A search is presented for the pair production of higgsinos $\tilde{\chi}$ in gauge-mediated supersymmetry models, where the lightest neutralinos $\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ decay into a light gravitino $\tilde{G}$ either via a Higgs $h$ or $Z$ boson. The search is performed with the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider using 139 fb$^{-1}$ of proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV. It targets final states in which a Higgs boson decays into a photon pair, while the other Higgs or $Z$ boson decays into a $b\bar{b}$ pair, with missing transverse momentum associated with the two gravitinos. Search regions dependent on the amount of missing transverse momentum are defined by the requirements that the diphoton mass should be consistent with the mass of the Higgs boson, and the $b\bar{b}$ mass with the mass of the Higgs or $Z$ boson. The main backgrounds are estimated with data-driven methods using the sidebands of the diphoton mass distribution. No excesses beyond Standard Model expectations are observed and higgsinos with masses up to 320 GeV are excluded, assuming a branching fraction of 100% for $\tilde{\chi}_1^0\rightarrow h\tilde{G}$. This analysis excludes higgsinos with masses of 130 GeV for branching fractions to $h\tilde{G}$ as low as 36%, thus providing complementarity to previous ATLAS searches in final states with multiple leptons or multiple $b$-jets, targeting different decays of the electroweak bosons.
<b>- - - - - - - - Overview of HEPData Record - - - - - - - -</b> <b>Histograms:</b><ul> <li><a href=?table=Distribution1>Figure 3a: $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ Distribution in VR1</a> <li><a href=?table=Distribution2>Figure 3b: $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ Distribution in VR1</a> <li><a href=?table=Distribution3>Figure 3c: $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ Distribution in VR2</a> <li><a href=?table=Distribution4>Figure 3d: $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ Distribution in VR2</a> <li><a href=?table=Distribution5>Figure 4a: N-1 $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ Distribution for SR1h</a> <li><a href=?table=Distribution6>Figure 4b: N-1 $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ Distribution for SR1Z</a> <li><a href=?table=Distribution7>Figure 4c: N-1 $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ Distribution for SR2</a> <li><a href=?table=Distribution8>Auxiliary Figure 1: Signal and Validation Region Yields</a> </ul> <b>Tables:</b><ul> <li><a href=?table=YieldsTable1>Table 3: Signal Region Yields & Model-independent Limits</a> <li><a href=?table=Cutflow1>Auxiliary Table 1: Benchmark Signal Cutflows</a> </ul> <b>Cross section limits:</b><ul> <li><a href=?table=X-sectionU.L.1>Figure 5: 1D Cross-section Limits</a> <li><a href=?table=X-sectionU.L.2>Auxiliary Figure 3: 2D Cross-section Limits</a> </ul> <b>2D CL limits:</b><ul> <li><a href=?table=Exclusioncontour1>Figure 6: Expected Limit on $\mathrm{BF}(\tilde{\chi}_1^0\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$</a> <li><a href=?table=Exclusioncontour2>Figure 6: $+1\sigma$ Variation for Expected Limit on $\mathrm{BF}(\tilde{\chi}_1^0\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$</a> <li><a href=?table=Exclusioncontour3>Figure 6: $-1\sigma$ Variation for Expected Limit on $\mathrm{BF}(\tilde{\chi}_1^0\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$</a> <li><a href=?table=Exclusioncontour4>Figure 6: Observed Limit on $\mathrm{BF}(\tilde{\chi}_1^0\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$</a> <li><a href=?table=Exclusioncontour5>Figure 6: $+1\sigma$ Variation for Observed Limit on $\mathrm{BF}(\tilde{\chi}_1^0\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$</a> <li><a href=?table=Exclusioncontour6>Figure 6: $-1\sigma$ Variation for Observed Limit on $\mathrm{BF}(\tilde{\chi}_1^0\rightarrow h\tilde{G})$</a> </ul> <b>2D Acceptance and Efficiency maps:</b><ul> <li><a href=?table=Acceptance1>Auxiliary Figure 4a: Acceptances SR1h</a> <li><a href=?table=Acceptance2>Auxiliary Figure 4b: Acceptances SR1Z</a> <li><a href=?table=Acceptance3>Auxiliary Figure 4c: Acceptances SR2</a> <li><a href=?table=Efficiency1>Auxiliary Figure 5a: Efficiencies SR1h</a> <li><a href=?table=Efficiency2>Auxiliary Figure 5b: Efficiencies SR1Z</a> <li><a href=?table=Efficiency3>Auxiliary Figure 5c: Efficiencies SR2</a> </ul>
Distribution of the diphoton invariant mass in validation region VR1. The solid histograms are stacked to show the SM expectations after the 2×2D background estimation technique is applied. Background and signal predictions are normalised to the luminosity. The background category "h (other)" includes events originating from VBF, Vh, ggF, thq, thW and bb̄h, all subdominant in this signature. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are indicated by the shaded area. The lower panel of each plot shows the ratio of the data to the SM prediction for the respective bin. The first and last bins include the underflows and overflows respectively.
Distribution of the missing transverse momentum in validation region VR1. The solid histograms are stacked to show the SM expectations after the 2×2D background estimation technique is applied. Background and signal predictions are normalised to the luminosity. The background category "h (other)" includes events originating from VBF, Vh, ggF, thq, thW and bb̄h, all subdominant in this signature. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are indicated by the shaded area. The lower panel of each plot shows the ratio of the data to the SM prediction for the respective bin. The first and last bins include the underflows and overflows respectively.
The production of single top quarks and top antiquarks via the $t$-channel exchange of a virtual $W$ boson is measured in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV at the LHC using $140\,\mathrm{fb^{-1}}$ of ATLAS data. The total cross-sections are determined to be $\sigma(tq)=137^{+8}_{-8}\,\mathrm{pb}$ and $\sigma(\bar{t}q)=84^{+6}_{-5}\,\mathrm{pb}$ for top-quark and top-antiquark production, respectively. The combined cross-section is found to be $\sigma(tq+\bar{t}q)=221^{+13}_{-13}\,\mathrm{pb}$ and the cross-section ratio is $R_{t}=\sigma(tq)/\sigma(\bar{t}q)=1.636^{+0.036}_{-0.034}$. The predictions at next-to-next-to-leading-order in quantum chromodynamics are in good agreement with these measurements. The predicted value of $R_{t}$ using different sets of parton distribution functions is compared with the measured value, demonstrating the potential to further constrain the functions when using this result in global fits. The measured cross-sections are interpreted in an effective field theory approach, setting limits at the 95% confidence level on the strength of a four-quark operator and an operator coupling the third quark generation to the Higgs boson doublet: $-0.37 < C_{Qq}^{3,1}/\Lambda^2 < 0.06$ and $-0.87 < C_{\phi Q}^{3}/\Lambda^2 < 1.42$. The constraint $|V_{tb}|>0.95$ at the 95% confidence level is derived from the measured value of $\sigma(tq+\bar{t}q)$. In a more general approach, pairs of CKM matrix elements involving top quarks are simultaneously constrained, leading to confidence contours in the corresponding two-dimensional parameter spaces.
The 17 variables used for the training of the NN ordered by their discriminating power. The jet that is not \(b\)-tagged is referred to as the untagged jet. The charged lepton is denoted \(\ell\). The sphericity tensor \(S^{\alpha\beta}\) used to define the sphericity \(S\) is formed with the three-momenta \(\vec{p}_i\) of the reconstructed objects, namely the jets, the charged lepton and the reconstructed neutrino. The tensor is given by \(S^{\alpha\beta}=\frac{\sum_i p_i^\alpha p_i^\beta}{\sum_i |\vec{p}_i|^2}\) where \(\alpha\) and \(\beta\) correspond to the spatial components $x$, $y$ and $z$.
The impact of different groups of systematic uncertainties on the \(\sigma(tq)\) , \(\sigma(\bar t q)\), \(\sigma(tq + \bar t q)\) and \(R_t\), given in %.
The impact of the eight most important systematic uncertainties on the \(\sigma(tq)\) , \(\sigma(\bar t q)\) and \(\sigma(tq + \bar t q)\), given in %. The sequence of the uncertainties is given by the impact on \(\sigma(tq + \bar t q)\)
Statistical combinations of searches for charginos and neutralinos using various decay channels are performed using $139\,$fb$^{-1}$ of $pp$ collision data at $\sqrt{s}=13\,$TeV with the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider. Searches targeting pure-wino chargino pair production, pure-wino chargino-neutralino production, or higgsino production decaying via Standard Model $W$, $Z$, or $h$ bosons are combined to extend the mass reach to the produced SUSY particles by 30-100 GeV. The depth of the sensitivity of the original searches is also improved by the combinations, lowering the 95% CL cross-section upper limits by 15%-40%.
Expected 95% CL exclusion limits on the simplified models of chargino-pair production decaying via W bosons.
$+1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on the simplified models of chargino-pair production decaying via W bosons.
$-1\sigma$ expected 95% CL exclusion limits on the simplified models of chargino-pair production decaying via W bosons.
Higgsinos with masses near the electroweak scale can solve the hierarchy problem and provide a dark matter candidate, while detecting them at the LHC remains challenging if their mass-splitting is $\mathcal{O}$(1 GeV). This Letter presents a novel search for nearly mass-degenerate higgsinos in events with an energetic jet, missing transverse momentum, and a low-momentum track with a significant transverse impact parameter using 140 fb$^{-1}$ of proton-proton collision data at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV collected by the ATLAS experiment. For the first time since LEP, a range of mass-splittings between the lightest charged and neutral higgsinos from 0.3 GeV to 0.9 GeV is excluded at 95% confidence level, with a maximum reach of approximately 170 GeV in the higgsino mass.
Number of expected and observed data events in the SR (top), and the model-independent upper limits obtained from their consistency (bottom). The symbol $\tau_{\ell}$ ($\tau_{h}$) refers to fully-leptonic (hadron-involved) tau decays. The Others category includes contributions from minor background processes including $t\bar{t}$, single-top and diboson. The individual uncertainties can be correlated and do not necessarily sum up in quadrature to the total uncertainty. The bottom section shows the observed 95% CL upper limits on the visible cross-section ($\langle\epsilon\sigma\rangle_{\mathrm{obs}}^{95}$), on the number of generic signal events ($S_{\mathrm{obs}}^{95}$) as well as the expected limit ($S_{\mathrm{exp}}^{95}$) given the expected number (and $\pm 1\sigma$ deviations from the expectation) of background events.
Expected (dashed black line) and observed (solid red line) 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino simplified model being considered. These are shown with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively. The limits set by the latest ATLAS searches using the soft lepton and disappearing track signatures are illustrated by the blue and green regions, respectively, while the limit imposed by the LEP experiments is shown in gray. The dot-dashed gray line indicates the predicted mass-splitting for the pure higgsino scenario.
Expected (dashed black line) and observed (solid red line) 95% CL exclusion limits on the higgsino simplified model being considered. These are shown with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{exp}}$ (yellow band) from experimental systematic and statistical uncertainties, and with $\pm 1\sigma_{\mathrm{theory}}^{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ (red dotted lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties, respectively. The limits set by the latest ATLAS searches using the soft lepton and disappearing track signatures are illustrated by the blue and green regions, respectively, while the limit imposed by the LEP experiments is shown in gray. The dot-dashed gray line indicates the predicted mass-splitting for the pure higgsino scenario.
This paper presents a study of $Z \to ll\gamma~$decays with the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider. The analysis uses a proton-proton data sample corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 20.2 fb$^{-1}$ collected at a centre-of-mass energy $\sqrt{s}$ = 8 TeV. Integrated fiducial cross-sections together with normalised differential fiducial cross-sections, sensitive to the kinematics of final-state QED radiation, are obtained. The results are found to be in agreement with state-of-the-art predictions for final-state QED radiation. First measurements of $Z \to ll\gamma\gamma$ decays are also reported.
Unfolded $M(l^{+}\gamma)$ distribution for $Z \to ee\gamma$ process with dressed leptons and bkg subtraction. $M_{ll}>20$ GeV. Nexp.un f. = 63717.4 $\pm$ 252.4, NPowHeg truth =338714.
Unfolded $M(l^{-}\gamma)$ distribution for $Z \to ee\gamma$ process with dressed leptons and bkg subtraction. $M_{ll}>20$ GeV. Nexp.un f. = 63855.8 $\pm$ 252.7 , NPowHeg truth =338708.
Unfolded $M(l^{+}\gamma)$ distribution for $Z \to \mu\mu\gamma$ process with dressed leptons and bkg subtraction. $M_{ll}>20$ GeV. Nexp.un f. = 64809.8 $\pm$ 254.6, NPowHeg truth =634285.
This paper presents for the first time a precise measurement of the production properties of the Z boson in the full phase space of the decay leptons. The measurement is obtained from proton-proton collision data collected by the ATLAS experiment in 2012 at $\sqrt s$ = 8 TeV at the LHC and corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 20.2 fb$^{-1}$. The results, based on a total of 15.3 million Z-boson decays to electron and muon pairs, extend and improve a previous measurement of the full set of angular coefficients describing Z-boson decay. The double-differential cross-section distributions in Z-boson transverse momentum p$_T$ and rapidity y are measured in the pole region, defined as 80 $<$ m $<$ 100 GeV, over the range $|y| <$ 3.6. The total uncertainty of the normalised cross-section measurements in the peak region of the p$_T$ distribution is dominated by statistical uncertainties over the full range and increases as a function of rapidity from 0.5-1.0% for $|y| <$ 2.0 to 2-7% at higher rapidities. The results for the rapidity-dependent transverse momentum distributions are compared to state-of-the-art QCD predictions, which combine in the best cases approximate N$^4$LL resummation with N$^3$LO fixed-order perturbative calculations. The differential rapidity distributions integrated over p$_T$ are even more precise, with accuracies from 0.2-0.3% for $|y| <$ 2.0 to 0.4-0.9% at higher rapidities, and are compared to fixed-order QCD predictions using the most recent parton distribution functions. The agreement between data and predictions is quite good in most cases.
Measured $p_T$ cross sections in full-lepton phase space for |y| < 0.4.
Measured $p_T$ cross sections in full-lepton phase space for 0.4 < |y| < 0.8.
Measured $p_T$ cross sections in full-lepton phase space for 0.8 < |y| < 1.2.
This letter presents a search for narrow, high-mass resonances in the $Z\gamma$ final state with the $Z$ boson decaying into a pair of electrons or muons. The $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV $pp$ collision data were recorded by the ATLAS detector at the CERN Large Hadron Collider and have an integrated luminosity of 140 fb$^{-1}$. The data are found to be in agreement with the Standard Model background expectation. Upper limits are set on the resonance production cross section times the decay branching ratio into $Z\gamma$. For spin-0 resonances produced via gluon-gluon fusion, the observed limits at 95% confidence level vary between 65.5 fb and 0.6 fb, while for spin-2 resonances produced via gluon-gluon fusion (or quark-antiquark initial states) limits vary between 77.4 (76.1) fb and 0.6 (0.5) fb, for the mass range from 220 GeV to 3400 GeV.
The main sources of systematic uncertainty for the $X\to Z \gamma$ search. The gluon-gluon fusion spin-0 signal samples produced at $m_{X} = [220-3400]$ GeV are used to evaluate the systematic uncertainty. The ranges for the uncertainties span the variations among different categories and different $m_{X}$ resonance masses. The uncertainty due to the spurious signal uncertainty is reported as the absolute number of events. In the table, "ID" for photon and electrons refers to identification efficiency uncertainties, "ISO" refers to isolation efficiency uncertainties, "TRIG" refers to trigger efficiency uncertainties, "RECO" refers to muon reconstruction efficiency uncertainty and "TTVA" refers to muon track-to-vertex-association efficiency uncertainty.
The observed (expected) upper limits of $\sigma(pp\to X)\cdot\mathcal{B}(X\to Z\gamma)$ for spin-0 and spin-2 heavy resonances at 95\% CL. $m_{X}$ varies from 220 GeV to 3400~\GeV.
Impacts of grouped dominant systematic uncertainties. The impact corresponds to the relative variation of the asymptotic expected upper limit of $\sigma(pp \rightarrow X) \times BR(X \rightarrow Z\gamma)$ from $m_{X}=220$ GeV to $m_{X}=3.4$ TeV when re-evaluating the quantity by fixing the corresponding nuisance parameters to the best-fit values, while keeping others free to float. The impact of total systematic uncertainties are performed in the last row.
