arXiv:2009.11297v2 [hep-th] 20 Jun 2021

(1)

Amit Sever , Alexander G. TumanovD, Matthias Wilhelm2

School of Physics and Astronomy, Tel Aviv University, Ramat Aviv 69978, Israel DMax-Planck-Institut f¨ur Physik, Werner-Heisenberg-Institut, 80805 M¨unchen, Germany

2Niels Bohr Institute, Copenhagen University, 2100 Copenhagen Ø, Denmark

We propose an operator product expansion for planar form factors of local operators inN = 4 SYM theory. This expansion is based on the dual conformal symmetry of these objects or, equivalently, the conformal symmetry of their dual description in terms of periodic Wilson loops. A form factor is decomposed into a sequence of known pentagon transitions and a new universal object that we call the “form factor transition”. This transition is subject to a set of non-trivial bootstrap constraints, which are sufficient to fully determine it. We evaluate the form factor transition for MHV form factors of the chiral half of the stress tensor supermultiplet at leading order in perturbation theory and use it to produce OPE predictions at any loop order. We match the one-loop and two-loop predictions with data available in the literature.

I. INTRODUCTION

The past ten years saw huge progress in our under- standing of null polygonal Wilson loops, which was pri- marily motivated by the fact that these objects describe color-ordered scattering amplitudes in planar N = 4 SYM theory. Another motivation lies in them controlling a certain limit of correlation functions of local operators in this theory [1–5]. A further class of fundamental ob- servables with a dual description in terms of certain null polygonal Wilson loops are form factors (FFs) [6–10]; in terms of complexity, they lie somewhere in between scattering amplitudes and correlation functions.

The FFF_O describes the overlap of a state created by a local operatorOwith ann-particle asymptotic state:

F_O(k₁, . . . , k_n;q) = Z

dx⁴e^−ixqhk₁, . . . , k_n|O(x)|0i, (1) which has support on q=P

iki. Whilek_i² = 0, generi- callyq²6= 0. Because of the dependence on the local operator FFs are richer than scattering amplitudes, which themselves can be thought of as FFs of the identity operator. The simplest non-trivial operator to consider is the chiral half of the stress tensor supermultiplet, which contains the self-dual part of the Lagrangian,F_L. Opera- tors in this multiplet preserve half of the supersymmetry and their FFs can be classified according to the helicity of the external particles. In this letter, we focus on the simplest, maximally-helicity-violating (MHV) configuration of the color-ordered form factor,F_L^MHV(k₁, . . . , k_n), which in many ways resembles MHV scattering amplitudes.

Many of the perturbative methods for computing scattering amplitudes have been generalized to FFs, see the recent review [11] for a detailed account. Moreover, integrable structures have been identified in FFs at strong coupling [7, 12] as well as at weak coupling [13].

At the non-perturbative level, the only systematic method of studying scattering amplitudes is the operator product expansion (OPE), which is based on dual conformal symmetry [14]. This powerful property of pla-

nar amplitudes is nothing but the conformal symmetry of their dual description in terms of null polygonal Wilson loops. The momenta of the particles,ki, determine the positions of the cusps of this Wilson loop by the simple rulex_i+1−x_i=k_i. ForF_L^MHV, the dual Wilson loop is determined in the same way. However, because the total momentumq 6= 0, the corresponding contour is not closed, but periodic: xi+n−xi = q. The periodicity is also imposed at the quantum level and mixes the spacetime translation with the color trace [9, 15]. As a result, this periodic Wilson loop is only defined in the planar limit. We will also refer to it as awrapped polygon, since it is wrapped once around a cylinder topology. Similar to amplitudes, FFs are invariant under a version of dual conformal symmetry – one that acts on both the cusps x_i of the wrapped polygon and its periodicity constraint [9, 10, 16]. The existence of this non-trivial symmetry suggests that the OPE method can be extended to FFs.

In this letter, we present this extension explicitly.

The OPE is a decomposition of the FF into two types of universal building blocks. One of them is the pentagon transition, which is independent of the operator O and has been bootstrapped at finite coupling in refs.

[17–26] using the integrability of the Gubser-Klebanov- Polyakov (GKP) flux tube. The other building block is theform factor transitionthat we introduce here, which encodes the information aboutO. We also expect that it can be bootstrapped at finite coupling. One can draw an analogy between the FF OPE and the OPE for local operators in a CFT. The pentagon transitions are analogous to the three-point functions, while the FF transition is analogous to the one-point function that can arise at non-zero temperature or in the presence of a defect.

