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 search for new phenomena has been performed in final states with at least one isolated high-momentum photon, jets and missing transverse momentum in proton--proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV. The data, collected by the ATLAS experiment at the CERN LHC, correspond to an integrated luminosity of 139 $fb^{-1}$. The experimental results are interpreted in a supersymmetric model in which pair-produced gluinos decay into neutralinos, which in turn decay into a gravitino, at least one photon, and jets. No significant deviations from the predictions of the Standard Model are observed. Upper limits are set on the visible cross section due to physics beyond the Standard Model, and lower limits are set on the masses of the gluinos and neutralinos, all at 95% confidence level. Visible cross sections greater than 0.022 fb are excluded and pair-produced gluinos with masses up to 2200 GeV are excluded for most of the NLSP masses investigated.
The observed and expected (post-fit) yields in the control and validation regions. The lower panel shows the difference in standard deviations between the observed and expected yields, considering both the systematic and statistical uncertainties on the background expectation.
Observed (points with error bars) and expected background (solid histograms) distributions for $E_{T}^{miss}$ in the signal region (a) SRL, (b) SRM and (c) SRH after the background-only fit applied to the CRs. The predicted signal distributions for the two models with a gluino mass of 2000 GeV and neutralino mass of 250 GeV (SRL), 1050 GeV (SRM) or 1950 GeV (SRH) are also shown for comparison. The uncertainties in the SM background are only statistical.
Observed (points with error bars) and expected background (solid histograms) distributions for $E_{T}^{miss}$ in the signal region (a) SRL, (b) SRM and (c) SRH after the background-only fit applied to the CRs. The predicted signal distributions for the two models with a gluino mass of 2000 GeV and neutralino mass of 250 GeV (SRL), 1050 GeV (SRM) or 1950 GeV (SRH) are also shown for comparison. The uncertainties in the SM background are only statistical.
Using a data sample collected with the BESIII detector operating at the BEPCII storage ring, we observe a new neutral state $Z_c(3900)^{0}$ with a significance of $10.4\sigma$. The mass and width are measured to be $3894.8\pm2.3\pm3.2$ MeV/$c^2$ and $29.6\pm8.2\pm8.2$~MeV, respectively, where the first error is statistical and the second systematic. The Born cross section for $e^+e^-\to\pi^0\pi^0 J/\psi$ and the fraction of it attributable to $\pi^0 Z_c(3900)^{0}\to\pi^0\pi^0 J/\psi$ in the range $E_{cm}=4.19-4.42$ GeV are also determined. We interpret this state as the neutral partner of the four-quark candidate $Z_c(3900)^\pm$.
Efficiencies, yields, $R=\frac{\sigma(e^+e^-\to\pi^0 Z_c(3900)^{0}\to\pi^0\pi^0 J/\psi)}{\sigma(e^+e^-\to\pi^0\pi^0 J/\psi)}$, and $\pi^0\pi^0 J/\psi$ Born cross sections at each energy point. For $N(Z_c^0)$ and $N(\pi^0\pi^0 J/\psi)$ errors and upper limits are statistical only. For $R$ and $\sigma_{\rm Born}$, the first errors and statistical and second errors are systematic. The statistical uncertainties on the efficiencies are negligible. Upper limits of $R$ (90$\%$ confidence level) include systematic errors.
Using data samples collected at center of mass energies of $\sqrt{s}$ = 4.009, 4.226, 4.257, 4.358, 4.416 and 4.599 GeV with the BESIII detector operating at the BEPCII storage ring, we search for the isospin violating decay $Y(4260)\rightarrow J/\psi \eta \pi^{0}$. No signal is observed, and upper limits on the cross section $\sigma(e^{+}e^{-}\rightarrow J/\psi \eta \pi^{0})$ at the 90\% confidence level are determined to be 3.6, 1.7, 2.4, 1.4, 0.9 and 1.9 pb, respectively.
Results on $e^{+}e^{-}\rightarrow J/\psi\eta\pi^{0}$. Listed in the table are the integrated luminosity $\cal{L}$, radiative correction factor (1+$\delta^{r}$) taken from QED calculation assuming the $Y(4260)$ cross section follows a Breit$-$Wigner line shape, vacuum polarization factor (1+$\delta^{v}$), average efficiency ($\epsilon^{ee}{\cal B}^{ee}$ + $\epsilon^{\mu\mu}{\cal B}^{\mu\mu}$), number of observed events $N^\text{obs}$, number of estimated background events $N^\text{bkg}$, the efficiency corrected upper limits on the number of signal events $N^\text{up}$, and upper limits on the Born cross section $\sigma^\text{Born}_\text{UL}$ (at the 90 $\%$ C.L.) at each energy point.
