero temperature all the microscopic excitations near the Fermi boundaries have to be summed over to recover the right critical exponents, but an expansion in terms of bare particle-hole excitations is still possible. 

From Sections \ref{which} and \ref{which2}, we conclude that the right expansion scheme of the spectral sum is an expansion in terms of dressed particle-hole excitations \eqref{dressedexp}, in the sense that the truncated spectral sums $\mathfrak{S}_n^{\rm dr}$ are finite and well-defined in the thermodynamic limit, and are smooth functions of the macroscopic excited rapidities. Moreover, as shown in \cite{granetessler20}, they admit a well-defined and uniform $1/c$ expansion without any spurious divergences in $L$ coming from $c$-dependent finite-size effects. These two properties are not satisfied by the 'bare' particle-hole excitations expansion.



\section{Summary and conclusion}
We computed the dynamical two-point function of the field and density operator averaged within a state with a small particle density ${\cal D}$, given by Equations \eqref{field} and \eqref{densityde}. They are valid for an arbitrary interaction strength $c>0$ and for all space and time -- hence one can deduce the spectral function and dynamical structure factor in the full momentum-frequency plane, in the same regime of small ${\cal D}$. This low-density limit is defined as the leading term in the correlation functions obtained by decomposing the form factors into partial fractions. 

Besides the explicit expressions obtained in the low-density regime, this work also provides interesting insights on the nature of states that contribute to the spectral sum, and on its possible expansions as detailed in Sections \ref{which} and \ref{which2}. The low-density regime is indeed naturally interpreted as a single dressed particle-hole excitation, i.e. a macroscopic particle-hole excitation with an arbitrary number of microscopic particle-hole excitations. In contrast, an integral representation in terms of 'bare' particle-hole excitations in the thermodynamic limit is found to be singular, in the sense that the 'thermodynamic form factor' for one-particle-hole excitations is non-zero only in the limit where the amplitude of the macroscopic excitation vanishes. Hence this work indicates that the right expansion of the spectral sum is in terms of dressed particle-hole excitations, as already suggested by the $1/c$ expansion developed in \cite{granetessler20}. Importantly, this dressing by microscopic particle-hole excitations also comes with an $x$ and $t$ dependence.


This PFD framework allows in principle for a computation of the next orders, which constitutes the most natural direction of improvement of this work. The fact that the next orders can indeed be computed with the PFD has been shown in \cite{GFE20} for a model that can be reformulated in terms of free fermions. In the Lieb-Liniger case, the interaction introduces technical but not fundamental difficulties, and we hope to be able to pursue this program in following works. 