The remainder of this letter is organized as follows.

In section II we describe the general features of the FF OPE. We define the FF transition and list the bootstrap constraints it has to satisfy in section III. In section IV we study the FF transition at leading order in perturbation theory, before we confront the OPE with the available perturbative data and make higher loop predictions in section V. Future direction are discussed in section VI.

arXiv:2009.11297v2 [hep-th] 20 Jun 2021

(2)

II. FORM FACTOR OPE

FIG. 1. Decomposition of ann-sided wrapped polygon into a sequence of pentagons and a two-sided wrapped polygon. Ev- ery two consecutive pentagons overlap on a null square and every two consecutive null squares form a pentagon. Simi- larly, the last pentagon overlaps with the two-sided wrapped polygon on a null square. Every square that arises from these overlaps shares two of its opposite cusps with the n-sided wrapped polygon. For the last (bottom) square, these two cusps coincide with one of the cusps of the two-sided wrapped polygon and its periodic image.

We decompose an n-sided wrapped polygon into one two-sided wrapped polygon andn−2 pentagons, which overlap onn−2 “middle squares”, as shown in figure 1.

A null square is invariant under three commuting conformal symmetries; they are parametrized byτ,σandφ that are conjugate to the GKP twist, conformal spin and angular momentum in the transverse plane, respectively.

We use these symmetries to parametrize all conformally inequivalentn-sided wrapped polygons by a set of 3n−7 independent conformal cross ratios as follows. To squares that are associated with an overlap of two pentagons, we assign three conformal cross ratios{τi, σ_i, φ_i}ⁿ⁻³_i=1 that are defined in the same way as for closed polygons, see figure 2 in ref. [17]. Geometrically, shifting these variables amounts to acting with the conformal symmetries of that square on all cusps above it; cf. figure 1. Similarly, for

FIG. 2. We associate two independent conformal cross ratios, τ and σ, to the last OPE channel. For an n-particle FF, these are denoted asτn−2 and σn−2. Here, P(x) stands for the periodic image of the point x. Under a conformal transformationx→K(x), the periodic image transforms as P(x)→P˜(K(x)) =K(P(x)). In a conformal frame in which P is a translation,P(x)−xis independent of the pointxand the expressions for the two conformal cross ratios in the figure simplify to complete squares.

FIG. 3. A finite conformally invariant ratio is constructed by multiplying the n-sided wrapped polygon by all squares except for the first and dividing by all pentagons as well as the two-sided wrapped polygon, Wn =

hW_{n-pt ff}i×hW_{2nd square}ihW_{3rd square}i...

hW_{2-pt ff}i×hW1st pentagoni hW2nd pentagoni.... Here, this ratio is il- lustrated forn= 4.

the last square the conformal cross ratiosτ_n−2andσ_n−2 are defined in figure 2, whileφ_n−2= 0 [27].

The UV divergences of the periodic Wilson loops are regularized using the pentagons, the squares and the two- sided wrapped polygon of the decomposition. Concretely, we are considering the ratioWn defined in figure 3.

The operator product expansion is the large τ expansion in which the sides of the polygon on top of each square are decomposed into a superposition of GKP flux- tube excitations. This flux is sourced by two opposite sides of the corresponding square. We start with the vacuum state in the top square in figure 1. It under- goes a series of pentagon transitions from one square to the next, with an eigenstate in thei^th channel denoted as ψi. The propagation of this state results in the factor exp(−Eiτi +ipiσi +imiφi), where {Ei, pi, mi} are the GKP energy, momentum and angular momentum, respectively. Finally, the stateψ_n−2 is absorbed by the two-sided periodic Wilson loop. We call this final step theform factor transition. In summary, this sequence of transitions and propagation can be written as

Wn= X

ψ1,...,ψn−2

e^P^j^(−E^j^τ^j^+ip^j^σ^j^+im^j^φ^j⁾

× P(0|ψ1). . .P(ψ_n−3|ψ_n−2)F(ψ_n−2). (2)

Here, P denotes the pentagon transition and F is the form factor transition.

The decomposition (2) applies to periodic Wilson loops in any conformal theory with a stable flux between fast- moving quarks. For the rest of this letter we focus on N = 4 SYM theory, in which periodic Wilson loops are dual to form factors. Under this duality, the OPE maps to the expansion around the multi-collinear limit. More- over, the GKP flux-tube dynamics of this theory is integrable. Therefore, we expect to be able to bootstrap the building blocks entering eq. (2) at finite ’t Hooft coupling.