A search for pair production of squarks or gluinos decaying via sleptons or weak bosons is reported. The search targets a final state with exactly two leptons with same-sign electric charge or at least three leptons without any charge requirement. The analysed data set corresponds to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ of proton$-$proton collisions collected at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector at the LHC. Multiple signal regions are defined, targeting several SUSY simplified models yielding the desired final states. A single control region is used to constrain the normalisation of the $WZ$+jets background. No significant excess of events over the Standard Model expectation is observed. The results are interpreted in the context of several supersymmetric models featuring R-parity conservation or R-parity violation, yielding exclusion limits surpassing those from previous searches. In models considering gluino (squark) pair production, gluino (squark) masses up to 2.2 (1.7) TeV are excluded at 95% confidence level.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(a) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Positive one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(a) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Negative one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(a) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
A search is presented for a heavy resonance $Y$ decaying into a Standard Model Higgs boson $H$ and a new particle $X$ in a fully hadronic final state. The full Large Hadron Collider Run 2 dataset of proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}= 13$ TeV collected by the ATLAS detector from 2015 to 2018 is used, and corresponds to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. The search targets the high $Y$-mass region, where the $H$ and $X$ have a significant Lorentz boost in the laboratory frame. A novel signal region is implemented using anomaly detection, where events are selected solely because of their incompatibility with a learned background-only model. It is defined using a jet-level tagger for signal-model-independent selection of the boosted $X$ particle, representing the first application of fully unsupervised machine learning to an ATLAS analysis. Two additional signal regions are implemented to target a benchmark $X$ decay into two quarks, covering topologies where the $X$ is reconstructed as either a single large-radius jet or two small-radius jets. The analysis selects Higgs boson decays into $b\bar{b}$, and a dedicated neural-network-based tagger provides sensitivity to the boosted heavy-flavor topology. No significant excess of data over the expected background is observed, and the results are presented as upper limits on the production cross section $\sigma(pp \rightarrow Y \rightarrow XH \rightarrow q\bar{q}b\bar{b}$) for signals with $m_Y$ between 1.5 and 6 TeV and $m_X$ between 65 and 3000 GeV.
Acceptance times efficiency for signal grid in anomaly signal region.
Acceptance times efficiency for signal grid in anomaly signal region.
Acceptance times efficiency for signal grid in merged two-prong signal region.
A search for Majorana neutrinos in same-sign $WW$ scattering events is presented. The analysis uses $\sqrt{s}= 13$ TeV proton-proton collision data with an integrated luminosity of 140 fb$^{-1}$ recorded during 2015-2018 by the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider. The analysis targets final states including exactly two same-sign muons and at least two hadronic jets well separated in rapidity. The modelling of the main backgrounds, from Standard Model same-sign $WW$ scattering and $WZ$ production, is constrained with data in dedicated signal-depleted control regions. The distribution of the transverse momentum of the second-hardest muon is used to search for signals originating from a heavy Majorana neutrino with a mass between 50 GeV and 20 TeV. No significant excess is observed over the background expectation. The results are interpreted in a benchmark scenario of the Phenomenological Type-I Seesaw model. In addition, the sensitivity to the Weinberg operator is investigated. Upper limits at the 95% confidence level are placed on the squared muon-neutrino-heavy-neutrino mass-mixing matrix element $\vert V_{\mu N} \vert^{2}$ as a function of the heavy Majorana neutrino's mass $m_N$, and on the effective $\mu\mu$ Majorana neutrino mass $|m_{\mu\mu}|$.
Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the heavy Majorana neutrino mixing element $\vert V_{\mu N} \vert^{2}$ as a function of $m_N$ in the Phenomenological Type-I Seesaw model.
Cutflow for a selection of signal samples used in this analysis. The flavour-aligned scenario (in which $\vert V_{\mu N} \vert^{2}=1$) is considered for heavy Majorana neutrino samples. The event yields include all correction factors applied to simulation, and is normalised to 140 fb$^{-1}$. The `Skim' selection requires 2 baseline muons and 2 jets satisfying the object definitions described in Section 3 and $m_{jj} > 150$ GeV. Uncertainties are statistical only.
A search for physics beyond the Standard Model inducing periodic signals in the dielectron and diphoton invariant mass spectra is presented using 139 fb$^{-1}$ of $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV $pp$ collision data collected by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC. Novel search techniques based on continuous wavelet transforms are used to infer the frequency of periodic signals from the invariant mass spectra and neural network classifiers are used to enhance the sensitivity to periodic resonances. In the absence of a signal, exclusion limits are placed at the 95% confidence level in the two-dimensional parameter space of the clockwork gravity model. Model-independent searches for deviations from the background-only hypothesis are also performed.
The observed exclusion limit at 95% CL for the clockwork gravity model projected in the $k–M_{5}$ parameter space for the $ee$ channel for the case with mass thresholds.
The median expected exclusion limit at 95% CL for the clockwork gravity model projected in the $k–M_{5}$ parameter space for the $ee$ channel for the case with mass thresholds.
The expected plus one standard deviation exclusion limit at 95% CL for the clockwork gravity model projected in the $k–M_{5}$ parameter space for the $ee$ channel for the case with mass thresholds.
A search for supersymmetry targeting the direct production of winos and higgsinos is conducted in final states with either two leptons ($e$ or $\mu$) with the same electric charge, or three leptons. The analysis uses 139 fb$^{-1}$ of $pp$ collision data at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV collected with the ATLAS detector during Run 2 of the Large Hadron Collider. No significant excess over the Standard Model expectation is observed. Simplified and complete models with and without $R$-parity conservation are considered. In topologies with intermediate states including either $Wh$ or $WZ$ pairs, wino masses up to 525 GeV and 250 GeV are excluded, respectively, for a bino of vanishing mass. Higgsino masses smaller than 440 GeV are excluded in a natural $R$-parity-violating model with bilinear terms. Upper limits on the production cross section of generic events beyond the Standard Model as low as 40 ab are obtained in signal regions optimised for these models and also for an $R$-parity-violating scenario with baryon-number-violating higgsino decays into top quarks and jets. The analysis significantly improves sensitivity to supersymmetric models and other processes beyond the Standard Model that may contribute to the considered final states.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL for the WZ-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production from Fig 13(b) and Fig 8(aux).
positive one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL for the WZ-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production from Fig 13(b) and Fig 8(aux).
negative $\sigma$ variation of observed exclusion limits at 95% CL for the WZ-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production from Fig 13(b) and Fig 8(aux).
A search is presented for displaced production of Higgs bosons or $Z$ bosons, originating from the decay of a neutral long-lived particle (LLP) and reconstructed in the decay modes $H\rightarrow \gamma\gamma$ and $Z\rightarrow ee$. The analysis uses the full Run 2 data set of proton$-$proton collisions delivered by the LHC at an energy of $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV between 2015 and 2018 and recorded by the ATLAS detector, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. Exploiting the capabilities of the ATLAS liquid argon calorimeter to precisely measure the arrival times and trajectories of electromagnetic objects, the analysis searches for the signature of pairs of photons or electrons which arise from a common displaced vertex and which arrive after some delay at the calorimeter. The results are interpreted in a gauge-mediated supersymmetry breaking model with pair-produced higgsinos that decay to LLPs, and each LLP subsequently decays into either a Higgs boson or a $Z$ boson. The final state includes at least two particles that escape direct detection, giving rise to missing transverse momentum. No significant excess is observed above the background expectation. The results are used to set upper limits on the cross section for higgsino pair production, up to a $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass of 369 (704) GeV for decays with 100% branching ratio of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ to Higgs ($Z$) bosons for a $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime of 2 ns. A model-independent limit is also set on the production of pairs of photons or electrons with a significant delay in arrival at the calorimeter.
Average timing distributions for SR data and the estimated background as determined by the background-only fit, in each of the five exclusive $\rho$ categories. For comparison, the expected timing shapes for a few different signal models are superimposed, with each model labeled by the values of the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass and lifetime, as well as decay mode. To provide some indication of the variations in signal yield and shape, three signal models are shown for each of the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decay modes, namely $\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow$ $H \tilde G$ and $\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow$ $Z \tilde G$. The models shown include a rather low $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass value of 135 GeV for lifetimes of either 2 ns or 10 ns, and a higher $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass value which is near the 95% CL exclusion limit for each decay mode for a lifetime of 2 ns. Each signal model is shown with the signal normalization corresponding to a BR value of unity for the decay mode in question.
Average timing distributions for SR data and the estimated background as determined by the background-only fit, in each of the five exclusive $\rho$ categories. For comparison, the expected timing shapes for a few different signal models are superimposed, with each model labeled by the values of the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass and lifetime, as well as decay mode. To provide some indication of the variations in signal yield and shape, three signal models are shown for each of the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decay modes, namely $\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow$ $H \tilde G$ and $\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow$ $Z \tilde G$. The models shown include a rather low $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass value of 135 GeV for lifetimes of either 2 ns or 10 ns, and a higher $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass value which is near the 95% CL exclusion limit for each decay mode for a lifetime of 2 ns. Each signal model is shown with the signal normalization corresponding to a BR value of unity for the decay mode in question.
Average timing distributions for SR data and the estimated background as determined by the background-only fit, in each of the five exclusive $\rho$ categories. For comparison, the expected timing shapes for a few different signal models are superimposed, with each model labeled by the values of the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass and lifetime, as well as decay mode. To provide some indication of the variations in signal yield and shape, three signal models are shown for each of the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decay modes, namely $\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow$ $H \tilde G$ and $\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow$ $Z \tilde G$. The models shown include a rather low $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass value of 135 GeV for lifetimes of either 2 ns or 10 ns, and a higher $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass value which is near the 95% CL exclusion limit for each decay mode for a lifetime of 2 ns. Each signal model is shown with the signal normalization corresponding to a BR value of unity for the decay mode in question.
We report the total and differential cross sections for $J/\psi$ photoproduction with the large acceptance GlueX spectrometer for photon beam energies from the threshold at 8.2~GeV up to 11.44~GeV and over the full kinematic range of momentum transfer squared, $t$. Such coverage facilitates the extrapolation of the differential cross sections to the forward ($t = 0$) point beyond the physical region. The forward cross section is used by many theoretical models and plays an important role in understanding $J/\psi$ photoproduction and its relation to the $J/\psi-$proton interaction. These measurements of $J/\psi$ photoproduction near threshold are also crucial inputs to theoretical models that are used to study important aspects of the gluon structure of the proton, such as the gluon Generalized Parton Distribution (GPD) of the proton, the mass radius of the proton, and the trace anomaly contribution to the proton mass. We observe possible structures in the total cross section energy dependence and find evidence for contributions beyond gluon exchange in the differential cross section close to threshold, both of which are consistent with contributions from open-charm intermediate states.
$\gamma p \rightarrow J/\psi p$ total cross sections in bins of beam energy. The first uncertainties are statistical, and the second are systematic. There is an additional fully correlated systematic uncertainty of 19.5% on the total cross section, not included here.
$\gamma p \rightarrow J/\psi p$ differential cross sections 8.2–9.28 GeV beam energy range, average $t$ and beam energy in bins of $t$. The first cross section uncertainties are statistical, and the second are systematic. The overall average beam energy is 8.93 GeV. There is an additional fully correlated systematic uncertainty of 19.5% on the total cross section, not included here.
$\gamma p \rightarrow J/\psi p$ differential cross sections 9.28–10.36 GeV beam energy range, average $t$ and beam energy in bins of $t$. The first cross section uncertainties are statistical, and the second are systematic. The overall average beam energy is 9.86 GeV. There is an additional fully correlated systematic uncertainty of 19.5% on the total cross section, not included here.
Differential and double-differential distributions of kinematic variables of leptons from decays of top-quark pairs ($t\bar{t}$) are measured using the full LHC Run 2 data sample collected with the ATLAS detector. The data were collected at a $pp$ collision energy of $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV and correspond to an integrated luminosity of 140 fb$^{-1}$. The measurements use events containing an oppositely charged $e\mu$ pair and $b$-tagged jets. The results are compared with predictions from several Monte Carlo generators. While no prediction is found to be consistent with all distributions, a better agreement with measurements of the lepton $p_{\text{T}}$ distributions is obtained by reweighting the $t\bar{t}$ sample so as to reproduce the top-quark $p_{\text{T}}$ distribution from an NNLO calculation. The inclusive top-quark pair production cross-section is measured as well, both in a fiducial region and in the full phase-space. The total inclusive cross-section is found to be \[ \sigma_{t\bar{t}} = 829 \pm 1\;(\textrm{stat}) \pm 13\;(\textrm{syst}) \pm 8\;(\textrm{lumi}) \pm 2\; (\textrm{beam})\ \textrm{pb}, \] where the uncertainties are due to statistics, systematic effects, the integrated luminosity and the beam energy. This is in excellent agreement with the theoretical expectation.
Definition of the fiducial phase space with the lepton candidate, electron $e$ and muon $\mu$, and jets.
Breakdown of systematic uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross-section. The impact of the top-quark mass on the cross-section is included in the table and not counted in the total uncertainty entry in the paper.
Data bootstrap post unfolding for the fiducial cross-section. The replicas are obtained by reweighting each observed data event by a random integer generated according to Poisson statistics, using the BootstrapGenerator software package (https://gitlab.cern.ch/atlas-physics/sm/StandardModelTools_BootstrapGenerator/BootstrapGenerator), which implements a technique described in ATL-PHYS-PUB-2021-011 (https://cds.cern.ch/record/2759945). The ATLAS event number and run number of each event are used as seed to uniquely but reproducibly initialise the random number generator for each event. All the provided numbers originate from pseudo-data, including the 0th entry, and are in units of [fb].
This Letter reports the observation of single top quarks produced together with a photon, which directly probes the electroweak coupling of the top quark. The analysis uses 139 fb$^{-1}$ of 13 TeV proton-proton collision data collected with the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider. Requiring a photon with transverse momentum larger than 20 GeV and within the detector acceptance, the fiducial cross section is measured to be 688 $\pm$ 23 (stat.) $^{+75}_{-71}$ (syst.) fb, to be compared with the standard model prediction of 515 $^{+36}_{-42}$ fb at next-to-leading order in QCD.
This table shows the values for $\sigma_{tq\gamma}\times\mathcal{B}(t\rightarrow l\nu b)$ and $\sigma_{tq\gamma}\times\mathcal{B}(t\rightarrow l\nu b)+\sigma_{t(\rightarrow l\nu b\gamma)q}$ obtained by a profile-likelihood fit in the fiducial parton-level phase space (defined in Table 1) and particle-level phase space (defined in Table 2), respectively.
Distribution of the reconstructed top-quark mass in the $W\gamma\,$CR before the profile-likelihood fit. The "Total" column corresponds to the sum of the expected contributions from the signal and background processes. The uncertainty represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the signal and background predictions. The first and last bins include the underflow and overflow, respectively.
Distribution of the NN output in the 0fj$\,$SR in data and the expected contribution of the signal and background processes after the profile-likelihood fit. The "Total" column corresponds to the sum of the expected contributions from the signal and background processes. The uncertainty represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the signal and background predictions considering the correlations of the uncertainties as obtained by the fit.
Measurements of differential cross sections are presented for inclusive isolated-photon production in $pp$ collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV provided by the LHC and using 139 fb$^{-1}$ of data recorded by the ATLAS experiment. The cross sections are measured as functions of the photon transverse energy in different regions of photon pseudorapidity. The photons are required to be isolated by means of a fixed-cone method with two different cone radii. The dependence of the inclusive-photon production on the photon isolation is investigated by measuring the fiducial cross sections as functions of the isolation-cone radius and the ratios of the differential cross sections with different radii in different regions of photon pseudorapidity. The results presented in this paper constitute an improvement with respect to those published by ATLAS earlier: the measurements are provided for different isolation radii and with a more granular segmentation in photon pseudorapidity that can be exploited in improving the determination of the proton parton distribution functions. These improvements provide a more in-depth test of the theoretical predictions. Next-to-leading-order QCD predictions from JETPHOX and SHERPA and next-to-next-to-leading-order QCD predictions from NNLOJET are compared to the measurements, using several parameterisations of the proton parton distribution functions. The measured cross sections are well described by the fixed-order QCD predictions within the experimental and theoretical uncertainties in most of the investigated phase-space region.
Measured cross sections for inclusive isolated-photon production as a function of $E_{\rm T}^{\gamma}$ for $|\eta^{\gamma}|<0.6$ and photon isolation cone radius $R=0.4$.
Measured cross sections for inclusive isolated-photon production as a function of $E_{\rm T}^{\gamma}$ for $0.6<|\eta^{\gamma}|<0.8$ and photon isolation cone radius $R=0.4$.
Measured cross sections for inclusive isolated-photon production as a function of $E_{\rm T}^{\gamma}$ for $0.8<|\eta^{\gamma}|<1.37$ and photon isolation cone radius $R=0.4$.
