cos [\pi z/2](\beta^2g_8)^{-z/2}\Gamma ((1\!-\!z)/2)\Gamma (z/2) \, \label{ym4}\end{aligned}$$ with $(f\!f\!+\!f\!f)(f\!f\!+\!f\!f) = (f^{age}\!f^{bhe}\!+\!f^{ahe}\!f^{bge})
(f^{cgf}\!f^{dhf}\!+\!f^{chf}\!f^{dgf}) = 4\delta_{ab}\delta_{cd}\!+\!2\delta_{ac}\delta_{bd} \!+\!2
\delta_{ad}\delta_{bc}\!+\!Nd_{abm}d_{cdm}$.

Contrary to the fermion case, at order $O(\beta^0)$ each diagram contains a logarithmic dependence on $T$ and the external momenta $\vec{k}_j$. In addition, the $T=0$ part depends logarithmically on $\vec{k}_j$ and an ultraviolet cut-off $\Lambda$, that has to be introduced to regularize the loop-momentum integral. The logarithmic dependence on $\vec{k}_j$ cancels out between the $T=0$ and $T>0$ parts for each permutation of each individual diagram, whereas the terms containing $\log T$ ($\log \Lambda $) only cancel out in the total $T>0$ ($T=0$) result, i.e. when all the different diagrams are added together. This was basically noted already in [@nadkarni], and we have checked that it holds true in our calculations as well. There is also a linear divergence when $\beta k\rightarrow 0$, at order $O(1/\beta)$, in all of the Eqs. (\[ym1\])-(\[ym4\]). This divergence originates from static propagators running in the loop, i.e. the propagators with a vanishing Matsubara frequency, $\omega_n=0$. If only the non-static modes are integrated out, the static terms should be subtracted and our remaining result is then finite in the limit $\beta k\rightarrow 0$, as it should [@nadkarni]. We emphasize that the $\omega_n=0$ modes do not influence the two-derivative term.

Taking into account all the permutations of Eqs. (\[ym1\])-(\[ym4
cos [ \pi z/2](\beta^2g_8)^{-z/2}\Gamma (( 1\!-\!z)/2)\Gamma (z/2) \, \label{ym4}\end{aligned}$$ with $ (f\!f\!+\!f\!f)(f\!f\!+\!f\!f) = (f^{age}\!f^{bhe}\!+\!f^{ahe}\!f^{bge }) 
 (f^{cgf}\!f^{dhf}\!+\!f^{chf}\!f^{dgf }) = 4\delta_{ab}\delta_{cd}\!+\!2\delta_{ac}\delta_{bd } \!+\!2 
 \delta_{ad}\delta_{bc}\!+\!Nd_{abm}d_{cdm}$. 

 Contrary to the fermion case, at order $ O(\beta^0)$ each diagram contains a logarithmic addiction on $ T$ and the external momentum $ \vec{k}_j$. In addition, the $ T=0 $ part depend logarithmically on $ \vec{k}_j$ and an ultraviolet deletion - off $ \Lambda$, that has to be introduced to regulate the loop - momentum integral. The logarithmic dependence on $ \vec{k}_j$ cancels out between the $ T=0 $ and $ T>0 $ part for each permutation of each individual diagram, whereas the terms contain $ \log T$ ($ \log \Lambda $) only cancel out in the full $ T>0 $ ($ T=0 $) resultant role, i.e. when all the different diagrams are added together. This was basically noted already in [ @nadkarni ], and we have crack that it holds true in our calculations equally well. There is also a analogue divergence when $ \beta k\rightarrow 0 $, at ordering $ O(1/\beta)$, in all of the Eqs.   (\[ym1\])-(\[ym4\ ]). This divergence originates from static propagators running in the loop topology, i.e. the propagators with a vanishing Matsubara frequency, $ \omega_n=0$. If only the non - static modes are integrated out, the static terms should be subtracted and our remaining result is then finite in the limit $ \beta k\rightarrow 0 $, as it should [ @nadkarni ]. We emphasize that the $ \omega_n=0 $ modes do not influence the two - derivative term. 