The basis of GKP eigenstates as well as their dispersion relations have been constructed in ref. [28]. The pentagon transitions and integration (or square) measures have been bootstrapped in refs. [17–26]. Hence, in order to compute planar form factors inN = 4 SYM theory, all that remains is to bootstrap one new building block – the form factor transition. This object is universal;

it does not depend on the number of particles or their

(3)

kinematical configuration, but only on the local operator and the GKP eigenstate. In the next sections, we study the FF transitions for the chiral part of the stress tensor supermultiplet. Before, let us set our notations, which are aligned with the ones introduced in ref. [17].

The simplest form factorFL that admits a nontrivial OPE decomposition is the three-point MHV one. For this case, we have

W3=X

a

Z

duPa(0|u)F¯a(¯u)e^{−τ E(u) +}^iσp(u), (3) where we sum over the complete basis of GKP eigenstates. These states are parametrized by the number of excitations N, their species a = {a1, . . . , aN} and their flux-tube momenta or, equivalently, their Bethe rapidities u = {u1, . . . , u_N}, with ¯a = {aN, . . . , a₁} and u¯ ={−uN, . . . ,−u1}. Here,Paare the pentagon transitions, and the integration measure is given by

du=Na N

Y

i=1

µa_i(ui)dui

2π , (4)

withµa being the single-particle measures andNabeing a symmetry factor. Lastly,Faare the FF transitions that will be studied in the following two sections.

III. THE FORM FACTOR TRANSITION The FF transition computes the amplitude for a GKP in-state to be absorbed by the two-sided wrapped polygon, see figure 4. It is subject to a set of constraints that we list below. These constraints are similar to those obeyed by integrable two-dimensional form factors of a branch-point operator of angleπ[29]. In ref. [30], we use them to bootstrap the FF transitions at finite ’t Hooft coupling.

FIG. 4. The FF transition is given by the ratio between the expectation value of the two-sided wrapped polygon with and without GKP excitations inserted on its base.

Watson – Reordering two adjacent excitations within a state is equivalent to acting on it with the S-matrix.

This property is inherited by the FF transition:

F(..., uj, uj+1, ...) =S(uj, uj+1)F(..., uj+1, uj, ...), (5) where we have suppressed the species index.

Singlet – The two-sided wrapped polygon is invariant under a U(1)φ ×SU(4)R symmetry, where the U(1)φ

factor corresponds to rotations in the two-dimensional transverse plane andSU(4)_R is the R-symmetry group.

As a result, the FF transition must be aU(1)_φ×SU(4)_R singlet:

F_a₁_,...,a_n(u) =M^b_a¹₁. . .M^b_aⁿ_nF_b₁_,...,b_n(u), (6) whereM ∈U(1)φ×SU(4)R. As such, it can only absorb singlet states.

As the fundamental GKP excitations are all charged underU(1)φ×SU(4)R, the FF transition cannot absorb a single-particle excitation. Moreover, only singlet states with even Born-level energy can contribute to the FF transition [31]. As a result, at any loop order only even powers ofe^−τ can appear in the largeτ expansion (3).

Reflection – In addition to the continuous symmetries above, the two-sided wrapped polygon is also invariant under a discrete Z2 symmetry. It acts by flipping the direction of the two edges. This transformation has the effect of inverting theσ direction. As a result, the FF transition is subject to the relation [32]

F_a(u) =Fa¯(¯u). (7) Square limit –The FF transition and the measure are related by

u₁lim→un

Fa(u) = −iδa_n,¯a₁

µ_a₁(u₁)

F_a₂_,...,a_n−1(u₂, . . . , u_n−1) u₁−u_n−i (8)

±

S(u1, un) Y

1<j<n

S(u1, uj)S(uj, un)^b

a

×−iδ_b

n,¯b₁

µ_b₁(u₁)

Fb₂,...,b_n−1(u2, . . . , u_n−1) u_n−u₁−i , where the plus sign is for bosons and the minus sign for fermions.

This relation can be understood as follows. In position space, the residue atu1 =un controls the regime of the FF transition where |σ1−σn| → ∞ with σ1+σn and σ_j for 1 < j < n fixed. For σ_n > σ₁ (σ_n < σ₁), this limit corresponds to sending the first excitation towards the left (right) edge and then^th excitation towards the right (left) edge in figure 4. Since the spectrum is gapped and the right edge is the periodic image of the left edge, the two excitations decouple and propagate as if they where inserted on the top and the bottom of a square.

