The first evidence for the Higgs boson decay to a $Z$ boson and a photon is presented, with a statistical significance of 3.4 standard deviations. The result is derived from a combined analysis of the searches performed by the ATLAS and CMS Collaborations with proton-proton collision data sets collected at the CERN Large Hadron Collider (LHC) from 2015 to 2018. These correspond to integrated luminosities of around 140 fb$^{-1}$ for each experiment, at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV. The measured signal yield is $2.2\pm0.7$ times the Standard Model prediction, and agrees with the theoretical expectation within 1.9 standard deviations.
The negative profile log-likelihood test statistic, where $\Lambda$ represents the likelihood ratio, as a function of the signal strength $\mu$ derived from the ATLAS data, the CMS data, and the combined result.
A search for a charged Higgs boson, $H^{\pm}$, produced in top-quark decays, $t \rightarrow H^{\pm}b$, is presented. The search targets $H^{\pm}$ decays into a bottom and a charm quark, $H^{\pm} \rightarrow cb$. The analysis focuses on a selection enriched in top-quark pair production, where one top quark decays into a leptonically decaying $W$ boson and a bottom quark, and the other top quark decays into a charged Higgs boson and a bottom quark. This topology leads to a lepton-plus-jets final state, characterised by an isolated electron or muon and at least four jets. The search exploits the high multiplicity of jets containing $b$-hadrons, and deploys a neural network classifier that uses the kinematic differences between the signal and the background. The search uses a dataset of proton-proton collisions collected at a centre-of-mass energy $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV between 2015 and 2018 with the ATLAS detector at CERN's Large Hadron Collider, amounting to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. Observed (expected) 95% confidence-level upper limits between 0.15% (0.09%) and 0.42% (0.25%) are derived for the product of branching fractions $\mathscr{B}(t\rightarrow H^{\pm}b) \times \mathscr{B}(H^{\pm}\rightarrow cb)$ for charged Higgs boson masses between 60 and 160 GeV, assuming the SM production of the top-quark pairs.
The observed 95% CL upper limits on $\mathscr{B}=\mathscr{B}(t\rightarrow H^{\pm}b) \times \mathscr{B}(H^{\pm}\rightarrow cb)$ as a function of $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and the expectation (dashed) under the background-only hypothesis. The inner green and outer yellow shaded bands show the $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ uncertainties of the expected limits. The exclusion limits are presented for $m_{H^{\pm}}$ between 60 and 160 GeV with 10 GeV $m_{H^{\pm}}$ spacing and linear interpolation between adjacent mass points. Superimposed on the upper limits, the predictions from the 3HDM are shown, corresponding to three benchmark values for the parameters $X$, $Y$, and $Z$
Pre-fit event yields in each of the nine analysis regions. The $H^{\pm}$ signal yields for $m_{H^{\pm}}=130$ GeV and $m_{H^{\pm}}=70$ GeV are normalised to $\mathscr{B}_{\mathrm{ref}}=1\%$. The quoted uncertainties are the sum in quadrature of statistical and systematic uncertainties of the yields, computed taking into account correlations among processes resulting from the data-based $t\bar{t}$ correction procedure.
Post-fit yields in each of the nine analysis regions considered. The total prediction is shown after the fit to data under the signal-plus-background hypothesis assuming $H^{\pm}$ signal with $m_{H^{\pm}}=130$ GeV. The predicted yileds for the $H^{\pm}$ signal with $m_{H^{\pm}}=70$ GeV are also shown for reference. The best fit-values of $\mathscr{B}$ for $H^{\pm}$ signal with $m_{H^{\pm}}=130$ GeV and $m_{H^{\pm}}=70$ GeV are 0.16% and 0.07% respectively. The quoted uncertainties are the sum in quadrature of statistical and systematic uncertainties of the yields, computed taking into account correlations among nuisance parameters and among processes.
