How do two-loop mixing patterns differ between leptophilic and four-quark operators?

This is a technical question about mixing patterns in effective field theory — specifically how four-fermion operators that couple only to leptons behave differently from those involving quarks when renormalized at two loops.

The preprints provided focus heavily on four-quark operators [AG-2025.01-1241, AG-2025.11-1171, AG-2026.04-1246] and do address two-loop mixing. One result directly covers four-fermion operators in general [AG-2025.01-1206], but it doesn't isolate or compare leptophilic operators as a distinct class.

Here's what we can extract: Four-quark operators exhibit rich mixing patterns because they can couple to themselves through many different loop topologies. The GIRS scheme papers [AG-2025.01-1241, AG-2025.11-1171] show that this self-mixing among four-quark operators is "a significant challenge" and requires careful treatment of Fierz identities and flavor symmetries. In contrast, purely leptonic four-fermion operators (like $(\bar{e}γ^\mu e)(\bar{μ}γ_\mu μ)$) cannot mix with quark operators by virtue of lepton-number conservation, which drastically simplifies their anomalous dimension matrices.

The two-loop anomalous dimension matrix for four-fermion operators in the LEFT framework [AG-2025.01-1206] includes the full set of corrections, but the abstract doesn't distinguish between leptophilic and quark-involving sectors. In practice, leptophilic operators form a closed subsector — their mixing among themselves would follow from the same loop structure as quark operators, but with no off-diagonal entries coupling them to four-quark channels.

The provided preprints don't directly compare leptophilic and four-quark mixing patterns side-by-side.