The first and second term in eq. (8) correspond to the limit in which the first excitation is sent towards the left and right edge, respectively. To reach the second limit, the first and the last excitations have to pass through all other excitations as well as through each other. Accord- ing to eq. (5), this results in the product of S-matrices appearing in the second term in eq. (8).

Crossing – The most non-trivial constraint has to do with the crossing symmetry of the transition and is de- picted in figure 5. It reads

F(u^2γ₁ , u2, . . . , un) =F(u2, . . . , un, u1). (9)

(4)

FIG. 5. Applying a mirror transformation to the first excitation is equivalent to transporting it to the neighboring edge on the left. After two successive mirror transformations, or a crossing transformation, the first excitation becomes the last one.

Here, u^γ is a mirror transformation such that p(u^γ) = iE(u) andE(u^γ) =ip(u), see ref. [28].

IV. FF TRANSITIONS AT BORN LEVEL

The leading contribution to the OPE (3) comes from the lightest singlet state. In perturbation theory, this contribution stems from three two-particle singlet states and two one-particle effective excitations, all of which have the same tree-level energyE= 2. Each of the three two-particle singlet states is a superposition of all possible singlet combinations of two scalar (φφ), two fermion¯ (ψψ) and two gluon (F¯ F¯) fields inserted on the base of the wrapped polygon in figure 4. These states differ in the asymptotic limit, in which the two fields are taken far apart. Only one out of the three pairs of fields survives in this limit, and this is the pair that labels the state.

The two effective one-particle excitationsF₊₋±Fz¯z correspond to parts of the two-fermion singlet state that be- have as independent single-particle excitations at weak coupling. We discuss them at the end of this section.

In ref. [33], we have explicitly constructed the afore- mentioned superpositions that correspond to the three two-particle singlet states at Born level. We will now use them to compute the Born-level FF transitions we denote byF_φφ¯, F_ψψ¯ andF_FF¯.

At leading order in perturbation theory, the expectation value of the two-sided wrapped polygon is equal to 1.

Hence, only the numerator in figure 4 contributes to the transition non-trivially. Consider the wrapped polygon with two conjugate fields inserted at positionsσ1 andσ2

with σ2 > σ1. At Born level, we obtain the propagator between the field atσ2and the periodic image of the field

atσ1:

(10) where Φ_s is a field of conformal spin s = ¹₂,1,³₂ for scalars, fermions and gluons respectively.

Convoluting the singlet states given in ref. [33] with the propagator (10), we arrive at

F_φφ¯(u, v) =−6× 4

g²(u−v−2i) (u−v−i)

× Γ (iu−iv) Γ ¹₂+iu

Γ ¹₂−iv, (11) F_ψψ¯(u, v) = + 4× 2

g²usinh(πu)δ(u−v), F_FF¯(u, v) =−1× 2

g² u²+¹₄

cosh(πu)δ(u−v), whereg²=^g²^{Y M}_16π₂^N. Factors of 6, 4 and 1 for the number of real scalars, fermions and gluons are included here for convenience, such that no further summation over the fla- vor index is required in eq. (3). Note that for two gluons and two fermions, the right-hand side of eq. (8) reduces to a delta function divided by the measure. We see that for these states the full Born level result is given solely by this simple square limit contribution. This might be surprising, because the contribution of each type of fields to eq. (11) is highly non-trivial, but they combine to an almost trivial result.

Lastly, we consider the two one-particle effective excitations, which consist of the fieldsF₊₋±F_z¯_zinserted on the base of the wrapped polygon in figure 4. There are two types of diagrams that contribute to the corresponding FF transitions at Born level. One consists of a cubic interaction vertex periodically contracted with itself and with the field insertion. We find that the contribution of this type vanishes due to the cancellation between the dif- ferent types of fields running in the loop. The other type is the periodic contraction of the commutator [A+, A₋].

The two orderings cancel each other, leading to the corresponding transitions vanishing in total.

V. PERTURBATIVE TESTS AND PREDICTIONS

We now perform a perturbative test of the FF OPE and use it to make higher loop predictions.