A precision measurement of the matrix elements for $\eta\to\pi^+\pi^-\pi^0$ and $\eta\to\pi^0\pi^0\pi^0$ decays is performed using a sample of $(10087\pm44)\times10^6$$J/\psi$ decays collected with the BESIII detector. The decay $J/\psi \to \gamma \eta$ is used to select clean samples of 631,686 $\eta\to\pi^+\pi^-\pi^0$ decays and 272,322 $\eta\to\pi^0\pi^0\pi^0$ decays. The matrix elements for both channels are in reasonable agreement with previous measurements. The non-zero $gX^2Y$ term for the decay mode $\eta\to\pi^+\pi^-\pi^0$ is confirmed, as reported by the KLOE Collaboration, while the other higher-order terms are found to be insignificant. Dalitz plot asymmetries in the $\eta\to\pi^+\pi^-\pi^0$ decay are also explored and are found to be consistent with charge conjugation invariance. In addition, a cusp effect is investigated in the $\eta\to\pi^0\pi^0\pi^0$ decay, and no obvious structure around the $\pi^+\pi^-$ mass threshold is observed.
The acceptance corrected $\eta\to\pi^+\pi^-\pi^0$ data from 10 billion $J/\psi$ events collected at BESIII and the corresponding statistical uncertainties in the Dalitz plot variables $X$ and $Y$. The data are divided into $20\times20$ bins in $X$ and $Y$, and only the bins with non-zero event are listed in the table. The first two columns in the table are the center values of $X$ and $Y$, respectively. The last column is the acceptance corrected data and the corresponding statistical uncertainties.
The acceptance corrected $\eta\to\pi^0\pi^0\pi^0$ data from 10 billion $J/\psi$ events collected at BESIII and the corresponding statistical uncertainties in the Dalitz plot variables $X$ and $Y$. The data are divided into $20\times20$ bins in $X$ and $Y$, and only the bins with non-zero event are listed in the table. The first two columns in the table are the center values of $X$ and $Y$, respectively. The last column is the acceptance corrected data and the corresponding statistical uncertainties.
This paper presents direct searches for lepton flavour violation in Higgs boson decays, $H\rightarrow e\tau$ and $H\rightarrow\mu\tau$, performed using data collected with the ATLAS detector at the LHC. The searches are based on a data sample of proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 138 fb$^{-1}$. Leptonic ($\tau \rightarrow \ell \nu_\ell \nu_\tau$) and hadronic ($\tau \rightarrow $ hadrons $ \nu_\tau$) decays of the $\tau$-lepton are considered. Two background estimation techniques are employed: the MC-template method, based on data-corrected simulation samples, and the Symmetry method, based on exploiting the symmetry between electrons and muons in the Standard Model backgrounds. No significant excess of events is observed and the results are interpreted as upper limits on lepton-flavour-violating branching ratios of the Higgs boson. The observed (expected) upper limits set on the branching ratios at 95% confidence level, $\mathcal{B}(H\rightarrow e\tau)<0.20\%$ (0.12%) and $\mathcal{B}(H\rightarrow \mu\tau)<0.18\%$ (0.09%), are obtained with the MC-template method from a simultaneous measurement of potential $H \rightarrow e\tau$ and $H \rightarrow\mu\tau$ signals. The best-fit branching ratio difference, $\mathcal{B}(H\rightarrow \mu\tau)- \mathcal{B}(H\rightarrow e\tau)$, measured with the Symmetry method in the channel where the $\tau$-lepton decays to leptons, is (0.25 $\pm$ 0.10)%, compatible with a value of zero within 2.5$\sigma$.
Fit results of the simultaneous measurements of the $H\to e\tau$ and $H\to \mu\tau$ signals (2POI) showing upper limits at 95% C.L. on the LFV branching ratios of the Higgs boson $H\to e\tau$. The results from standalone channel/categories fits are compared with the results of the combined fit.
Fit results of the simultaneous measurements of the $H\to e\tau$ and $H\to \mu\tau$ signals (2POI) showing upper limits at 95% C.L. on the LFV branching ratios of the Higgs boson $H\to e\tau$. The results from standalone channel/categories fits are compared with the results of the combined fit.
Fit results of the simultaneous measurements of the $H\to e\tau$ and $H\to \mu\tau$ signals (2POI) showing best-fit values of the LFV branching ratios of the Higgs boson $\hat{B}$($H\to e\tau$). The results from standalone channel/categories fits are compared with the results of the combined fit.
