Bootstrapping leading hadronic muon anomaly
Extracted source text · arXiv 2412.00187
%\documentclass[aps,twocolumn,nofootinbib,preprintnumbers,10pt]{revtex4-2}
%\linespread{1.1}
%\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
%\usepackage[ inner=1.5cm, outer=1.5cm, top=1cm, bottom=1.9cm]{geometry}
\documentclass[12pt]{article}
\usepackage[utf8]{inputenc}
\usepackage[svgnames,dvipsnames]{xcolor}
%\usepackage[dvipsnames]{xcolor}
\usepackage[a4paper, inner=1cm, outer=1cm, top=1cm, bottom=2cm]{geometry}
%\usepackage[svgnames]{xcolor}
\usepackage[most]{tcolorbox}
\usepackage{caption}
\tcbset{colback=PaleGreen!0!white, colframe=NavyBlue,
highlight math style= {enhanced, %<-- needed for the ’remember’ options
colframe=red,colback=red!10!white,boxsep=0pt}
}
\usepackage{relsize}
\newcommand\hmmax{0}
\newcommand\bmmax{0}
%\usepackage[unicode]{hyperref}
\usepackage{amsmath}\usepackage[bottom]{footmisc}
%\usepackage{showkeys}
\usepackage{braket}
\usepackage{graphicx}
\usepackage{mwe}
\usepackage[section]{placeins}
\usepackage{framed}
\usepackage{csquotes}
\usepackage{tikz}
\usetikzlibrary{decorations.markings}
\usetikzlibrary{decorations.pathmorphing}
\definecolor{shadecolor}{rgb}{0.90,0.90,0.90}
%\usepackage{natbib}
\usepackage{cite}
%\usepackage[linkbordercolor=blue]{hyperref}
\usepackage{hyperref}
\usepackage{bbold}
%\usepackage{wick}
\usepackage{subcaption}
\usepackage{pifont}
%\usepackage{dingbat}
%\usepackage{mathtools}
\usepackage{setspace}
\usepackage{amsmath, amssymb, amsthm, float, graphicx,amsfonts}
%\usepackage{titlesec}
%\titlelabel{\thetitle.\quad}
%\usepackage{MnSymbol}
%\numberwithin{equation}{section}
%t\usepackage{wasysym}
%\setlength{\unitlength}{1mm}
%\DeclareMathOperator{\arccsc}{arccsc}
\usepackage{amsthm}
\usepackage{array, boldline, makecell, booktabs}
\newcommand\btrule[1]{\specialrule{#1}{0pt}{0pt}}
\setlength{\arrayrulewidth}{0.5mm}
\setlength{\tabcolsep}{10pt}
\renewcommand{\arraystretch}{1.4}
%\usepackage{dirtytalk}
%\usepackage{wrapfig}
\newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[section]
\theoremstyle{definition}
\newtheorem{definition}{Definition}[section]
\newtheorem{corollary}{Corollary}[theorem]
\newtheorem{lemma}{Lemma}
\captionsetup{justification = raggedright,
singlelinecheck = false}
%\textwidth 18.5cm
%\textheight 24cm
%\topmargin -2.2cm \hoffset -2.5cm
\hypersetup{colorlinks=true, linkcolor=DarkRed, citecolor=DarkRed,urlcolor=Indigo,linktocpage}
\def\beq{\begin{eqnarray}}\def\eeq{\end{eqnarray}}
\def\be{\begin{equation}}\def\ee{\end{equation}}
\def\bs{\begin{split}}\def\es{\end{split}}
\def\g{\gamma}
\def\r{\rho}
\def\s{\sigma}
\def\m{\mu}
\def\n{\nu}
\def\a{\alpha}
\def\e{\epsilon}
\def\k{\kappa}
\def\b{\beta}
\def\d{\delta}
\def\c{\chi}
\def\f{\phi}
\def\t{\theta}
\def\D{\Delta}
\def\G{\Gamma}
\def\l{\lambda}
\def\pd{\partial}
\def\tq{\tilde{q}}
\def\tf{\tilde{f}}
\def\ta{\tau}
\def\bz{\bar{z}}
\def\la{\langle}
\def\ra{\rangle}
\def\fin{f_{\infty}}
\def\mo{{\mathcal{O}}}
\def\mw{{\mathcal{W}}}
\def\ml{{\mathcal{L}}}
\def\G{\Gamma}
\def\tn{\tilde{n}}
\def\mc{{\mathcal{C}}}
\def\bh{\bar{h}}
\def\w{\omega}
\def\ib{{\mathbb{I}}}
\def\tell{\tilde{\ell}}
\def\tr{{\rm tr~}}
\def\Dphi{\Delta_\phi}
\def\mW{{\mathcal{W}}}
\def\expval#1{\mathinner{\left\langle{#1}\right\rangle}}
\def\oforder#1{\mathinner{O\left({#1}\right)}}
\usepackage{bm}
\def\full#1{{%\color{DarkGreen}
\text{\boldmath$#1$}}}
\def\mM{{\mathcal{M}}}
\usepackage{amstext} % for \text macro
\usepackage{array} % for \newcolumntype macro
\newcolumntype{C}{>{$}c<{$}}
\newcolumntype{L}{>{$}l<{$}} % math-mode version of "l" column type
\begin{document}
\title{\bf Bootstrapping leading hadronic muon anomaly}
\date{}
\author{
Ahmadullah Zahed\\~~~~\\
\it ICTP, International Centre for Theoretical Physics,\\
\it Strada Costiera 11, 34135, Trieste, Italy.\\
azahed@ictp.it
}
\maketitle
\vskip 2cm
\abstract{
We bootstrap the leading order hadronic contribution to muon anomalous magnetic moment. The leading hadronic contribution comes from the hadronic vacuum polarization function (HVP). We explore the bootstrap constraints, namely unitarity, analyticity, crossing symmetry and finite energy sum rules (FESR) from quantum chromodynamics (QCD). The unitarity appears as a positive semi-definite condition among the pion partial waves, form factor and spectral density function of HVP, which establishes a lower bound on leading order hadronic contribution to muon anomalous magnetic moment. We also impose chiral symmetry breaking to improve the bound slightly. By combining the lower bound with the remaining extensively calculated contributions, we achieve a bound on anomalous magnetic moment $a_\mu^\text{bootstrap-min}=11659176.3^{+3}_{-3}\times 10^{-10}$ and standard model prediction saturates this bound within the error bars. We also present a possible improvement that is saturated by both lattice computation and measured value within the error bars.
}
\setcounter{tocdepth}{1}
\tableofcontents
\section{Introduction}
The anomalous magnetic moment $a_\mu=(g-2)_\mu/2$ of the muon encapsulates how the muon interacts with magnetic fields through its intrinsic spin. The measurements of the muon’s magnetic moment\cite{exp1,exp2} show a deviation from theoretical prediction up to $5.0\sigma$\cite{th1}, while agreeing with lattice QCD simulations within $0.9\sigma$ \cite{lat1,lat2}.