%\subsection {A spectral sum for the field four-point function}
%Our approach begins with the spectral representation \eqref{bigsumfield4} of the four-point function of the field operator. In order to derive its low-density limit, we need to use the low-density form factors \eqref{ldff} and sum only over the relevant excited states. 
%
%As outlined above, the non-zero contributions to \eqref{bigsumfield4} in the thermodynamic limit are, first, such that each of the $\mu^{(1)}_{i}$ are at a distance ${\cal O}(L^{-1})$ of one $\lambda_i$. This leaves exactly one $\lambda_a$ with $a=1,...,N$ without $\mu^{(1)}_{i}$'s around. Now, for the same reason, each $\mu^{(1)}_{i}$ has to be at a distance ${\cal O}(L^{-1})$ of one and only one $\mu^{(2)}_i$. This implies that $N-1$ roots of $\pmb{\mu}^{(2)}$ are at a distance ${\cal O}(L^{-1})$ of one and only one $\lambda_i$, while the $N$th remaining root of $\pmb{\mu}^{(2)}$, denoted $\nu$, is arbitrary up to differing from all the $\lambda_i$'s. Lastly, each of the $N-1$ roots $\mu^{(3)}_i$ has to be at a distance ${\cal O}(L^{-1})$ of both one and only one $\lambda_i$ and one and only one $\mu^{(2)}_i$. This implies that the root of $\pmb{\mu}^{(2)}$ without any $\mu^{(3)}_i$ around is necessarily $\nu$, and the root of $\pmb{\lambda}$ without any $\mu^{(3)}_i$ around is necessarily $\lambda_a$. It follows from this analysis that one has the following low-density expressions of the form factors
%\begin{equation}
%\begin{aligned}
%\frac { \left\langle \pmb{\mu}^{(1)} |\psi \left( 0\right) |\pmb{\lambda}\right\rangle  } {\sqrt{\left\langle \pmb{\lambda} \left| \pmb{\lambda} \right\rangle \left\langle \pmb{\mu}^{(1)}\right| \pmb{\mu}^{(1)}\right\rangle }}&\ld\frac{-i}{\sqrt{L}}\prod_{j\neq a}\frac{2c}{\sqrt{(\lambda_j-\lambda_a)^2+c^2}}\prod_{j\neq a}\frac{1}{L(\mu^{(1)}_j-\lambda_j)}\\
%\frac { \left\langle \pmb{\mu}^{(1)} |\psi \left( 0\right) |\pmb{\mu}^{(2)}\right\rangle  } {\sqrt{\left\langle \pmb{\mu}^{(2)} \left|\pmb{\mu}^{(2)} \right\rangle \left\langle \pmb{\mu}^{(1)}\right| \pmb{\mu}^{(1)}\right\rangle }}&\ld\frac{-i}{\sqrt{L}}\prod_{j\neq a}\frac{2c}{\sqrt{(\lambda_j-\nu)^2+c^2}}\prod_{j\neq a}\frac{1}{L(\mu^{(1)}_j-\mu^{(2)}_j)}\\
%\frac { \left\langle \pmb{\mu}^{(3)} |\psi \left( 0\right) |\pmb{\mu}^{(2)}\right\rangle  } {\sqrt{\left\langle \pmb{\mu}^{(2)} \left|\pmb{\mu}^{(2)} \right\rangle \left\langle \pmb{\mu}^{(3)}\right| \pmb{\mu}^{(3)}\right\rangle }}&\ld\frac{-i}{\sqrt{L}}\prod_{j\neq a}\frac{2c}{\sqrt{(\lambda_j-\nu)^2+c^2}}\prod_{j\neq a}\frac{1}{L(\mu^{(3)}_j-\mu^{(2)}_j)}\\
%\frac { \left\langle \pmb{\mu}^{(3)} |\psi \left( 0\right) |\pmb{\lambda}\right\rangle  } {\sqrt{\left\langle \pmb{\lambda} \left| \pmb{\lambda} \right\rangle \left\langle \pmb{\mu}^{(3)}\right| \pmb{\mu}^{(3)}\right\rangle }}&\ld\frac{-i}{\sqrt{L}}\prod_{j\neq a}\frac{2c}{\sqrt{(\lambda_j-\lambda_a)^2+c^2}}\prod_{j\neq a}\frac{1}{L(\mu^{(3)}_j-\lambda_j)}\,.
%\end{aligned}
%\end{equation}
%The differences between the roots can be written in the low-density limit as
%\begin{equation}
%\begin{aligned}
%\mu^{(1)}_j-\lambda_j&\ld\frac{2\pi}{L}(n_j+\alpha_j(\lambda_a))\\
%\mu^{(2)}_j-\mu^{(1)}_j&\ld\frac{2\pi}{L}(m_j+\alpha_j(\nu))\\
%\mu^{(3)}_j-\mu^{(2)}_j&\ld\frac{2\pi}{L}(p_j+\alpha_j(\nu))\\
%\mu^{(3)}_j-\lambda_j&\ld\frac{2\pi}{L}(n_j-m_j+p_j+\alpha_j(\lambda_a))\,,
%\end{aligned}
%\end{equation}
%with $n_j,m_j,p_j$ integers of order ${\cal O}(L^0)$. This yields the low-density limit of the spectral sum for the four-point function of the field
%\begin{equation}
%\begin{aligned}
%&\left\langle \psi^\dagger( x_3,t_3) \psi ( x_2,t_2) \psi^\dagger( x_1,t_1) \psi ( 0,0)\right\rangle\ld\\
%&\qquad\qquad\qquad\frac{1}{L^2}\sum_{a=1}^N \sum_\nu \prod_{j\neq a} \left[\frac{c^2/\pi^2}{(\lambda_j-\lambda_a)^2+c^2}\frac{c^2/\pi^2}{(\lambda_j-\nu)^2+c^2}\Sigma_{j}(\lambda_a,\nu)\right]\,,
%\end{aligned}
%\end{equation}
%with
%\begin{equation}\label{hugesum}
%\begin{aligned}
%&\Sigma_{j}(\lambda_a,\nu)=\\
%&\sum_{n,m,p=-\infty}^\infty \frac{e^{-it_1[(\lambda_j+ \tilde{m})^2-\lambda_j^2]+ix_1 \tilde{m}+it_2[(\lambda_j+ \tilde{p})^2-\lambda_j^2]-ix_2 \tilde{p}-it_3[(\lambda_j+ \tilde{p}- \tilde{m}+ \tilde{n})^2-\lambda_j^2]+ix_3(\tilde{p}- \tilde{m}+ \tilde{n})}}{(n+\alpha_j(\lambda_a))(m+\alpha_j(\nu))(p+\alpha_j(\nu))(n+p-m+\alpha_j(\lambda_a))} 
%\end{aligned}
%\end{equation}
%where we introduced
%\begin{equation}
%\tilde{n}=\frac{2\pi(n+\alpha_j(\lambda_a))}{L}\,,\qquad \tilde{m}=\frac{2\pi(m+\alpha_j(\nu))}{L}\,,\qquad \tilde{p}=\frac{2\pi(p+\alpha_j(\nu))}{L}\,.
%\end{equation}
%We will denote
%\begin{equation}\label{nmp}
%\begin{aligned}
%N_j&=\frac{2\pi}{L} (x_3-2\lambda_jt_3)\\
%M_j&=\frac{2\pi}{L}  (x_1-x_3-2\lambda_j(t_1-t_3))\\
%P_j&=\frac{2\pi}{L}  (x_3-x_2-2\lambda_j(t_3-t_2))\,.
%\end{aligned}
%\end{equation}
%
%\subsection {The thermodynamic limit of the spectral sum}
%In order to determine the thermodynamic limit of the field four-point function we need to carry out the sums over the integers. We have the following exact formula for given $W,\alpha$
%\begin{equation}
%\sum_{n\in\mathbb{Z}}\frac{e^{iW(n+\alpha)}}{n+\alpha}=\frac{\pi}{\sin \pi\alpha}e^{i\pi\alpha\sign(W)}\,,\qquad\text{for }-\pi<W\leq\pi\,,
%\end{equation}
%that is obtained by computing the Fourier series coefficients of the right-hand side multiplied by $e^{-iw\alpha}$, seen as a $2\pi$-periodic function of $w$. This permits us to write
%\begin{equation}
%\sum_{n\in\mathbb{Z}}\frac{e^{i\frac{w}{L}(n+\alpha)+i\frac{\tau}{L^2}(n+\alpha)^2}}{n+\alpha}=\frac{\pi}{\sin \pi\alpha}e^{i\pi\alpha\sign(w)}A_\alpha\left( \frac{w}{\sqrt{\tau}}\right) +{\cal O}(L^{-2})\,,
%\end{equation}
%with
%\begin{equation}
%A_\alpha\left(x\right)=1-i\sin(\pi\alpha)e^{-i\pi\alpha\sign(x)}\chi'_{\sign(x)}(x)\,,
%\end{equation}
%and $\chi'_\pm(x)$ the derivative of $\chi_\pm(x)$ defined in \eqref{chi}.\\
%
%We first apply this formula to the sum over $m$ in \eqref{hugesum}, by decomposing
%\begin{equation}
%\begin{aligned}
%&\frac{1}{(m+\alpha_j(\nu))(n+p-m+\alpha_j(\lambda_a))}\\
%&=\frac{1}{n+p+\alpha_j(\nu)+\alpha_j(\lambda_a)}\left(\frac{1}{m-n-p-\alpha_j(\lambda_a)}-\frac{1}{m+\alpha_j(\nu)} \right)\,,
%\end{aligned}
%\end{equation}
%and setting for the first sum
%\begin{equation}
%\begin{aligned}
%\alpha&=-n-p-\alpha_j(\lambda_a)\\
%w&=2\pi\left[x_1-x_3+2\lambda_j(t_3-t_1)-\tfrac{4\pi}{L}t_1(p+n+\alpha_j(\nu)+\alpha_j(\lambda_a)) \right]\\
% \tau&=-(2\pi)^2(t_1+t_3)\,,
%\end{aligned}
%\end{equation}
%and for the second sum
%\begin{equation}
%\begin{aligned}
%\alpha&=\alpha_j(\nu)\\
%w&=2\pi\left[x_1-x_3+2\lambda_j(t_3-t_1)+\tfrac{4\pi}{L}t_3(p+n+\alpha_j(\nu)+\alpha_j(\lambda_a)) \right]\\
% \tau&=-(2\pi)^2(t_1+t_3)\,.
%\end{aligned}
%\end{equation}
%It yields
%\begin{equation}\label{hugesum2}
%\begin{aligned}
%&\Sigma_{j}(\lambda_a,\nu)=\\
%&-\frac{\pi e^{i\pi\alpha_j(\nu)\sign(M_j)}}{\sin\pi\alpha_j(\nu)}A_{\alpha_j(\nu)}(\tfrac{x_1-x_3+2\lambda_j(t_3-t_1)}{\sqrt{|t_1+t_3|}})\\
%&\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\times\sum_{n,p=-\infty}^\infty \frac{e^{it_2[(\lambda_j+ \tilde{p})^2-\lambda_j^2]-ix_2 \tilde{p}-it_3[(\lambda_j+ \tilde{p}+ \tilde{n})^2-\lambda_j^2]+ix_3(\tilde{p}+ \tilde{n})}}{(n+\alpha_j(\lambda_a))(p+\alpha_j(\nu))(n+p+\alpha_j(\lambda_a)+\alpha_j(\nu))}\\
%&-\frac{\pi e^{-i\pi\alpha_j(\lambda_a)\sign(M_j)}}{\sin\pi\alpha_j(\lambda_a)}A_{-\alpha_j(\lambda_a)}(\tfrac{x_1-x_3+2\lambda_j(t_3-t_1)}{\sqrt{|t_1+t_3|}})\Bigg[\frac{\pi}{\tan \pi\alpha_j(\lambda_a)}-\frac{i\pi}{L}\chi'_{-s_{13}}(\tfrac{x_1-x_3+2\lambda_j(t_3-t_1)}{\sqrt{|t_1+t_3|}})\Bigg]\\
%&\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\times\sum_{n,p=-\infty}^\infty \frac{e^{it_2[(\lambda_j+ \tilde{p})^2-\lambda_j^2]-ix_2 \tilde{p}-it_1[(\lambda_j+ \tilde{p}+ \tilde{n})^2-\lambda_j^2]+ix_1(\tilde{p}+ \tilde{n})}}{(n+\alpha_j(\lambda_a))(p+\alpha_j(\nu))(n+p+\alpha_j(\lambda_a)+\alpha_j(\nu))}\,.
%\end{aligned}
%\end{equation}
%We now apply the same procedure to the sum over $n$ by decomposing
%\begin{equation}
%\begin{aligned}
%&\frac{1}{(n+\alpha_j(\lambda_a))(n+p+\alpha_j(\lambda_a)+\alpha_j(\nu))}\\
%&=\frac{1}{p+\alpha_j(\nu)}\left(\frac{1}{n+\alpha_j(\lambda_a)}-\frac{1}{n+p+\alpha_j(\nu)+\alpha_j(\lambda_a)} \right)\,,
%\end{aligned}
%\end{equation}
%and setting for the first sum
%\begin{equation}
%\begin{aligned}
%\alpha&=\alpha_j(\lambda_a)\\
%w&=2\pi\left[x_3-2\lambda_jt_3-\tfrac{4\pi}{L}t_3(p+\alpha_j(\nu)) \right]\\
% \tau&=-(2\pi)^2t_3\,,
%\end{aligned}
%\end{equation}
%and for the second sum
%\begin{equation}
%\begin{aligned}
%\alpha&=p+\alpha_j(\lambda_a)+\alpha_j(\nu)\\
%w&=2\pi\left[x_3-2\lambda_jt_3\right]\\
% \tau&=-(2\pi)^2t_3\,.
%\end{aligned}
%\end{equation}
%It yields
%\begin{equation}
%\begin{aligned}
%&\sum_{n,p=-\infty}^\infty \frac{e^{it_2[(\lambda_j+ \tilde{p})^2-\lambda_j^2]-ix_2 \tilde{p}-it_3[(\lambda_j+ \tilde{p}+ \tilde{n})^2-\lambda_j^2]+ix_3(\tilde{p}+ \tilde{n})}}{(n+\alpha_j(\lambda_a))(p+\alpha_j(\nu))(n+p+\alpha_j(\lambda_a)+\alpha_j(\nu))}=\\
%&\Bigg[\frac{\pi}{\tan \pi\alpha_j(\lambda_a)}+\frac{i\pi}{L}\chi'_{-s_{3}}(\tfrac{x_3-2\lambda_jt_3}{\sqrt{|t_3|}})\Bigg]\sum_{p=-\infty}^\infty \frac{e^{it_2[(\lambda_j+ \tilde{p})^2-\lambda_j^2]-ix_2 \tilde{p}-it_3[(\lambda_j+ \tilde{p})^2-\lambda_j^2]+ix_3\tilde{p}}}{(p+\alpha_j(\nu))^2}\\
%&-\Bigg[\frac{\pi}{\tan \pi(\alpha_j(\lambda_a)+\alpha_j(\nu))}-\frac{i\pi}{L}\chi'_{-s_{3}}(\tfrac{x_3-2\lambda_jt_3}{\sqrt{|t_3|}})\Bigg]\sum_{p=-\infty}^\infty \frac{e^{it_2[(\lambda_j+ \tilde{p})^2-\lambda_j^2]-ix_2 \tilde{p}}}{(p+\alpha_j(\nu))^2}\,.
%\end{aligned}
%\end{equation}
%Finally we use \eqref{s2s2} to evaluate the remaining sum over $p$. We obtain
%
%