We start by extracting the OPE data from previously computed form factors [8]. At one-loop order, we find

(5)

the ratioWn=3defined in figure 3 to be given by W₃⁽¹⁾= 4σ²−2 Li2(−e^−2τ) + 2 Li2(−e^−2τ−e^2σ)

+ 2 Li2(−e^−2τ−e^−2σ(1 +e^−2τ)²) +π² 3 , (12) where W3 = 1 +P∞

`=1g^2`W₃^(`). As expected from the singlet axiom, the large τ expansion of W₃⁽¹⁾ contains only even powers ofe^−τ, with the leading one given by

W₃⁽¹⁾= 2e^−2τ 1−2σ e^−2σ−4 cosh²(σ) log 1 +e^−2σ

+O(e^−4τ). (13)

On the OPE side, we insert the Born-level FF transitions (11) into eq. (3) and perform the integration over the two rapidities, finding a perfect match with eq. (13) [34].

Even without the higher loop FF transitions, we can already make certain all-loops predictions. Namely, at

`-loop order we can predict the term with the high- est power of τ, i.e. τ^`−1e^−2τ. It is given by pulling down (` − 1) powers of the one-loop correction to the energy g²(E_2s⁽¹⁾(u1) + E⁽¹⁾_2s(u2)) from the exponent e^−τ(E^2s^(u¹^)+E^2s^(u²⁾⁾. The one-loop correction to the energy of the individual excitations is given by [28]

E_2s⁽¹⁾(u) = 2 [ψ(s+iu) +ψ(s−iu)−2ψ(1)] , (14) whereψ(x) =^Γ_Γ(x)⁰^(x) is Euler’s digamma function.

With the two-loop data available for the three-point form factor reminder function R3 [35], we can test the OPE prediction for the τ e^−2τ term in W3 at two-loop order. To do so, one first has to translate between these two finite dual conformally invariant functions, R and W. They are related as

Wn= exp Γcusp

4 W_n⁽¹⁾

× Rn , (15) where Γcusp= 4g²+. . . is the cusp anomalous dimension.

Using eq. (15), we obtain the following result:

W_{3, τ e}⁽²⁾ −2τ =−8

1− 1 +e^−2σ

log 1 +e^2σ

×

1− 1 +e^2σ

log 1 +e^−2σ ,

(16) which is in perfect agreement with the OPE prediction.

At three-loop order, we can predict the term propor- tional toτ²e^−2τ:

W_{3, τ}⁽³⁾2e^−2τ = (17) 16

3 cosh²(σ) log 1 +e^−2σh

12σ(4−3σ)−24−π² + 8 log 1 +e^−2σ

3−6σ−2 log 1 +e^−2σi +4π²

3 + 24−16σ 4−3σ+ 4e^−2σ

−32 cosh²(σ) Li3 −e^−2σ . Similarly, we can produce higher loop predictions; we refrain from giving these explicitly due to their size.

VI. DISCUSSION

In this letter, we have introduced an operator product expansion for form factors in planarN = 4 SYM theory.

It reduces the computation of the dual periodic Wilson loop to known fundamental building blocks [17, 19] and a single new universal building block – the FF transition.

We have calculated the two-particle FF transition at Born level (11). A natural finite-coupling ansatz for the gluonic and fermionic two-particle FF transitions that is consistent with all the constraints is [36]

F_{Φ ¯}_Φ(u, v)∝ δ(pΦ(u)−pΦ(v))

µΦ(u) ×∂pΦ(u)

∂u , (18)

where Φ ∈ {ψ, F} and pΦ(u) is the GKP momentum.

Based on this conjecture, the bootstrap constraints for the FF transition that we formulated in this letter, and the perturbative data available to us, we were able to fix the remaining scalar two-particle FF transition at finite coupling [30]. Transitions involving more than two flux- tube excitations can hopefully be fixed in terms of the two-particle ones using integrability. Our construction therefore opens the door for finite-coupling computations of FFs.

There are multiple future directions to pursue, some of which we list below. I) At strong coupling, the FFs are computed by minimizing the area of a periodic string in AdS₅ [7, 12]. We expect the corresponding Yang-Yang functional to be constructed from the gluon and fermion FF transitions (18) along with the corresponding pentagon transitions and measures. II) In this letter, we have only considered MHV FFs of the chiral part of the stress tensor supermultiplet. It would be interesting to extend our considerations to the N^kMHV case, for which the result is expected to be given by a version of the super- periodic Wilson loop introduced in ref. [9]. In parallel, it would be interesting to bootstrap the corresponding charged FF transitions, in analogy to the charged pentagon transitions of refs. [21, 22]. III) Another interesting direction is to consider local operators other than the chiral part of the stress tensor supermultiplet; corresponding FFs have been studied in refs. [37–47]. T-duality is expected to map their higher integrability Yangian charges into dual ones [48, 49] that are evaluated along one pe- riod of the dual Wilson loop. IV) It is possible to extend the hexagon function program of refs. [50–53] to analogous FF functions [54]. The interplay between the OPE and these FF functions provides a plethora of valuable checks of our predictions and vice versa. V) Finally, it would be interesting to see if our considerations can be used for studying FFs in other theories like ABJM [55].