A significant contribution to this discrepancy arises from hadronic vacuum polarization (HVP) at the leading order in the fine-structure constant ($a_\mu^{\text{LO-HVP}}$), where the muon’s interaction is influenced by the complex interplay of quarks and gluons through the strong force, as described by quantum chromodynamics (QCD). The hadronic contribution is more elusive due to the strongly coupled, non-perturbative nature of QCD at low energies, unlike the electromagnetic contributions, which can be calculated with great precision. This makes the precise evaluation of the hadronic effects a central challenge to understand $a_\mu$ and its implications for particle physics.
The bootstrap approach in quantum field theory (QFT) is a non-perturbative framework utilizing basic principles like unitarity, analyticity, crossing and other symmetries of QFT to constrain theory space \cite{boot_white, cftboot_white}.
This work provides a bootstrap approach to the hadronic contribution by imposing theoretical constraints. In particular, we use the fact that the imaginary part of HVP, pion partial wave and form factor satisfy semi-definite positivity due to unitarity \cite{joao_semi}--see also \cite{Heboth}. Analyticity and crossing symmetry of pion amplitudes are used to compute the pion partial waves \cite{qcdboot1,sboot3}--see also\cite{aninda1,mehmet1,me1,me2}. We establish a lower bound on leading order hadronic contribution to muon anomalous magnetic moment using unitarity, analyticity, crossing symmetry and QCD finite energy sum rules (FESR). The theory of pions well approximates the low energy QCD due to chiral symmetry breaking. We use tree level $\chi$PT to capture the low energy physics, which slightly improves the bound. Our lower bound is more robust than \cite{qcdpaper}, where Holder's inequality and FESRs were used to establish two-sided bounds.
The finite energy sum rules (FESR) have errors due to QCD parameters, mainly from gluon condensate $\langle \a G^2\rangle$, vacuum saturation constant\footnote{The proportionality constant that expresses dimension-six quark condensates as products of dimension-three quark condensates, $\alpha_s \langle (\bar{n}n)^2 \rangle=\kappa \alpha_s \langle \bar{n}n \rangle^2$\cite{refpara_k}.} $\kappa$. Hence, we input FESRs as inequality up to a tolerance. The weakest choice of the tolerance is the error itself, which leads to the result from light quark contributions as
$680.5^{+3}_{-3}$ and adding with charmonium and bottomonium resonance contributions \cite{charm1}, we reach our final bound Min$[a_\mu^\text{LO-HVP}]=
688.4^{+3}_{-3}\times 10^{-10}
$
and combining with other precisely calculated standard model(SM) contributions \cite{th1}, we find
\be
a_\mu^\text{bootstrap-min}=11659176.3^{+3}_{-3}\times 10^{-10}\,,
\ee
while the measured value is
$
a_\mu^{\text{exp}}= 11659208.9^{+6.3}_{-6.3}\times 10^{-10}.
$
The prediction from the SM is \cite{th1}
$
a_\mu^{\text{SM}}= 11659181.0^{+4.3}_{-4.3}\times 10^{-10}.
$
The SM prediction within the error bars saturates our lower bound.
The improvement due to the tolerance is evident from the fact that the probability of finding the mean value is greater, and the QCD parameters $\langle \a G^2\rangle$ and $\k$ are poorly determined. Since FESRs are equalities, we don't want these inequalities too far away from the mean value. Choosing the tolerance as half of the error gives the result from light quark contributions as
$707.5^{+1.6}_{-1.6}$ and adding with charmonium and bottomonium resonance contributions, we reach an improved lower bound Min$[a_\mu^\text{LO-HVP}]=
715.43^{+1.6}_{-1.6}\times 10^{-10}
$
and adding with other extensively calculated SM contributions \cite{th1}, we find
\be
a_\mu^\text{bootstrap-min-improved}=11659203.3^{+1.6}_{-1.6}\times 10^{-10}\,.
\ee
This is incompatible with SM prediction while saturated\footnote{The bootstrap solution for the improved lower bound corresponds to $\langle \alpha G^2 \rangle=0.06315 \, \mathrm{GeV}^4$
, $\kappa$ $=3.47$, while known literature values are $0.0649 \pm 0.0035 \, \mathrm{GeV}^4$
, $3.22 \pm 0.5$, respectively--see tables in appendix \eqref{ap:qcdsumrules}. Assuming that the theory of nature saturates the lower bound, the agreement of improved lower bound with lattice and measured value suggests that these are the potential numbers for $\langle \alpha G^2 \rangle, ~\kappa$.} by lattice evaluation\cite{lat2} $a_\mu^\text{lattice}=11659201.9(3.8)\times 10^{-10}$ and measured value within the error bars. Figure \eqref{fig:bootmuong} summarises our findings.
\begin{figure}[hbt!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.25]{boot_muon_gv5}
%\caption{Convergence of numerics with $L$.}
\caption{Comparison: SM prediction (dark blue) within the error bars saturates our conservative lower bound (green). However, an improved bound (red) is incompatible with SM prediction and is saturated by the lattice result (brown) and within the error bars of the measured value (magenta).}
\label{fig:bootmuong}
\end{figure}
\section{Bootstrapping leading hadronic contribution to muon anomaly}
The leading hadronic contribution to muon anomalous magnetic moment is given by
\begin{equation}
a_\mu^\text{LO-HVP} = \frac{4\alpha^2}{\pi} \int_{4m_\pi^2}^{\infty}\frac{K(t) \text{Im}\Pi(t)}{t} \, dt\,,
\end{equation}
where $\Pi(t) = \sum_{q=u,d,s} e_q^2 \Pi_q(t)$ is the hadronic vacuum polarization (HVP) and $\Pi_q$ are contributions from different quarks. % Each quark sector should satisfy the positivity condition $\text{Im} \Pi_q(t) \geq 0$.
The kernel is given by $K(t)=\int_{0}^{1}dx \frac{x^2(1-x)}{x^2+(1-x)t/m^2_\mu}$. The $\text{Im}\Pi(t)$ is proportional to the hadronic R-ratio. We will set $m_\pi=1$ for convenience. We use unitary condition on Im$\Pi(t)$ along with analyticity and FESRs to bootstrap $a_\mu^\text{LO-HVP}$.
Following \cite{joao_semi}, we write down the unitary condition among imaginary part of HVP, pion partial wave and form factor as positive semi-definite condition
\be\label{semimat}
B(s)\equiv\left(
\begin{array}{ccc}
1 & S_1^1(s) & \mathcal{F}_1^1(s) \\
S_1^{1*}(s) & 1 & \mathcal{F}_1^{1*}(s) \\
\mathcal{F}_1^{1*}(s) & \mathcal{F}_1^{1}(s) & \rho_1^1(s)
\end{array}
\right) \succeq 0, \quad s > 4\,.
\ee
%Note that a_mu has a 1/pi and (2\pi)^4 is the normalization. In the computation tabT so factor 16\pi^3 has been taken.