The production of a $W$ boson in association with a single charm quark is studied using 140 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ of $\sqrt{s} = 13\,\mathrm{TeV}$ proton-proton collision data collected with the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider. The charm quark is tagged by a charmed hadron, reconstructed with a secondary-vertex fit. The $W$ boson is reconstructed from an electron/muon decay and the missing transverse momentum. The mesons reconstructed are $D^{\pm} \to K^\mp \pi^\pm \pi^\pm$ and $D^{*\pm} \to D^{0} \pi^\pm \to (K^\mp \pi^\pm) \pi^\pm$, where $p_{\text{T}}(e, \mu) > 30\,\mathrm{GeV}$, $|\eta(e, \mu)| < 2.5$, $p_{\text{T}}(D) > 8\,\mathrm{GeV}$, and $|\eta(D)| < 2.2$. The integrated and normalized differential cross-sections as a function of the pseudorapidity of the lepton from the $W$ boson decay, and of the transverse momentum of the meson, are extracted from the data using a profile likelihood fit. The measured fiducial cross-sections are $\sigma^{\mathrm{OS-SS}}_{\mathrm{fid}}(W^{-}{+}D^{+}) = 50.2\pm0.2\,\mathrm{(stat.)}\,^{+2.4}_{-2.3}\,\mathrm{(syst.)}\,\mathrm{pb}$, $\sigma^{\mathrm{OS-SS}}_{\mathrm{fid}}(W^{+}{+}D^{-}) = 48.5\pm0.2\,\mathrm{(stat.)}\,^{+2.3}_{-2.2}\,\mathrm{(syst.)}\,\mathrm{pb}$, $\sigma^{\mathrm{OS-SS}}_{\mathrm{fid}}(W^{-}{+}D^{*+}) = 51.1\pm0.4\,\mathrm{(stat.)}\,^{+1.9}_{-1.8}\,\mathrm{(syst.)}\,\mathrm{pb}$, and $\sigma^{\mathrm{OS-SS}}_{\mathrm{fid}}(W^{+}{+}D^{*-}) = 50.0\pm0.4\,\mathrm{(stat.)}\,^{+1.9}_{-1.8}\,\mathrm{(syst.)}\,\mathrm{pb}$. Results are compared with the predictions of next-to-leading-order quantum chromodynamics calculations performed using state-of-the-art parton distribution functions. The ratio of charm to anti-charm production cross-sections is studied to probe the $s$-$\bar{s}$ quark asymmetry and is found to be $R_c^\pm = 0.971\pm0.006\,\mathrm{(stat.)}\pm0.011\,\mathrm{(syst.)}$.
Measured fiducial cross-sections times the single-lepton-flavor W boson branching ratio.
Measured cross section ratios for the W+D production. The $R_{c}(D^{(*)})$ observable is obtained by combining the individual measurements of $R_{c}(D^{+})$ and $R_{c}(D^{*+})$ as explained in the text. The displayed cross sections are integrated over each differential bin.
Measured $p_{\mathrm{T}}(D^{+})$ differential fiducial cross-section times the single-lepton-flavor W boson branching ratio in the $W^{-}+D^{+}$ channel. The last $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ bin has no upper bound. The displayed cross sections are integrated over each differential bin.
A search for long-lived particles decaying into hadrons is presented. The analysis uses 139 fb$^{-1}$ of $pp$ collision data collected at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV by the ATLAS detector at the LHC using events that contain multiple energetic jets and a displaced vertex. The search employs dedicated reconstruction techniques that significantly increase the sensitivity to long-lived particles decaying in the ATLAS inner detector. Background estimates for Standard Model processes and instrumental effects are extracted from data. The observed event yields are compatible with those expected from background processes. The results are used to set limits at 95% confidence level on model-independent cross sections for processes beyond the Standard Model, and on scenarios with pair-production of supersymmetric particles with long-lived electroweakinos that decay via a small $R$-parity-violating coupling. The pair-production of electroweakinos with masses below 1.5 TeV is excluded for mean proper lifetimes in the range from 0.03 ns to 1 ns. When produced in the decay of $m(\tilde{g})=2.4$ TeV gluinos, electroweakinos with $m(\tilde\chi^0_1)=1.5$ TeV are excluded with lifetimes in the range of 0.02 ns to 4 ns.
<b>Tables of Yields:</b> <a href="?table=validation_regions_yields_highpt_SR">Validation Regions Summary Yields, High-pT jet selections</a> <a href="?table=validation_regions_yields_trackless_SR">Validiation Regions Summary Yields, Trackless jet selections</a> <a href="?table=yields_highpt_SR_observed">Signal region (and sidebands) observed yields, High-pT jet selections</a> <a href="?table=yields_highpt_SR_expected">Signal region (and sidebands) expected yields, High-pT jet selections</a> <a href="?table=yields_trackless_SR_observed">Signal region (and sidebands) observed yields, Trackless jet selections</a> <a href="?table=yields_trackless_SR_expected">Signal region (and sidebands) expected yields, Trackless jet selections</a> <b>Exclusion Contours:</b> <a href="?table=excl_ewk_exp_nominal">EWK RPV signal; expected, nominal</a> <a href="?table=excl_ewk_exp_up">EWK RPV signal; expected, $+1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_ewk_exp_down">EWK RPV signal; expected, $-1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_ewk_obs_nominal">EWK RPV signal; observed, nominal</a> <a href="?table=excl_ewk_obs_up">EWK RPV signal; observed, $+1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_ewk_obs_down">EWK RPV signal; observed, $-1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_mgluino_2400_GeV_exp_nominal">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{g}$)=2.4 TeV; expected, nominal</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_mgluino_2400_GeV_exp_up">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{g}$)=2.4 TeV; expected, $+1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_mgluino_2400_GeV_exp_down">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{g}$)=2.4 TeV; expected, $-1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_mgluino_2400_GeV_obs_nominal">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{g}$)=2.4 TeV; observed, nominal</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_mgluino_2400_GeV_obs_up">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{g}$)=2.4 TeV; observed, $+1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_mgluino_2400_GeV_obs_down">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{g}$)=2.4 TeV; observed, $-1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_xsec_ewk">EWK RPV signal; cross-section limits for fixed lifetime values.</a> <a href="?table=excl_xsec_strong_mgluino_2400">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{g}$)=2.4 TeV; cross-section limits for fixed lifetime values.</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_mgluino_2000_GeV_exp_nominal">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{g}$)=2.0 TeV; expected, nominal</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_mgluino_2000_GeV_exp_up">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{g}$)=2.0 TeV; expected, $+1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_mgluino_2000_GeV_exp_down">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{g}$)=2.0 TeV; expected, $-1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_mgluino_2000_GeV_obs_nominal">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{g}$)=2.0 TeV; observed, nominal</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_mgluino_2000_GeV_obs_up">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{g}$)=2.0 TeV; observed, $+1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_mgluino_2000_GeV_obs_down">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{g}$)=2.0 TeV; observed, $-1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_mgluino_2200_GeV_exp_nominal">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{g}$)=2.2 TeV; expected, nominal</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_mgluino_2200_GeV_exp_up">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{g}$)=2.2 TeV; expected, $+1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_mgluino_2200_GeV_exp_down">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{g}$)=2.2 TeV; expected, $-1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_mgluino_2200_GeV_obs_nominal">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{g}$)=2.2 TeV; observed, nominal</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_mgluino_2200_GeV_obs_up">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{g}$)=2.2 TeV; observed, $+1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_mgluino_2200_GeV_obs_down">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{g}$)=2.2 TeV; observed, $-1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_mchi0_50_GeV_exp_nominal">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{\chi}^{0}$)=0.1 TeV; expected, nominal</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_mchi0_50_GeV_exp_up">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{\chi}^{0}$)=0.1 TeV; expected, $+1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_mchi0_50_GeV_exp_down">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{\chi}^{0}$)=0.1 TeV; expected, $-1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_mchi0_50_GeV_obs_nominal">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{\chi}^{0}$)=0.1 TeV; observed, nominal</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_mchi0_50_GeV_obs_up">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{\chi}^{0}$)=0.1 TeV; observed, $+1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_mchi0_50_GeV_obs_down">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{\chi}^{0}$)=0.1 TeV; observed, $-1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_mchi0_450_GeV_exp_nominal">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{\chi}^{0}$)=0.5 TeV; expected, nominal</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_mchi0_450_GeV_exp_up">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{\chi}^{0}$)=0.5 TeV; expected, $+1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_mchi0_450_GeV_exp_down">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{\chi}^{0}$)=0.5 TeV; expected, $-1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_mchi0_450_GeV_obs_nominal">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{\chi}^{0}$)=0.5 TeV; observed, nominal</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_mchi0_450_GeV_obs_up">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{\chi}^{0}$)=0.5 TeV; observed, $+1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_mchi0_450_GeV_obs_down">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{\chi}^{0}$)=0.5 TeV; observed, $-1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_tau_0p01_ns_exp_nominal">Strong RPV signal, $\tau$=0.01 ns; expected, nominal</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_tau_0p01_ns_exp_up">Strong RPV signal, $\tau$=0.01 ns; expected, $+1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_tau_0p01_ns_exp_down">Strong RPV signal, $\tau$=0.01 ns; expected, $-1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_tau_0p01_ns_obs_nominal">Strong RPV signal, $\tau$=0.01 ns; observed, nominal</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_tau_0p01_ns_obs_up">Strong RPV signal, $\tau$=0.01 ns; observed, $+1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_tau_0p01_ns_obs_down">Strong RPV signal, $\tau$=0.01 ns; observed, $-1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_tau_0p1_ns_exp_nominal">Strong RPV signal, $\tau$=0.10 ns; expected, nominal</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_tau_0p1_ns_exp_up">Strong RPV signal, $\tau$=0.10 ns; expected, $+1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_tau_0p1_ns_exp_down">Strong RPV signal, $\tau$=0.10 ns; expected, $-1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_tau_0p1_ns_obs_nominal">Strong RPV signal, $\tau$=0.10 ns; observed, nominal</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_tau_0p1_ns_obs_up">Strong RPV signal, $\tau$=0.10 ns; observed, $+1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_tau_0p1_ns_obs_down">Strong RPV signal, $\tau$=0.10 ns; observed, $-1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_tau_1_ns_exp_nominal">Strong RPV signal, $\tau$=1.00 ns; expected, nominal</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_tau_1_ns_exp_up">Strong RPV signal, $\tau$=1.00 ns; expected, $+1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_tau_1_ns_exp_down">Strong RPV signal, $\tau$=1.00 ns; expected, $-1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_tau_1_ns_obs_nominal">Strong RPV signal, $\tau$=1.00 ns; observed, nominal</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_tau_1_ns_obs_up">Strong RPV signal, $\tau$=1.00 ns; observed, $+1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_tau_1_ns_obs_down">Strong RPV signal, $\tau$=1.00 ns; observed, $-1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_tau_10_ns_exp_nominal">Strong RPV signal, $\tau$=10.00 ns; expected, nominal</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_tau_10_ns_exp_up">Strong RPV signal, $\tau$=10.00 ns; expected, $+1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_tau_10_ns_exp_down">Strong RPV signal, $\tau$=10.00 ns; expected, $-1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_tau_10_ns_obs_nominal">Strong RPV signal, $\tau$=10.00 ns; observed, nominal</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_tau_10_ns_obs_up">Strong RPV signal, $\tau$=10.00 ns; observed, $+1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_strong_tau_10_ns_obs_down">Strong RPV signal, $\tau$=10.00 ns; observed, $-1\sigma$</a> <a href="?table=excl_xsec_strong_chi0_1250">Strong RPV signal, m($\tilde{\chi}^0_1$)=1.25 TeV; cross-section limits for fixed lifetime values.</a> <br/><b>Reinterpretation Material:</b> See the attached resource (purple button on the left) or directly <a href="https://atlas.web.cern.ch/Atlas/GROUPS/PHYSICS/PAPERS/SUSY-2016-08/hepdata_info.pdf">this link</a> for information about acceptance definition and about how to use the efficiency histograms below. SLHA files are also available in the reource page of this HEPData record. <a href="?table=acceptance_highpt_strong"> Acceptance cutflow, High-pT SR, Strong production.</a> <a href="?table=acceptance_trackless_ewk"> Acceptance cutflow, Trackless SR, EWK production.</a> <a href="?table=acceptance_trackless_ewk_hf"> Acceptance cutflow, Trackless SR, EWK production with heavy-flavor.</a> <a href="?table=acceptance_highpt_ewk_hf"> Acceptance cutflow, Trackless SR, EWK production with heavy-flavor.</a> <a href="?table=event_efficiency_HighPt_R_1150_mm">Reinterpretation Material: Event-level Efficiency for HighPt SR selections, R < 1150 mm</a> <a href="?table=event_efficiency_HighPt_R_1150_3870_mm">Reinterpretation Material: Event-level Efficiency for HighPt SR selections, R [1150, 3870] mm</a> <a href="?table=event_efficiency_HighPt_R_3870_mm">Reinterpretation Material: Event-level Efficiency for HighPt SR selections, R > 3870 mm</a> <a href="?table=event_efficiency_Trackless_R_1150_mm">Reinterpretation Material: Event-level Efficiency for Trackless SR selections, R < 1150 mm</a> <a href="?table=event_efficiency_Trackless_R_1150_3870_mm">Reinterpretation Material: Event-level Efficiency for Trackless SR selections, R [1150, 3870] mm</a> <a href="?table=event_efficiency_Trackless_R_3870_mm">Reinterpretation Material: Event-level Efficiency for Trackless SR selections, R > 3870 mm</a> <a href="?table=vertex_efficiency_R_22_mm">Reinterpretation Material: Vertex-level Efficiency for R < 22 mm</a> <a href="?table=vertex_efficiency_R_22_25_mm">Reinterpretation Material: Vertex-level Efficiency for R [22, 25] mm</a> <a href="?table=vertex_efficiency_R_25_29_mm">Reinterpretation Material: Vertex-level Efficiency for R [25, 29] mm</a> <a href="?table=vertex_efficiency_R_29_38_mm">Reinterpretation Material: Vertex-level Efficiency for R [29, 38] mm</a> <a href="?table=vertex_efficiency_R_38_46_mm">Reinterpretation Material: Vertex-level Efficiency for R [38, 46] mm</a> <a href="?table=vertex_efficiency_R_46_73_mm">Reinterpretation Material: Vertex-level Efficiency for R [46, 73] mm</a> <a href="?table=vertex_efficiency_R_73_84_mm">Reinterpretation Material: Vertex-level Efficiency for R [73, 84] mm</a> <a href="?table=vertex_efficiency_R_84_111_mm">Reinterpretation Material: Vertex-level Efficiency for R [84, 111] mm</a> <a href="?table=vertex_efficiency_R_111_120_mm">Reinterpretation Material: Vertex-level Efficiency for R [111, 120] mm</a> <a href="?table=vertex_efficiency_R_120_145_mm">Reinterpretation Material: Vertex-level Efficiency for R [120, 145] mm</a> <a href="?table=vertex_efficiency_R_145_180_mm">Reinterpretation Material: Vertex-level Efficiency for R [145, 180] mm</a> <a href="?table=vertex_efficiency_R_180_300_mm">Reinterpretation Material: Vertex-level Efficiency for R [180, 300] mm</a> <br/><b>Cutflow Tables:</b> <a href="?table=cutflow_highpt_strong"> Cutflow (Acceptance x Efficiency), High-pT SR, Strong production.</a> <a href="?table=cutflow_trackless_ewk"> Cutflow (Acceptance x Efficiency), Trackless SR, EWK production.</a> <a href="?table=cutflow_trackless_ewk_hf"> Cutflow (Acceptance x Efficiency), Trackless SR, EWK production with heavy-flavor quarks.</a> <a href="?table=cutflow_highpt_ewk_hf"> Cutflow (Acceptance x Efficiency), High-pT SR, EWK production with heavy-flavor quarks.</a>
Validation of background estimate in validation regions for the High-pT jet selections
Validation of background estimate in validation regions for the Trackless jet selections
A search for physics beyond the standard model (SM) in the final state with a hadronically decaying tau lepton and a neutrino is presented. This analysis is based on data recorded by the CMS experiment from proton-proton collisions at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV at the LHC, corresponding to a total integrated luminosity of 138 fb$^{=1}$. The transverse mass spectrum is analyzed for the presence of new physics. No significant deviation from the SM prediction is observed. Limits are set on the production cross section of a W' boson decaying into a tau lepton and a neutrino. Lower limits are set on the mass of the sequential SM-like heavy charged vector boson and the mass of a quantum black hole. Upper limits are placed on the couplings of a new boson to the SM fermions. Constraints are put on a nonuniversal gauge interaction model and an effective field theory model. For the first time, upper limits on the cross section of $t$-channel leptoquark (LQ) exchange are presented. These limits are translated into exclusion limits on the LQ mass and on its coupling in the $t$-channel. The sensitivity of this analysis extends into the parameter space of LQ models that attempt to explain the anomalies observed in B meson decays. The limits presented for the various interpretations are the most stringent to date. Additionally, a model-independent limit is provided.
The transverse mass distribution of $ au$ leptons and missing transverse momentum observed in the Run-2 data (black dots with statistical uncertainty) as well as the expectation from SM processes (stacked histograms). Different signal hypotheses normalized to 10 fb$^{-1}$ are illustrated as dashed lines for exemplary SSM W$\prime$ boson, QBH and EFT signal hypotheses. The ratios of the background-subtracted data yields to the expected background yields are presented in the lower panel. The combined statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background are represented by the grey shaded band in the ratio panel.
Bayesian upper exclusion limits at 95% CL on the product of the cross section and branching fraction of a W$\prime$ boson decaying to a $\tau$ lepton and a neutrino in the SSM model. For this model, W$\prime$ boson masses of up to 4.8 TeV can be excluded. The limit is given by the intersection of the observed (solid) limit and the theoretical cross section (blue dotted curve). The 68 and 95% quantiles of the limits are represented by the green and yellow bands, respectively. The $\sigma \mathcal{B}$ for an SSM W' boson, along with its associated uncertainty, calculated at NNLO precision in QCD is shown.