Acknowledgements: We are very grateful to B. Basso for many valuable discussions and comments on the draft.

AT and MW are grateful to CERN for hospitality. AS is grateful to NBI for hospitality. AS was supported by the I-CORE Program of the Planning and Budget- ing Committee, The Israel Science Foundation (grant number 1937/12) and by the Israel Science Foundation

(6)

(grant number 1197/20). AT received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the Euro- pean Unions Horizon 2020 research and innovation pro- gramme, Novel structures in scattering amplitudes (grant

agreement No. 725110). MW was supported in part by the ERC starting grant 757978 and the research grants 00015369 and 00025445 from Villum Fonden.

[1] L.F. Alday, B. Eden, G.P. Korchemsky, J. Maldacena, and E. Sokatchev, “From correlation functions to Wilson loops,” JHEP09, 123 (2011), arXiv:1007.3243 [hep-th].

[2] B. Eden, G.P. Korchemsky, and E. Sokatchev, “From correlation functions to scattering amplitudes,” JHEP 12, 002 (2011), arXiv:1007.3246 [hep-th].

[3] B. Eden, G.P. Korchemsky, and E. Sokatchev, “More on the duality correlators/amplitudes,” Phys. Lett. B 709, 247–253 (2012), arXiv:1009.2488 [hep-th].

[4] B. Eden, P. Heslop, G.P. Korchemsky, and E. Sokatchev,

“The super-correlator/super-amplitude duality: Part I,”

Nucl. Phys. B 869, 329–377 (2013), arXiv:1103.3714 [hep-th].

[5] B. Eden, P. Heslop, G.P. Korchemsky, and E. Sokatchev,

“The super-correlator/super-amplitude duality: Part II,”

[6] L.F. Alday and J. Maldacena, “Comments on gluon scattering amplitudes via AdS/CFT,” JHEP11, 068 (2007), arXiv:0710.1060 [hep-th].

[7] J. Maldacena and A. Zhiboedov, “Form factors at strong coupling via a Y-system,” JHEP 11, 104 (2010), arXiv:1009.1139 [hep-th].

[8] A. Brandhuber, B. Spence, G. Travaglini, and G. Yang,

“Form Factors in N = 4 Super Yang-Mills and Periodic Wilson Loops,” JHEP 01, 134 (2011), arXiv:1011.1899 [hep-th].

[9] R. Ben-Israel, A. G. Tumanov, and A. Sever,

“Scattering amplitudes —Wilson loops duality for the first non-planar correction,” JHEP 08, 122 (2018), arXiv:1802.09395 [hep-th].

[10] L. Bianchi, A. Brandhuber, R. Panerai, and G. Travaglini, “Dual conformal invariance for form factors,” JHEP02, 134 (2019), arXiv:1812.10468 [hep-th].

[11] G. Yang, “On-shell methods for form factors in N = 4 SYM and their applications,” Sci. China Phys. Mech.

Astron.63, 270001 (2020), arXiv:1912.11454 [hep-th].

[12] Z. Gao and G. Yang, “Y-system for form factors at strong coupling in AdS5 and with multi-operator insertions in AdS3,” JHEP06, 105 (2013), arXiv:1303.2668 [hep-th].

[13] R. Frassek, D. Meidinger, D. Nandan, and M. Wilhelm,

“On-shell diagrams, Graßmannians and integrability for form factors,” JHEP 01, 182 (2016), arXiv:1506.08192 [hep-th].

[14] J.M. Drummond, J. Henn, G.P. Korchemsky, and E. Sokatchev, “Conformal Ward identities for Wilson loops and a test of the duality with gluon amplitudes,”

[15] A. Cavaglia, D. Grabner, N. Gromov, and A. Sever,

“Colour-twist operators. Part I. Spectrum and wave functions,” JHEP06, 092 (2020), arXiv:2001.07259 [hep-th].