The rescaled spectral functions are given by $\rho^1_1(s)\times \frac{(2\pi)^4}{s}=\text{Im}\Pi(s)$ and $\mathcal{F}_1^1(s)=\frac{\sqrt{\frac{4 \pi }{3}} \left(\frac{s-4}{4}\right)^{3/4}}{\left(8 \pi ^3\right) \sqrt[4]{s}}F(s) $,
where $F(s)$ is some vector form factor normalized such that $F(0)=1$. Further, $S_1^1$ is the spin-1 pion partial wave for the anti-symmetric sector. This unitary condition is a generalization of Watson's equation\cite{Watson:1954uc}. For derivation and details\footnote{Keeping in mind $J_\mu=\sum_{q=u,d,s} e_q \bar{q}\gamma_\mu q$.
}, we refer to \cite{Heboth,joao_semi}. The FESRs for each quark contribution
$
\int_{4}^{s_0} \text{Im}\Pi_q(t)t^k dt, k=0,1,2
$
are well known\cite{SVZ, SVZ2, qcdpaper}. One can add each quark contribution with appropriate pre-factors to write FESRs for $\int_{4}^{s_0}t^{n}\rho_1^1(t)$.
\vspace{0.25cm}
\\
\textcolor{Blue}{\textbf{Bootstrap strategy:}} \textit{Impose unitary condition \eqref{semimat}, analyticity, sum rules for $\int_{4}^{s_0}t^{n}\rho_1^1(t)$ and partial wave unitarity $|S_\ell^I(s)|\leq 1$ to scan the space of $S_\ell^{I}(s), ~\rho_1^1(s)$ and $ \mathcal{F}^1_1(s)$ which minimizes $a_\mu^\text{LO-HVP}$.}
\vspace{0.25cm}
\\
We also impose chiral symmetry breaking, which marginally improves the bound.
\subsection{Bootstrap implementations}
In this section, we show the details of the numerical implementation of the bootstrap. We write a suitable ansatz for the pion partial waves, form factor and spectral density.
\\
The pion partial waves $S_\ell^I(s)=1+i \pi \sqrt{\frac{s-4}{s}}f_\ell^I(s)$ are given by
\be
f_\ell^I(s)=\frac{1}{4}\int_{-1}^1dx P_\ell(x)M^{(I)}\left(s,t=\frac{(s-4)(x-1)}{2}\right)\,,
\ee
where the isospin $I$ channel amplitudes are
\be
\begin{split}
&M^{(0)}=3A(s|t,u)+A(t|s,u)+A(u|t,s)\,,\\
&M^{(1)}=A(t|s,u)-A(u|t,s)\,,\\
&M^{(2)}=A(t|s,u)+A(u|t,s)\,.\\
\end{split}
\ee
The crossing symmetry and analyticity of $A(s|t,u)$ implies the following ansatz \cite{qcdboot1},
\be\label{eqAstu}
A(s|,t,u)=\sum _{n=1}^{P} \sum _{m=1}^n a_{n m}\left(\eta_t^m\eta_u^n+\eta_t^n \eta_u^m\right)+\sum _{n=0}^{P} \sum _{m=0}^{P} b_{n m}\left(\eta_t^m+\eta_u^m\right) \eta_s^n\,,
\ee
where $\eta_z=\frac{\left(\sqrt{4-4/3}-\sqrt{4-z}\right)}{\left(\sqrt{4-4/3+\sqrt{4-z}}\right)}$ and we truncate the sum upto $P$.
The analyticity of spectral density and form factor implies the following ansatz \cite{joao_semi},
\be\label{ansatzrhoF}
\rho_1^1(s)=-\sum_{n=1}^{N} d_n \sin\left(n \arccos\left(\frac{8}{s}-1\right)\right),~ F(s)=\sum_{n=0}^{N} b_n \left(\frac{\sqrt{4}-\sqrt{4-s}}{\sqrt{4+\sqrt{4-s}}}\right)^n \,.
\ee
Note that $b_0=1$ because of $F(s=0)=1$.
After writing down the ansatz, we want to impose FESRs for $\int_{4}^{s_0}t^{n}\rho_1^1(t)$ when $n=-1,0,1$. The choice of the $s_0$ is crucial. The lower the value of $s_0$, the better, the lower bound, as was pointed out in\cite{qcdpaper}. However we can't go arbitrarily low in $s_0$. Below $s_0=1.19$ GeV, the strange quark FESRs starts violating simple positivity inequality derived from Holder's inequality \cite{qcdpaper}. Hence, we stop at $s_0=1.19$ GeV --see appendix for details. The FESRs, along with the errors coming from the QCD parameters%\footnote{I thank Andrea Guerrieri for this suggestion.}
\be
\begin{split}
\frac{1}{s_0}\int_{4}^{s_0}\frac{\rho_1^1(t)}{t}&=0.0000416772_{-0.00000000105807}^{+0.00000000260880}\,, \\
\frac{1}{s_0^2}\int_{4}^{s_0}\rho_1^1(t)&=0.0000186454\pm 6.4034\times 10^{-8}\,,\\
\frac{1}{s_0^3}\int_{4}^{s_0}t \rho_1^1(t)&=9.17113\times 10^{-6}\pm 5.6487\times 10^{-7}\,.
\end{split}
\ee
\\
The sum rules are given in the appendix\footnote{These calculations should be done carefully considering the RG running for $\alpha_s$ and condensates. I thank the authors of \cite{qcdpaper} for helping us to reproduce their results. The details are in the appendix.}. The dimension-four gluon condensate $\langle \a G^2\rangle$, vacuum saturation constant ($\kappa$) provide dominant contributions to the errors \cite{qcdpaper}. For the convenience of determining tolerance, we considered an error for the first sum rule coming from strange quark mass, even though it has no visible effect in numerics.
Since the FESRs have errors, we naively can't put them as equality. Rather, we must put them as inequality upto a tolerance. A weak but rigorous possible choice for the tolerance is the error, namely $ (\text{mean}-\text{error})<\frac{1}{s_0^{2+n}}\int_{4}^{s_0}t^n \rho_1^1(t)<(\text{mean}+\text{error})$.
Considering this, we have
\be\label{ineqSVZ}
\begin{split}
0.0000416667<\frac{1}{s_0}\int_{4}^{s_0}\frac{\rho_1^1(t)}{t}&<0.0000417033\,,\\
0.0000185063<\frac{1}{s_0^2}\int_{4}^{s_0}\rho_1^1(t)&<0.0000187844\,,\\
8.51123\times 10^{-6}<\frac{1}{s_0^3}\int_{4}^{s_0}t \rho_1^1(t)&<9.81765\times 10^{-6}\,.
\end{split}
\ee
An improvement of the tolerance will be discussed in the upcoming section.
Given the ansatz, now we are in a position to minimize $a_\mu^\text{LO-HVP}$ imposing the constraints \eqref{semimat}, \eqref{ineqSVZ} and partial wave unitarity $|S_\ell^I(s)|\leq 1$.