 learn into account all the permutations of Eqs.   (\[ym1\])-(\[ym4
cos [\pi z/2](\beta^2g_8)^{-z/2}\Gamma ((1\!-\!z)/2)\Gamma (e/2) \, \label{ym4}\end{aliguwd}$$ witi $(f\!f\!+\!f\!f)(f\!r\!+\!f\!f) = (f^{agd}\!f^{bhe}\!+\!f^{ahe}\!f^{bge})
(f^{cgf}\!f^{dhf}\!+\!f^{chf}\!f^{dgh}) = 4\dwlta_{av}\delta_{cd}\!+\!2\delta_{ac}\delta_{bd} \!+\!2
\delta_{ad}\dvlta_{bc}\!+\!Nd_{avm}d_{cvm}$.

Contrary to thx fermiok cass, at mcder $O(\beta^0)$ each diagram cmntains a logasighlic dependence on $T$ and the externaj momenya $\vec{k}_j$. In addijion, uhe $T=0$ pzgt depends logarithmically on $\vsc{k}_j$ anv an ultravioley cut-off $\Lambda$, that has tl be introduced to regklarize the loo[-nomentum intdgral. The logarithmic sependence on $\vec{k}_j$ cancels out betwzen the $T=0$ abd $T>0$ odrts for earh periutation of csch ingividuak diagram, whercas tie twrms containing $\log T$ ($\log \Lambda $) only sancel oud nn the total $T>0$ ($T=0$) resuot, i.e. wven dll gye aifrecenf diaggama are addes together. Rhis was basically moevc already in [@nadkawny], and we have checked that it holds trut in kur calculations as welo. There is also a lingar divergqnce when $\beta k\rightarrow 0$, at order $O(1/\beta)$, in all of tie Eqw. (\[yi1\])-(\[hn4\]). Hhis divergence originates from static propagwfots running in thc loop, i.e. the propsgwtpts with a vanirhing Mataubara frequency, $\olega_n=0$. Is onlt the non-ftatoc modes are integrated out, the static nermw should be subtraeted and our remsininb result is then finite in fhe limit $\bfta k\righfxrrow 0$, as it shojld [@nddkarni]. We emphasize that ehe $\omega_i=0$ modzs do nog ingluencq the two-dfrivabhve term.

Taking intl acclutt all the permutations of Eqs. (\[ym1\])-(\[ym4
cos [\pi z/2](\beta^2g_8)^{-z/2}\Gamma ((1\!-\!z)/2)\Gamma (z/2) \, \label{ym4}\end{aligned}$$ = (f^{cgf}\!f^{dhf}\!+\!f^{chf}\!f^{dgf}) = \!+\!2 \delta_{ad}\delta_{bc}\!+\!Nd_{abm}d_{cdm}$. Contrary order each diagram contains logarithmic dependence on and the external momenta $\vec{k}_j$. In the $T=0$ part depends logarithmically on $\vec{k}_j$ and an ultraviolet cut-off $\Lambda$, that to be introduced to regularize the loop-momentum integral. The logarithmic dependence on $\vec{k}_j$ out the and parts for each permutation of each individual diagram, whereas the terms containing $\log T$ ($\log \Lambda only cancel out in the total $T>0$ ($T=0$) i.e. when all the diagrams are added together. This basically already in and have that it holds in our calculations as well. There is also a linear divergence when $\beta k\rightarrow 0$, at order in all Eqs. (\[ym1\])-(\[ym4\]). divergence from propagators running in i.e. the propagators with a vanishing If only the non-static modes are integrated out, static terms be subtracted and our remaining result then finite in the limit $\beta k\rightarrow 0$, it should [@nadkarni]. We emphasize that the $\omega_n=0$ modes do not influence the two-derivative term. account all the permutations Eqs. (\[ym1\])-(\[ym4
cos [\pi z/2](\beta^2g_8)^{-z/2}\Gamma ((1\!-\!z)/2)\Gamma (z/2) \, \lAbel{ym4}\end{aLigneD}$$ wiTh $(f\!F\!+\!f\!F)(f\!f\!+\!f\!F) = (f^{agE}\!f^{bhe}\!+\!f^{ahe}\!f^{bge})
(f^{CGf}\!f^{dHf}\!+\!f^{chf}\!f^{dgf}) = 4\delta_{ab}\delta_{Cd}\!+\!2\delTa_{AC}\delTA_{bD} \!+\!2
\deltA_{ad}\deltA_{Bc}\!+\!nD_{Abm}D_{cDm}$.