Using data samples collected with the BESIII detector at the BEPCII collider, we measure the Born cross section of $e^{+}e^{-}\rightarrow p\bar{p}$ at 12 center-of-mass energies from 2232.4 to 3671.0 MeV. The corresponding effective electromagnetic form factor of the proton is deduced under the assumption that the electric and magnetic form factors are equal $(|G_{E}|= |G_{M}|)$. In addition, the ratio of electric to magnetic form factors, $|G_{E}/G_{M}|$, and $|G_{M}|$ are extracted by fitting the polar angle distribution of the proton for the data samples with larger statistics, namely at $\sqrt{s}=$ 2232.4 and 2400.0 MeV and a combined sample at $\sqrt{s}$ = 3050.0, 3060.0 and 3080.0 MeV, respectively. The measured cross sections are in agreement with recent results from BaBar, improving the overall uncertainty by about 30\%. The $|G_{E}/G_{M}|$ ratios are close to unity and consistent with BaBar results in the same $q^{2}$ region, which indicates the data are consistent with the assumption that $|G_{E}|=|G_{M}|$ within uncertainties.
Summary of the Born cross section $\sigma_\text{Born}$, the effective FF $|G|$, and the related variables used to calculate the Born cross sections at the different c.m.energies $\sqrt{s}$, where $N_\text{obs}$ is the number of candidate events, $N_\text{bkg}$ is the estimated background yield, $\varepsilon^\prime=\varepsilon\times(1+\delta)$ is the product of detection efficiency $\varepsilon$ and the radiative correction factor $(1+\delta)$, and $L$ is the integrated luminosity. The first errors are statistical, and the second systematic.
We report on measurements of dielectron ($e^+e^-$) production in Au$+$Au collisions at a center-of-mass energy of 200 GeV per nucleon-nucleon pair using the STAR detector at RHIC. Systematic measurements of the dielectron yield as a function of transverse momentum ($p_{\rm T}$) and collision centrality show an enhancement compared to a cocktail simulation of hadronic sources in the low invariant-mass region ($M_{ee}<$ 1 GeV/$c^2$). This enhancement cannot be reproduced by the $\rho$-meson vacuum spectral function. In minimum-bias collisions, in the invariant-mass range of 0.30 $-$ 0.76 GeV/$c^2$, integrated over the full $p_{\rm T}$ acceptance, the enhancement factor is 1.76 $\pm$ 0.06 (stat.) $\pm$ 0.26 (sys.) $\pm$ 0.29 (cocktail). The enhancement factor exhibits weak centrality and $p_{\rm T}$ dependence in STAR's accessible kinematic regions, while the excess yield in this invariant-mass region as a function of the number of participating nucleons follows a power-law shape with a power of 1.44 $\pm$ 0.10. Models that assume an in-medium broadening of the $\rho$ meson spectral function consistently describe the observed excess in these measurements. Additionally, we report on measurements of $\omega$ and $\phi$-meson production through their $e^+e^-$ decay channel. These measurements show good agreement with Tsallis Blast-Wave model predictions as well as, in the case of the $\phi$-meson, results through its $K^+K^-$ decay channel. In the intermediate invariant-mass region (1.1$<M_{ee}<$ 3 GeV/$c^2$), we investigate the spectral shapes from different collision centralities. Physics implications for possible in-medium modification of charmed hadron production and other physics sources are discussed.
Estimated electron purity vs. momentum in 200 GeV Au + Au collisions.
Acceptance correction factor for unlike-sign and like-sign pair difference from 200 GeV Au+Au minimum-bias collisions.
Ratio of the same-event like-sign to the mixed event unlike-sign distributions.