[16] D. Chicherin, J.M. Henn, and E. Sokatchev, “Implica- tions of nonplanar dual conformal symmetry,” JHEP09, 012 (2018), arXiv:1807.06321 [hep-th].

[17] B. Basso, A. Sever, and P. Vieira, “Spacetime and Flux Tube S-Matrices at Finite Coupling forN = 4 Supersym- metric Yang-Mills Theory,” Phys. Rev. Lett.111, 091602 (2013), arXiv:1303.1396 [hep-th].

[18] B. Basso, A. Sever, and P. Vieira, “Space-time S-matrix and Flux tube S-matrix II. Extracting and Matching Data,” JHEP01, 008 (2014), arXiv:1306.2058 [hep-th].

[19] B. Basso, A. Sever, and P. Vieira, “Space-time S-matrix and Flux-tube S-matrix III. The two-particle contribu- tions,” JHEP08, 085 (2014), arXiv:1402.3307 [hep-th].

[20] B. Basso, A. Sever, and P. Vieira, “Space-time S-matrix and Flux-tube S-matrix IV. Gluons and Fusion,” JHEP 09, 149 (2014), arXiv:1407.1736 [hep-th].

[21] B. Basso, J. Caetano, L. Cordova, A. Sever, and P. Vieira, “OPE for all Helicity Amplitudes,” JHEP08, 018 (2015), arXiv:1412.1132 [hep-th].

[22] B. Basso, J. Caetano, L. Cordova, A. Sever, and P. Vieira, “OPE for all Helicity Amplitudes II. Form Factors and Data Analysis,” JHEP 12, 088 (2015), arXiv:1508.02987 [hep-th].

[23] B. Basso, A. Sever, and P. Vieira, “Hexagonal Wilson loops in planarN = 4 SYM theory at finite coupling,” J.

Phys. A49, 41LT01 (2016), arXiv:1508.03045 [hep-th].

[24] A.V. Belitsky, “Nonsinglet pentagons and NMHV amplitudes,” Nucl. Phys. B 896, 493–554 (2015), arXiv:1407.2853 [hep-th].

[25] A.V. Belitsky, “Fermionic pentagons and NMHV hexagon,” Nucl. Phys. B 894, 108–135 (2015), arXiv:1410.2534 [hep-th].

[26] A.V. Belitsky, “Matrix pentagons,” Nucl. Phys. B923, 588–607 (2017), arXiv:1607.06555 [hep-th].

[27] For two overlapping pentagons,φi is the angle between the two opposite cusps in the plane that is transverse to the corresponding square. For the overlap of a pentagon with the two-sided wrapped polygon, only one cusp and its periodic images lay outside of the plane of the corresponding square; since the periodicity constraint acts within the plane of the square, their relative angle in the transverse plane vanishes.

[28] B. Basso, “Exciting the GKP string at any coupling,”

[29] For relativistic theories, the Watson’s equations are spelled out in ref. [? ]. The FF transition corresponds to the casek= ¹₂ with a modified factorization pole.

[30] A. Sever, A.G. Tumanov, and M. Wilhelm, “An Opera- tor Product Expansion for Form Factors III,” (2020), to appear.

[31] One can see thatmi, the U(1)φ charge of the i^th excitation,ti, the number of Graßmann variables θi associated with it, and Ei, its Born-level energy, are related by (mi+ti/2) mod 2 = Eimod 2. Combining this with the singlet constraints,P

imi= 0 andP

itimod 4 = 0, leads toP

iEimod 2 =P

i(mi+ti/2) mod 2 = (P

imi)+

(P

iti)/2 mod 2 = 0.

(7)

[32] The OPE tessellation is alternating and therefore not invariant under this reflection. As for the scattering amplitude OPE, this is only reflected in theiprescription for the fermions’ measure, see the discussion in ref. [19].

[33] A. Sever, A.G. Tumanov, and M. Wilhelm, “An Opera- tor Product Expansion for Form Factors II. Born level,”

(2021), arXiv:2105.13367 [hep-th].

[34] Note that since the scalars are real the correspondingNa

factor from eq. (4) is equal to ¹₂.

[35] A. Brandhuber, G. Travaglini, and G. Yang, “Analytic two-loop form factors in N = 4 SYM,” JHEP 05, 082 (2012), arXiv:1201.4170 [hep-th].

[36] To analytically continue the delta function along the crossing path, we can express it as a pair of poles as was done in eq. (8).