conTrARy To the FerMion casE, at order $O(\bEta^0)$ EaCh diagram conTAiNs a logaritHmiC dependence oN $T$ aNd the eXtErnAL momeNta $\Vec{k}_j$. in addiTIon, the $t=0$ part depeNdS LogariTHmicallY ON $\vEc{k}_j$ And an ultraviolet cUT-oFF $\Lambda$, that has To be inTrODuCED to RegUlarize the LoOp-momENtum intEGrAL. tHe lOGarithmic depeNdence on $\vec{K}_J$ caNcels oUt BetWEen the $t=0$ and $T>0$ PaRTs fOr each permuTatiOn of each iNdividUAl diagrAM, whereaS the teRms ConTainINg $\LoG T$ ($\lOg \lAmbDA $) oNly CAncEl out in tHe ToTal $T>0$ ($T=0$) ResuLT, I.E. When All The dIfferEnt diagrams arE adDed tOGetHer. ThIs was BasiCaLly noTed alrEady iN [@nAdkarni], and we havE cheCked that iT hoLdS trUe In our CAlculaTioNs aS well. ThEre is alSO a lInEAR DiVergence when $\beta k\rIgHTArRow 0$, at ordEr $O(1/\betA)$, In AlL Of the Eqs. (\[Ym1\])-(\[Ym4\]). THis dIVErgenCe orIGiNates froM statiC PrOpAgators RuNning iN tHe lOop, I.e. the PRopaGators With a vanIshinG matsubara frequENcy, $\omega_n=0$. If onLY tHE NoN-StatIc mOdes are inteGratED out, The sTAtIc tERms shOuld bE sUBtRActed and our remaininG rEsult iS then Finite in the liMit $\beta k\riGHTArrow 0$, as iT shoULd [@NAdkarni]. We emphaSize tHat the $\omegA_N=0$ modes do Not inFluence tHe two-deriVATive term.

takIng IntO acCOUnT all the permutATIons Of eqs. (\[ym1\])-(\[ym4
cos [\pi z/2](\beta^2g_8)^ {-z/2}\Gam ma (( 1\! -\! z) /2)\ Gamm a (z/2) \, \la b el{y m4}\end{aligned}$$ wit h $(f \! f \!+\ ! f\ !f)(f \!f\!+\ ! f\ ! f ) =  ( f^ {ag e} \ !f ^{bhe }\! +\!f^{a he}\!f^{bg e}) 
( f^{cgf}\!f^{ d hf }\!+\!f^{c hf} \!f^{dgf}) =  4\ delta_ {a b}\ d elta_ {cd }\!+\ !2\del t a_{ac} \delta_{b d} \!+\!2 \delta_ { a d} \del ta_{bc}\!+\!Nd_{a b m} d _{cdm}$.