%
%\section {Partial fraction decomposition of the form factor}
%
%
%\subsection {Recursive structure}
%Now, we make the following observation. In \eqref{formulA}, whenever an index $i$ has $\nu_i=2$, the value of $\mu_i$ is simply set to the value $\lambda_{f(i)}$, and this value is attained by no other Bethe root. This fact simplifies greatly the calculation of \eqref{formulA}, because the form factors possess some recursive structure whenever a subset of rapidities of one of the state is exactly equal to a subset of rapidities of the other state. 
%
%To be specific, let us consider two subsets $I\subset \{1,...,N\}$, $J\subset \{1,...,N-1\}$ such that $|I|=|J|+1$, and denote 
%\begin{equation}
%\pmb{\lambda}_I=\{\lambda_i | i\in I\}\,,\qquad \pmb{\mu}_J=\{\mu_j | j\in J\}\,.
%\end{equation}
%We denote $\bar{I}= \{1,...,N\}-I$ and $\bar{J}= \{1,...,N-1\}-J$. For any one-to-one function $g: \bar{J}\mapsto \bar{I}$ we find that
%\begin{equation}\label{dressing}
%\Big[\prod_{i\in \bar{J}}(\mu_i-\lambda_{g(i)})^2F(\pmb{\lambda},\pmb{\mu})\Big]|_{\forall i\in \bar{J},\,\mu_i=\lambda_{g(i)}}=F(\pmb{\lambda}_I,\pmb{\mu}_J)\prod_{i\in \bar{I}}4\sin^2 \theta_{i}\,,
%\end{equation}
%%\begin{equation}\label{dressing}
%%\prod_{i\notin J}(\mu_i-\lambda_{g(i)})^2F(\pmb{\lambda},\pmb{\mu})|_{\forall i\notin J,\,\mu_i=\lambda_{g(i)}}=F(\pmb{\lambda}_I,\pmb{\mu}_J)\prod_{i\notin I}\frac{\left[2\Im \prod_{j\in J}(\mu_j-\lambda_i+ic)\prod_{j\in I}(\lambda_j-\lambda_i-ic) \right]^2}{\prod_{j\in J}[(\mu_j-\lambda_i)^2+c^2]\prod_{j\in I}[(\lambda_j-\lambda_i)^2+c^2]}\,,
%%\end{equation}
%where $\theta_{i}$ is defined by
%\begin{equation}
%\frac{\prod_{j\in J}(\mu_j-\lambda_i+ic)}{\prod_{j\in I}(\lambda_j-\lambda_i+ic)}=m_{i}e^{i\theta_{i}}\,,
%\end{equation}
%with $m_{i}>0$ the modulus of the left-hand side. This relation means that if one sets a certain number of $\lambda_i$'s equal to some $\mu_i$'s in the form factor (with the associated double pole removed), then it is equal to the form factor between the remaining rapidities, multiplied by the dressing term $\prod_{i\in \bar{I}}4\sin^2 \theta_{i}$. 
%%This remark is particularly useful for the calculation of the coefficients \eqref{formulA}, since all the terms with $\nu_i=2$ result in setting one of the $\mu_i$'s to one of the $\lambda_i$'s.
%%%\frac{\prod_{i\notin I,\,j\in I}[(\lambda_i-\lambda_j)^2+c^2]}{\prod_{i\notin I,\, j\in J}[(\lambda_i-\mu_j)^2+c^2]}\prod_{i\notin I}(V_i^+-V_i^-)^2
%%with
%%\begin{equation}
%%V_i^\pm=\frac{\prod_{j\in J}(\mu_j-\lambda_i\pm ic)}{\prod_{j\in I}(\lambda_j-\lambda_i\pm ic)}\,.
%%\end{equation}
%Interestingly, this means that the terms arising in \eqref{pfd} are effectively (derivatives of) form factors between states with \textit{a finite number} of rapidities, and not with a number of rapidities that scales like $L$. 
%
%\section{Leading order in the particle density}
%
%\subsection {Expression of $S_{0,0}$}
%Since one must have $|I_0|=1+|I_1|$, the leading term of \eqref{psipsi} in the particle density $D$ is obtained with $I_1=I_2=\varnothing$ and $I_0=\{a\}$ for $a=1,...,N$. From \eqref{dressing} one has
%\begin{equation}
%A(I_0,I_1,I_2)=\prod_{i\neq a}4\sin^2\theta_i\,,
%%\frac{4c^2}{(\lambda_i-\lambda_a)^2+c^2}
%\end{equation}
%with $\theta_i$ being the phase of
%\begin{equation}
%\frac{1}{\lambda_a-\lambda_i+ic}\,.
%\end{equation}
%The corresponding contribution to the correlation function is
%\begin{equation}\label{S00}
%\begin{aligned}
%S_{0,0}=\frac{1}{L}\sum_{a=1}^N\sum_{J_i\,,\, i\neq a}\frac{e^{it \lambda_a^2-ix\lambda_a}}{\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\lambda}}\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\mu}}}\prod_{i\neq a}\left[\frac{4\sin^2\theta_i}{L^2(\mu_i-\lambda_{i})^{2}}e^{it(\lambda_i^2-\mu_i^2)+ix(\mu_i-\lambda_i)}\right]\,.
%\end{aligned}
%\end{equation}
%
%\subsection {Expression of $S_{0,0}$}
%In order to carry out the sum over the Bethe numbers in \eqref{S00}, let us first investigate which values of Bethe numbers will give a non-zero contribution in the thermodynamic limit.
%
%Let us consider Bethe number configurations such that $\mu_i-\lambda_i=\mathcal{O}(L^{-b_i})$ with $ b_i\geq 0$. Since the parity of the numbers of roots $\lambda_i$ and $\mu_i$ is different, the Bethe numbers of $\lambda_i$ are integers (resp. half-odd integers) if those of $\mu_i$ half-odd integers (resp. integers). From the Bethe equations one has $b_i\leq 1$.
%
%Now, since the Bethe number $J_i$ can take $\mathcal{O}(L^{1-b_i})$ values, and since $a$ can take $\mathcal{O}(L)$ values, one has $\mathcal{O}(L^{N-\sum_{i\neq a}b_i})$ such configurations. Each term in \eqref{S00} is $\mathcal{O}(L^{-2N+1+2\sum_{i\neq a}b_i})$. Hence the contribution of these configurations is $\mathcal{O}(L^{-N+1+\sum_{i\neq a}b_i})$. Given that $0\leq b_i\leq 1$, the only possibility to have a non-vanishing result in the thermodynamic limit is to have $\forall i,\, b_i=1$. Hence the only non-vanishing configurations in \eqref{S00} are those for which the Bethe numbers of $\mu_i$ differ from that of $\lambda_i$ by $\mathcal{O}(L^{0})$. Let us now denote
%\begin{equation}
%n_i+\frac{1}{2}=J_i-I_i\,,
%\end{equation}
%the difference between the Bethe numbers of $\mu_i$ and $\lambda_i$, and introduce the Gaudin matrix
%\begin{equation}
%G_{ij}= \delta_{ij} \left(1+\frac{1}{L}\sum_{k=1}^N \frac{2c}{c^2+(\lambda_i-\lambda_k)^2}\right)-\frac{1}{L}\frac{2c}{c^2+(\lambda_i-\lambda_j)^2}\,.
%\end{equation}
%Taking the difference of the Bethe equations \eqref{belog} for $\mu_k$ and $\lambda_k$, one obtains
%\begin{equation}
%\mu_k-\lambda_k=\frac{2\pi}{L}(G^{-1}\tilde{n})_k+{\cal O}(L^{-2})\,,
%\end{equation}
%with
%\begin{equation}
%\begin{aligned}
%\tilde{n}_k&=n_k+\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{\pi}\arctan \frac{\lambda_k-\lambda_a}{c}\\
%&=n_k-\frac{\theta_k}{\pi}\,.
%\end{aligned}
%\end{equation}
%Equation \eqref{S00} becomes
%\begin{equation}\label{S001}
%\begin{aligned}
%S_{0,0}=\frac{1}{L}\sum_{a=1}^Ne^{it \lambda_a^2-ix\lambda_a}\sum_{\substack{-\infty<n_i<\infty\\ i\neq a}}\prod_{i\neq a}\left[\frac{\sin^2\theta_i}{\pi^2[(G^{-1}\tilde{n})_i]^{2}}e^{\frac{2i\pi}{L}(G^{-1}\tilde{n})_i(x-2\lambda_it)}\right]\,.
%\end{aligned}
%\end{equation}
%
%\subsection {Leading order in density in $S_{0,0}$}
%For pedagogical reasons, let us first evaluate \eqref{S001} at leading order in the density of particles $D$. When $D$ is small, we have
%\begin{equation}
%G=\text{Id}+{\cal O}(D)\,,
%\end{equation}
%which decouples the sums in \eqref{S001}. We have
%\begin{equation}
%\begin{aligned}
%S_{0,0}=\frac{1}{L}\sum_{a=1}^Ne^{it \lambda_a^2-ix\lambda_a}\prod_{i\neq a}\frac{\sin^2\theta_i}{\pi^2}\sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty\frac{e^{\frac{2i\pi}{L}(n-\tfrac{\theta_i}{\pi})(x-2\lambda_it)}}{(n-\tfrac{\theta_i}{\pi})^{2}}+{\cal O}(D^2)\,.
%\end{aligned}
%\end{equation}
%We now use
%\begin{equation}
%\sum_{n\in\mathbb{Z}}\frac{e^{iw(n+\alpha)}}{(n+\alpha)^2}=\left(\frac{\pi}{\sin \pi\alpha}\right)^2 +\frac{i\pi}{\sin\pi\alpha}w e^{i\pi\alpha\sign(w)}\,,\qquad\text{for }-\pi<w\leq\pi\,,
%\end{equation}
%to obtain
%\begin{equation}
%\frac{\sin^2\theta_i}{\pi^2}\sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty\frac{e^{\frac{2i\pi}{L}(n-\tfrac{\theta_i}{\pi})(x-2\lambda_it)}}{(n-\tfrac{\theta_i}{\pi})^{2}}=1-\frac{2i\sin\theta_i}{L}(x-2\lambda_i t)e^{-i\theta_i \sign(x-2\lambda_i t)}
%\end{equation}
%
%
%\section{PAst}
%Let $ |\pmb{\lambda} \rangle $ be an eigenstate with Bethe roots $ \lambda_1,...,\lambda_N $. We wish to evaluate
%\begin{equation}
%  \left\langle \psi ^{\dagger}\left( x,t\right) \psi \left( 0,0\right) \right\rangle =\frac {\left\langle \pmb{\lambda} \left| \psi ^{\dagger}\left( x,t\right) \psi \left( 0,0\right) \right| \pmb{\lambda} \right\rangle } {\left\langle \phi |\phi \right\rangle }
%\end{equation}
%in the limit where either $x$ or $t$ is large.
%We decompose over intermediate states $ \pmb{\mu} $ with Bethe roots $\mu_1,...,\mu_{N-1}$
%\begin{equation}
%\begin{aligned}
%  \left\langle \psi ^{\dagger}\left( x,t\right) \psi \left( 0,0\right) \right\rangle &=\sum _{ \pmb{\mu}}\frac {\left| \left\langle \pmb{\lambda} |\psi \left( 0\right) |\pmb{\mu}\right\rangle \right| ^{2}} {\left\langle \pmb{\lambda} \left| \pmb{\lambda} \right\rangle \left\langle \pmb{\mu}\right| \pmb{\mu}\right\rangle }e^{it\left( E\left( \pmb{\mu}\right) -E\left( \pmb{\lambda} \right) \right) +ix\left( P\left( \pmb{\mu}\right) -P\left( \pmb{\lambda}\right) \right) }\\