Bayesian 95% CL model-independent upper limit on the product of signal cross sections and branching fraction for the $\tau+\nu$ decay for a back-to-back $\tau$ lepton plus $p_{T}^{miss}$ topology. To calculate this limit, all events for signal, background, and data are summed starting from a minimum $m_{T}$ threshold and then divided by the total number of events. No assumption on signal shape is included in this limit. The expected (dashed line) and observed (solid line) limits are shown as well as the 68% and 95% CL uncertainty bands (green and yellow, respectively).
A search for physics beyond the standard model (SM) in final states with an electron or muon and missing transverse momentum is presented. The analysis uses data from proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV, collected with the CMS detector at the LHC in 2016–2018 and corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 138 fb−1. No significant deviation from the SM prediction is observed. Model-independent limits are set on the production cross section of W’ bosons decaying into lepton-plus-neutrino final states. Within the framework of the sequential standard model, with the combined results from the electron and muon decay channels a W’ boson with mass less than 5.7 TeV is excluded at 95% confidence level. Results on a SM precision test, the determination of the oblique electroweak W parameter, are presented using LHC data for the first time. These results together with those from the direct W’ resonance search are used to extend existing constraints on composite Higgs scenarios. This is the first experimental exclusion on compositeness parameters using results from LHC data other than Higgs boson measurements.
Product of signal selection efficiency and acceptance as a function of resonance mass for a SSM WPRIME decaying to electron or muon plus neutrino.It is calculated as the number of WPRIME signal events passing the selection process over the number of generated events. In the selection process there is no requirement on a minimum $M_T$ applied. The SSM WPRIME signal samples have been generated with PYTHIA 8.2. More details in paper
Observed and expected number of events in the electron and muon channels, collected during three years (2016, 2017, and 2018), for selected values of $M_T$ thresholds. The statistical and systematic uncertainties are added in quadrature providing the total uncertainty.
Observed and expected-from-SM number of events in the electron and muon channels, collected during three years (2016, 2017, and 2018), for two steps in the selection procedure: 1) one high-quality high-$p_T$ lepton with $p_T$ > 240(53) GeV for E(MU), and no other lepton in the event, with $M_T$ > 400(120) GeV for events with E(MU). 2) additionally the ratio of the lepton $p_T$ and $p_T^{miss}$ must be 0.4 < $p_T$/$p_T^{miss}$ < 1.5 and the azimuthal angular difference between them, ${\Delta\phi}$> 2.5. The signal yield for an SSM WPRIME of mass 5.6 TeV is also included.
The exclusive production of pion pairs in the process $pp\to pp\pi^+\pi^-$ has been measured at $\sqrt{s}$ = 7 TeV with the ATLAS detector at the LHC, using 80 $\mu$b$^{-1}$ of low-luminosity data. The pion pairs were detected in the ATLAS central detector while outgoing protons were measured in the forward ATLAS ALFA detector system. This represents the first use of proton tagging to measure an exclusive hadronic final state at the LHC. A cross-section measurement is performed in two kinematic regions defined by the proton momenta, the pion rapidities and transverse momenta, and the pion-pion invariant mass. Cross section values of $4.8 \pm 1.0 \text{(stat.)} + {}^{+0.3}_{-0.2} \text{(syst.)}\mu$b and $9 \pm 6 \text{(stat.)} + {}^{+2}_{-2}\text{(syst.)}\mu$b are obtained in the two regions; they are compared with theoretical models and provide a demonstration of the feasibility of measurements of this type.
The measured fiducial cross sections. The first systematic uncertainty is the combined systematic uncertainty excluding luminosity, the second is the luminosity
Cross-sections for the production of a $Z$ boson in association with two photons are measured in proton$-$proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV. The data used correspond to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ recorded by the ATLAS experiment during Run 2 of the LHC. The measurements use the electron and muon decay channels of the $Z$ boson, and a fiducial phase-space region where the photons are not radiated from the leptons. The integrated $Z(\rightarrow\ell\ell)\gamma\gamma$ cross-section is measured with a precision of 12% and differential cross-sections are measured as a function of six kinematic variables of the $Z\gamma\gamma$ system. The data are compared with predictions from MC event generators which are accurate to up to next-to-leading order in QCD. The cross-section measurements are used to set limits on the coupling strengths of dimension-8 operators in the framework of an effective field theory.
Measured fiducial-level integrated cross-section. NLO predictions from Sherpa 2.2.10 and MadGraph5_aMC@NLO 2.7.3 are also shown. The uncertainty in the predictions is divided into statistical and theoretical uncertainties (scale and PDF+$\alpha_{s}$).
Measured unfolded differential cross-section as a function of the leading photon transverse energy $E^{\gamma1}_{\mathrm{T}}$. NLO predictions from Sherpa 2.2.10 and MadGraph5_aMC@NLO 2.7.3 are also shown. The uncertainty in the predictions is divided into statistical and theoretical uncertainties (scale and PDF+$\alpha_{s}$).
Measured unfolded differential cross-section as a function of the subleading photon transverse energy $E^{\gamma2}_{\mathrm{T}}$. NLO predictions from Sherpa 2.2.10 and MadGraph5_aMC@NLO 2.7.3 are also shown. The uncertainty in the predictions is divided into statistical and theoretical uncertainties (scale and PDF+$\alpha_{s}$).
A search for diphoton resonances in the mass range between 10 and 70 GeV with the ATLAS experiment at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is presented. The analysis is based on $pp$ collision data corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 138 fb$^{-1}$ at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV recorded from 2015 to 2018. Previous searches for diphoton resonances at the LHC have explored masses down to 65 GeV, finding no evidence of new particles. This search exploits the particular kinematics of events with pairs of closely spaced photons reconstructed in the detector, allowing examination of invariant masses down to 10 GeV. The presented strategy covers a region previously unexplored at hadron colliders because of the experimental challenges of recording low-energy photons and estimating the backgrounds. No significant excess is observed and the reported limits provide the strongest bound on promptly decaying axion-like particles coupling to gluons and photons for masses between 10 and 70 GeV.
The expected and observed upper limits at 95\% CL on the fiducial cross-section times branching ratio to two photons of a narrow-width ($\Gamma_{X}$ = 4 MeV) scalar resonance as a function of its mass $m_{X}$.
Diphoton invariant mass in the signal region using a 0.1 GeV binning.
Parametrization of the $C_{X}$ factor, defined as the ratio between the number of reconstructed signal events passing the analysis cuts and the number of signal events at the particle level generated within the fiducial volume, as function of $m_{X}$ obtained from the narrow width simulated signal samples produced in gluon fusion.
A search for the electroweak production of pairs of charged sleptons or charginos decaying into two-lepton final states with missing transverse momentum is presented. Two simplified models of $R$-parity-conserving supersymmetry are considered: direct pair-production of sleptons ($\tilde{\ell}\tilde{\ell}$), with each decaying into a charged lepton and a $\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ neutralino, and direct pair-production of the lightest charginos $(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm\tilde{\chi}_1^\mp)$, with each decaying into a $W$-boson and a $\tilde{\chi}_1^0$. The lightest neutralino ($\tilde{\chi}_1^0$) is assumed to be the lightest supersymmetric particle (LSP). The analyses target the experimentally challenging mass regions where $m(\tilde{\ell})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and $m(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm)-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ are close to the $W$-boson mass (`moderately compressed' regions). The search uses 139 fb$^{-1}$ of $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV proton-proton collisions recorded by the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider. No significant excesses over the expected background are observed. Exclusion limits on the simplified models under study are reported in the ($\tilde{\ell},\tilde{\chi}_1^0$) and ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0$) mass planes at 95% confidence level (CL). Sleptons with masses up to 150 GeV are excluded at 95% CL for the case of a mass-splitting between sleptons and the LSP of 50 GeV. Chargino masses up to 140 GeV are excluded at 95% CL for the case of a mass-splitting between the chargino and the LSP down to about 100 GeV.
<b>- - - - - - - - Overview of HEPData Record - - - - - - - -</b> <b>Title: </b><em>Search for direct pair production of sleptons and charginos decaying to two leptons and neutralinos with mass splittings near the $W$ boson mass in $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV $pp$ collisions with the ATLAS detector</em> <b>Paper website:</b> <a href="https://atlas.web.cern.ch/Atlas/GROUPS/PHYSICS/PAPERS/SUSY-2019-02/">SUSY-2019-02</a> <b>Exclusion contours</b> <ul><li><b>Sleptons:</b> <a href=?table=excl_comb_obs_nominal>Combined Observed Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_comb_obs_up>Combined Observed Up</a> <a href=?table=excl_comb_obs_down>Combined Observed Down</a> <a href=?table=excl_comb_exp_nominal>Combined Expected Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_comb_exp_up>Combined Expected Up</a> <a href=?table=excl_comb_exp_down>Combined Expected Down</a> <a href=?table=excl_comb_obs_nominal_dM>Combined Observed Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_comb_obs_up_dM>Combined Observed Up $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_comb_obs_down_dM>Combined Observed Down $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_comb_exp_nominal_dM>Combined Expected Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_comb_exp_up_dM>Combined Expected Up $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_comb_exp_down_dM>Combined Expected Down $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_ee_obs_nominal>$\tilde{e}_\mathrm{L,R}$ Observed Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_ee_exp_nominal>$\tilde{e}_\mathrm{L,R}$ Expected Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_eLeL_obs_nominal>$\tilde{e}_\mathrm{L}$ Observed Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_eLeL_exp_nominal>$\tilde{e}_\mathrm{L}$ Expected Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_eReR_obs_nominal>$\tilde{e}_\mathrm{R}$ Observed Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_eReR_exp_nominal>$\tilde{e}_\mathrm{R}$ Expected Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_ee_obs_nominal_dM>$\tilde{e}_\mathrm{L,R}$ Observed Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_ee_exp_nominal_dM>$\tilde{e}_\mathrm{L,R}$ Expected Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_eLeL_obs_nominal_dM>$\tilde{e}_\mathrm{L}$ Observed Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_eLeL_exp_nominal_dM>$\tilde{e}_\mathrm{L}$ Expected Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_eReR_obs_nominal_dM>$\tilde{e}_\mathrm{R}$ Observed Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_eReR_exp_nominal_dM>$\tilde{e}_\mathrm{R}$ Expected Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_mm_obs_nominal>$\tilde{\mu}_\mathrm{L,R}$ Observed Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_mm_exp_nominal>$\tilde{\mu}_\mathrm{L,R}$ Expected Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_mLmL_obs_nominal>$\tilde{\mu}_\mathrm{L}$ Observed Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_mLmL_exp_nominal>$\tilde{\mu}_\mathrm{L}$ Expected Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_mRmR_obs_nominal>$\tilde{\mu}_\mathrm{R}$ Observed Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_mRmR_exp_nominal>$\tilde{\mu}_\mathrm{R}$ Expected Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_mm_obs_nominal_dM>$\tilde{\mu}_\mathrm{L,R}$ Observed Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_mm_exp_nominal_dM>$\tilde{\mu}_\mathrm{L,R}$ Expected Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_mLmL_obs_nominal_dM>$\tilde{\mu}_\mathrm{L}$ Observed Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_mLmL_exp_nominal_dM>$\tilde{\mu}_\mathrm{L}$ Expected Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_mRmR_obs_nominal_dM>$\tilde{\mu}_\mathrm{R}$ Observed Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_mRmR_exp_nominal_dM>$\tilde{\mu}_\mathrm{R}$ Expected Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_comb_obs_nominal_SR0j>Combined Observed Nominal SR-0j</a> <a href=?table=excl_comb_exp_nominal_SR0j>Combined Expected Nominal SR-0j</a> <a href=?table=excl_comb_obs_nominal_SR1j>Combined Observed Nominal SR-1j</a> <a href=?table=excl_comb_exp_nominal_SR1j>Combined Expected Nominal SR-1j</a> <li><b>Charginos:</b> <a href=?table=excl_c1c1_obs_nominal>Observed Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_c1c1_obs_up>Observed Up</a> <a href=?table=excl_c1c1_obs_down>Observed Down</a> <a href=?table=excl_c1c1_exp_nominal>Expected Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_c1c1_exp_nominal>Expected Up</a> <a href=?table=excl_c1c1_exp_nominal>Expected Down</a> <a href=?table=excl_c1c1_obs_nominal_dM>Observed Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_c1c1_obs_up_dM>Observed Up $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_c1c1_obs_down_dM>Observed Down $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_c1c1_exp_nominal_dM>Expected Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_c1c1_exp_nominal_dM>Expected Up $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_c1c1_exp_nominal_dM>Expected Down $(\Delta m)$</a> </ul> <b>Upper Limits</b> <ul><li><b>Sleptons:</b> <a href=?table=UL_slep>ULs</a> <li><b>Charginos:</b> <a href=?table=UL_c1c1>ULs</a> </ul> <b>Pull Plots</b> <ul><li><b>Sleptons:</b> <a href=?table=pullplot_slep>SRs summary plot</a> <li><b>Charginos:</b> <a href=?table=pullplot_c1c1>SRs summary plot</a> </ul> <b>Cutflows</b> <ul><li><b>Sleptons:</b> <a href=?table=Cutflow_slep_SR0j>Towards SR-0J</a> <a href=?table=Cutflow_slep_SR1j>Towards SR-1J</a> <li><b>Charginos:</b> <a href=?table=Cutflow_SRs>Towards SRs</a> </ul> <b>Acceptance and Efficiencies</b> <ul><li><b>Sleptons:</b> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR0j_MT2_100_infty>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[100,\infty)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR0j_MT2_100_infty>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[100,\infty)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR0j_MT2_110_infty>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[110,\infty)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR0j_MT2_110_infty>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[110,\infty)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR0j_MT2_120_infty>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[120,\infty)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR0j_MT2_120_infty>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[120,\infty)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR0j_MT2_130_infty>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[130,\infty)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR0j_MT2_130_infty>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[130,\infty)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR0j_MT2_100_105>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[100,105)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR0j_MT2_100_105>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[100,105)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR0j_MT2_105_110>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[105,110)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR0j_MT2_105_110>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[105,110)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR0j_MT2_110_115>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[110,115)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR0j_MT2_110_115>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[110,115)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR0j_MT2_115_120>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[115,120)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR0j_MT2_115_120>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[115,120)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR0j_MT2_120_125>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[120,125)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR0j_MT2_125_130>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[125,130)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR0j_MT2_130_140>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[130,140)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR0j_MT2_130_140>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[130,140)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR0j_MT2_140_infty>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[140,\infty)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR0j_MT2_140_infty>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[140,\infty)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR1j_MT2_100_infty>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[100,\infty)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR1j_MT2_100_infty>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[100,\infty)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR1j_MT2_110_infty>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[110,\infty)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR1j_MT2_110_infty>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[110,\infty)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR1j_MT2_120_infty>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[120,\infty)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR1j_MT2_120_infty>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[120,\infty)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR1j_MT2_130_infty>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[130,\infty)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR1j_MT2_130_infty>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[130,\infty)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR1j_MT2_100_105>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[100,105)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR1j_MT2_100_105>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[100,105)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR1j_MT2_105_110>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[105,110)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR1j_MT2_105_110>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[105,110)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR1j_MT2_110_115>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[110,115)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR1j_MT2_110_115>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[110,115)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR1j_MT2_115_120>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[115,120)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR1j_MT2_115_120>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[115,120)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR1j_MT2_120_125>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[120,125)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR1j_MT2_125_130>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[125,130)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR1j_MT2_130_140>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[130,140)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR1j_MT2_130_140>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[130,140)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR1j_MT2_140_infty>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[140,\infty)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR1j_MT2_140_infty>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[140,\infty)$ Efficiency</a> <li><b>Charginos:</b> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_81_1_SF_77_1>SR$^{\text{-DF BDT-signal}\in(0.81,1]}_{\text{-SF BDT-signal}\in(0.77,1]}$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_81_1_SF_77_1>SR$^{\text{-DF BDT-signal}\in(0.81,1]}_{\text{-SF BDT-signal}\in(0.77,1]}$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_81_1>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.81,1]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_81_1>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.81,1]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_82_1>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.82,1]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_82_1>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.82,1]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_83_1>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.83,1]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_83_1>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.83,1]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_84_1>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.84,1]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_84_1>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.84,1]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_85_1>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.85,1]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_85_1>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.85,1]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_81_8125>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.81,8125]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_81_8125>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.81,8125]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_8125_815>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8125,815]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_8125_815>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8125,815]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_815_8175>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.815,8175]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_815_8175>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.815,8175]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_8175_82>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8175,82]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_8175_82>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8175,82]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_82_8225>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.82,8225]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_82_8225>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.82,8225]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_8225_825>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8225,825]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_8225_825>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8225,825]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_825_8275>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.825,8275]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_825_8275>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.825,8275]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_8275_83>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8275,83]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_8275_83>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8275,83]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_83_8325>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.83,8325]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_83_8325>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.83,8325]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_8325_835>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8325,835]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_8325_835>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8325,835]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_835_8375>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.835,8375]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_835_8375>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.835,8375]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_8375_84>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8375,84]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_8375_84>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8375,84]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_84_845>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.85,845]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_84_845>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.85,845]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_845_85>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.845,85]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_845_85>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.845,85]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_85_86>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.85,86]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_85_86>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.85,86]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_86_1>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.86,1]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_86_1>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.86,1]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_SF_77_1>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.77,1]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_SF_77_1>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.77,1]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_SF_78_1>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.78,1]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_SF_78_1>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.78,1]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_SF_79_1>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.79,1]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_SF_79_1>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.79,1]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_SF_80_1>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.80,1]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_SF_80_1>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.80,1]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_SF_77_775>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.77,0.775]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_SF_77_775>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.77,0.775]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_SF_775_78>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.775,0.78]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_SF_775_78>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.775,0.78]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_SF_78_785>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.78,0.785]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_SF_78_785>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.78,0.785]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_SF_785_79>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.785,0.79]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_SF_785_79>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.785,0.79]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_SF_79_795>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.79,0.795]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_SF_79_795>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.79,0.795]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_SF_795_80>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.795,0.80]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_SF_795_80>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.795,0.80]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_SF_80_81>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.80,0.81]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_SF_80_81>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.80,0.81]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_SF_81_1>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.81,1]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_SF_81_1>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.81,1]$ Efficiency</a></ul> <b>Truth Code snippets</b>, <b>SLHA</b> and <b>machine learning</b> files are available under "Resources" (purple button on the left)
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[100,\infty)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[100,\infty)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
A measurement of single top-quark production in the s-channel is performed in proton$-$proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector at the CERN Large Hadron Collider. The dataset corresponds to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. The analysis is performed on events with an electron or muon, missing transverse momentum and exactly two $b$-tagged jets in the final state. A discriminant based on matrix element calculations is used to separate single-top-quark s-channel events from the main background contributions, which are top-quark pair production and $W$-boson production in association with jets. The observed (expected) signal significance over the background-only hypothesis is 3.3 (3.9) standard deviations, and the measured cross-section is $\sigma=8.2^{+3.5}_{-2.9}$ pb, consistent with the Standard Model prediction of $\sigma^{\mathrm{SM}}=10.32^{+0.40}_{-0.36}$ pb.