Using data samples collected with the BESIII detector operating at the BEPCII collider at center-of-mass energies from 3.810 to 4.600 GeV, we perform a study of $e^{+}e^{-} \to \eta J/\psi$ and $\pi^0 J/\psi$. Statistically significant signals of $e^{+}e^{-} \to \eta J/\psi$ are observed at $\sqrt{s}$ = 4.190, 4.210, 4.220, 4.230, 4.245, 4.260, 4.360 and 4.420 GeV, while no signals of $e^{+}e^{-} \to \pi^{0} J/\psi$ are observed. The measured energy-dependent Born cross section for $e^{+}e^{-} \to \eta J/\psi$ shows an enhancement around 4.2~GeV. The measurement is compatible with an earlier measurement by Belle, but with a significantly improved precision.
Results on $e^{+}e^{-}\to\eta J/\psi$ in data samples in which a signal is observed with a statistical significance larger than $5\sigma$. The table shows the CM energy $\sqrt{s}$, integrated luminosity $\mathcal{L}_\mathrm{int}$, number of observed $\eta$ events $N^\mathrm{obs}_{\eta}(\mu^{+}\mu^{-})$/$N^\mathrm{obs}_{\eta}(e^{+}e^{-})$ from the fit, efficiency $\epsilon_{\mu}/\epsilon_{e}$, radiative correction factor $(1+\delta^{r})$, vacuum polarization factor $(1+\delta^{v})$, Born cross section $\sigma^{B}(\mu^{+}\mu^{-})$/$\sigma^{B}(e^{+}e^{-})$ and combined Born cross section $\sigma^{B}_\mathrm{Com}$. The first uncertainties are statistical and the second systematic.
Upper limits of $e^{+}e^{-} \to \eta J/\psi$ using the $\mu^{+}\mu^{-}$ mode. The table shows the CM energy $\sqrt{s}$, integrated luminosity $\mathcal{L}_\mathrm{int}$, number of observed $\eta$ events $N^\mathrm{sg}_{\eta}$, number of background from $\eta$ sideband $N^\mathrm{sb}_{\eta}$, and from $J/\psi$ sideband $N^\mathrm{sb}_{J/\psi}$, efficiency $\epsilon$, upper limit of signal number with the consideration of selection efficiency $N^\mathrm{up}_{\eta}/\epsilon$ (at the $90\%$ C.L.), radiative correction factor $(1+\delta^{r})$, vacuum polarization factor $(1+\delta^{v})$, Born cross section $\sigma^{B}$ and upper limit on the Born cross sections $\sigma^{B}_\mathrm{up}$ (at the $90\%$ C.L.). The first uncertainties are statistical and the second systematic.
Upper limits of $e^{+}e^{-} \to \pi^{0} J/\psi$. The table shows the number of observed events in the $\pi^{0}$ signal region $N^\mathrm{sg}$, number of events in $\pi^{0}$ sideband $N^\mathrm{sb}_{\pi^{0}}$, and in $J/\psi$ sideband $N^\mathrm{sb}_{J/\psi}$, efficiency $\epsilon$, the upper limit of signal events with the consideration of the selection efficiency $N^\mathrm{up}(\mu^{+}\mu^{-})/\epsilon$ (at the $90\%$ C.L.) and the upper limit of Born cross sections $\sigma^{B}_\mathrm{up}$ (at the $90\%$ C.L.).
The transverse polarization of $\Lambda$ and $\bar\Lambda$ hyperons produced in proton-proton collisions at a center-of-mass energy of 7 TeV is measured. The analysis uses 760 $\mu$b$^{-1}$ of minimum bias data collected by the ATLAS detector at the LHC in the year 2010. The measured transverse polarization averaged over Feynman $x_{\rm F}$ from $5\times 10^{-5}$ to 0.01 and transverse momentum $p_{\rm T}$ from 0.8 to 15 GeV is $-0.010 \pm 0.005({\rm stat}) \pm 0.004({\rm syst})$ for $\Lambda$ and $0.002 \pm 0.006({\rm stat}) \pm 0.004({\rm syst})$ for $\bar\Lambda$. It is also measured as a function of $x_{\rm F}$ and $p_{\rm T}$, but no significant dependence on these variables is observed. Prior to this measurement, the polarization was measured at fixed-target experiments with center-of-mass energies up to about 40 GeV. The ATLAS results are compatible with the extrapolation of a fit from previous measurements to the $x_{\rm F}$ range covered by this mesurement.
Transverse polarization POL of LAMBDA and LAMBDABAR hyperons averaged over PT and XF.
Transverse polarization POL of LAMBDA and LAMBDABAR hyperons as a function of XF.
Transverse polarization POL of LAMBDA and LAMBDABAR hyperons as a function of PT.