%  &=\frac{1}{(N-1)!}\sum _{\mu_1,...,\mu_{N-1}}\frac {\left| \left\langle \pmb{\lambda} |\psi \left( 0\right) |\pmb{\mu}\right\rangle \right| ^{2}} {\left\langle \pmb{\lambda} \left| \pmb{\lambda} \right\rangle \left\langle \pmb{\mu}\right| \pmb{\mu}\right\rangle }e^{it\left( E\left( \pmb{\mu}\right) -E\left( \pmb{\lambda} \right) \right) +ix\left( P\left( \pmb{\mu}\right) -P\left( \pmb{\lambda}\right) \right) }
%\end{aligned}
%\end{equation}
%We recall the expression for the square of the normalized form factor \cite{}
%\begin{equation}
%\begin{aligned}
%&\frac {\left| \left\langle \pmb{\lambda} |\psi \left( 0\right) |\pmb{\mu}\right\rangle \right| ^{2}} {\left\langle \pmb{\lambda} \left| \pmb{\lambda} \right\rangle \left\langle \pmb{\mu}\right| \pmb{\mu}\right\rangle }=\frac{1}{L^{2N-1}\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\lambda}}\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\mu}}}\frac{\prod_{i\neq j}(\lambda_i-\lambda_j)\prod_{i\neq j}(\mu_i-\mu_j)}{\prod_{i, j}(\lambda_i-\mu_j)^2}\frac{\prod_{i\neq j}(\lambda_i-\lambda_j+ic)}{\prod_{i\neq j}(\mu_i-\mu_j+ic)}\frac{1}{(V_p^+-V_p^-)^2(V_s^+-V_s^-)^2}\\
%&\times \underset{i,j=1,...,N}{\det}\left[\delta_{ij}(V_i^+-V_i^-)+i\frac{\prod_k (\mu_k-\lambda_i)}{\prod_{k\neq i}(\lambda_k-\lambda_i)}\left(\frac{2c}{c^2+(\lambda_i-\lambda_j)^2}-\frac{4c^2}{(c^2+(\lambda_p-\lambda_j)^2)(c^2+(\lambda_s-\lambda_i)^2)}\right)\right]^2
%\end{aligned}
%\end{equation}
%with
%\begin{equation}
%V_i^\pm=\frac{\prod_{k=1}^{N-1}(\mu_k-\lambda_i\pm ic)}{\prod_{k=1}^{N}(\lambda_k-\lambda_i\pm ic)}
%\end{equation}
%and
%\begin{equation}
%\label{norm}
%\mathcal{N}_{\pmb{\lambda}}=\underset{i,j=1,...,N}{\det}\left[ \delta_{ij} \left(1+\frac{1}{L}\sum_{k=1}^N \frac{2c}{c^2+(\lambda_i-\lambda_k)^2}\right)-\frac{1}{L}\frac{2c}{c^2+(\lambda_i-\lambda_j)^2}\right]
%\end{equation}
%with an identical relation for $\pmb{\mu}$.
%We decompose the form factor into partial fractions
%\begin{equation}\label{pfd}
%\begin{aligned}
%&F(\pmb{\lambda},\pmb{\mu})=\sum_{\{\nu\},f}\frac{A(\pmb{\lambda},\{\nu\},f)}{\prod_{i=1}^{N-1}(\mu_i-\lambda_{f(i)})^{\nu_i}}\\
%&\text{with }\quad\frac {\left| \left\langle \pmb{\lambda} |\psi \left( 0\right) |\pmb{\mu}\right\rangle \right| ^{2}} {\left\langle \pmb{\lambda} \left| \pmb{\lambda} \right\rangle \left\langle \pmb{\mu}\right| \pmb{\mu}\right\rangle }\equiv \frac{1}{L^{2N-1}D_{\pmb{\lambda}}D_{\pmb{\mu}}} F(\pmb{\lambda},\pmb{\mu})\,.
%\end{aligned}
%\end{equation}
%Contrarily to the TFIM case, the whole form factor is a ratio of two polynomials in each of the $\mu$'s, and moreover it goes to zero when one of the $\mu$'s is sent to infinity. This means that the only possible values for the $\nu$'s are $1$ and $2$, without any approximation in time. This means that $A(\pmb{\lambda},\{\nu\},f)$ can always be computed through the formula
%\begin{equation}
%\label{formulA}
%A(\pmb{\lambda},\{\nu\},f)=\prod_{i=1}^{N-1}\left[\left(\frac{d}{d\mu_i}\right)^{2-\nu_i} (\mu_i-\lambda_{f(i)})^2 \right]F(\pmb{\lambda},\pmb{\mu})|_{\mu_i=\lambda_{f(i)}}\,.
%\end{equation}
%
%
%
%Again, the structure of the form factor imposes that $f(i)\neq f(j)$ if $\nu_i=2$ and $\nu_j=1,2$, and that $i=1,...,N$ can be attained at most twice by $f$ when the corresponding $\nu$ is equal to $1$.\\
%
%The form factors possess some recursive structure that simplifies the calculation of \eqref{formulA}, in the following sense. Let us consider two subsets $I\subset \{1,...,N\}$, $J\subset \{1,...,N-1\}$ such that $|I|=|J|+1$, and denote 
%\begin{equation}
%\pmb{\lambda}_I=\{\lambda_i | i\in I\}\,,\qquad \pmb{\mu}_J=\{\mu_j | j\in J\}\,.
%\end{equation}
%For any one-to-one function $g: \{1,...,N-1\}-J\mapsto  \{1,...,N\}-I$ we have
%\begin{equation}
%\prod_{i\notin J}(\mu_i-\lambda_{g(i)})^2F(\pmb{\lambda},\pmb{\mu})|_{\forall i\notin J,\,\mu_i=\lambda_{g(i)}}=F(\pmb{\lambda}_I,\pmb{\mu}_J)\frac{\prod_{i\notin I,\,j\in I}[(\lambda_i-\lambda_j)^2+c^2]}{\prod_{i\notin I,\, j\in J}[(\lambda_i-\mu_j)^2+c^2]}\prod_{i\notin I}(V_i^+-V_i^-)^2\,,
%\end{equation}
%with
%\begin{equation}
%V_i^\pm=\frac{\prod_{j\in J}(\mu_j-\lambda_i\pm ic)}{\prod_{j\in I}(\lambda_j-\lambda_i\pm ic)}\,.
%\end{equation}
%%Hence formula \eqref{formulA} can be recast in the following form. For $n=0,1,2$ we denote
%%\begin{equation}
%%I_n=\{k=1,...,N \text{ such that }\nu_k=1 \text{ and } |\{p|f(p)=k\}|=n \}\,,
%%\end{equation}
%%the set of points with $\nu_k=1$ attained $n$ times by $f$. Then the function $f$ is equivalent to giving three disjoint subsets $I_0,I_1,I_2\subset \{1,...,N\}$ with $|I_0|=|I_2|+1$. The points where $\nu_k=2$ are $\{1,...,N\}-(I_0\cup I_1\cup I_2)$.
%
%\subsubsection {Leading order in density}
%Since there are $N-1$ roots $\mu$ and $N$ roots $\lambda$, the dominant contribution is obtained with $\nu_i=2$ for all $i=1,...,N-1$ and only one $\lambda_a$ is not attained by $f$, $f$ being one-to-one otherwise. Hence once $\lambda_a$ chosen there are $(N-1)!$ equivalent possibilities for $f$. Formula \eqref{formulA} gives
%\begin{equation}
%A(\{\lambda\},\{\nu\},f)=\prod_{i\neq a}\frac{4c^2}{(\lambda_i-\lambda_a)^2+c^2}
%\end{equation}
%This gives the contribution
%\begin{equation}
%S=\frac{1}{L}\sum_a e^{-it\lambda_a^2+ix\lambda_a}\sum_{\{\mu_i\}_{ i\neq a}}\frac{1}{D_{\pmb{\lambda}}D_{\pmb{\mu}}} \prod_{i\neq a}\frac{4c^2}{(\lambda_i-\lambda_a)^2+c^2}\frac{e^{it(\lambda_i^2-\mu_i^2)+ix(\mu_i-\lambda_i)}}{L^2(\mu_i-\lambda_i)^2}
%\end{equation}
%The evaluation of the sum over $\mu_i$'s requires to take into account the Bethe equations, and the sums turn out to be all coupled. 
%
%
%However, in the low-density limit and large time it simplifies greatly. This first implies $D_{\pmb{\lambda}}=D_{\pmb{\mu}}=1$ in this low-density limit. Second, at large times contribution from $\mu_i-\lambda_i={\cal O}(L^0)$ contribute to a decaying function of time, hence can be neglected. It follows that only the contributions for which $\mu_i-\lambda_i=o(L^0)$ will matter. Let us denote $I_i$ the Bethe number of $\lambda_i$ and $J_i+1/2$ the Bethe number of $\mu_i$. We can assume for example that $I_i$ is an integer, in which case $J_i+1/2$ has to be an half-integer since there are $N-1$ roots $\mu_i$. The Bethe equations yield
%\begin{equation}
%\mu_i-\lambda_i=\frac{2\pi}{L}\left(J_i+\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{\pi}\arctan \frac{\lambda_i-\lambda_a}{c}-I_i\right)+\frac{2}{L}\sum_{j\neq a}\arctan \frac{\lambda_i-\lambda_j}{c}-\arctan \frac{\mu_i-\mu_j}{c}
%\end{equation}
%Since $\mu_i-\lambda_i={\cal O}(L^{-1})$ the rightmost term is of order $D/L$ whereas the first term on the right-hand side is of order $1/L$. Hence in the low-density regime the rightmost term can be neglected. It follows that
%\begin{equation}
%S=\frac{1}{L}\sum_a e^{-it\lambda_a^2+ix\lambda_a}\prod_{i\neq a}\frac{4c^2}{(\lambda_i-\lambda_a)^2+c^2}\sum_{n=-\infty}^\infty\frac{e^{2i\pi (x-2t\lambda_i)\tfrac{n+\alpha_{ia}}{L}}}{(2\pi)^2(n+\alpha_{ia})^2}
%\end{equation}
%with
%\begin{equation}
%\alpha_{ij}=\frac{1}{2}+\frac{1}{\pi}\arctan \frac{\lambda_i-\lambda_j}{c}
%\end{equation}
%We now have the following relation 
%\begin{equation}
%\begin{aligned}
%\sum_{n\in\mathbb{Z}}\frac{e^{iw(n+\alpha)}}{(n+\alpha)^2}&=\left(\frac{\pi}{\sin \pi\alpha}\right)^2 +\frac{i\pi}{\sin\pi\alpha}w e^{i\pi\alpha\sign(w)}\,,\qquad\text{for }-\pi<w\leq\pi\ ,
%\end{aligned}
%\end{equation}
%It yields
%\begin{equation}
%S=\frac{1}{L}\sum_a e^{-it\lambda_a^2+ix\lambda_a}\prod_{i\neq a}\frac{c^2}{(\lambda_i-\lambda_a)^2+c^2}\left(\frac{1}{\sin^2 \pi\alpha_{ia}}+\frac{2i}{\sin\pi\alpha_{ia}}\frac{x-2t\lambda_i}{L}e^{i\pi\alpha_{ia}\sign(x-2t\lambda_i)}\right)
%\end{equation}
%Using trigonometric relations, we have
%\begin{equation}
%\begin{aligned}
%\frac{c^2}{(\lambda_i-\lambda_a)^2+c^2}&\left(\frac{1}{\sin^2 \pi\alpha_{ia}}+\frac{2i}{\sin\pi\alpha_{ia}}\frac{x-2t\lambda_i}{L}e^{i\pi\alpha_{ia}\sign(x-2t\lambda_i)}\right)\\
%&=1-\frac {2c^{2}} {\left( \lambda _{i}-\lambda _{a}\right) ^{2}+c^{2}}\frac{\left| -2\lambda _{i}t+x\right|}{L}+\frac {2ic(\lambda _{i}-\lambda _{a})} {\left( \lambda _{i}-\lambda _{a}\right) ^{2}+c^{2}}\frac{2\lambda _{i}t-x}{L}
%\end{aligned}
%\end{equation}
%
%%
%%At leading order in $\rho$, we have $D_{\pmb{\lambda}}=D_{\pmb{\mu}}=1$. 
%%
%%
%%\begin{equation}