Result of the s-channel single-top cross-section measurement, in pb. The statistical and systematic uncertainties are given, as well as the total uncertainty. The normalisation factors for the $t\bar{t}$ and $W$+jets backgrounds are also shown, with their total uncertainties.
Distribution of ${E}_{T}^{miss}$ after the fit of the multijet backgrounds, in the electron channel, in the signal region, without applying the cut on ${E}_{T}^{miss}$. Simulated events are normalised to the expected number of events given the integrated luminosity, after applying the normalisation factors obtained in the multijet fit. The last bin includes the overflow. The uncertainty band indicates the simulation's statistical uncertainty, the normalisation uncertainties for different processes ($40$ % for $W$+jets production, $30$ % for multijet background and $6$ % for top-quark processes) and the multijet background shape uncertainty in each bin, summed in quadrature. The lower panel of the figure shows the ratio of the data to the prediction.
Distribution of ${E}_{T}^{miss}$ after the fit of the multijet backgrounds, in the electron channel, in the $W$+jets VR, without applying the cut on ${E}_{T}^{miss}$. Simulated events are normalised to the expected number of events given the integrated luminosity, after applying the normalisation factors obtained in the multijet fit. The last bin includes the overflow. The uncertainty band indicates the simulation's statistical uncertainty, the normalisation uncertainties for different processes ($40$ % for $W$+jets production, $30$ % for multijet background and $6$ % for top-quark processes) and the multijet background shape uncertainty in each bin, summed in quadrature. The lower panel of the figure shows the ratio of the data to the prediction.
A search is presented for vector-like T and B quark-antiquark pairs produced in proton-proton collisions at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV. Data were collected by the CMS experiment at the CERN LHC in 2016-2018, with an integrated luminosity of 138 fb$^{-1}$. Events are separated into single-lepton, same-sign charge dilepton, and multilepton channels. In the analysis of the single-lepton channel a multilayer neural network and jet identification techniques are employed to select signal events, while the same-sign dilepton and multilepton channels rely on the high-energy signature of the signal to distinguish it from standard model backgrounds. The data are consistent with standard model background predictions, and the production of vector-like quark pairs is excluded at 95% confidence level for T quark masses up to 1.54 TeV and B quark masses up to 1.56 TeV, depending on the branching fractions assumed, with maximal sensitivity to decay modes that include multiple top quarks. The limits obtained in this search are the strongest limits to date for $\mathrm{T\overline{T}}$ production, excluding masses below 1.48 TeV for all decays to third generation quarks, and are the strongest limits to date for $\mathrm{B\overline{B}}$ production with B quark decays to tW.
Distribution of ST in the training region for the $T\overline{T}$ MLP. The observed data are shown along with the predicted $T\overline{T}$ signal with mass of 1.2 (1.5) TeV in the singlet scenario and the background. Statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction before performing the fit to data are also shown. The signal predictions of 1.2 TeV and 1.5 TeV signals have been scaled by factors of x300 and x600, respectively, for visibility.
Distribution of the leading jet’s DEEPAK8 light quark or gluon score in the training region for the $T\overline{T}$ MLP. The observed data are shown along with the predicted $T\overline{T}$ signal with mass of 1.2 (1.5) TeV in the singlet scenario and the background. Statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction before performing the fit to data are also shown. The signal predictions of 1.2 TeV and 1.5 TeV signals have been scaled by factors of x300 and x600, respectively, for visibility.
Distribution of the MLP T quark score in the SR for the $T\overline{T}$ search. The observed data, predicted $T\overline{T}$ signal with mass of 1.2 (1.5) TeV in the singlet scenario, and the background are all shown. Statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction before performing the fit to data are also shown. The signal predictions of 1.2 TeV and 1.5 TeV signals have been scaled by factors of x10 and x20, respectively, for visibility.
The electroweak production of $Z(\nu\bar{\nu})\gamma$ in association with two jets is studied in a regime with a photon of high transverse momentum above 150 GeV using proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV at the Large Hadron Collider. The analysis uses a data sample with an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ collected by the ATLAS detector during the 2015-2018 LHC data-taking period. This process is an important probe of the electroweak symmetry breaking mechanism in the Standard Model and is sensitive to quartic gauge boson couplings via vector-boson scattering. The fiducial $Z(\nu\bar{\nu})\gamma jj$ cross section for electroweak production is measured to be 0.77$^{+0.34}_{-0.30}$ fb and is consistent with the Standard Model prediction. Evidence of electroweak $Z(\nu\bar{\nu})\gamma jj$ production is found with an observed significance of 3.2$\sigma$ for the background-only hypothesis, compared with an expected significance of 3.7$\sigma$. The combination of this result with the previously published ATLAS observation of electroweak $Z(\nu\bar{\nu})\gamma jj$ production yields an observed (expected) signal significance of 6.3$\sigma$ (6.6$\sigma$). Limits on anomalous quartic gauge boson couplings are obtained in the framework of effective field theory with dimension-8 operators.
These graphs indicate the effect of the main theory uncertainties, which are associated with the renormalisation and factorisation scales (dashed cyan), underlying event and parton showering (UE+PS) or generator choice (dash-dotted red), alternative PDF sets (dotted orange), combined NNPDF set variation and $\alpha_s$ uncertainty (loosely dash-dotted green). These are shown in the signal region for the $Z(\nu\bar{\nu})\gamma jj$ EWK process. The BDT classifier response was remapped into equal width bins for better representation. The uncertainty band corresponds to the uncertainty due to the limited number of MC events.
These graphs indicate the effect of the main theory uncertainties, which are associated with the renormalisation and factorisation scales (dashed cyan), underlying event and parton showering (UE+PS) or generator choice (dash-dotted red), alternative PDF sets (dotted orange), combined NNPDF set variation and $\alpha_{s}$ uncertainty (loosely dash-dotted green). These are shown in the signal region for the $Z(\nu\bar{\nu})\gamma jj$ QCD process. The BDT classifier response was remapped into equal width bins for better representation. The uncertainty band corresponds to the uncertainty due to the limited number of MC events.
The $m_{jj}$ distributions for the CRs and the BDT classifier response distribution for the SR after the fit in all regions. The dashed line shows the total background distribution before the fit. The vertical error bars on the data points correspond to the data's statistical uncertainty. Overflows are included in the last bin. The uncertainty band corresponds to the combination of the MC statistical uncertainty and systematic uncertainties obtained in the fit.
A search for the exotic decay of the Higgs boson to a pair of light pseudoscalars, each of which subsequently decays into a pair of photons, is presented. The search uses data from proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV recorded with the CMS detector at the LHC that corresponds to an integrated luminosity of 132 fb$^{-1}$. The analysis probes pseudoscalar bosons with masses in the range 15-62 GeV, coming from the Higgs boson decay, which leads to four well-isolated photons in the final state. No significant deviation from the background-only hypothesis is observed. Upper limits are set on the product of the Higgs boson production cross section and branching fraction into four photons. The observed (expected) limits range from 0.80 (1.00) fb for a pseudoscalar boson mass of 15 GeV to 0.26 (0.24) fb for a mass of 62 GeV at 95% confidence level.
Exclusion limits on the product of the production cross section and the branching fraction, as a function of the pseudoscalar mass hypothesis.
In a special run of the LHC with $\beta^\star = 2.5~$km, proton-proton elastic-scattering events were recorded at $\sqrt{s} = 13~$TeV with an integrated luminosity of $340~\mu \textrm{b}^{-1}$ using the ALFA subdetector of ATLAS in 2016. The elastic cross section was measured differentially in the Mandelstam $t$ variable in the range from $-t = 2.5 \cdot 10^{-4}~$GeV$^{2}$ to $-t = 0.46~$GeV$^{2}$ using 6.9 million elastic-scattering candidates. This paper presents measurements of the total cross section $\sigma_{\textrm{tot}}$, parameters of the nuclear slope, and the $\rho$-parameter defined as the ratio of the real part to the imaginary part of the elastic-scattering amplitude in the limit $t \rightarrow 0$. These parameters are determined from a fit to the differential elastic cross section using the optical theorem and different parameterizations of the $t$-dependence. The results for $\sigma_{\textrm{tot}}$ and $\rho$ are \begin{equation*} \sigma_{\textrm{tot}}(pp\rightarrow X) = \mbox{104.7} \pm 1.1 \; \mbox{mb} , \; \; \; \rho = \mbox{0.098} \pm 0.011 . \end{equation*} The uncertainty in $\sigma_{\textrm{tot}}$ is dominated by the luminosity measurement, and in $\rho$ by imperfect knowledge of the detector alignment and by modelling of the nuclear amplitude.
The measured total cross section. The systematic uncertainty includes experimental and theoretical uncerainties.
The measured total cross section. The systematic uncertainty includes experimental and theoretical uncerainties.
The rho-parameter, i.e. the ratio of the real to imaginary part of the elastic scattering amplitude extrapolated to t=0. The systematic uncertainty includes experimental and theoretical uncerainties.
Measurements of Higgs boson production cross-sections are carried out in the diphoton decay channel using 139 fb$^{-1}$ of $pp$ collision data at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV collected by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC. The analysis is based on the definition of 101 distinct signal regions using machine-learning techniques. The inclusive Higgs boson signal strength in the diphoton channel is measured to be $1.04^{+0.10}_{-0.09}$. Cross-sections for gluon-gluon fusion, vector-boson fusion, associated production with a $W$ or $Z$ boson, and top associated production processes are reported. An upper limit of 10 times the Standard Model prediction is set for the associated production process of a Higgs boson with a single top quark, which has a unique sensitivity to the sign of the top quark Yukawa coupling. Higgs boson production is further characterized through measurements of Simplified Template Cross-Sections (STXS). In total, cross-sections of 28 STXS regions are measured. The measured STXS cross-sections are compatible with their Standard Model predictions, with a $p$-value of $93\%$. The measurements are also used to set constraints on Higgs boson coupling strengths, as well as on new interactions beyond the Standard Model in an effective field theory approach. No significant deviations from the Standard Model predictions are observed in these measurements, which provide significant sensitivity improvements compared to the previous ATLAS results.
Cross-sections times H->yy branching ratio for ggF +bbH, VBF, VH, ttH, and tH production, normalized to their SM predictions. The values are obtained from a simultaneous fit to all categories. The theory uncertainties in the predictions include uncertainties due to missing higher-order terms in the perturbative QCD calculations and choices of parton distribution functions and value of alpha_s, as well as the H->yy branching ratio uncertainty.
Correlation matrix for the measurement of production cross-sections of the Higgs boson times the H->yy branching ratio.
Best-fit values and uncertainties for STXS parameters in each of the 28 regions considered, normalized to their SM predictions. The values for the gg->H process also include the contributions from bbH production.
A search is reported for heavy resonances and quantum black holes decaying into e$\mu$, e$\tau$, and $\mu\tau$ final states in proton-proton collision data recorded by the CMS experiment at the CERN LHC during 2016-2018 at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 138 fb$^{-1}$. The e$\mu$, e$\tau$, and $\mu\tau$ invariant mass spectra are reconstructed, and no evidence is found for physics beyond the standard model. Upper limits are set at 95% confidence level on the product of the cross section and branching fraction for lepton flavor violating signals. Three benchmark signals are studied: resonant $\tau$ sneutrino production in $R$ parity violating supersymmetric models, heavy Z' gauge bosons with lepton flavor violating decays, and nonresonant quantum black hole production in models with extra spatial dimensions. Resonant $\tau$ sneutrinos are excluded for masses up to 4.2 TeV in the e$\mu$ channel, 3.7 TeV in the e$\tau$ channel, and 3.6 TeV in the $\mu\tau$ channel. A Z' boson with lepton flavor violating couplings is excluded up to a mass of 5.0 TeV in the e$\mu$ channel, up to 4.3 TeV in the e$\tau$ channel, and up to 4.1 TeV in the $\mu\tau$ channel. Quantum black holes in the benchmark model are excluded up to the threshold mass of 5.6 TeV in the e$\mu$ channel, 5.2 TeV in the e$\tau$ channel, and 5.0 TeV in the $\mu\tau$ channel. In addition, model-independent limits are extracted to allow comparisons with other models for the same final states and similar event selection requirements. The results of these searches provide the most stringent limits available from collider experiments for heavy particles that undergo lepton flavor violating decays.
Mass distributions for the e$\mu$ channel. In addition to the observed data (black points) and SM prediction (filled histograms), expected signal distributions for three models are shown: the RPV SUSY model with $\lambda = \lambda' = 0.01$ and $\tau$ sneutrino mass of 1.6 TeV, a Z′ boson ($\mathcal{B}=0.1$) with a mass of 1.6 TeV , and the QBH signal expectation for $n=4$ and a threshold mass of 1.6 TeV. The bin width gradually increases with mass.
Mass distributions for the e$\tau$ channel. In addition to the observed data (black points) and SM prediction (filled histograms), expected signal distributions for three models are shown: the RPV SUSY model with $\lambda = \lambda' = 0.01$ and $\tau$ sneutrino mass of 1.6 TeV, a Z′ boson ($\mathcal{B}=0.1$) with a mass of 1.6 TeV , and the QBH signal expectation for $n=4$ and a threshold mass of 1.6 TeV. The bin width gradually increases with mass.
Mass distributions for the $\mu\tau$ channel. In addition to the observed data (black points) and SM prediction (filled histograms), expected signal distributions for three models are shown: the RPV SUSY model with $\lambda = \lambda' = 0.01$ and $\tau$ sneutrino mass of 1.6 TeV, a Z′ boson ($\mathcal{B}=0.1$) with a mass of 1.6 TeV , and the QBH signal expectation for $n=4$ and a threshold mass of 1.6 TeV. The bin width gradually increases with mass.
A search is reported for pairs of light Higgs bosons (H$_1$) produced in supersymmetric cascade decays in final states with small missing transverse momentum. A data set of LHC pp collisions collected with the CMS detector at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV and corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 138 fb$^{-1}$ is used. The search targets events where both H$_1$ bosons decay into $\mathrm{b\bar{b}}$ pairs that are reconstructed as large-radius jets using substructure techniques. No evidence is found for an excess of events beyond the background expectations of the standard model (SM). Results from the search are interpreted in the next-to-minimal supersymmetric extension of the SM, where a "singlino" of small mass leads to squark and gluino cascade decays that can predominantly end in a highly Lorentz-boosted singlet-like H$_1$ and a singlino-like neutralino of small transverse momentum. Upper limits are set on the product of the squark or gluino pair production cross section and the square of the $\mathrm{b\bar{b}}$ branching fraction of the H$_1$ in a benchmark model containing almost mass-degenerate gluinos and light-flavour squarks. Under the assumption of an SM-like H$_1$$\to$$\mathrm{b\bar{b}}$ branching fraction, H$_1$ bosons with masses in the range 40-120 GeV arising from the decays of squarks or gluinos with a mass of 1200 to 2500 GeV are excluded at 95% confidence level.
Reference acceptance times efficiency values for the kinematic selection and $H_T>3500\;\mathrm{GeV}$ requirements ($A_{\mathrm{kin}}$) for the benchmark signal model with different values of $m_{\mathrm{SUSY}}$. These values are independent of $m_{\mathrm{H_1}}$ within 2% in the range $30 \le m_{\mathrm{H_1}} \le 125\;\mathrm{GeV}$.