[37] O.T. Engelund and R. Roiban, “Correlation functions of local composite operators from generalized unitarity,”

JHEP03, 172 (2013), arXiv:1209.0227 [hep-th].

[38] A. Brandhuber, B. Penante, G. Travaglini, and C. Wen,

“The last of the simple remainders,” JHEP 08, 100 (2014), arXiv:1406.1443 [hep-th].

[39] M. Wilhelm, “Amplitudes, Form Factors and the Dilata- tion Operator in N = 4 SYM Theory,” JHEP 02, 149 (2015), arXiv:1410.6309 [hep-th].

[40] D. Nandan, C. Sieg, M. Wilhelm, and G. Yang, “Cut- ting through form factors and cross sections of non- protected operators in N = 4 SYM,” JHEP 06, 156 (2015), arXiv:1410.8485 [hep-th].

[41] F. Loebbert, D. Nandan, C. Sieg, M. Wilhelm, and G. Yang, “On-Shell Methods for the Two-Loop Dilata- tion Operator and Finite Remainders,” JHEP 10, 012 (2015), arXiv:1504.06323 [hep-th].

[42] A. Brandhuber, M. Kostacinska, B. Penante, G. Travaglini, and D. Young, “The SU(2|3) dy- namic two-loop form factors,” JHEP 08, 134 (2016), arXiv:1606.08682 [hep-th].

[43] F. Loebbert, C. Sieg, M. Wilhelm, and G. Yang, “Two- Loop SL(2) Form Factors and Maximal Transcendental- ity,” JHEP12, 090 (2016), arXiv:1610.06567 [hep-th].

[44] S. Caron-Huot and M. Wilhelm, “Renormalization group coefficients and the S-matrix,” JHEP 12, 010 (2016), arXiv:1607.06448 [hep-th].

[45] P. Banerjee, P.K. Dhani, M. Mahakhud, V. Ravin- dran, and S. Seth, “Finite remainders of the Konishi at two loops in N = 4 SYM,” JHEP 05, 085 (2017), arXiv:1612.00885 [hep-th].

[46] T. Ahmed, P. Banerjee, P.K. Dhani, N. Rana, V. Ravin- dran, and S. Seth, “Konishi form factor at three loops in N = 4 supersymmetric Yang-Mills theory,” Phys. Rev.

D95, 085019 (2017), arXiv:1610.05317 [hep-th].

[47] A. Brandhuber, M. Kostacinska, B. Penante, and G. Travaglini, “Tr(F³) supersymmetric form factors and maximal transcendentality Part I: N = 4 super Yang- Mills,” JHEP12, 076 (2018), arXiv:1804.05703 [hep-th].

[48] N. Beisert, R. Ricci, A.A. Tseytlin, and M. Wolf,

“Dual Superconformal Symmetry from AdS5×S⁵ Su- perstring Integrability,” Phys. Rev. D78, 126004 (2008), arXiv:0807.3228 [hep-th].

[49] N. Beisert, “T-Duality, Dual Conformal Symmetry and Integrability for Strings on AdS5×S⁵,” Fortsch. Phys.

57, 329–337 (2009), arXiv:0903.0609 [hep-th].

[50] L. J. Dixon, J.M. Drummond, and J.M. Henn, “Boot- strapping the three-loop hexagon,” JHEP11, 023 (2011), arXiv:1108.4461 [hep-th].

[51] L. J. Dixon, J.M. Drummond, M. von Hippel, and J. Pennington, “Hexagon functions and the three- loop remainder function,” JHEP 12, 049 (2013), arXiv:1308.2276 [hep-th].

[52] L. J. Dixon and M. von Hippel, “Bootstrapping an NMHV amplitude through three loops,” JHEP10, 065 (2014), arXiv:1408.1505 [hep-th].

[53] S. Caron-Huot, L. J. Dixon, A. McLeod, and M. von Hip- pel, “Bootstrapping a Five-Loop Amplitude Using Stein- mann Relations,” Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 241601 (2016), arXiv:1609.00669 [hep-th].

[54] L.J. Dixon, A.J. McLeod, and M. Wilhelm, “A Three- Point Form Factor Through Five Loops,” JHEP04, 147 (2021), arXiv:2012.12286 [hep-th].

[55] O. Aharony, O. Bergman, D.L. Jafferis, and J. Malda- cena, “N = 6 superconformal Chern-Simons-matter theories, M2-branes and their gravity duals,” JHEP10, 091 (2008), arXiv:0806.1218 [hep-th].