\subsection{Step by step bootstrap}
We illustrate the bootstrap implementation in three steps. Firstly, we consider the simplest bootstrap constraint between form factor and spectral density. The result from the first step is comparable to known literature. In the second step, we consider the full bootstrap conditions and increasing partial wave unitary constraints spin by spin. Thirdly, we consider chiral symmetry breaking, which improves the numerics slightly.
\subsubsection*{\textcolor{Blue}{Step 1$\setminus$} Simplest condition for form factor and spectral density}
Unitary condition \eqref{semimat} implies that all the principle minors of the matrix $B(s)$ are non-negative, resulting in a simple condition $\rho^1_1(s)\geq |\mathcal{F}^{1}_1(s)|^2$ upon considering the bottom-right minor. Solely using this condition and FESRs \eqref{ineqSVZ}, it is possible to achieve a minimum for $a_\mu^\text{LO-HVP}$ as demonstrated in figure \eqref{fig:rhoF}. %The number of basis elements truncated is $N$ eq \eqref{ansatzrhoF}..
The extrapolation\footnote{We do extrapolations for large $N$ with different models and average the errors and mean values \cite{andreafit}. Since the convergence at the third significant digit is visible, we discarded the models that were far from these values.} for large number of basis elements ($N$) gives Min$[a_\mu^\text{LO-HVP}]=630.7^{+3}_{-3}\times 10^{-10}$.
\\
\textbf{A comparison:}
A reasonable comparison for the number Min$[a_\mu^\text{LO-HVP}]=630.7^{+3}_{-3}\times 10^{-10}$ can be found in \cite{qcdpaper}. In \cite{qcdpaper}, a two-sided bound on $a_\mu^\text{LO-HVP}$ was derived using positivity of the spectral density and FESRs for each quark section utilizing Holder's inequalities. For lower bound, the authors noticed that simple form of Kernel $K(t)$ enables to write $a_\mu^\text{LO-HVP}\geq 0.83\times \frac{4 \a^2 m_\mu^2}{3\pi} \times \int_{4m_\pi^2}^{\infty}\frac{\text{Im}\Pi(t)}{t^2}$ and FESRs puts a lower bound on $\int_{4m_\pi^2}^{\infty}\frac{\text{Im}\Pi(t)}{t^2}$. Considering errors for FESRs coming from gluon condensate $\langle \a G^2\rangle$, vacuum saturation constant ($\kappa$) they arrive at conclusion that $a_\mu^\text{LO-HVP}> 657_{-34}^{+34}\times 10^{-10}$. Since we are using FESRs as inequalities due to errors and minimization process picks up the lowest of the bound, hence correct number we should compare is $a_\mu^\text{LO-HVP}> 623\times 10^{-10}$, which is in good agreement with our lower bound Min$[a_\mu^\text{LO-HVP}]=630.7^{+3}_{-3}\times 10^{-10}$ achieved using simplest condition $\rho^1_1(s)\geq |\mathcal{F}^{1}_1(s)|^2$ and FESRs.
\begin{figure}[hbt!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{convN_rhoF_msg2kv2}
\caption{Convergence of numerics with the number of basis elements $N$ for the simplest condition $\rho^1_1(s)\geq |\mathcal{F}^{1}_1(s)|^2$.}
\label{fig:rhoF}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection*{\textcolor{Blue}{Step 2$\setminus$} Comprehensive constraints for form factor, spectral density and partial waves}
We now focus on complete numerics after demonstrating a simple form of numerics and a successful comparison. We implement the condition \eqref{semimat} by converting the $B(s)$ matrix into a $6\times 6$ matrix \cite{joao_semi} with an equivalent condition $\left(
\begin{array}{cc}
\text{Re}B(s) & -\text{Im}B(s) \\
\text{Im}B(s) & \text{Re}B(s)
\end{array}
\right) \succeq 0$ using SDPB solver \cite{sdpb}. We impose the partial wave unitarity $|S_\ell^I(s)|\leq 1$ upto spin $L$, namely $\ell=1,3,5,\dots L$ for isospin $I=1$ and $\ell=0,2,4,\dots L-1$ for $I=0,2$. We remind the reader that truncation in the number of basis elements is $N$ in eq \eqref{ansatzrhoF} and $P$ in eq \eqref{eqAstu}. Convergence\footnote{The minimum should stabilize at some point with $N,L,P$--see \cite{boot_white} for the primal bootstrap algorithm.} with $N, L, P$ are shown in figure \eqref{fig:LPconvergence}. Truncating the spin at $L=9$ and $P=10$ does not alter the third significant digits. Hence, throughout our analysis, we use these truncations. The convergence with $N$ is evident in figure \eqref{fig:LPconvergence}. For light quark contribution, the final bound in second step is $680.0^{+3}_{-3}\times 10^{-10}$, which shows improvement from full unitarity.
\begin{figure}[hbt!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{Conv_N_P_L_msg2kv2}
\caption{The convergence of numerics with $N, L, P$. We impose partial wave unitarity up to $\ell=1,3,5,\dots L$ for isospin $I=1$ and $\ell=0,2,4,\dots L-1$ for isospin $I=0,2$, $P$ is the truncation of the sum for ansatz for $A(s|t,u)$ in \eqref{eqAstu} and $N$ is the truncation in \eqref{ansatzrhoF}.}
\label{fig:LPconvergence}
\end{figure}
\subsubsection*{\textcolor{Blue}{Step 3$\setminus$} Imposing chiral symmetry breaking}
The theory of pion well approximates the low energy QCD due to chiral symmetry breaking. We use tree level $\chi$PT to capture the low energy physics. These barely improve the bound (adds half to the third significant digit), but we impose these for completeness. The tree-level partial waves are
\be
f^0_{0,\text{tree}}(s)=\frac{2 }{\pi}\frac{2 s-1}{ 32 \pi f_{\pi}^2},~ f^1_{1,\text{tree}}(s)=\frac{2 }{\pi}\frac{s-4}{96 \pi f_{\pi}^2} , ~f^2_{0,\text{tree}}(s)=\frac{2 }{\pi}\frac{2-s}{32 \pi f_{\pi}^2}\,.
\ee
For $0\leq s \leq 4$, we impose the following
\be
|f^0_{0}(s)-f^0_{0,\text{tree}}(s)|<3\times 10^{-2}, ~~~|f^1_{1}(s)-f^1_{1,\text{tree}}(s)|<3\times 10^{-2}, ~~~|f^2_{0}(s)-f^2_{0,\text{tree}}(s)|<3\times 10^{-2}\,.
\ee
We choose tolerance $3\times 10^{-2}$, which is dictated by 2-loop answer that matches with the tolerance used in \cite{Heboth}. For example $f^0_{0,\text{tree}}$ differs maximum at $s=4$ with 2-loop answer which is about $25\%$, hence we use tolerance of $30\%$. We impose these inequalities for $0\leq s\leq 4$ with a spacing $1/2$. We observed that reducing the spacing to $1$ does not change the answers to the 4th significant digits.