Using data samples collected at center-of-mass energies of $\sqrt{s}$ = 4.009, 4.230, 4.260, and 4.360 GeV with the BESIII detector operating at the BEPCII collider, we perform a search for the process $e^+e^-\to\gamma\chi_{cJ}$ $(J = 0, 1, 2)$ and find evidence for $e^+e^-\to\gamma\chi_{c1}$ and $e^+e^-\to\gamma\chi_{c2}$ with statistical significances of 3.0$\sigma$ and 3.4$\sigma$, respectively. The Born cross sections $\sigma^{B}(e^+e^-\to\gamma\chi_{cJ})$, as well as their upper limits at the 90% confidence level are determined at each center-of-mass energy.
The results on $e^+e^-\to\gamma\chi_{c0}$ Born cross section measurement. Shown in the table are the significance $\sigma$, detection efficiency $\epsilon$, number of signal events from the fits N$^{\rm obs}$, radiative correction factor ($1+\delta^{r}$), vacuum polarization factor ($1+\delta^{v}$), upper limit (at the 90$\%$ C.L.) on the number of signal events N$^{\rm UP}$, Born cross section $\sigma^{B}$ and upper limit (at the 90$\%$ C.L.) on the Born cross section $\sigma^{\rm UP}$ at different CME points. Numbers taken from journal version: some slight differences with respect to arXiv:1411.6336v1 in last two columns.
The results on $e^+e^-\to\gamma\chi_{c1}$ Born cross section measurement. Shown in the table are the significance $\sigma$, detection efficiency $\epsilon$, number of signal events from the fits N$^{\rm obs}$, radiative correction factor ($1+\delta^{r}$), vacuum polarization factor ($1+\delta^{v}$), upper limit (at the 90$\%$ C.L.) on the number of signal events N$^{\rm UP}$, Born cross section $\sigma^{B}$ and upper limit (at the 90$\%$ C.L.) on the Born cross section $\sigma^{\rm UP}$ at different CME points.
The results on $e^+e^-\to\gamma\chi_{c2}$ Born cross section measurement. Shown in the table are the significance $\sigma$, detection efficiency $\epsilon$, number of signal events from the fits N$^{\rm obs}$, radiative correction factor ($1+\delta^{r}$), vacuum polarization factor ($1+\delta^{v}$), upper limit (at the 90$\%$ C.L.) on the number of signal events N$^{\rm UP}$, Born cross section $\sigma^{B}$ and upper limit (at the 90$\%$ C.L.) on the Born cross section $\sigma^{\rm UP}$ at different CME points.
A search for a massive $W'$ gauge boson decaying to a top quark and a bottom quark is performed with the ATLAS detector in $pp$ collisions at the LHC. The dataset was taken at a centre-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s} = 8$ TeV and corresponds to 20.3 fb$^{-1}$ of integrated luminosity. This analysis is done in the hadronic decay mode of the top quark, where novel jet substructure techniques are used to identify jets from high-momentum top quarks. This allows for a search for high-mass $W'$ bosons in the range $1.5 - 3.0$ TeV. $b$-tagging is used to identify jets originating from $b$-quarks. The data are consistent with Standard Model background-only expectations, and upper limits at 95% confidence level are set on the $W' \rightarrow tb$ cross section times branching ratio ranging from $0.16$ pb to $0.33$ pb for left-handed $W'$ bosons, and ranging from $0.10$ pb to $0.21$ pb for $W'$ bosons with purely right-handed couplings. Upper limits at 95% confidence level are set on the $W'$-boson coupling to $tb$ as a function of the $W'$ mass using an effective field theory approach, which is independent of details of particular models predicting a $W'$ boson.
m_tb distributions in data in the one b-tag and the two b-tag category, together with background-only fits excluding the region 4-5 TeV which is beyond the range considered for this analysis. Potential WPRIME_L signal shapes in the hadronic top-quark decay channel with gPRIME = gSM are also given for resonance masses of 1.5, 2.0, 2.5 and 3.0 TeV.
Limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching ratio to TOP BOTTOM for the left-handed and for the right-handed WPRIME model. The expected cross section for WPRIME production with gprime = gSM is also shown.
Observed and expected 95% CL limits on the ratio of coupling gWPRIME_L/gSM (gWPRIME_R/gSM) of the WPRIME_L (WPRIME_R) model as a function of the WPRIME mass.
Forum