$\newcommand{\d}{\,\mathrm{d}}$The great work of Blagouchine massively generalises the Malmsten integral. I am actually familiar with contour integration, but he consistently introduces results from other papers that I am unfamiliar with, so it feels disingenuous to take notes on a proof I can't understand.
I am interested in arriving at the following in a more "simple" manner:
Let $a\ge0$ be real. Then: $$J(a)=\int_0^\infty\frac{\ln(x^2+a^2)}{\cosh(x)}\d x=2\pi\ln\left(\frac{\Gamma\left(\frac{3}{4}+\frac{a}{2\pi}\right)}{\Gamma\left(\frac{1}{4}+\frac{a}{2\pi}\right)}\right)+\pi\ln2\pi$$
As I mentioned, his derivation is not one that I am particularly keen to follow, but the similarity between this integral and Malmsten's integral made me hopeful one could be derived from the other.
Malmsten's Integral: If $-\pi\lt\varphi\lt\pi$, then:$$I(\varphi)=\int_1^\infty\frac{\ln(\ln(x))}{x^2+2\cdot\cos(\varphi)x+1}\d x=\frac{\pi}{2}\csc(\varphi)\ln\left((2\pi)^{\varphi/\pi}\frac{\Gamma\left(\frac{1}{2}+\frac{\varphi}{2\pi}\right)}{\Gamma\left(\frac{1}{2}-\frac{\varphi}{2\pi}\right)}\right)$$
This I have seen a good proof of and am satisfied with.
Sadly I did not get very far with tackling $J$:
$$J(a)=2\int_0^\infty\frac{\ln(x^2+a^2)}{e^x+e^{-x}}\d x$$Which under the transformation $x\mapsto e^x$ becomes: $$J(a)=2\int_1^\infty\frac{\ln(\ln^2(x)+a^2)}{x^2+1}\d x$$Which is almost equal to $2\cdot I\left(\frac{\pi}{2}\right)$. We want the term inside the logarithm to be simply $\ln(x)$. For clarity, introduce $t$ a dummy variable. For $\ln^2(x)+a^2=\ln(t)$, one gets $t=e^{a^2}x^{\ln(x)}$, and$\d t=2e^{a^2}x^{\ln(x)}\frac{\ln(x)}{x}\d x$, and an expression for $x$ in terms of $t$ too ugly to type.
I do not see how to go any further.
I also do not see how to reverse engineer Blagouchine's closed form into an expression involving $I$ and $a$. It is similar to $I(\pi/2 + a)$, but not close enough.
Must I resign myself to researching his contour integration, or can this be done using Malmsten's integral as a first principle? If it can be done, I am not expecting the full proof, just an indication. Of course, if an answerer wants to derive it fully anyway for the joy of it, feel free!