The convergence for the lower bound is shown in figure \eqref{fig:N_chipt}. The extrapolated value for large N is $680.5^{+3}_{-3}$. Now adding with charmonium and bottomonium resonance contributions \cite{charm1}, we reach our final bound Min$[a_\mu^\text{LO-HVP}]=
688.4^{+3}_{-3}\times 10^{-10}
$
\begin{figure}[hbt!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{Conv_N_chipt_msg2kv2}
%\caption{Convergence of numerics with $L$.}
\caption{The convergence of numerics with $N$, the truncation in \eqref{ansatzrhoF} imposing $\chi$PT.}
\label{fig:N_chipt}
\end{figure}
The upper bound does not converge. There is a transient platue, which can be thought of as an upper bound; we refrain from showing the details.
\subsection{Comparison with hadronic cross-ratio data}
This section will compare extremal spectral density to the experimental hadronic cross-ratio data. We plot the $R(s)=12\pi \text{Im}\Pi(s)=12\pi \times \rho^1_1(s)\times \frac{(2\pi)^4}{s}$. For $\rho$--resonances appearing above $\sqrt{s}= 0.7$, bootstrap shows excellent agreement with the location of the peak in experimental hadronic cross-ratio data\cite{PDG2022} --see figure \eqref{fig:expdata}. %
\begin{figure}[hbt!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{compare_msg2k_correct}
%\caption{Convergence of numerics with $L$.}
\caption{Comparison of bootstrap spectral density with the experimental hadronic cross ratio data. We find $m_\rho=0.73$ GeV.}
\label{fig:expdata}
\end{figure}
To demonstrate convergence, we plotted the bootstrapped data for various $P$ truncations with $L=9,N=95$. Data with or without imposing $\chi$PT are almost identical. For these data, the peak position is about $\sqrt{s}=0.73$, corresponding to $\rho$ mass.
\section{Improvement of FESRs inequalities}
In this section, we discuss the improvement of the FESR inequalities. Improvement in tolerance is evident from the fact that the probability of finding the mean value is greater and the dimension-four gluon condensate $\langle \a G^2\rangle$, vacuum saturation constant ($\kappa$) are poorly determined amongst the QCD parameters. Since FESRs are equalities, we don't want these inequalities too far away from the mean value. We slightly improve the FESRs by choosing the tolerance as the half of the errors, namely $ (\text{mean}-\frac{\text{error}}{2})<\frac{1}{s_0^{2+n}}\int_{4}^{s_0}t^n \rho_1^1(t)<(\text{mean}+\frac{\text{error}}{2})$.
Considering this, we have
\be\label{ineqSVZimprove}
\begin{split}
0.00004167197<\frac{1}{s_0}\int_{4}^{s_0}\frac{\rho_1^1(t)}{t}&<0.0000416904\,,\\
0.00001861338<\frac{1}{s_0^2}\int_{4}^{s_0}\rho_1^1(t)&<0.00001867741\,,\\
8.888697\times 10^{-6}<\frac{1}{s_0^3}\int_{4}^{s_0}t \rho_1^1(t)&<9.453568\times 10^{-6}\,.
\end{split}
\ee
We show the convergence for the improved lower bound in figure \eqref{fig:N_sigma}. The extrapolation for large number of basis elements $N$ gives $707.5^{+1.6}_{-1.6}$ and combining charmonium and bottomonium resonance contributions, we reach our improved bound Min$[a_\mu^\text{LO-HVP}]=
715.43^{+1.6}_{-1.6}\times 10^{-10}
$.
\begin{figure}[hbt!]
\centering
\includegraphics[scale=0.45]{Conv_N_chipt_exp_msg2k}
%\caption{Convergence of numerics with $L$.}
\caption{The convergence of numerics with $N$, the truncation in \eqref{ansatzrhoF} considering $\chi$PT and improved FESRs.}
\label{fig:N_sigma}
\end{figure}
\section*{Discussion}
We demonstrate that unitarity, analyticity, crossing symmetry and FESRs can establish a lower bound on $a_\mu^\text{LO-HVP}$. We demonstrate the bootstrap implementation in three steps. Firstly, we consider the simplest bootstrap constraint between form factor and spectral density and make a successful comparison to known literature. In the second step, we consider full bootstrap conditions and increasing partial wave unitary constraints spin by spin. Thirdly, we slightly improve the numerics by imposing chiral symmetry breaking. Adding $a_\mu^\text{LO-HVP}$ with rest of the extensively calculated SM contribution, we reach $a_\mu^\text{bootstrap-min}=11659176.3^{+3}_{-3}\times 10^{-10}$, which saturated by SM prediction within the error bars. We compare bootstrap spectral density to the experimental hadronic cross-ratio data, which shows an excellent agreement. We also present a possible improvement of the FESRs, which gives an improved lower bound $
a_\mu^\text{bootstrap-min-improved}=11659203.3^{+1.6}_{-1.6}\times 10^{-10}\,
$, which is incompatible with SM prediction while saturated by lattice evaluation and measured value within the error bars.
\section*{Acknowledgments}
We thank Bobby Samir Acharya, Subham D. Chowdhury, Paolo Creminelli, Atish Dabholkar, Ehsan Ebrahimian, Aditya Hebbar, Joan Elias Miro, Andrea L. Guerrieri, Mehmet A. Gumus, Thomas G. Steele, Aninda Sinha, Shaswat Tiwari, and Alexander V. Zhiboedov for their helpful discussions. We would also like to thank SISSA, Trieste for supporting with their powerful clusters. I have received support from the European Research Council, grant agreement n. 101039756.
{\begin{center}\bf \Large{Appendix}\end{center} }
\begin{appendix}
\section{QCD finite energy sum rules}\label{ap:qcdsumrules}
We use the following QCD sum rules
\be
\begin{split}
\frac{1}{s_0}\int_{4}^{s_0}\frac{\rho_1^1(t)}{t}&=\frac{\pi}{s_0}\frac{1}{(2\pi)^4}\left(\frac{4}{9} F_0^{(up)}(s_0)+\frac{1}{9} F_0^{(down)}(s_0)+\frac{1}{9} F_0^{(strange)}(s_0)\right)\,,\\
\frac{1}{s_0^2}\int_{4}^{s_0}\rho_1^1(t)&=\frac{\pi}{s_0^2}\frac{1}{(2\pi)^4} \left(\frac{4}{9} F_1^{(up)}(s_0)+\frac{1}{9} F_1^{(down)}(s_0)+\frac{1}{9} F_1^{(strange)}(s_0)\right)\,,\\
\frac{1}{s_0^3}\int_{4}^{s_0}t \rho_1^1(t)&=\frac{\pi}{s_0^3}\frac{1}{(2\pi)^4} \left(\frac{4}{9} F_2^{(up)}(s_0)+\frac{1}{9} F_2^{(down)}(s_0)+\frac{1}{9} F_2^{(strange)}(s_0)\right)\,,
\end{split}
\ee
%Factor of pi is because of F_k's defination. don't get confused again and again.