Cont rary t ot he f erm ion  case, ator der $ O (\beta^ 0 )$ e a chd iagram contai ns a logari t hmi c depe nd enc e  on $T $ and  t h e e xternal mom enta  $\vec{k} _j$. I n  additi o n, the$T=0$par t d epen d slo gar it h mic a ll y o n  $\ vec{k}_j $an d anultr a v i o letcut -off  $\La mbda$, that h asto b e  in trodu ced t o re gu lariz e theloop- mo mentum integral . Th e logarit hmi cdep en dence on $\v ec{ k}_ j$ canc els out bet we e n th e $T=0$ and $T>0$pa r t sfor each  permu t at io n  of each  i ndi vidu a l  diag ram, wh ereas th e term s  c on taining  $ \log T $($\ log  \Lam b da $ ) only  cancelout i n  the total $T> 0 $ ($T=0$) res u lt , i. e . wh enall the dif fere n t di agra m sare added  toge th e r. This was basicallyno ted al ready  in [@nadkarn i], and we h a ve check ed t h at it holds truein ou r calculat i ons as w ell.There is  also a l i n ear dive rge nce  wh en$ \ be ta k\rightarr o w  0$,  a t order  $O (1/\bet a)$ , i n a llof  the Eqs.  (\[ym1\ ]) -( \[ ym 4\] ). Th i s diverg en ceor igi nates from s tatic  pro pa ga t ors  runnin g  i n thelo op , i. e.th e pro paga t ors  with a  vanishin g M a tsub ar afrequen cy, $\omega_n =0 $. If only  t henon-st a t ic modes  are integrated out, th e  static  te rms s houl d be subt rac ted an d o u r rema iningresul tist h en fi n i te  in  t he limit $ \ b eta  k\ri gh tarr ow 0$,as it should [@nad k arn i]. We emphas ize  tha t th e $ \ om e ga_ n= 0 $ m o d es do not influ ence the t wo - de rivative t e rm. 
Takinginto ac count all the  permutat ions of E qs . (\ [ y m1\ ])-(\[ym4
cos [\pi_z/2](\beta^2g_8)^{-z/2}\Gamma ((1\!-\!z)/2)\Gamma_(z/2) \, \label{ym4}\end{aligned}$$ with_$(f\!f\!+\!f\!f)(f\!f\!+\!f\!f) =_(f^{age}\!f^{bhe}\!+\!f^{ahe}\!f^{bge})
(f^{cgf}\!f^{dhf}\!+\!f^{chf}\!f^{dgf})_= 4\delta_{ab}\delta_{cd}\!+\!2\delta_{ac}\delta_{bd}_\!+\!2
\delta_{ad}\delta_{bc}\!+\!Nd_{abm}d_{cdm}$.

Contrary_to the fermion_case, at order_$O(\beta^0)$ each diagram contains_a logarithmic dependence_on_$T$ and the external momenta $\vec{k}_j$. In addition, the $T=0$ part depends logarithmically on_$\vec{k}_j$_and an_ultraviolet_cut-off_$\Lambda$, that has to be_introduced to regularize the loop-momentum_integral. The_logarithmic dependence on $\vec{k}_j$ cancels out between the_$T=0$_and $T>0$ parts_for each permutation of each individual diagram, whereas the_terms containing $\log T$ ($\log \Lambda_$) only cancel_out_in_the total $T>0$ ($T=0$)_result, i.e. when all the different_diagrams are added together. This was_basically noted already in [@nadkarni], and we_have checked that it holds true_in our calculations as well._There is_also a linear divergence when_$\beta k\rightarrow 0$,_at order_$O(1/\beta)$, in all_of the Eqs. (\[ym1\])-(\[ym4\]). This divergence originates_from static propagators_running in the loop, i.e. the_propagators_with a vanishing_Matsubara_frequency,_$\omega_n=0$. If_only the non-static_modes_are integrated_out,_the static terms should be subtracted_and_our remaining result is then finite in_the limit $\beta k\rightarrow_0$,_as it should [@nadkarni]._We emphasize that the $\omega_n=0$_modes do not influence the two-derivative_term.

Taking into_account all_the permutations of Eqs. (\[ym1\])-(\[ym4