Measurements of the suppression and correlations of dijets is performed using 3 $\mu$b$^{-1}$ of Xe+Xe data at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.44$ TeV collected with the ATLAS detector at the LHC. Dijets with jets reconstructed using the $R=0.4$ anti-$k_t$ algorithm are measured differentially in jet $p_{\text{T}}$ over the range of 32 GeV to 398 GeV and the centrality of the collisions. Significant dijet momentum imbalance is found in the most central Xe+Xe collisions, which decreases in more peripheral collisions. Results from the measurement of per-pair normalized and absolutely normalized dijet $p_{\text{T}}$ balance are compared with previous Pb+Pb measurements at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} =5.02$ TeV. The differences between the dijet suppression in Xe+Xe and Pb+Pb are further quantified by the ratio of pair nuclear-modification factors. The results are found to be consistent with those measured in Pb+Pb data when compared in classes of the same event activity and when taking into account the difference between the center-of-mass energies of the initial parton scattering process in Xe+Xe and Pb+Pb collisions. These results should provide input for a better understanding of the role of energy density, system size, path length, and fluctuations in the parton energy loss.
The centrality intervals in Xe+Xe collisions and their corresponding TAA with absolute uncertainties.
The centrality intervals in Xe+Xe and Pb+Pb collisions for matching SUM ET FCAL intervals and respective TAA values for Xe+Xe collisions.
The performance of the jet energy scale (JES) for jets with $|y| < 2.1$ evaluated as a function of pT_truth in different centrality bins. Simulated hard scatter events were overlaid onto events from a dedicated sample of minimum-bias Xe+Xe data.
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 $R=0.4$.
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 flavor-changing neutral-current couplings between a top quark, an up or charm quark and a $Z$ boson is presented, using proton-proton collision data at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV collected by the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider. The analyzed dataset corresponds to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. The search targets both single-top-quark events produced as $gq\rightarrow tZ$ (with $q = u, c$) and top-quark-pair events, with one top quark decaying through the $t \rightarrow Zq$ channel. The analysis considers events with three leptons (electrons or muons), a $b$-tagged jet, possible additional jets, and missing transverse momentum. The data are found to be consistent with the background-only hypothesis and 95% confidence-level limits on the $t \rightarrow Zq$ branching ratios are set, assuming only tensor operators of the Standard Model effective field theory framework contribute to the $tZq$ vertices. These are $6.2 \times 10^{-5}$ ($13\times 10^{-5}$) for $t\rightarrow Zu$ ($t\rightarrow Zc$) for a left-handed $tZq$ coupling, and $6.6 \times 10^{-5}$ ($12\times 10^{-5}$) in the case of a right-handed coupling. These results are interpreted as 95% CL upper limits on the strength of corresponding couplings, yielding limits for $|C_{uW}^{(13)*}|$ and $|C_{uB}^{(13)*}|$ ($|C_{uW}^{(31)}|$ and $|C_{uB}^{(31)}|$) of 0.15 (0.16), and limits for $|C_{uW}^{(23)*}|$ and $|C_{uB}^{(23)*}|$ ($|C_{uW}^{(32)}|$ and $|C_{uB}^{(32)}|$) of 0.22 (0.21), assuming a new-physics energy scale $\Lambda_\text{NP}$ of 1 TeV.
Summary of the signal strength $\mu$ parameters obtained from the fits to extract LH and RH results for the FCNC tZu and tZc couplings. For the reference branching ratio, the most stringent limits are used.
Observed and expected 95% CL limits on the FCNC $t\rightarrow Zq$ branching ratios and the effective coupling strengths for different vertices and couplings (top eight rows). For the latter, the energy scale is assumed to be $\Lambda_{NP}$ = 1 TeV. The bottom rows show, for the case of the FCNC $t\rightarrow Zu$ branching ratio, the observed and expected 95% CL limits when only one of the two SRs, either SR1 or SR2, and all CRs are included in the likelihood.