%%  \left\langle \phi | \phi \right\rangle=c^{N}\prod _{j < k}\frac {\left( \lambda _{j}-\lambda _{k}\right) ^{2}+c^{2}} {\left( \lambda _{j}-\lambda _{k}\right) ^{2}}\det_{j,k} \left[ \delta _{jk}\left( L+\sum _{l}\frac {2c} {\left( \lambda _{j}-\lambda _{l}\right) ^{2}+c^{2}}\right) -\frac {2c} {\left( \lambda _{j}-\lambda _{k}\right) ^{2}+c^{2}}\right] 
%%\end{equation}
%%We also recall the form factor formula where the Bethe roots of $ \phi _{1}$ are $ \mu _{1},\ldots ,\mu _{N-1}$ and that of $ \phi _{2}$ are $ \lambda _{1},\ldots ,\lambda _N$:
%%\begin{equation}
%%  \left\langle \phi _1| \psi \left( 0\right) |\phi _2\right\rangle =\frac {i} {\sqrt {c}}\prod _{j,k=1}^{N}\left( \lambda _{j}-\lambda _{k}+ic\right) \prod _{j=1}^{N}\prod _{k=1}^{N-1}\frac {1} {\lambda _{j}-\mu _{k}}\prod _{j=1}^{N}\left( V_{j}^{+}-V_{j}^-\right) \frac {\det _{jk}\left( \delta _{jk}+U_{jk}\right) } {\left( V_{p}^{+}-V_{p}^-\right) \left( V_{s}^{+}-V_{s}^{-}\right) }
%%\end{equation}
%%with
%%\begin{equation}
%%  V_{j}^{\pm }=\frac {\prod _{m=1}^{N-1}\left( \mu _{m}-\lambda _{j}\pm ic\right) } {\prod _{m=1}^{N}\left( \lambda _{m}-\lambda _{j}\pm ic\right) }
%%\end{equation}
%%and
%%\begin{equation}
%%  U_{jk}=\frac {i} {V_{j}^{+}-V_{j}^{-}}\frac {\prod _{m=1}^{N-1}\mu _{m}-\lambda _{j}} {\prod _{m=1, \neq j}^{N}\lambda _{m}-\lambda _{j}}\left( \frac {2c} {\left( \lambda _{j}-\lambda _{k}\right) ^{2}+c^{2}}-\frac {4c^{2}} {\left( \left( \lambda _{p}-\lambda _{k}\right) ^{2}+c^{2}\right) \left( \left( \lambda _{s}-\lambda _{j}\right) ^{2}+c^{2}\right) }\right) 
%%\end{equation}
%%where $ \lambda _{s}, \lambda _{p}$ are arbitrary real numbers. \\
%%
%%Our first task is to derive the low density limit of these form factors, that is their behaviour when $m= \lim _{L\rightarrow \infty } N / L>0 $ goes to zero and when $ \rho \left( \lambda_{i}\right) =\lim _{L\rightarrow \infty }\frac {1} {L\left( \lambda_{i+1}-\lambda_{i}\right) }>0$ goes to zero. In this regime 
%%
%%\begin{equation}
%%  \left\langle \phi _2| \phi _2\right\rangle=(cL)^{N}\prod _{j < k}^{N}\frac {\left( \lambda_{j}-\lambda_{k}\right) ^{2}+c^{2}} {\left( \lambda_{j}-\lambda_{k}\right) ^{2}}
%%\end{equation}
%%
%%\begin{equation}
%%  \left\langle \phi _1| \phi _1\right\rangle=(cL)^{N-1}\prod _{j < k}^{N-1}\frac {\left( \mu_{j}-\mu_{k}\right) ^{2}+c^{2}} {\left( \mu_{j}-\mu_{k}\right) ^{2}}
%%\end{equation}
%%As for the scalar product $  \left\langle \phi _1| \psi \left( 0\right) |\phi _2\right\rangle$ it is seen that in order to compensate the $ L ^N $ factors in the norm, one needs that each $ \mu $ is at $ O\left( L^{-1}\right) $ distance from a $ \lambda $. Since there is one $ \lambda $ more than $ \mu $, there must be one $ \lambda $ without $ \mu $. One can always re order the $ \lambda $ such that  $ \lambda _{1} < \ldots  < \lambda _{N-1}$ and  $ \mu _{i}=\lambda _{i}+\frac {\varepsilon _{i}} {L}$ for $ i=1,\ldots ,N-1$ and where $ \lambda _N $ is an arbitrary element among the original non ordered $ \lambda $. \\
%%
%%The assumption of low density implies that the $ \epsilon $ 's are negligible in front of any $ \lambda _N -\lambda _j $. It follows that for all $ j $ 
%%\begin{equation}
%%  V_{j}^{+}-V_{j}^{-}=\frac {-2ic} {\left( \lambda _{N}-\lambda _{j}\right) ^{2}+c^{2}}
%%\end{equation}
%%and that the dominant matrix elements  in $ U $ are
%%\begin{equation}
%%  U_{Nk}=\frac {-c^{2}+2c} {\left( \lambda _{N}-\lambda _{k}\right) ^{2}+c^{2}}
%%\end{equation}
%%(where we set $ \lambda _s =\lambda _p =\lambda _N $) the other matrix entries being of order $ \epsilon /L$. Hence 
%%\begin{equation}
%%  \det _{jk}\left( \delta _{jk}+U_{jk}\right) =\frac {2} {c}
%%\end{equation}
%%and we get 
%%\begin{equation}
%% \left\langle \phi _1| \psi \left( 0\right) |\phi _2\right\rangle=-i\sqrt {c}\left( 2Lc^{2}\right) ^{N-1}\prod _{j < k}^{N-1}\frac {\left( \lambda _{j}-\lambda _{k}\right) ^{2}+c^{2}} {\left( \lambda _{j}-\lambda _{k}\right) ^{2}}\prod _{j=1}^{N-1}\frac {1} {\lambda _{N}-\lambda _{j}}\prod _{j=1}^{N-1}\frac {1} {\varepsilon _{j}}
%%\end{equation}
%%Hence we obtain the following dominant behaviour in the low density regime 
%%\begin{equation}
%%\label {approx}
%%  \frac {\vert \left\langle \phi _1| \psi \left( 0\right) |\phi _2\right\rangle\vert^2}{ \left\langle \phi _1| \phi _1\right\rangle \left\langle \phi _2| \phi _2\right\rangle}=\frac {\left( 4c^{2}\right) ^{N-1}} {L}\prod _{j=1}^{N-1}\frac {1} {\left( \lambda _{j}-\lambda _{N}\right) ^{2}+c^{2}} \prod _{j=1}^{N-1}\frac {1} {\varepsilon _{j}^{2}}
%%\end{equation}
%%Formula \eqref {approx} is the crucial point of the derivation. It has been checked numerically and gives a perfect agreement. \\
%%
%%Both sets of Bethe roots have to satisfy Bethe's equations which constrains the possible values for $ \epsilon $. One has in the low  density regime 
%%\begin{equation}
%%  \varepsilon _{j}=2\pi \left( m_j+\frac {1} {2}+\frac {1} {\pi }\arctan \frac {\lambda _{j}-\lambda _{N}} {c}\right) 
%%\end{equation}
%%with $ m _j $ an integer. It yields
%%\begin{equation}
%%  \left\langle \psi ^{\dagger}\left( l,t\right) \psi \left( 0,0\right) \right\rangle=\frac {1} {L}\sum _{q=1}^{N}e^{it\lambda _{q}^{2}-il\lambda_q  }\prod _{j\neq q}\frac {1} {\pi ^{2}}\frac {c^{2}} {\left( \lambda _{j}-\lambda _{q}\right) ^{2}+c^{2}} \sum _{m_j=-\infty }^{\infty }\frac {e^{i\left( l-2t\lambda _{j}\right) \frac {2\pi } {L}\left( m_{j}+\alpha _{j,q}\right) }} {\left( m_{j}+\alpha _{j,q}\right) ^{2}}
%%\end{equation}
%%with
%%\begin{equation}
%%  \alpha _{j, q}=\frac {1} {2}+\frac {1} {\pi }\arctan \frac {\lambda _{j}-\lambda _{q}} {c}
%%\end{equation}
%%We now use the following relation 
%%\begin{equation}
%%  \sum _{n\in \mathbb{Z} }\frac {e^{iw  \left( n+\alpha \right) }} {\left( n+\alpha \right) ^{2}}=\frac {\pi ^{2}} {\sin ^{2}\left( \pi \alpha \right) }\left( 1+\frac {e^{-i\pi \alpha }} {i\pi }\sin \left( \pi \alpha \right) w\right) \, \qquad \text {for }0\leq w < 2\pi 
%%\end{equation}
%%that is obtained by computing the Fourier series coefficients of the right-hand side, and standard trigonometric relations, to write 
%%\begin{equation}
%%\begin {aligned}
%%  \sum _{m_j=-\infty }^{\infty }\frac {e^{i\left( l-2t\lambda _{j}\right) \frac {2\pi } {L}\left( m_{j}+\alpha _{j,q}\right) }} {\left( m_{j}+\alpha _{j,q}\right) ^{2}}&=\frac {\pi ^{2}} {c^{2}}(\left( \lambda _{j}-\lambda _{q}\right) ^{2}+c^{2})\times\\
%%  &\left(1-\frac {2c^{2}} {\left( \lambda _{j}-\lambda _{q}\right) ^{2}+c^{2}}\frac{\left| -2\lambda _{j}t+l\right|}{L}+\frac {2ic(\lambda _{j}-\lambda _{q})} {\left( \lambda _{j}-\lambda _{q}\right) ^{2}+c^{2}}\frac{-2\lambda _{j}t+l}{L}  \right )
%%  \end {aligned}
%%\end{equation}
%%We have now for a function $ f $
%%\begin{equation}
%%  \lim _{N\to\infty }\prod _{i=1}^{N}\left( 1-\frac {f\left( i / N\right) } {N}\right) =\exp \left( -\int _{0}^{1}f\left( x\right) dx\right) 
%%\end{equation}
%%
%%It yields
%Hence in the limit $L\to\infty$
%\begin{equation}
%\begin {aligned}
% \left\langle \psi ^{\dagger}\left( x,t\right) \psi \left( 0,0\right) \right\rangle=\int _{-\infty }^\infty e^{-it\mu ^{2}+ix\mu } \rho \left( \mu \right)&\exp \left (-\int \frac {2c^{2}} {\left( \lambda -\mu \right) ^{2}+c^{2}}\left| -2t\lambda +x\right| \rho \left( \lambda  \right) d\lambda\right) \times\\
% &\exp \left (i\int \frac {2c(\lambda -\mu )} {\left( \lambda -\mu \right) ^{2}+c^{2}}(2t\lambda -x) \rho \left( \lambda  \right) d\lambda\right) d\mu 
%  \end {aligned}
%\end{equation}
%This constitutes the order ${\cal O}(D)$ of the correlation function that is uniform in space and time. It means that the difference between the full correlation function and this first order, can be bounded by $\kappa\times D^2$ for all $x,t$ where the constant $\kappa$ does not depend on space and time.
%
%%In case of a symmetric root distribution, the dominant behaviour at late times is given by
%%\begin{equation}
%%  \left\langle \psi ^{\dagger}\left( l,t\right) \psi \left( 0,0\right) \right\rangle\sim\rho \left( 0\right) \sqrt {\pi }\frac {\cos \left( -\frac {\pi } {4}+\omega t\right) } {\sqrt {t}} \exp \left (-\int \frac {2c^{2}} {\lambda ^{2}+c^{2}}\left| -2t\lambda +l\right| \rho \left( \lambda  \right) d\lambda\right)
%%\end{equation}
%%with
%%\begin{equation}
%%  \omega =\int \frac {4c\lambda ^{2}} {\lambda ^{2}+c^{2}}\rho \left( \lambda \right) d\lambda 
%%\end{equation}
\paragraph{Acknowledgements}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
We thank Fabian Essler and Jacopo De Nardis for helpful discussions. This work was
supported by the EPSRC under grant EP/S020527/1.