Upper limits at 95% CL on $\sigma\times\mathcal{B}^2(\mathrm{H}_1\rightarrow b\bar{b}) \times A_{\mathrm{kin}}$ as a function of $m_{\mathrm{H_1}}$. The results are independent of $m_{\mathrm{SUSY}}$ within 10% in the range $1600<m_{\mathrm{SUSY}}<2800\;\mathrm{GeV}$.
Upper limits at 95% CL on $\sigma\times\mathcal{B}^2(\mathrm{H}_1\rightarrow b\bar{b})$ as a function of $m_{\mathrm{H_1}}$ for $m_{\mathrm{SUSY}}=1200\;\mathrm{GeV}$.
Cross-section measurements of top-quark pair production where the hadronically decaying top quark has transverse momentum greater than $355$ GeV and the other top quark decays into $\ell \nu b$ are presented using 139 fb$^{-1}$ of data collected by the ATLAS experiment during proton-proton collisions at the LHC. The fiducial cross-section at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV is measured to be $\sigma = 1.267 \pm 0.005 \pm 0.053$ pb, where the uncertainties reflect the limited number of data events and the systematic uncertainties, giving a total uncertainty of $4.2\%$. The cross-section is measured differentially as a function of variables characterising the $t\bar{t}$ system and additional radiation in the events. The results are compared with various Monte Carlo generators, including comparisons where the generators are reweighted to match a parton-level calculation at next-to-next-to-leading order. The reweighting improves the agreement between data and theory. The measured distribution of the top-quark transverse momentum is used to set limits on the Wilson coefficients of the dimension-six operators $O_{tG}$ and $O_{tq}^{(8)}$ in the effective field theory framework.
- - - - - - - - Overview of HEPData Record - - - - - - - - <br/><br/> <b>Fiducial phase space definitions:</b><br/> <ul> <li> NLEP = 1, either E or MU, PT > 27 GeV, ABS ETA < 2.5 <li> NJETS >= 2, R = 0.4, PT > 26 GeV, ABS ETA < 2.5 <li> NBJETS >= 2 <li> NJETS >= 1, R=1, PT > 355 GeV, ABS ETA < 2.0, top-tagged </ul><br/> <u>1D:</u><br/> Spectra:<br/> <ul><br/> <li>SIG (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 1">Table 1</a> ) <li>DSIG/DPT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 2">Table 2</a> ) <li>1/SIG*DSIG/DPT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 4">Table 4</a> ) <li>DSIG/DPT_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 5">Table 5</a> ) <li>1/SIG*DSIG/DPT_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 7">Table 7</a> ) <li>DSIG/DM_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 8">Table 8</a> ) <li>1/SIG*DSIG/DM_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 10">Table 10</a> ) <li>DSIG/DABS_Y_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 11">Table 11</a> ) <li>1/SIG*DSIG/DABS_Y_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 13">Table 13</a> ) <li>DSIG/DABS_Y_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 14">Table 14</a> ) <li>1/SIG*DSIG/DABS_Y_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 16">Table 16</a> ) <li>DSIG/DY_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 17">Table 17</a> ) <li>1/SIG*DSIG/DY_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 19">Table 19</a> ) <li>DSIG/DHT_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 20">Table 20</a> ) <li>1/SIG*DSIG/DHT_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 22">Table 22</a> ) <li>DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_BLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 23">Table 23</a> ) <li>1/SIG*DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_BLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 25">Table 25</a> ) <li>DSIG/DPT_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 26">Table 26</a> ) <li>1/SIG*DSIG/DPT_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 28">Table 28</a> ) <li>DSIG/DDPHIOPI_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 29">Table 29</a> ) <li>1/SIG*DSIG/DDPHIOPI_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 31">Table 31</a> ) <li>DSIG/DHT (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 32">Table 32</a> ) <li>1/SIG*DSIG/DHT (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 34">Table 34</a> ) <li>DSIG/DNJETS (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 35">Table 35</a> ) <li>1/SIG*DSIG/DNJETS (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 37">Table 37</a> ) <li>DSIG/DPT_J1 (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 38">Table 38</a> ) <li>1/SIG*DSIG/DPT_J1 (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 40">Table 40</a> ) <li>DSIG/DM_J1_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 41">Table 41</a> ) <li>1/SIG*DSIG/DM_J1_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 43">Table 43</a> ) <li>DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1 (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 44">Table 44</a> ) <li>1/SIG*DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1 (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 46">Table 46</a> ) <li>DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J2 (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 47">Table 47</a> ) <li>1/SIG*DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J2 (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 49">Table 49</a> ) <li>DSIG/DDPHIOPI_J1_J2 (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 50">Table 50</a> ) <li>1/SIG*DSIG/DDPHIOPI_J1_J2 (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 52">Table 52</a> ) <li>DSIG/DPT_J2 (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 53">Table 53</a> ) <li>1/SIG*DSIG/DPT_J2 (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 55">Table 55</a> ) </ul><br/> Statistical covariance matrices: <ul> <li>DSIG/DPT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 3">Table 3</a> ) <li>DSIG/DPT_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 6">Table 6</a> ) <li>DSIG/DM_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 9">Table 9</a> ) <li>DSIG/DABS_Y_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 12">Table 12</a> ) <li>DSIG/DABS_Y_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 15">Table 15</a> ) <li>DSIG/DY_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 18">Table 18</a> ) <li>DSIG/DHT_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 21">Table 21</a> ) <li>DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_BLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 24">Table 24</a> ) <li>DSIG/DPT_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 27">Table 27</a> ) <li>DSIG/DDPHIOPI_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 30">Table 30</a> ) <li>DSIG/DHT (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 33">Table 33</a> ) <li>DSIG/DNJETS (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 36">Table 36</a> ) <li>DSIG/DPT_J1 (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 39">Table 39</a> ) <li>DSIG/DM_J1_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 42">Table 42</a> ) <li>DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1 (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 45">Table 45</a> ) <li>DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J2 (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 48">Table 48</a> ) <li>DSIG/DDPHIOPI_J1_J2 (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 51">Table 51</a> ) <li>DSIG/DPT_J2 (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 54">Table 54</a> ) </ul><br/> Inter-spectra statistical covariance matrices: <ul> <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_THAD and DSIG/DSIG (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 104">Table 104</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_TLEP and DSIG/DSIG (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 105">Table 105</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_TLEP and DSIG/DPT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 106">Table 106</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DM_TTBAR and DSIG/DSIG (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 107">Table 107</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DM_TTBAR and DSIG/DPT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 108">Table 108</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DM_TTBAR and DSIG/DPT_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 109">Table 109</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DABS_Y_THAD and DSIG/DSIG (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 110">Table 110</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DABS_Y_THAD and DSIG/DPT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 111">Table 111</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DABS_Y_THAD and DSIG/DPT_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 112">Table 112</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DABS_Y_THAD and DSIG/DM_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 113">Table 113</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DABS_Y_TLEP and DSIG/DSIG (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 114">Table 114</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DABS_Y_TLEP and DSIG/DPT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 115">Table 115</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DABS_Y_TLEP and DSIG/DPT_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 116">Table 116</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DABS_Y_TLEP and DSIG/DM_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 117">Table 117</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DABS_Y_TLEP and DSIG/DABS_Y_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 118">Table 118</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DY_TTBAR and DSIG/DSIG (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 119">Table 119</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DY_TTBAR and DSIG/DPT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 120">Table 120</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DY_TTBAR and DSIG/DPT_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 121">Table 121</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DY_TTBAR and DSIG/DM_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 122">Table 122</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DY_TTBAR and DSIG/DABS_Y_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 123">Table 123</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DY_TTBAR and DSIG/DABS_Y_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 124">Table 124</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DHT_TTBAR and DSIG/DSIG (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 125">Table 125</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DHT_TTBAR and DSIG/DPT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 126">Table 126</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DHT_TTBAR and DSIG/DPT_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 127">Table 127</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DHT_TTBAR and DSIG/DM_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 128">Table 128</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DHT_TTBAR and DSIG/DABS_Y_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 129">Table 129</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DHT_TTBAR and DSIG/DABS_Y_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 130">Table 130</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DHT_TTBAR and DSIG/DY_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 131">Table 131</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_BLEP and DSIG/DSIG (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 132">Table 132</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_BLEP and DSIG/DPT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 133">Table 133</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_BLEP and DSIG/DPT_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 134">Table 134</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_BLEP and DSIG/DM_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 135">Table 135</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_BLEP and DSIG/DABS_Y_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 136">Table 136</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_BLEP and DSIG/DABS_Y_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 137">Table 137</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_BLEP and DSIG/DY_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 138">Table 138</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_BLEP and DSIG/DHT_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 139">Table 139</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_TTBAR and DSIG/DSIG (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 140">Table 140</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_TTBAR and DSIG/DPT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 141">Table 141</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_TTBAR and DSIG/DPT_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 142">Table 142</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_TTBAR and DSIG/DM_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 143">Table 143</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_TTBAR and DSIG/DABS_Y_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 144">Table 144</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_TTBAR and DSIG/DABS_Y_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 145">Table 145</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_TTBAR and DSIG/DY_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 146">Table 146</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_TTBAR and DSIG/DHT_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 147">Table 147</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_TTBAR and DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_BLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 148">Table 148</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_TTBAR and DSIG/DSIG (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 149">Table 149</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_TTBAR and DSIG/DPT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 150">Table 150</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_TTBAR and DSIG/DPT_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 151">Table 151</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_TTBAR and DSIG/DM_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 152">Table 152</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_TTBAR and DSIG/DABS_Y_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 153">Table 153</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_TTBAR and DSIG/DABS_Y_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 154">Table 154</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_TTBAR and DSIG/DY_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 155">Table 155</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_TTBAR and DSIG/DHT_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 156">Table 156</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_TTBAR and DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_BLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 157">Table 157</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_TTBAR and DSIG/DPT_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 158">Table 158</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DHT and DSIG/DSIG (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 159">Table 159</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DHT and DSIG/DPT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 160">Table 160</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DHT and DSIG/DPT_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 161">Table 161</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DHT and DSIG/DM_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 162">Table 162</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DHT and DSIG/DABS_Y_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 163">Table 163</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DHT and DSIG/DABS_Y_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 164">Table 164</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DHT and DSIG/DY_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 165">Table 165</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DHT and DSIG/DHT_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 166">Table 166</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DHT and DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_BLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 167">Table 167</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DHT and DSIG/DPT_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 168">Table 168</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DHT and DSIG/DDPHIOPI_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 169">Table 169</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DNJETS and DSIG/DSIG (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 170">Table 170</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DNJETS and DSIG/DPT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 171">Table 171</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DNJETS and DSIG/DPT_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 172">Table 172</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DNJETS and DSIG/DM_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 173">Table 173</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DNJETS and DSIG/DABS_Y_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 174">Table 174</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DNJETS and DSIG/DABS_Y_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 175">Table 175</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DNJETS and DSIG/DY_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 176">Table 176</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DNJETS and DSIG/DHT_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 177">Table 177</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DNJETS and DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_BLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 178">Table 178</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DNJETS and DSIG/DPT_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 179">Table 179</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DNJETS and DSIG/DDPHIOPI_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 180">Table 180</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DNJETS and DSIG/DHT (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 181">Table 181</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_J1 and DSIG/DSIG (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 182">Table 182</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_J1 and DSIG/DPT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 183">Table 183</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_J1 and DSIG/DPT_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 184">Table 184</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_J1 and DSIG/DM_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 185">Table 185</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_J1 and DSIG/DABS_Y_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 186">Table 186</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_J1 and DSIG/DABS_Y_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 187">Table 187</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_J1 and DSIG/DY_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 188">Table 188</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_J1 and DSIG/DHT_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 189">Table 189</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_J1 and DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_BLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 190">Table 190</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_J1 and DSIG/DPT_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 191">Table 191</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_J1 and DSIG/DDPHIOPI_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 192">Table 192</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_J1 and DSIG/DHT (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 193">Table 193</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_J1 and DSIG/DNJETS (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 194">Table 194</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DM_J1_THAD and DSIG/DSIG (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 195">Table 195</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DM_J1_THAD and DSIG/DPT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 196">Table 196</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DM_J1_THAD and DSIG/DPT_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 197">Table 197</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DM_J1_THAD and DSIG/DM_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 198">Table 198</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DM_J1_THAD and DSIG/DABS_Y_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 199">Table 199</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DM_J1_THAD and DSIG/DABS_Y_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 200">Table 200</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DM_J1_THAD and DSIG/DY_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 201">Table 201</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DM_J1_THAD and DSIG/DHT_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 202">Table 202</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DM_J1_THAD and DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_BLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 203">Table 203</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DM_J1_THAD and DSIG/DPT_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 204">Table 204</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DM_J1_THAD and DSIG/DDPHIOPI_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 205">Table 205</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DM_J1_THAD and DSIG/DHT (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 206">Table 206</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DM_J1_THAD and DSIG/DNJETS (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 207">Table 207</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DM_J1_THAD and DSIG/DPT_J1 (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 208">Table 208</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1 and DSIG/DSIG (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 209">Table 209</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1 and DSIG/DPT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 210">Table 210</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1 and DSIG/DPT_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 211">Table 211</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1 and DSIG/DM_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 212">Table 212</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1 and DSIG/DABS_Y_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 213">Table 213</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1 and DSIG/DABS_Y_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 214">Table 214</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1 and DSIG/DY_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 215">Table 215</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1 and DSIG/DHT_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 216">Table 216</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1 and DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_BLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 217">Table 217</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1 and DSIG/DPT_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 218">Table 218</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1 and DSIG/DDPHIOPI_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 219">Table 219</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1 and DSIG/DHT (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 220">Table 220</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1 and DSIG/DNJETS (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 221">Table 221</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1 and DSIG/DPT_J1 (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 222">Table 222</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1 and DSIG/DM_J1_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 223">Table 223</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J2 and DSIG/DSIG (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 224">Table 224</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J2 and DSIG/DPT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 225">Table 225</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J2 and DSIG/DPT_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 226">Table 226</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J2 and DSIG/DM_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 227">Table 227</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J2 and DSIG/DABS_Y_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 228">Table 228</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J2 and DSIG/DABS_Y_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 229">Table 229</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J2 and DSIG/DY_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 230">Table 230</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J2 and DSIG/DHT_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 231">Table 231</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J2 and DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_BLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 232">Table 232</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J2 and DSIG/DPT_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 233">Table 233</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J2 and DSIG/DDPHIOPI_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 234">Table 234</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J2 and DSIG/DHT (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 235">Table 235</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J2 and DSIG/DNJETS (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 236">Table 236</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J2 and DSIG/DPT_J1 (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 237">Table 237</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J2 and DSIG/DM_J1_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 238">Table 238</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J2 and DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1 (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 239">Table 239</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_J1_J2 and DSIG/DSIG (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 240">Table 240</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_J1_J2 and DSIG/DPT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 241">Table 241</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_J1_J2 and DSIG/DPT_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 242">Table 242</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_J1_J2 and DSIG/DM_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 243">Table 243</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_J1_J2 and DSIG/DABS_Y_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 244">Table 244</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_J1_J2 and DSIG/DABS_Y_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 245">Table 245</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_J1_J2 and DSIG/DY_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 246">Table 246</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_J1_J2 and DSIG/DHT_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 247">Table 247</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_J1_J2 and DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_BLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 248">Table 248</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_J1_J2 and DSIG/DPT_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 249">Table 249</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_J1_J2 and DSIG/DDPHIOPI_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 250">Table 250</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_J1_J2 and DSIG/DHT (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 251">Table 251</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_J1_J2 and DSIG/DNJETS (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 252">Table 252</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_J1_J2 and DSIG/DPT_J1 (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 253">Table 253</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_J1_J2 and DSIG/DM_J1_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 254">Table 254</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_J1_J2 and DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1 (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 255">Table 255</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DDPHIOPI_J1_J2 and DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J2 (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 256">Table 256</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_J2 and DSIG/DSIG (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 257">Table 257</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_J2 and DSIG/DPT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 258">Table 258</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_J2 and DSIG/DPT_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 259">Table 259</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_J2 and DSIG/DM_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 260">Table 260</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_J2 and DSIG/DABS_Y_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 261">Table 261</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_J2 and DSIG/DABS_Y_TLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 262">Table 262</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_J2 and DSIG/DY_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 263">Table 263</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_J2 and DSIG/DHT_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 264">Table 264</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_J2 and DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_BLEP (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 265">Table 265</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_J2 and DSIG/DPT_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 266">Table 266</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_J2 and DSIG/DDPHIOPI_TTBAR (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 267">Table 267</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_J2 and DSIG/DHT (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 268">Table 268</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_J2 and DSIG/DNJETS (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 269">Table 269</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_J2 and DSIG/DPT_J1 (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 270">Table 270</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_J2 and DSIG/DM_J1_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 271">Table 271</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_J2 and DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1 (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 272">Table 272</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_J2 and DSIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J2 (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 273">Table 273</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance between DSIG/DPT_J2 and DSIG/DDPHIOPI_J1_J2 (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 274">Table 274</a> ) </ul><br/> <u>2D:</u><br/> Spectra: <ul> <li>1/SIG*D2SIG/DPT_J1/DNJETS (NJETS = 1) (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 56">Table 56</a> ) <li>1/SIG*D2SIG/DPT_J1/DNJETS (NJETS = 2) (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 57">Table 57</a> ) <li>1/SIG*D2SIG/DPT_J1/DNJETS (NJETS $\geq$ 3) (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 58">Table 58</a> ) <li>D2SIG/DPT_J1/DNJETS (NJETS = 1) (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 59">Table 59</a> ) <li>D2SIG/DPT_J1/DNJETS (NJETS = 2) (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 60">Table 60</a> ) <li>D2SIG/DPT_J1/DNJETS (NJETS $\geq$ 3) (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 61">Table 61</a> ) <li>1/SIG*D2SIG/DPT_J1/DPT_THAD ( 355.0 GeV < PT_THAD < 398.0 GeV) (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 68">Table 68</a> ) <li>1/SIG*D2SIG/DPT_J1/DPT_THAD ( 398.0 GeV < PT_THAD < 496.0 GeV) (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 69">Table 69</a> ) <li>1/SIG*D2SIG/DPT_J1/DPT_THAD ( 496.0 GeV < PT_THAD < 2000.0 GeV) (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 70">Table 70</a> ) <li>D2SIG/DPT_J1/DPT_THAD ( 355.0 GeV < PT_THAD < 398.0 GeV) (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 71">Table 71</a> ) <li>D2SIG/DPT_J1/DPT_THAD ( 398.0 GeV < PT_THAD < 496.0 GeV) (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 72">Table 72</a> ) <li>D2SIG/DPT_J1/DPT_THAD ( 496.0 GeV < PT_THAD < 2000.0 GeV) (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 73">Table 73</a> ) <li>1/SIG*D2SIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1/DPT_THAD ( 355.0 GeV < PT_THAD < 398.0 GeV) (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 80">Table 80</a> ) <li>1/SIG*D2SIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1/DPT_THAD ( 398.0 GeV < PT_THAD < 496.0 GeV) (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 81">Table 81</a> ) <li>1/SIG*D2SIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1/DPT_THAD ( 496.0 GeV < PT_THAD < 2000.0 GeV) (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 82">Table 82</a> ) <li>D2SIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1/DPT_THAD ( 355.0 GeV < PT_THAD < 398.0 GeV) (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 83">Table 83</a> ) <li>D2SIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1/DPT_THAD ( 398.0 GeV < PT_THAD < 496.0 GeV) (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 84">Table 84</a> ) <li>D2SIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1/DPT_THAD ( 496.0 GeV < PT_THAD < 2000.0 GeV) (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 85">Table 85</a> ) <li>1/SIG*D2SIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1/DNJETS (NJETS = 1) (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 92">Table 92</a> ) <li>1/SIG*D2SIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1/DNJETS (NJETS = 2) (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 93">Table 93</a> ) <li>1/SIG*D2SIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1/DNJETS (NJETS $\geq$ 3) (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 94">Table 94</a> ) <li>D2SIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1/DNJETS (NJETS = 1) (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 95">Table 95</a> ) <li>D2SIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1/DNJETS (NJETS = 2) (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 96">Table 96</a> ) <li>D2SIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1/DNJETS (NJETS $\geq$ 3) (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 97">Table 97</a> ) </ul><br/> Statistical covariance matrices: <ul> <li>Statistical covariance matrix for D2SIG/DPT_J1/DNJETS between the 1st and 1st bins of NJETS (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 62">Table 62</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance matrix for D2SIG/DPT_J1/DNJETS between the 2nd and 1st bins of NJETS (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 63">Table 63</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance matrix for D2SIG/DPT_J1/DNJETS between the 2nd and 2nd bins of NJETS (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 64">Table 64</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance matrix for D2SIG/DPT_J1/DNJETS between the 3rd and 1st bins of NJETS (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 65">Table 65</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance matrix for D2SIG/DPT_J1/DNJETS between the 3rd and 2nd bins of NJETS (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 66">Table 66</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance matrix for D2SIG/DPT_J1/DNJETS between the 3rd and 3rd bins of NJETS (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 67">Table 67</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance matrix for D2SIG/DPT_J1/DPT_THAD between the 1st and 1st bins of PT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 74">Table 74</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance matrix for D2SIG/DPT_J1/DPT_THAD between the 2nd and 1st bins of PT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 75">Table 75</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance matrix for D2SIG/DPT_J1/DPT_THAD between the 2nd and 2nd bins of PT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 76">Table 76</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance matrix for D2SIG/DPT_J1/DPT_THAD between the 3rd and 1st bins of PT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 77">Table 77</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance matrix for D2SIG/DPT_J1/DPT_THAD between the 3rd and 2nd bins of PT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 78">Table 78</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance matrix for D2SIG/DPT_J1/DPT_THAD between the 3rd and 3rd bins of PT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 79">Table 79</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance matrix for D2SIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1/DPT_THAD between the 1st and 1st bins of PT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 86">Table 86</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance matrix for D2SIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1/DPT_THAD between the 2nd and 1st bins of PT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 87">Table 87</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance matrix for D2SIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1/DPT_THAD between the 2nd and 2nd bins of PT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 88">Table 88</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance matrix for D2SIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1/DPT_THAD between the 3rd and 1st bins of PT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 89">Table 89</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance matrix for D2SIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1/DPT_THAD between the 3rd and 2nd bins of PT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 90">Table 90</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance matrix for D2SIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1/DPT_THAD between the 3rd and 3rd bins of PT_THAD (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 91">Table 91</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance matrix for D2SIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1/DNJETS between the 1st and 1st bins of NJETS (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 98">Table 98</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance matrix for D2SIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1/DNJETS between the 2nd and 1st bins of NJETS (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 99">Table 99</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance matrix for D2SIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1/DNJETS between the 2nd and 2nd bins of NJETS (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 100">Table 100</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance matrix for D2SIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1/DNJETS between the 3rd and 1st bins of NJETS (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 101">Table 101</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance matrix for D2SIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1/DNJETS between the 3rd and 2nd bins of NJETS (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 102">Table 102</a> ) <li>Statistical covariance matrix for D2SIG/DDPHIOPI_THAD_J1/DNJETS between the 3rd and 3rd bins of NJETS (<a href="1651136742?version=1&table=Table 103">Table 103</a> ) </ul><br/>
Total cross-section at particle level in the boosted topology. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text. The measured cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
Absolute differential cross-section as a function of $p_T^{t,h}$ at particle level in the boosted topology. The measured differential cross-section is compared with the prediction obtained with the Powheg+Pythia8 Monte Carlo generator.
A precision measurement of the $Z$ boson production cross-section at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV in the forward region is presented, using $pp$ collision data collected by the LHCb detector, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 5.1 fb$^{-1}$. The production cross-section is measured using $Z\rightarrow\mu^+\mu^-$ events within the fiducial region defined as pseudorapidity $2.0<\eta<4.5$ and transverse momentum $p_{T}>20$ GeV/$c$ for both muons and dimuon invariant mass $60<M_{\mu\mu}<120$ GeV/$c^2$. The integrated cross-section is determined to be $\sigma (Z \rightarrow \mu^+ \mu^-)$ = 196.4 $\pm$ 0.2 $\pm$ 1.6 $\pm$ 3.9~pb, where the first uncertainty is statistical, the second is systematic, and the third is due to the luminosity determination. The measured results are in agreement with theoretical predictions within uncertainties.
Relative uncertainty for the integrated $Z -> \mu^{+} \mu^{-}$ cross-section measurement. The total uncertainty is the quadratic sum of uncertainties from statistical, systematic and luminosity contributions.
Final state radiation correction used in the $y^{Z}$ cross-section measurement. The first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic.
Final state radiation correction used in the $p_{T}^{Z}$ cross-section measurement. The first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic.
A search for a heavy resonance decaying into a top quark and a W boson in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} =$ 13 TeV is presented. The data analyzed were recorded with the CMS detector at the LHC and correspond to an integrated luminosity of 138 fb$^{-1}$. The top quark is reconstructed as a single jet and the W boson, from its decay into an electron or muon and the corresponding neutrino. A top quark tagging technique based on jet clustering with a variable distance parameter and simultaneous jet grooming is used to identify jets from the collimated top quark decay. The results are interpreted in the context of two benchmark models, where the heavy resonance is either an excited bottom quark b$^*$ or a vector-like quark B. A statistical combination with an earlier search by the CMS Collaboration in the all-hadronic final state is performed to place upper cross section limits on these two models. The new analysis extends the lower range of resonance mass probed from 1.4 down to 0.7 TeV. For left-handed, right-handed, and vector-like couplings, b$^*$ masses up to 3.0, 3.0, and 3.2 TeV are excluded at 95% confidence level, respectively. The observed upper limits represent the most stringent constraints on the b$^*$ model to date.
Distributions of MtW in the 1b category. The data are shown by filled markers, where the horizontal bars indicate the bin widths. The individual background contributions are given by filled histograms. The expected signal for a LH b* with mb∗ = 2.4 TeV is shown by a dashed line. The shaded region is the uncertainty in the total background estimate. The lower panel shows the ratio of data to the background estimate, with the total uncertainty on the predicted background displayed as the gray band.
Distributions of MtW in the 2b category. The data are shown by filled markers, where the horizontal bars indicate the bin widths. The individual background contributions are given by filled histograms. The expected signal for a LH b* with mb∗ = 2.4 TeV is shown by a dashed line. The shaded region is the uncertainty in the total background estimate. The lower panel shows the ratio of data to the background estimate, with the total uncertainty on the predicted background displayed as the gray band.
Upper limits on the production cross section times branching fraction of the b* LH hypothesis at a 95% CL. Dashed colored lines show the expected limits from the l+jets and all-hadronic channels, where the latter start at resonance masses of 1.4 TeV. The observed and expected limits from the combination are shown as solid and dashed black lines, respectively. The green and yellow bands show the 68 and 95% confidence intervals on the combined expected limits.
The associated production of a Higgs boson and a top-quark pair is measured in events characterised by the presence of one or two electrons or muons. The Higgs boson decay into a $b$-quark pair is used. The analysed data, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$, were collected in proton-proton collisions at the Large Hadron Collider between 2015 and 2018 at a centre-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV. The measured signal strength, defined as the ratio of the measured signal yield to that predicted by the Standard Model, is $0.35^{+0.36}_{-0.34}$. This result is compatible with the Standard Model prediction and corresponds to an observed (expected) significance of 1.0 (2.7) standard deviations. The signal strength is also measured differentially in bins of the Higgs boson transverse momentum in the simplified template cross-section framework, including a bin for specially selected boosted Higgs bosons with transverse momentum above 300 GeV.
Comparison between data and prediction for the DNN $P(H)$ output for the Higgs boson candidate prior to any fit to the data in the single-lepton boosted channel for $300\le p_T^H<450$ GeV. The dashed line shows the ${t\bar {t}H}$ signal distribution normalised to the total background prediction. The uncertainty band includes all uncertainties and their correlations.
Comparison between data and prediction for the DNN $P(H)$ output for the Higgs boson candidate prior to any fit to the data in the single-lepton boosted channel for $p_{{T}}^{H}\ge 450$ GeV. The dashed line shows the ${t\bar {t}H}$ signal distribution normalised to the total background prediction. The uncertainty band includes all uncertainties and their correlations.
Performance of the Higgs boson reconstruction algorithms. For each row of `truth' ${\hat{p}_{{T}}^{H}}$, the matrix shows (in percentages) the fraction of all Higgs boson candidates with reconstructed $p_T^H$ in the various bins of the dilepton (left), single-lepton resolved (middle) and boosted (right) channels.
The reaction $\gamma p \rightarrow p \pi^0 \eta$ has been studied with the CBELSA/TAPS detector at the electron stretcher accelerator ELSA in Bonn for incident photon energies from threshold up to 3.1 GeV. This paper has been motivated by the recently claimed observation of a narrow structure in the M$_{N\eta}$ invariant mass distribution at a mass of 1678 MeV/$c^2$. The existence of this structure cannot be confirmed in the present work. Instead, for E$_{\gamma}$ = 1400 - 1500 MeV and the cut M$_{p\pi^0} \le 1190 $ MeV/$c^2$ a statistically significant structure in the M$_{p\eta}$ invariant mass distribution near 1700 MeV/$c^2$ is observed with a width of $\Gamma\approx 35$ MeV/$c^2$ while the mass resolution is $\sigma_{res}$ = 5 MeV/$c^2$. Increasing the incident photon energy from 1420 to 1540 MeV this structure shifts in mass from $\approx$ 1700MeV/c$^2$ to $\approx$ 1725 MeV/$c^2$; the width increases to about 50 MeV/$c^2$ and decreases thereafter. The cross section associated with this structure reaches a maximum of $\approx$ 100 nb around E$_{\gamma} \approx$ 1490 MeV (W $\approx $ 1920 MeV), which coincides with the $p a_0$ threshold. Three scenarios are discussed which might be the origin of this structure in the M$_{p\eta}$ invariant mass distribution. The most likely interpretation is that it is due to a triangular singularity in the $\gamma p \rightarrow p a_0 \rightarrow p \pi^0 \eta$ reaction
Differential cross section for $\pi^0$ in the $\gamma p$ for the incident photon energy range of $E_\gamma$ = 1400-1500 MeV.
Differential cross section for $\eta$ in the $\gamma p$ for the incident photon energy range of $E_\gamma$ = 1400-1500 MeV.
Differential cross section for $p$ in the $\gamma p$ for the incident photon energy range of $E_\gamma$ = 1400-1500 MeV.
This paper presents a measurement of the electroweak production of two jets in association with a $Z\gamma$ pair, with the $Z$ boson decaying into two neutrinos. It also presents a search for invisible or partially invisible decays of a Higgs boson with a mass of 125 GeV produced through vector-boson fusion with a photon in the final state. These results use data from LHC proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV collected with the ATLAS detector and corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. The event signature, shared by all benchmark processes considered for the measurements and searches, is characterized by a significant amount of unbalanced transverse momentum and a photon in the final state, in addition to a pair of forward jets. Electroweak $Z\gamma$ production in association with two jets is observed in this final state with a significance of 5.2 (5.1 expected) standard deviations. The measured fiducial cross-section for this process is 1.31$\pm$0.29 fb. An observed (expected) upper limit of 0.37 ($0.34^{+0.15}_{-0.10}$) at 95% confidence level is set on the branching ratio of a 125 GeV Higgs boson to invisible particles, assuming the Standard Model production cross-section. The signature is also interpreted in the context of decays of a Higgs boson into a photon and a dark photon. An observed (expected) 95% CL upper limit on the branching ratio for this decay is set at 0.018 ($0.017^{+0.007}_{-0.005}$), assuming the Standard Model production cross-section for a 125 GeV Higgs boson.
Post-fit results for all $m_\text{jj}$ SR and CR bins in the EW $Z \gamma + \text{jets}$ cross-section measurement with the $\mu_{Z \gamma_\text{EW}}$ signal normalization floating. The post-fit uncertainties include statistical, experimental, and theory contributions.
Post-fit results for all DNN SR and CR bins in the search for $H \to \text{inv.}$ with the $\mathcal{B}_\text{inv}$ signal normalization set to zero. For the $Z_\text{Rev.Cen.}^\gamma$ CR, the third bin contains all events with DNN output score values of 0.6-1.0. The $H \to \text{inv.}$ signal is scaled to a $\mathcal{B}_\text{inv}$ of 37%. The post-fit uncertainties include statistical, experimental, and theoretical contributions.
Post-fit results for the ten [$m_\text{jj}$, $m_\text{T}$] bins constituting the SR and CRs defined for the dark photon search with the $\mathcal{B}(H \to \gamma \gamma_\text{d})$ signal normalization set to zero. A $H \to \gamma \gamma_\text{d}$ signal is shown for two different mass hypotheses (125 GeV, 500 GeV) and scaled to a branching ratio of 2% and 1%, respectively. The post-fit uncertainties include statistical, experimental, and theoretical contributions.
A search optimized for new heavy particles decaying to two $b$-quarks and produced in association with additional $b$-quarks is reported. The sensitivity is improved by $b$-tagging at least one lower-$p_{\rm{T}}$ jet in addition to the two highest-$p_{\rm{T}}$ jets. The data used in this search correspond to an integrated luminosity of 103 $\text{fb}^{-1}$ collected with a dedicated trijet trigger during the 2017 and 2018 $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV proton-proton collision runs with the ATLAS detector at the LHC. The search looks for resonant peaks in the $b$-tagged dijet invariant mass spectrum over a smoothly falling background. The background is estimated with an innovative data-driven method based on orthonormal functions. The observed $b$-tagged dijet invariant mass spectrum is compatible with the background-only hypothesis. Upper limits at 95% confidence level on a heavy vector-boson production cross section times branching ratio to a pair of $b$-quarks are derived.
Background estimate from the FD method with N=3 and data in the SR.