with
\begin{align}
F_0^{(q)}(s_0) &= \frac{1}{4 \pi^2} \Big[ 1 + \frac{\alpha_s(\mu)}{\pi} T_{10} + \left( \frac{\alpha_s(\mu)}{\pi} \right)^2 (T_{20} + T_{21}) + \left( \frac{\alpha_s(\mu)}{\pi} \right)^3 (T_{30} + 2 T_{31} + 2 T_{32}) \\
&+ \left( \frac{\alpha_s(\mu)}{\pi} \right)^4 (T_{40} + 2 T_{41} + 6 T_{42} + 6 T_{43}) \Big] s_0 - \frac{3}{2 \pi^2} m_q^2, \\
F_1^{(q)}(s_0) &= \frac{1}{8 \pi^2} \Big[ 1 + \frac{\alpha_s(\mu)}{\pi} T_{10} + \left( \frac{\alpha_s(\mu)}{\pi} \right)^2 (T_{20} + T_{21}) + \left( \frac{\alpha_s(\mu)}{\pi} \right)^3 (T_{30} + T_{31} + T_{32}) \\
&+ \left( \frac{\alpha_s(\mu)}{\pi} \right)^4 \left( T_{40} + \frac{1}{3} T_{41} + \frac{2}{3} T_{42} + \frac{3}{4} T_{43} \right) \Big] s_0^2 \\
&\quad - 2 m_{q}\langle\bar{q} q\rangle \left( 1 + \frac{\alpha_s(\mu)}{3} \right) - \frac{1}{12 \pi} \langle \a_s G^2\rangle \left( 1 + \frac{7}{6}\frac{\alpha_s(\mu)}{\pi} \right) , \\
F_2^{(q)}(s_0)&= \frac{1}{12 \pi^2} \Big[ 1 + \frac{\alpha_s(\mu)}{\pi} T_{10} + \left( \frac{\alpha_s(\mu)}{\pi} \right)^2 \left( T_{20} + \frac{1}{3} T_{21} \right) + \left( \frac{\alpha_s(\mu)}{\pi} \right)^3 \left( T_{30} + \frac{1}{3} T_{31} + \frac{2}{9} T_{32} \right) \\
&\quad + \left( \frac{\alpha_s(\mu)}{\pi} \right)^4 \left( T_{40} + \frac{1}{3} T_{41} + \frac{2}{9} T_{42} + \frac{2}{9} T_{43} \right) \Big] s_0^3 - \frac{224}{81} \pi \alpha_s(\mu) m_q \langle \bar{q} \bar{q} q q\rangle\,,
\end{align}
where $\mu=\sqrt{s_0}$ and
\be
F_k^{(q)}(s_0)=\int_{4m_\pi^2}^{s_0} \frac{\text{Im}\Pi_q(t)}{\pi} t^k dt
\ee
We numerically solve four loops RG equation for $\alpha_s(\mu)$ using $\alpha_s (M_\tau)$ as a boundary condition, which is above the charm threshold. Since we are interested in up to $s_0=1.19$ GeV, below the charm threshold, we start the RG for $N_f=4$, do matching at the charm threshold, and then transit to $N_f=3$. The RG equation is as follows \cite{fourloopbeta}
\be
\frac{1}{2} \, \mu \, \frac{\partial a(\mu)}{\partial \mu} = -\sum_{n=0}^3 a(\mu)^{n+2} \, \beta_n\,,
\ee
where $\alpha_s(\mu)=4\pi a(\mu)$ with
\begin{align*}
\beta_0 &= 11 - \frac{2}{3} N_f, \\
\beta_1 &= 102 - \frac{38}{3} N_f, \\
\beta_2 &= 1428.5 - 279.611 \, N_f + 6.01852 \, N_f^2, \\
\beta_3 &= 29243 - 6946.3 \, N_f + 405.089 \, N_f^2 + 1.49931 \, N_f^3.
\end{align*}
Leading order RG effect of quark mass is also taken care of \cite{quarkmass}. RG effect for the condensates also has been take care of up to NLO using the fact that $m_q\langle \bar{q}q\rangle$ and $\langle\beta G^2\rangle +4\gamma m_q\langle \bar{q}q\rangle$ does not run with RG, where $\beta$ is the beta function $\beta(\mu)=\mu \frac{\partial \alpha _s(\mu )}{\partial \mu }$ and $\gamma$ is mass anomalous dimension $ \mu \frac{\partial m_q(\mu )}{\partial \mu }=-\gamma(\mu) m_q(\mu)$.
\\
We used QCD parameters as given below in tables \eqref{tabqcd1}, \eqref{tabqcd2}--see \cite{qcdpaper} and references \cite{fourloopbeta,PDG2022, quarkmass,refpara, refpara_k},
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|}
\hline
\textbf{Coefficient} & \textbf{Value} \\
\hline
\( T_{10} \) & \( 1 \) \\
\( T_{20} \) & \( 1.63982 \) \\
\( T_{21} \) & \( \frac{9}{4} \) \\
\( T_{30} \) & \( -10.2839 \) \\
\( T_{31} \) & \( 11.3792 \) \\
\( T_{32} \) & \( \frac{81}{16} \) \\
\( T_{40} \) & \( -106.896 \) \\
\( T_{41} \) & \( -46.2379 \) \\
\( T_{42} \) & \( 47.4048 \) \\
\( T_{43} \) & \( \frac{729}{64} \) \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{Coefficients for \( N_f = 3 \).}
\label{tabqcd1}
\end{table}
\begin{table}[h!]