\begin{thebibliography}{99}
\providecommand{\url}[1]{\texttt{#1}}
\providecommand{\urlprefix}{URL }
\expandafter\ifx\csname urlstyle\endcsname\relax
  \providecommand{\doi}[1]{doi:\discretionary{}{}{}#1}\else
  \providecommand{\doi}{doi:\discretionary{}{}{}\begingroup
  \urlstyle{rm}\Url}\fi
\providecommand{\eprint}[2][]{\url{#2}}

\bibitem{LiebLiniger63a}
E. H. Lieb and W. Liniger, \emph{Exact Analysis of an Interacting Bose
  Gas. I. The General Solution and the Ground State},
Phys. Rev. \href{\doi10.1103/PhysRev.130.1605 }{{\bf 130}, 1605 (1963). }

\bibitem{Brezin64}
F.A.~Br\'ezin, G.P.~Pohil and V.M.~Finkelberg, \emph{The Schr\"{o}dinger equation for a system of one-dimensional particles with point interactions.},
Viest. Mosk. Uni. {\bf 1}, 21-28 (1964). 

\bibitem{korepin}
V.~E. Korepin, N.~M. Bogoliubov and A.~G. Izergin,
\newblock \emph{Quantum inverse scattering method and correlation functions},
\newblock Cambridge University Press (1993).

\bibitem{Lieb63}
E.H. Lieb, \emph{Exact Analysis of an Interacting Bose Gas. II. The
  Excitation Spectrum}, Phys. Rev. \href{\doi10.1103/PhysRev.130.1616 }{{\bf 130}, 1616 (1963).}

\bibitem{YangYang69}
C.N. Yang and C.P.Yang, \emph{Thermodynamics of a One‐Dimensional
  System of Bosons with Repulsive Delta‐Function Interaction},
J. Math. Phys. \href{https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1664947}{{\bf 10}, 1115
  (1969). } 
  
  
  
  %%%%%experiments%%%%%%%%
%  \bibitem{kww-06}
%T. Kinoshita, T. Wenger,  D. S. Weiss, \emph{A quantum Newton's cradle},
% Nature \href{\doi10.1038/nature04693}{\bf 440}, 900 (2006).
%
%\bibitem{HL:Bose07} S. Hofferberth, I. Lesanovsky, B. Fischer, T. Schumm, and J. Schmiedmayer, \emph{Non-equilibrium coherence dynamics in one-dimensional Bose gases}, Nature \href{doi:10.1038/nature06149}{\bf 449}, 324-327 (2007).
%
%\bibitem{cetal-12}
%M. Cheneau, P. Barmettler, D. Poletti, M. Endres, P. Schauss, T. Fukuhara, C. Gross, I. Bloch, C. Kollath, and S. Kuhr, \emph{Light-cone-like spreading of correlations in a quantum many-body system},
%Nature \href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature10748}{\bf 481}, 484 (2012).