The observed (solid) and expected (dashed) 95% CL upper limits on the production of $Z' \to b\bar{b}$ in association with b-quarks.
Acceptance and Acceptance times efficiency for the LUV Z' model.
A search is presented for new particles produced at the LHC in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} =$ 13 TeV, using events with energetic jets and large missing transverse momentum. The analysis is based on a data sample corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 101 fb$^{-1}$, collected in 2017-2018 with the CMS detector. Machine learning techniques are used to define separate categories for events with narrow jets from initial-state radiation and events with large-radius jets consistent with a hadronic decay of a W or Z boson. A statistical combination is made with an earlier search based on a data sample of 36 fb$^{-1}$, collected in 2016. No significant excess of events is observed with respect to the standard model background expectation determined from control samples in data. The results are interpreted in terms of limits on the branching fraction of an invisible decay of the Higgs boson, as well as constraints on simplified models of dark matter, on first-generation scalar leptoquarks decaying to quarks and neutrinos, and on models with large extra dimensions. Several of the new limits, specifically for spin-1 dark matter mediators, pseudoscalar mediators, colored mediators, and leptoquarks, are the most restrictive to date.
Differential signal yields for various signal hypotheses.
Differential signal yields for various signal hypotheses.
Differential signal yields for various signal hypotheses.
A measurement of four-top-quark production using proton-proton collision data at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV collected by the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ is presented. Events are selected if they contain a single lepton (electron or muon) or an opposite-sign lepton pair, in association with multiple jets. The events are categorised according to the number of jets and how likely these are to contain $b$-hadrons. A multivariate technique is then used to discriminate between signal and background events. The measured four-top-quark production cross section is found to be 26$^{+17}_{-15}$ fb, with a corresponding observed (expected) significance of 1.9 (1.0) standard deviations over the background-only hypothesis. The result is combined with the previous measurement performed by the ATLAS Collaboration in the multilepton final state. The combined four-top-quark production cross section is measured to be 24$^{+7}_{-6}$ fb, with a corresponding observed (expected) signal significance of 4.7 (2.6) standard deviations over the background-only predictions. It is consistent within 2.0 standard deviations with the Standard Model expectation of 12.0$\pm$2.4 fb.
The results of the fitted signal strength $\mu$ in the 1L/2LOS channel
The results of fitted inclusive ${t\bar{t}t\bar{t}}$ cross-section in the 1L/2LOS channel
Ranking of the nuisance parameters included in the fit according to their impact on the signal strength $\mu$. The impact of each nuisance parameter, $\Delta\mu$, is computed by comparing the nominal best-fit value of $\mu$ with the result of the fit when fixing the nuisance parameter to its best-fit value, $\hat{\theta}$, shifted by its pre-fit (post-fit) uncertainties $\pm \Delta\theta$ ($\pm \Delta\hat{\theta}$).
Measurements of both the inclusive and differential production cross sections of a top-quark-antiquark pair in association with a $Z$ boson ($t\bar{t}Z$) are presented. The measurements are performed by targeting final states with three or four isolated leptons (electrons or muons) and are based on $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV proton-proton collision data with an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$, recorded from 2015 to 2018 with the ATLAS detector at the CERN Large Hadron Collider. The inclusive cross section is measured to be $\sigma_{t\bar{t}Z} = 0.99 \pm 0.05$ (stat.) $\pm 0.08$ (syst.) pb, in agreement with the most precise theoretical predictions. The differential measurements are presented as a function of a number of kinematic variables which probe the kinematics of the $t\bar{t}Z$ system. Both absolute and normalised differential cross-section measurements are performed at particle and parton levels for specific fiducial volumes and are compared with theoretical predictions at different levels of precision, based on a $\chi^{2}/$ndf and $p$-value computation. Overall, good agreement is observed between the unfolded data and the predictions.
The measured $t\bar{t}\text{Z}$ cross-section value and its uncertainty based on the fit results from the combined trilepton and tetralepton channels. The value corresponds to the phase-space region where the difermion mass from the Z boson decay lies in the range $70 < m_{f\bar{f}} < 110$ GeV.
The measured $t\bar{t}\text{Z}$ cross-section value and its uncertainty based on the fit results from the combined trilepton and tetralepton channels. The value corresponds to the phase-space region where the difermion mass from the Z boson decay lies in the range $70 < m_{f\bar{f}} < 110$ GeV.
List of relative uncertainties of the measured inclusive $t\bar{t}\text{Z}$ cross section from the combined fit. The uncertainties are symmetrised for presentation and grouped into the categories described in the text. The quadratic sum of the individual uncertainties is not equal to the total uncertainty due to correlations introduced by the fit.
A search for the Higgs boson decaying into a photon and a pair of electrons or muons with an invariant mass $m_{\ell\ell} < 30$ GeV is presented. The analysis is performed using 139 fb$^{-1}$ of proton-proton collision data, produced by the LHC at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV and collected by the ATLAS experiment. Evidence for the $H \rightarrow \ell \ell \gamma$ process is found with a significance of 3.2$\sigma$ over the background-only hypothesis, compared to an expected significance of 2.1$\sigma$. The best-fit value of the signal strength parameter, defined as the ratio of the observed signal yield to the one expected in the Standard Model, is $\mu = 1.5 \pm 0.5$. The Higgs boson production cross-section times the $H \rightarrow\ell\ell\gamma$ branching ratio for $m_{\ell\ell} <$ 30 GeV is determined to be 8.7 $^{+2.8}_{-2.7}$ fb.
Number of data events selected in each analysis category in the $m_{\ell\ell\gamma}$ mass range of 110--160 GeV. In addition, the following numbers are given: number of $H\rightarrow\gamma^{*}\gamma\rightarrow \ell\ell\gamma$ events in the smallest $m_{\ell\ell\gamma}$ window containing 90\% of the expected signal ($S_{90}$), the non-resonant background in the same interval ($B_{90}^N$) as estimated from fits to the data sidebands using the background models, the resonant background in the same interval ($B_{H\rightarrow\gamma\gamma}$), the expected signal purity $f_{90} = S_{90}/(S_{90}+B_{90})$, and the expected significance estimate defined as $Z_{90} = \sqrt{ 2( (S_{90}+B_{90})\,\ln(1+S_{90}/B_{90}) - S_{90}) }$ where $B_{90} = B_{90}^N+B_{H\rightarrow\gamma\gamma}$. $B_{H\rightarrow\gamma\gamma}$ is only relevant for the electron categories and is marked as 0 otherwise
The best fit value for the signal yield normalised to the Standard Model prediction (signal strength) for $pp \to H \to Z+\gamma$
Measured $\sigma( p p \rightarrow H) \cdot B(H\rightarrow \ell\ell\gamma)$ for $m_{\ell\ell} < 30$ GeV
Fiducial and differential measurements of $W^+W^-$ production in events with at least one hadronic jet are presented. These cross-section measurements are sensitive to the properties of electroweak-boson self-interactions and provide a test of perturbative quantum chromodynamics and the electroweak theory. The analysis is performed using proton$-$proton collision data collected at $\sqrt{s}=13~$TeV with the ATLAS experiment, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139$~$fb$^{-1}$. Events are selected with exactly one oppositely charged electron$-$muon pair and at least one hadronic jet with a transverse momentum of $p_{\mathrm{T}}>30~$GeV and a pseudorapidity of $|\eta|<4.5$. After subtracting the background contributions and correcting for detector effects, the jet-inclusive $W^+W^-+\ge 1~$jet fiducial cross-section and $W^+W^-+$ jets differential cross-sections with respect to several kinematic variables are measured, thus probing a previously unexplored event topology at the LHC. These measurements include leptonic quantities, such as the lepton transverse momenta and the transverse mass of the $W^+W^-$ system, as well as jet-related observables such as the leading jet transverse momentum and the jet multiplicity. Limits on anomalous triple-gauge-boson couplings are obtained in a phase space where interference between the Standard Model amplitude and the anomalous amplitude is enhanced.
Measured fiducial cross section for $pp\rightarrow W^+W^-$+jets production. The second column contains the results obtained with a fiducial particle phase space that includes a veto on $b$-jets. This alternative result is obtained from the nominal result by the application of bin-wise correction that is calculated as the ratio of the predicted differential cross-section in the nominal analysis phase space and the predicted cross-section for a phase space that includes a veto on events with $b$-jets with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 20$ GeV. Also shown are the Standard Model predictions for $q\bar{q} \rightarrow WW$, obtained from Sherpa 2.2.2, MadGraph 2.3.3 + Pythia 8.212 using FxFx merging, and Powheg MiNLO + Pythia 8.244. These predictions are supplemented by the Sherpa 2.2.2 + OpenLoops simulation of $gg\rightarrow WW$. Finally, the prediction from MATRIX is given, which includes nNLO QCD and NLO EW corrections to $WW$+jet production.
Measured fiducial cross section for $pp\rightarrow W^+W^-$+jets production for the observable $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{lead.~lep.}}$. The second column contains the results obtained with a fiducial particle phase space that includes a veto on $b$-jets. This alternative result is obtained from the nominal result by the application of bin-wise correction that is calculated as the ratio of the predicted differential cross-section in the nominal analysis phase space and the predicted cross-section for a phase space that includes a veto on events with $b$-jets with $p_{\mathrm{T}} > 20$ GeV. Also shown are the Standard Model predictions for $q\bar{q} \rightarrow WW$, obtained from Sherpa 2.2.2, MadGraph 2.3.3 + Pythia 8.212 using FxFx merging, and Powheg MiNLO + Pythia 8.244. These predictions are supplemented by the Sherpa 2.2.2 + OpenLoops simulation of $gg\rightarrow WW$. Finally, the prediction from MATRIX is given, which includes nNLO QCD and NLO EW corrections to $WW$+jet production. Overflow events are included in the last bin. The largest observed value is 1168 GeV.
Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{lead.~lep.}}$
The production cross section of 30.92 GeV/$c$ protons on carbon is measured by the NA61/SHINE spectrometer at the CERN SPS by means of beam attenuation in a copy (replica) of the 90-cm-long target of the T2K neutrino oscillation experiment. The employed method for direct production cross-section estimation minimizes model corrections for elastic and quasi-elastic interactions. The obtained production cross section is $\sigma_\mathrm{prod}~=~227.6~\pm~0.8\mathrm{(stat)}~_{-~3.2}^{+~1.9}\mathrm{(sys)}~{-~0.8}\mathrm{(mod)}$ mb. It is in agreement with previous NA61/SHINE results obtained with a thin carbon target, while providing improved precision with a total fractional uncertainty of less than 2$\%$. This direct measurement is performed to reduce the uncertainty on the T2K neutrino flux prediction associated with the re-weighting of the interaction rate of neutrino-yielding hadrons.
Production cross section in p+C interactions at different incident beam momenta.
Production cross section in p+C interactions at different beam momenta. The total uncertainty is the statistical, systematic and model uncertainties added in quadrature.
Several extensions of the Standard Model predict the production of dark matter particles at the LHC. An uncharted signature of dark matter particles produced in association with $VV=W^\pm W^\mp$ or $ZZ$ pairs from a decay of a dark Higgs boson $s$ is searched for using 139 fb$^{-1}$ of $pp$ collisions recorded by the ATLAS detector at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV. The $s\to V(q\bar q)V(q\bar q)$ decays are reconstructed with a novel technique aimed at resolving the dense topology from boosted $VV$ pairs using jets in the calorimeter and tracking information. Dark Higgs scenarios with $m_s > 160$ GeV are excluded.
Data overlaid on SM background post-fit yields stacked in each SR and CR category and E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> bin with the maximum-likelihood estimators set to the conditional values of the CR-only fit, and propagated to SR and CRs. Pre-fit uncertainties cover differences between the data and pre-fit background prediction.
Dominant sources of uncertainty for three dark Higgs scenarios after the fit to Asimov data generated from the expected values of the maximum-likelihood estimators including predicted signals with m<sub>Z'</sub> = 1 TeV and m<sub>s</sub> of (a) 160 GeV, (b) 235 GeV, and (c) 310 GeV. The uncertainty in the fitted signal yield relative to the theory prediction is presented. Total is the quadrature sum of statistical and total systematic uncertainties, which consider correlations.
The ratios (μ) of the 95% C.L. upper limits on the combined s→ W<sup>±</sup>W<sup>∓</sup> and s→ ZZ cross section to simplified model expectations for the m<sub>Z'</sub>=0.5 TeV scenario, for various m<sub>s</sub> hypotheses. The observed limits (solid line) are consistent with the expectation under the SM-only hypothesis (dashed line) within uncertainties (filled band), except for a small excess for m<sub>s</sub>=160 GeV, discussed in the text.
The observation of forward proton scattering in association with lepton pairs ($e^+e^-+p$ or $\mu^+\mu^-+p$) produced via photon fusion is presented. The scattered proton is detected by the ATLAS Forward Proton spectrometer while the leptons are reconstructed by the central ATLAS detector. Proton-proton collision data recorded in 2017 at a center-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV are analyzed, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 14.6 fb$^{-1}$. A total of 57 (123) candidates in the $ee+p$ ($\mu\mu+p$) final state are selected, allowing the background-only hypothesis to be rejected with a significance exceeding five standard deviations in each channel. Proton-tagging techniques are introduced for cross-section measurements in the fiducial detector acceptance, corresponding to $\sigma_{ee+p}$ = 11.0 $\pm$ 2.6 (stat.) $\pm$ 1.2 (syst.) $\pm$ 0.3 (lumi.) fb and $\sigma_{\mu\mu+p}$ = 7.2 $\pm$ 1.6 (stat.) $\pm$ 0.9 (syst.) $\pm$ 0.2 (lumi.) fb in the dielectron and dimuon channel, respectively.
The measured fiducial cross sections. The first systematic uncertainty is the combined systematic uncertainty excluding luminosity, the second is the luminosity
A search is presented for four-top-quark production using an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ of proton-proton collision data at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV collected by the ATLAS detector at the LHC. Events are selected if they contain a same-sign lepton pair or at least three leptons (electrons or muons). Jet multiplicity, jet flavour and event kinematics are used to separate signal from the background through a multivariate discriminant, and dedicated control regions are used to constrain the dominant backgrounds. The four-top-quark production cross section is measured to be 24$^{+7}_{-6}$ fb. This corresponds to an observed (expected) significance with respect to the background-only hypothesis of 4.3 (2.4) standard deviations and provides evidence for this process.
The results of fitted inclusive ${t\bar{t}t\bar{t}}$ cross-section
The results of the fitted signal strength $\mu$
List of the uncertainties in the signal strength $\mu$, grouped in categories. The quoted values are obtained by repeating the fit, fixing a set of nuisance parameters of the sources corresponding to the considered category, and subtracting in quadrature the resulting uncertainty from the total uncertainty of the nominal fit presented in the last line. The total uncertainty is different from the sum in quadrature of the components due to correlations between nuisance parameters.
In this paper, a new technique for reconstructing and identifying hadronically decaying $\tau^+\tau^-$ pairs with a large Lorentz boost, referred to as the di-$\tau$ tagger, is developed and used for the first time in the ATLAS experiment at the Large Hadron Collider. A benchmark di-$\tau$ tagging selection is employed in the search for resonant Higgs boson pair production, where one Higgs boson decays into a boosted $b\bar{b}$ pair and the other into a boosted $\tau^+\tau^-$ pair, with two hadronically decaying $\tau$-leptons in the final state. Using 139 fb$^{-1}$ of proton$-$proton collision data recorded at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV, the efficiency of the di-$\tau$ tagger is determined and the background with quark- or gluon-initiated jets misidentified as di-$\tau$ objects is estimated. The search for a heavy, narrow, scalar resonance produced via gluon$-$gluon fusion and decaying into two Higgs bosons is carried out in the mass range 1$-$3 TeV using the same dataset. No deviations from the Standard Model predictions are observed, and 95% confidence-level exclusion limits are set on this model.
Signal acceptance times selection efficiency as a function of the resonance mass, at various stages of the event selection. From top to bottom: an event pre-selection (trigger, object definitions and $E_{T}^{miss}>10$ GeV) is performed first; the requirements on the di-$\tau$ object and large-$R$ jet detailed in the text are then applied; finally, the $HH$ SR definition must be satisfied.
Signal acceptance times selection efficiency as a function of the resonance mass, at various stages of the event selection. From top to bottom: an event pre-selection (trigger, object definitions and $E_{T}^{miss}>10$ GeV) is performed first; the requirements on the di-$\tau$ object and large-$R$ jet detailed in the text are then applied; finally, the $HH$ SR definition must be satisfied.
Distribution of $m^{vis}_{HH}$ after applying all the event selection that define the $HH$ SR, except the requirement on $m^{vis}_{HH}$. The background labelled as "Others" contains $W$+jets, diboson, $t\bar{t}$ and single-top-quark processes. The $X\rightarrow HH \rightarrow b\bar{b}\tau^{+}\tau^{-}$ signal is overlaid for two resonance mass hypotheses with a cross-section set to the expected limit, while all backgrounds are pre-fit. The first and the last bins contains the under-flow and over-flow bin entries, respectively. The hatched bands represent combined statistical and systematic uncertainties.
Forum