\centering
\begin{tabular}{|c|c|}
\hline
\textbf{Parameter} & \textbf{Value} \\
\hline
$\alpha$ & $1/137.036$ \\
$\alpha_s(M_\tau)$ & $0.312 \pm 0.015$ \\
$m_u(2 \, \mathrm{GeV})$ & $2.16^{+0.49}_{-0.26} \, \mathrm{MeV}$ \\
$m_d(2 \, \mathrm{GeV})$ & $4.67^{+0.48}_{-0.17} \, \mathrm{MeV}$ \\
$m_s(2 \, \mathrm{GeV})$ & $0.0934^{+0.0086}_{-0.0034} \, \mathrm{GeV}$ \\
$f_\pi$ & $(0.13056 \pm 0.00019)/\sqrt{2} \, \mathrm{GeV}$ \\
$m_n\langle \bar{n}n \rangle$ & $-\frac{1}{2} f_\pi^2 m_\pi^2$ \\
$m_s\langle \bar{s}s \rangle$ & $r_m r_c m_n \langle \bar{n}n \rangle$ \\
$r_c$ & $0.66 \pm 0.10$ \\
$m_s/m_n = r_m$ & $27.33^{+0.67}_{-0.77}$ \\
$\langle \alpha G^2 \rangle$ (2 GeV) & $0.0649 \pm 0.0035 \, \mathrm{GeV}^4$ \\
$\kappa$ & $3.22 \pm 0.5$ \\
$\kappa \alpha_s \langle \bar{n}n \rangle^2$ & $\kappa (1.8 \times 10^{-4}) \, \mathrm{GeV}^6$ \\
$\alpha_s \langle (\bar{s}s)^2 \rangle$ & $r_c^2 \alpha_s \langle \bar{n}n \rangle^2$ \\
\hline
\end{tabular}
\caption{QCD parameters and values with $m_n=(m_u+m_d)/2, \langle \bar{n}n \rangle=\langle \bar{u}u \rangle=\langle \bar{d}d \rangle $.}
\label{tabqcd2}
\end{table}
Using Holder's inequality and positivity of Im$\Pi_q(t)$, the paper \cite{qcdpaper} established that each quark sector should obey the following inequality
\be
\left(\frac{F_1}{(4m_\pi^2)^2} - F_B\right)^2 \leq \left(\frac{F_1}{(4m_\pi^2)^2} - F_0^2/F_1\right)^2,
\ee
with $F_B=\frac{F_0}{4m_\pi^2}-\frac{\left(\frac{F_1}{4m_\pi^2}-F_0\right)^2}{\frac{F_2}{4m_\pi^2}-F_1}$ and we have suppressed the $q,s_0$ labels from $F_k^{(q)}(s_0)$ for clarity. One can easily verify that for up and down quark, it gets violated below $s_0=1.09$ GeV while for strange quark, it gets violated below $s_0=1.19$ GeV--see \cite{qcdpaper}.
\end{appendix}
\begin{thebibliography}{99}
%\cite{Muong-2:2023cdq}
\bibitem{exp1}
D.~P.~Aguillard \textit{et al.} [Muon g-2],
``Measurement of the Positive Muon Anomalous Magnetic Moment to 0.20~ppm,''
Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{131} (2023) no.16, 161802
doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.161802
[arXiv:2308.06230 [hep-ex]].
%373 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 26 Oct 2024
%\cite{Muong-2:2024hpx}
\bibitem{exp2}
D.~P.~Aguillard \textit{et al.} [Muon g-2],
``Detailed report on the measurement of the positive muon anomalous magnetic moment to 0.20~ppm,''
Phys. Rev. D \textbf{110} (2024) no.3, 032009
doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.032009
[arXiv:2402.15410 [hep-ex]].
%14 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 26 Oct 2024
%\cite{CMD-3:2023rfe}
\bibitem{th1}
T.~Aoyama, N.~Asmussen, M.~Benayoun, J.~Bijnens, T.~Blum, M.~Bruno, I.~Caprini, C.~M.~Carloni Calame, M.~C\`e and G.~Colangelo, \textit{et al.}
``The anomalous magnetic moment of the muon in the Standard Model,''
Phys. Rept. \textbf{887} (2020), 1-166
doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2020.07.006
[arXiv:2006.04822 [hep-ph]].
%1458 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 26 Oct 2024
%\cite{Borsanyi:2020mff}
\bibitem{lat1}
S.~Borsanyi, Z.~Fodor, J.~N.~Guenther, C.~Hoelbling, S.~D.~Katz, L.~Lellouch, T.~Lippert, K.~Miura, L.~Parato and K.~K.~Szabo, \textit{et al.}
``Leading hadronic contribution to the muon magnetic moment from lattice QCD,''
Nature \textbf{593} (2021) no.7857, 51-55
doi:10.1038/s41586-021-03418-1
[arXiv:2002.12347 [hep-lat]].
%946 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 26 Oct 2024
%\cite{Boccaletti:2024guq}
\bibitem{lat2}
A.~Boccaletti, S.~Borsanyi, M.~Davier, Z.~Fodor, F.~Frech, A.~Gerardin, D.~Giusti, A.~Y.~Kotov, L.~Lellouch and T.~Lippert, \textit{et al.}
``High precision calculation of the hadronic vacuum polarisation contribution to the muon anomaly,''
[arXiv:2407.10913 [hep-lat]].
%21 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 26 Oct 2024
%\cite{Kruczenski:2022lot}
\bibitem{boot_white}
M.~Kruczenski, J.~Penedones and B.~C.~van Rees,
``Snowmass White Paper: S-matrix Bootstrap,''
[arXiv:2203.02421 [hep-th]].
%88 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 26 Oct 2024
%\cite{Poland:2022qrs}
\bibitem{cftboot_white}
D.~Poland and D.~Simmons-Duffin,
``Snowmass White Paper: The Numerical Conformal Bootstrap,''
[arXiv:2203.08117 [hep-th]].
%61 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 26 Oct 2024
%\cite{Karateev:2019ymz}
\bibitem{joao_semi}
D.~Karateev, S.~Kuhn and J.~Penedones,
``Bootstrapping Massive Quantum Field Theories,''
JHEP \textbf{07} (2020), 035
doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2020)035
[arXiv:1912.08940 [hep-th]].
%49 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 26 Oct 2024
%\cite{He:2024nwd}
\bibitem{Heboth}
Y.~He and M.~Kruczenski,
``Gauge Theory Bootstrap: Pion amplitudes and low energy parameters,''
[arXiv:2403.10772 [hep-th]].
%3 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 26 Oct 2024
\\
Y.~He and M.~Kruczenski,
``Bootstrapping gauge theories,''
[arXiv:2309.12402 [hep-th]].
%10 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 26 Oct 2024
%\cite{Guerrieri:2018uew}
\bibitem{qcdboot1}
A.~L.~Guerrieri, J.~Penedones and P.~Vieira,
``Bootstrapping QCD Using Pion Scattering Amplitudes,''
Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{122} (2019) no.24, 241604
doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.122.241604
[arXiv:1810.12849 [hep-th]].
%77 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 26 Oct 2024
%\cite{Paulos:2017fhb}
\bibitem{sboot3}
M.~F.~Paulos, J.~Penedones, J.~Toledo, B.~C.~van Rees and P.~Vieira,
``The S-matrix bootstrap. Part III: higher dimensional amplitudes,''
JHEP \textbf{12} (2019), 040
doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2019)040
[arXiv:1708.06765 [hep-th]].
%134 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 26 Oct 2024
%\cite{Bose:2020cod}
\bibitem{aninda1}
A.~Bose, A.~Sinha and S.~S.~Tiwari,
``Selection rules for the S-Matrix bootstrap,''
SciPost Phys. \textbf{10} (2021) no.5, 122
doi:10.21468/SciPostPhys.10.5.122
[arXiv:2011.07944 [hep-th]].\\
%31 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 26 Oct 2024
%\cite{Bose:2020shm}
%\bibitem{Bose:2020shm}
A.~Bose, P.~Haldar, A.~Sinha, P.~Sinha and S.~S.~Tiwari,
``Relative entropy in scattering and the S-matrix bootstrap,''
SciPost Phys. \textbf{9} (2020), 081
doi:10.21468/SciPostPhys.9.5.081
[arXiv:2006.12213 [hep-th]].