\bibitem{naegerl15}
F. Meinert, M. Panfil, M.J. Mark, K. Lauber, J.-S. Caux, and H.-C. N\"agerl,
\emph{Probing the Excitations of a Lieb-Liniger Gas from Weak to Strong Coupling},
Phys. Rev. Lett. \href{https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.085301}{{\bf 115}, 085301 (2015).}

\bibitem{Bouchoule16}
B. Fang, A. Johnson, T. Roscilde and I. Bouchoule, \emph{Momentum-Space
Correlations of a One-Dimensional Bose Gas},
Phys. Rev. Lett. \href{\doi10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.050402.}{{\bf 116},
  050402 (2016).}

\bibitem{Fabbri15}
N. Fabbri, M. Panfil, D. Clément, L. Fallani, M. Inguscio, C. Fort and J.-S.
Caux, \emph{Dynamical structure factor of one-dimensional Bose gases: Experimental
signatures of beyond-Luttinger-liquid physics}, Phys. Rev. A
\href{\doi10.1103/PhysRevA.91.043617}{{\bf 91}, 043617 (2015). }


%%%%%%%%%%%% impenetrable Bose gas %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%


\bibitem{girardeau}
M. Girardeau, \emph{Relationship between systems of impenetrable bosons and fermions in one dimension}
J. Math. Phys. \href{https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1703687
}{ {\bf 1}, 516 (1960).}


\bibitem{GFE20}
E. Granet, M. Fagotti and F.H.L. Essler, \emph{Finite temperature and
  quench dynamics in the Transverse Field Ising Model from form factor
  expansions},  SciPost Phys. \href{https://doi.org/10.21468/SciPostPhys.9.3.033
}{ {\bf 9}, 033 (2020).}

%\bibitem{Lenard64}
%A. Lenard, \emph{Momentum Distribution in the Ground State of the
%  One‐Dimensional System of Impenetrable Bosons}, J. Math. Phys. \href{https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1704196}{{\bf  5}, 930 (1964).}
%
%\bibitem{Lenard66}
%A. Lenard, \emph{One‐Dimensional Impenetrable Bosons in Thermal Equilibrium},
%J. Math. Phys. \href{ https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1705029}{{\bf 7}, 1268 (1966).}
%
%\bibitem{VaidyaTracy79a}
%H. G. Vaidya and C. A. Tracy, \emph{One particle reduced density
%  matrix of impenetrable bosons in one dimension at zero temperature}, 
%Phys. Rev. Lett. \href{https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.42.3}{{\bf 42}, 3 (1979).}
%
%\bibitem{VaidyaTracy79b}
%H. G. Vaidya and C. A. Tracy, \emph{One particle reduced density
%  matrix of impenetrable bosons in one dimension at zero temperature}, 
%J. Math. Phys. \href{https://doi.org/10.1063/1.524010}{{\bf 20}, 2291 (1979).}
%
%\bibitem{JMMS80}
%M. Jimbo, T. Miwa, Y. Mori and M. Sato, \emph{Density matrix of an
%  impenetrable Bose gas and the fifth Painlev\'e transcendent},
%Physica  \href{https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2789(80)90006-}{{\bf D1}, 80 (1980).}
%
%\bibitem{Thacker81}
%H. B. Thacker, \emph{Exact integrability in quantum field theory and
%  statistical systems},
%Rev. Mod. Phys. \href{https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.53.253}{{\bf
%    53}, 253 (1981). } 
%
%\bibitem{IIK89}
%A.R. Its, A.G. Izergin and V.E. Korepin,  
%\emph{Correlation radius for one-dimensional impenetrable bosons},
%Phys. Lett. \href{https://doi.org/10.1016/0375-9601(89)90771-8}{{\bf A 141}, 121 (1989).}
%
\bibitem{KS90}
V.E. Korepin and N.A. Slavnov, \emph{The time dependent correlation
  function of an Impenetrable Bose gas as a Fredholm minor.I},
Comm. Math. Phys. \href{https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02096781}{{\bf 129}, 103-113 (1990).}

\bibitem{slavnov90}
N. Slavnov, \emph{Nonequal-time current correlation function in a one-dimensional Bose gas},
Theor. Math. Phys. \href{\doi10.1007/BF01029221}{{\bf 82},
  273 (1990).} 
  
\bibitem{izergin87}
A. G. Izergin, V. E. Korepin and N. Y. Reshetikhin, \emph{Correlation functions in a one-dimensional Bose gas},
J. Phys. A: Math. Gen \href{\doi10.1088/0305-4470/20/14/022}{{\bf 20},
  4799 (1987).} 
  
\bibitem{kojima97}
T. Kojima, V. E. Korepin and N. A. Slavnov, \emph{Determinant representation for dynamical correlation functions of the quantum nonlinear Schr\"odinger equation},
Commun. Math. Phys. \href{\doi10.1007/s002200050182}{{\bf 188},
  657 (1997).} 

%\bibitem{IIK90a}
%A.R. Its, A.G. Izergin and V.E. Korepin,  
%\emph{Temperature correlators of the impenetrable Bose gas as an integrable system}
%Comm. Math. Phys. {\bf 129}, 205 (1990).
%
%\bibitem{IIK90b}
%A.R. Its, A.G. Izergin and V.E. Korepin,
%\emph{Long-distance asymptotics of temperature correlators of the
%  impenetrable Bose gas},
%Comm. Math. Phys. \href{https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02096932}{{\bf 130},
%  471 (1990).} 

\bibitem{IIKS90}
A.R. Its, A.G. Izergin, V.E. Korepin and N.A. Slavnov,
\emph{Differential equations for quantum correlation functions},
Int. Jour. Mod. Phys. \href{\doi10.1142/S0217979290000504}{{\bf B4},
  1003, (1990).}

%\bibitem{IIK91}
%A.R. Its, A.G. Izergin and V.E. Korepin,  
%\emph{Space correlations in the one-dimensional impenetrable Bose gas
%  at finite temperature}, Physica
%\href{https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2789(91)90171-5}{{\bf D 53}, 187 (1991).}

\bibitem{IIKV92}
A.R. Its, A.G. Izergin, V.E. Korepin and G.G. Varzugin,
\emph{Large time and distance asymptotics of field correlation
  function of impenetrable bosons at finite temperature}, Physica \href{https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-2789(92)90043-M}{{\bf  D54}, 351 (1992).}

%\bibitem{Gangardt04}
%D.M. Gangardt, \emph{Universal correlations of trapped one-dimensional
%  impenetrable bosons}, J. Phys. \href{https://doi.org/10.1088/0305-4470/37/40/002}{{\bf A37}, 9335 (2004).}



%%%%%%interacting case ground state static%%%%%%%


%\bibitem{izerginkorepin84}
%A. G. Izergin and V. E. Korepin, \emph{The quantum inverse scattering method approach to correlation functions},  Comm. Math. Phys.
%\href{\doi10.1007/BF01212350}{{\bf 94}, 67, (1984).} 
%
%\bibitem{korepin87}
%V. E. Korepin, \emph{Dual field formulation of quantum integrable models},  Comm. Math. Phys.
%\href{\doi10.1007/BF01223510}{{\bf 113}, 177, (1987).} 
%
%\bibitem{jimbomiwa92}
%M. Jimbo, K. Miki, T. Miwa and A. Nakayashiki, \emph{Correlation functions of the XXZ model for $\Delta<-1$},  Phys. Lett. A
%\href{\doi10.1016/0375-9601(92)91128-E}{{\bf 168}, 256, (1992).} 
%
%\bibitem{jimbomiwa96}
%M. Jimbo and T. Miwa, \emph{Quantum KZ equation with $|q|=1$ and correlation functions of the XXZ model in the gapless regime},  J. Phys. A: Math. Gen.
%\href{\doi10.1088/0305-4470/29/12/005}{{\bf 29}, 2923, (1996).} 
%
%\bibitem{kitanineetalg2}
%N.~Kitanine, K.~K. Kozlowski, J.-M. Maillet, N.~A. Slavnov and V.~Terras,
%\newblock \emph{On correlation functions of integrable models associated with the six-vertex $R$-matrix},
%\newblock J. Stat. Mech. Theory Exp. \href{\doi10.1088/1742-5468/2007/01/P01022}{P01022 (2007).}

\bibitem{kitanineetalg}
N.~Kitanine, K.~K. Kozlowski, J.-M. Maillet, N.~A. Slavnov and V.~Terras,
\newblock \emph{Algebraic Bethe ansatz approach to the asymptotic behavior of correlation functions},
\newblock J. Stat. Mech \href{\doi10.1088/1742-5468/2009/04/P04003}{04, P04003 (2009).}

%%%%%%interacting case ground state dynamical%%%%%%%
  
  
\bibitem{kitanineetcformfactor}
N.~Kitanine, K.~K. Kozlowski, J.-M. Maillet, N.~A. Slavnov and V.~Terras,
\newblock \emph{Form factor approach to dynamical correlation functions in
  critical models},
\newblock J. Stat. Mech \href{\doi10.1088/1742-5468/2012/09/P09001}{P09001 (2012).}

\bibitem{kozlowskimaillet}
K. K. Kozlowski and J.-M. Maillet, \emph{Microscopic approach to a
  class of {1D} quantum critical models},  J. Phys. A
\href{\doi10.1088/1751-8113/48/48/484004}{{\bf 48}, 484004, (2015).} 

\bibitem{kozlowski4}
K.K. Kozlowski, \emph{Large-Distance and Long-Time Asymptotic Behavior
  of the Reduced Density Matrix in the Non-Linear Schr\"odinger Model},
Ann. Henri Poincar\'e \href{\doi10.1007/s00023-014-0327-3}{{\bf 16},
  437 (2015).} 

  
  %%%%%%%%form factors%%%%%%%%
  
  
  \bibitem{Korepin82}
V. E. Korepin, \emph{Calculation of norms of Bethe wave functions},
Comm. Math. Phys. \href{https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01212176}{{\bf 86}, 391 (1982).}

\bibitem{Slavnov89}
N.A. Slavnov, \emph{Calculation of scalar products of wave functions
  and form factors in the framework of the algebraic Bethe ansatz},
Theor. Math. Phys. \href{https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01016531}{{\bf 79}, 502 (1989).}

  
\bibitem{Slavnov90}
N.A. Slavnov, \emph{Nonequal-time current correlation function in a
  one-dimensional Bose gas}, Theor. Math. Phys. \href{https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01029221}{{\bf 82}, 273 (1990).}

\bibitem{KorepinSlavnov99}
V.E.~Korepin and N.A.~Slavnov, \emph{The form factors in the finite volume.}, Int. J. Mod. Phys. B \href{https://doi.org/110.1142/S0217979299002769}{{\bf 13}, 2933 (1999).}

\bibitem{Oota04}
T.~Oota, \emph{Quantum projectors and local operators in lattice integrable models.}, J. Phys. A: Math. Gen. \href{https://doi.org/10.1088/0305-4470/37/2/013}{{\bf 37}, 441 (2004).}