%46 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 26 Oct 2024
%\cite{EliasMiro:2023fqi}
\bibitem{mehmet1}
J.~Elias Miro, A.~L.~Guerrieri and M.~A.~Gumus,
``Extremal Higgs couplings,''
Phys. Rev. D \textbf{110} (2024) no.1, 016007
doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.016007
[arXiv:2311.09283 [hep-ph]].
%8 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 26 Oct 2024
%\cite{Sinha:2020win}
\bibitem{me1}
A.~Sinha and A.~Zahed,
``Crossing Symmetric Dispersion Relations in Quantum Field Theories,''
Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{126} (2021) no.18, 181601
doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.126.181601
[arXiv:2012.04877 [hep-th]].
%113 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 26 Oct 2024
%\cite{Zahed:2021fkp}
\bibitem{me2}
A.~Zahed,
``Positivity and geometric function theory constraints on pion scattering,''
JHEP \textbf{12} (2021), 036
doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2021)036
[arXiv:2108.10355 [hep-th]].
%27 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 26 Oct 2024
\bibitem{qcdpaper}
S.~Li, T.~G.~Steele, J.~Ho, R.~Raza, K.~Williams and R.~T.~Kleiv,
``QCD bounds on leading-order hadronic vacuum polarization contributions to the muon anomalous magnetic moment,''
Phys. Rev. D \textbf{110} (2024) no.1, 014046
doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.014046
[arXiv:2404.08591 [hep-ph]].
%1 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 26 Oct 2024
%\cite{Shifman:1978bx}
%\cite{Mickens:1978qb}
\bibitem{refpara_k}
D.~Harnett, J.~Ho and T.~G.~Steele,
``Correlations Between the Strange Quark Condensate, Strange Quark Mass, and Kaon PCAC Relation,''
Phys. Rev. D \textbf{103} (2021) no.11, 114005
doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.103.114005
[arXiv:2104.00752 [hep-ph]].
\bibitem{charm1}
A.~Keshavarzi, D.~Nomura and T.~Teubner,
``$g-2$ of charged leptons, $\alpha (M^2_Z)$ , and the hyperfine splitting of muonium,''
Phys. Rev. D \textbf{101} (2020) no.1, 014029
doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.101.014029
[arXiv:1911.00367 [hep-ph]].
%554 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 28 Oct 2024
%\cite{Watson:1954uc}
\bibitem{Watson:1954uc}
K.~M.~Watson,
``Some general relations between the photoproduction and scattering of pi mesons,''
Phys. Rev. \textbf{95} (1954), 228-236
doi:10.1103/PhysRev.95.228
%524 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 29 Nov 2024
%\cite{Guerrieri:2021ivu}
\bibitem{SVZ}
M.~A.~Shifman, A.~I.~Vainshtein and V.~I.~Zakharov,
``QCD and Resonance Physics. Theoretical Foundations,''
Nucl. Phys. B \textbf{147} (1979), 385-447
doi:10.1016/0550-3213(79)90022-1
%5854 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 25 Nov 2024
%\cite{Shifman:1978by}
\bibitem{SVZ2}
M.~A.~Shifman, A.~I.~Vainshtein and V.~I.~Zakharov,
``QCD and Resonance Physics: Applications,''
Nucl. Phys. B \textbf{147} (1979), 448-518
doi:10.1016/0550-3213(79)90023-3
%3218 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 25 Nov 2024
%\cite{Li:2024frm}
\bibitem{andreafit}
A.~Guerrieri, J.~Penedones and P.~Vieira,
``Where Is String Theory in the Space of Scattering Amplitudes?,''
Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{127} (2021) no.8, 081601
doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.081601
[arXiv:2102.02847 [hep-th]].
%85 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 10 Nov 2024
%\cite{Simmons-Duffin:2015qma}
\bibitem{sdpb}
D.~Simmons-Duffin,
``A Semidefinite Program Solver for the Conformal Bootstrap,''
JHEP \textbf{06} (2015), 174
doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2015)174
[arXiv:1502.02033 [hep-th]].
%380 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 12 Nov 2024
%\cite{vanRitbergen:1997va}
\bibitem{PDG2022}
R.~L.~Workman \textit{et al.} [Particle Data Group],
``Review of Particle Physics,''
PTEP \textbf{2022} (2022), 083C01
doi:10.1093/ptep/ptac097\\
%4197 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 13 Nov 2024
\href{https://pdg.lbl.gov/2022/hadronic-xsections/#miscplots}{Link for hadronic cross ratio data.}
\bibitem{fourloopbeta}
T.~van Ritbergen, J.~A.~M.~Vermaseren and S.~A.~Larin,
``The Four loop beta function in quantum chromodynamics,''
Phys. Lett. B \textbf{400} (1997), 379-384
doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(97)00370-5
[arXiv:hep-ph/9701390 [hep-ph]].
%1309 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 13 Nov 2024
%\cite{Baikov:2008jh}
\bibitem{quarkmass}
J.~Gasser and H.~Leutwyler,
``Quark Masses,''
Phys. Rept. \textbf{87} (1982), 77-169
doi:10.1016/0370-1573(82)90035-7
%2246 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 13 Nov 2024
\bibitem{refpara}
P.~A.~Baikov, K.~G.~Chetyrkin and J.~H.~Kuhn,
``Order alpha**4(s) QCD Corrections to Z and tau Decays,''
Phys. Rev. Lett. \textbf{101} (2008), 012002
doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.101.012002
[arXiv:0801.1821 [hep-ph]].\\
%540 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 13 Nov 2024
%\cite{Ahmady:2002pa}
M.~R.~Ahmady, F.~A.~Chishtie, V.~Elias, A.~H.~Fariborz, D.~G.~C.~McKeon, T.~N.~Sherry, A.~Squires and T.~G.~Steele,
``Optimal renormalization group improvement of the perturbative series for the e+ e- annihilation cross-section,''
Phys. Rev. D \textbf{67} (2003), 034017
doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.67.034017
[arXiv:hep-ph/0208025 [hep-ph]].
%34 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 13 Nov 2024
\\
%\cite{Gell-Mann:1968hlm}
M.~Gell-Mann, R.~J.~Oakes and B.~Renner,
``Behavior of current divergences under SU(3) x SU(3),''
Phys. Rev. \textbf{175} (1968), 2195-2199
doi:10.1103/PhysRev.175.2195
%2287 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 13 Nov 2024
\\%\cite{Harnett:2021zug}
%8 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 13 Nov 2024
%\cite{Albuquerque:2023bex}
%\\
R.~Albuquerque, S.~Narison and D.~Rabetiarivony,
``Scrutinizing the light scalar quarkonia from LSR at higher orders,''
Nucl. Phys. A \textbf{1039} (2023), 122743
doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2023.122743
[arXiv:2305.02421 [hep-ph]].
%10 citations counted in INSPIRE as of 13 Nov 2024
%\cite{Gasser:1982ap}
\end{thebibliography}
\end{document}