\bibitem{KozlowskiForm11}
K.K.~Kozlowski, \emph{On form factors of the conjugated field in the non-linear Schr\"{o}dinger model.}, J. Math. Phys. \href{https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3625628}{{\bf 52}, 083302 (2011).}

\bibitem{Gaudin71}
M.~Gaudin, Preprint, Centres d'\'etudes nucl\'eaires de Saclay, CEA-N-{\bf 1559}, (1971)


%%%%%%static temperature%%%%%%%

\bibitem{suzuki85}
M. Suzuki, \emph{Transfer-matrix method and Monte Carlo simulation in quantum spin systems}, Phys. Rev. B \href{https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.31.2957}{{\bf 31}, 2957 (1985).}

\bibitem{klumper92}
A. Kl\"umper, \emph{Free energy and correlation lengths of quantum chains related to restricted solid-on-solid lattice models}, Ann. der Phys. \href{https://doi.org/10.1002/andp.19925040707}{{\bf 1}, 540 (1992).}

\bibitem{patuklumper}
O. I. Patu and A. Kl\"umper \emph{Correlation lengths of the repulsive one-dimensional Bose gas}, Phys. Rev. A \href{https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.88.033623}{{\bf 88}, 033623 (2013).}

\bibitem{kozlowskimailletslvanov}
K. K. Kozlowski, J.-M. Maillet and N. A. Slavnov \emph{Long-distance behavior of temperature correlation functions in the one-dimensional Bose gas}, J. Stat. Mech \href{https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-5468/2011/03/P03018}{P03018 (2011).}

\bibitem{kozlowskimailletslvanov2}
K. K. Kozlowski, J.-M. Maillet and N. A. Slavnov \emph{Correlation functions of one-dimensional bosons at low temperature}, J. Stat. Mech \href{https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-5468/2011/03/P03019}{P03019 (2011).}

%%%%%%LL CFT%%%%%%%

\bibitem{BIK86}
N.M. Bogoliubov, A.G. Izergin and V.E. Korepin, \emph{Critical
  exponents for integrable models},
Nucl. Phys. \href{\doi10.1016/0550-3213(86)90579-1}{{\bf B 275}, 687 (1986).}

\bibitem{IKR87}
A.G. Izergin, V.E. Korepin and N.Yu. Reshetikhin, \emph{
Correlation functions in a one-dimensional Bose gas}, J. Phys. {\bf
  A20} 4799 (1987). 

\bibitem{haldane}
F.~D.~M. Haldane,
\newblock \emph{Effective harmonic-fluid approach to low-energy properties of
  one-dimensional quantum fluids},
\newblock Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{47} (1981).

\bibitem{cazalilla}
M.~A. Cazalilla,
\newblock \emph{Bosonizing one-dimensional cold atomic gases},
\newblock J. Phys. B: atomic, molecular and optical physics \textbf{37} (2004).

\bibitem{IG08}
A. Imambekov and L.I. Glazman, \emph{Exact Exponents of Edge
  Singularities in Dynamic Correlation Functions of 1D Bose Gas},
Phys. Rev. Lett. \href{https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.100.206805}{{\bf 100}, 206805 (2008).}

\bibitem{PAW09}
R.G. Pereira, S.R. White and I. Affleck, \emph{Spectral function of
  spinless fermions on a one-dimensional lattice},
Phys. Rev. B\href{https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.79.165113}{{\bf
    79}, 165113 (2009).}

\bibitem{ISG12}
A. Imambekov, T.L. Schmidt and L.I. Glazman,
\emph{One-dimensional quantum liquids: Beyond the Luttinger liquid paradigm}
Rev. Mod. Phys. \href{https://doi.org/10.1103/RevModPhys.84.1253}{{\bf
    84}, 1253 (2012).} 

\bibitem{P12}
R.G. Pereira, \emph{Long time correlations of nonlinear Luttinger liquids}
Int. Jour. Mod. Phys. B\href{https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217979212440080
}{ {\bf 26}, 1244008 (2012).}

\bibitem{shashipanfilcaux}
A.~Shashi, M.~Panfil, J.-S. Caux and A.~Imambekov,
\newblock \emph{Exact prefactors in static and dynamic correlation functions of
  1{D} quantum integrable models: applications to the {C}alogero-{S}utherland,
  {L}ieb-{L}iniger and {XXZ} models},
\newblock Phys. Rev. B \textbf{85}, 155136 (2012).

\bibitem{Price17}
T. Price, D.L. Kovrizhin and A. Lamacraft, \emph{Nonlinear Luttinger
  liquid: Exact result for the Green function in terms of the fourth
  Painlev\'e transcendent}, SciPost Phys. \href{\doi10.21468/SciPostPhys.2.1.005}{{\bf2}, 005 (2017).}



%%%%%%numerics%%%%%%%
\bibitem{cauxcalabreseslavnov}
J.-S. Caux, P. Calabrese and N. A. Slavnov, \emph{One-particle dynamical correlations in the one-dimensional Bose gas}
J. Stat. Mech. \href{https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-5468/2007/01/P01008}{ {\bf 142}, P01008 (2007).}

\bibitem{PC14}
M. Panfil and J.-S. Caux, \emph{Finite-temperature correlations in the
  Lieb-Liniger one-dimensional Bose gas},
Phys. Rev. A\href{http://dx.doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.89.033605}{89,
  033605 (2014).}

%%%%%GHD%%%%%%
\bibitem{CADY16}
O. A. Castro-Alvaredo, B. Doyon, T. Yoshimura, \emph{Emergent hydrodynamics
 in integrable quantum systems out of equilibrium}, Phys. Rev. X \href{https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevX.6.041065}{{\bf 6}, 041065 (2016).}

\bibitem{BCDF16}
B. Bertini, M. Collura, J. De Nardis, M. Fagotti, \emph{Transport in
out-of-equilibrium xxz chains: Exact profiles of charges and
currents}, Phys. Rev. Lett. \href{https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.207201}{{\bf 117}, 207201 (2016).}
\bibitem{Doyon18}
B. Doyon, \emph{Exact large-scale correlations in integrable systems
  out of equilibrium}, SciPost Phys. \href{\doi10.21468/SciPostPhys.5.5.054}{{\bf 5}, 054 (2018).} 


%%%%%1 point%%%%%%
\bibitem{negrosmirovn}
S. Negro and F. Smirnov, \emph{On one-point functions for sinh-gordon model at finite temperature}, Nucl. Phys. B \href{https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2013.06.023}{{\bf 875}, 166 (2013).}

\bibitem{bastianellopiroli}
A. Bastianello and L. Piroli, \emph{From the sinh-gordon field theory to the one-dimensional bose gas: exact local correlations and full counting statistics}, J. Stat. Mech.: Theor. Exp. \href{https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-5468/aaeb48}{{\bf 2018}, 113104 (2018).}

\bibitem{bastianellopirolicalabrese}
A. Bastianello, L. Piroli and P. Calabrese, \emph{Exact local correlations and full counting statistics for arbitrary states of the one-dimensional interacting bose gas}, Phys. Rev. Lett. \href{\doi10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.190601}{{\bf 120} 190601 (2018).} 


%%%%%thermodynamic form factor%%%%%%

\bibitem{deNP15}
J. de Nardis and M. Panfil, \emph{Density form factors of the 1D Bose
  gas for finite entropy states}, J. Stat. Mech. \href{
  \doi10.1088/1742-5468/2015/02/P02019}{P02019 (2015).}

\bibitem{deNP16}
J. De Nardis and M. Panfil, \emph{Exact correlations in the
  Lieb-Liniger model and detailed balance out-of-equilibrium},
SciPost Phys. \href{\doi10.21468/SciPostPhys.1.2.015}{{\bf 1}, 015 (2016).}

\bibitem{DNP18}
J. de Nardis and M. Panfil, \emph{Particle-hole pairs and
density-density correlations in the Lieb-Liniger model},
J. Stat. Mech. \href{https://doi.org/10.1088/1742-5468/aab012}
{(2018) 033102.}

\bibitem{panfil20}
M. Panfil, \emph{The two particle-hole pairs contribution to the dynamic correlation functions of quantum integrable models},
{arxiv:2008.08872}

\bibitem{cortescuberopanfil1}
A. Cort\'es Cubero and M. Panfil, \emph{Generalized hydrodynamics regime from the thermodynamic bootstrap program},
SciPost Phys. \href{https://doi.org/10.21468/SciPostPhys.8.1.004}
{{\bf 8}, 004 (2020).}

\bibitem{cortescuberopanfil2}
A. Cort\'es Cubero and M. Panfil, \emph{Thermodynamic bootstrap program for integrable QFT's: Form factors and correlation functions at finite energy density},
JHEP \href{https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP01(2019)104}
{104 (2019).}
  
\bibitem{kozlowski1}
K. K. Kozlowski, \emph{On the thermodynamic limit of form factor expansions of dynamical correlation functions in the massless regime of the {XXZ} spin {1/2} chain},  J. Math. Phys. \href{\doi10.1063/1.5021892}{{\bf 59}, 091408, (2018).}

%%%%1/c&&&&&

%\bibitem{brand05}
%J. Brand and A. Y. Cherny,
%\emph{Dynamic structure factor of the one-dimensional
%Bose gas near the Tonks-Girardeau limit},
%Phys. Rev. A\href{\doi10.1103/PhysRevA.73.023612.}{{\bf 72}, 033619 (2005).}

\bibitem{granetessler20}
E. Granet and F. H. L. Essler,
\emph{A systematic $1/c$-expansion of form factor sums for dynamical correlations in the Lieb-Liniger model},
{arxiv:2007.15369}


%\bibliographystyle{ieeetr}
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%



\end{thebibliography}



\end{document}