Comparison between data and background prediction before the fit (Pre-Fit) for the mass of the SM top-quark candidate in SR1. The uncertainty band includes both the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The four FCNC LH signals are also shown separately, normalized to five times the cross-section corresponding to the most stringent observed branching ratio limits. The first (last) bin in all distributions includes the underflow (overflow). The lower panels show the ratios of the data (Data) to the background prediction (Bkg.).
Measurements of transverse energy$-$energy correlations and their associated azimuthal asymmetries in multijet events are presented. The analysis is performed using a data sample corresponding to 139 $\mbox{fb\(^{-1}\)}$ of proton$-$proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV, collected with the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider. The measurements are presented in bins of the scalar sum of the transverse momenta of the two leading jets and unfolded to particle level. They are then compared to next-to-next-to-leading-order perturbative QCD calculations for the first time, which feature a significant reduction in the theoretical uncertainties estimated using variations of the renormalisation and factorisation scales. The agreement between data and theory is good, thus providing a precision test of QCD at large momentum transfers $Q$. The strong coupling constant $\alpha_s$ is extracted differentially as a function of $Q$, showing a good agreement with the renormalisation group equation and with previous analyses. A simultaneous fit to all transverse energy$-$energy correlation distributions across different kinematic regions yields a value of $\alpha_\mathrm{s}(m_Z) = 0.1175 \pm 0.0006 \mbox{ (exp.)} ^{+0.0034}_{-0.0017} \mbox{ (theo.)}$, while the global fit to the asymmetry distributions yields $\alpha_{\mathrm{s}}(m_Z) = 0.1185 \pm 0.0009 \mbox{ (exp.)} ^{+0.0025}_{-0.0012} \mbox{ (theo.)}$.
Particle-level TEEC results
Particle-level TEEC results for the first HT2 bin
Particle-level TEEC results for the second HT2 bin
This paper presents a search for a new Z' vector gauge boson with the ATLAS experiment at the Large Hadron Collider using pp collision data collected at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. The new gauge boson Z' is predicted by $L_{\mu}-L_{\tau}$ models to address observed phenomena that can not be explained by the Standard Model. The search examines the four-muon (4$\mu$) final state, using a deep learning neural network classifier to separate the Z' signal from the Standard Model background events. The di-muon invariant masses in the $4\mu$ events are used to extract the Z' resonance signature. No significant excess of events is observed over the predicted background. Upper limits at a 95% confidence level on the Z' production cross-section times the decay branching fraction of $pp \rightarrow Z'\mu\mu \rightarrow 4\mu$ are set from 0.31 to 4.3 fb for the Z' mass ranging from 5 to 81 GeV. The corresponding common coupling strengths, $g_{Z'}$, of the Z' boson to the second and third generation leptons above 0.003 - 0.2 have been excluded.
Summary of the chosen $Z'$ hypotheses and corresponding coupling, width, and cross-section (calculated at LO accuracy in QCD) at each mass point.
Summary of the chosen $Z'$ hypotheses and corresponding coupling, width, and cross-section (calculated at LO accuracy in QCD) at each mass point.
The $Z'$ signal event selection efficiencies compared to the events passing the previous cut level for several representative mass points. The overall signal efficiencies are the products of the 4$\mu$ MC filter and the combined event selection efficiencies.
A search for flavour-changing neutral-current decays of a top quark into an up-type quark (either up or charm) and a light scalar particle $X$ decaying into a bottom anti-bottom quark pair is presented. The search focuses on top-quark pair production where one top quark decays to $qX$, with $X \rightarrow b\bar{b}$, and the other top quark decays according to the Standard Model, with the $W$ boson decaying leptonically. The final state is thus characterised by an isolated electron or muon and at least four jets. Events are categorised according to the multiplicity of jets and jets tagged as originating from $b$-quarks, and a neural network is used to discriminate between signal and background processes. The data analysed correspond to 139 fb$^{-1}$ of proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV, recorded with the ATLAS detector at the LHC. The 95% confidence-level upper limits between 0.019% and 0.062% are derived for the branching fraction $\mathcal{B}$($t \rightarrow uX$) and between 0.018% and 0.078% for the branching fraction $\mathcal{B}$($t \rightarrow cX$), for masses of the scalar particle $X$ between 20 and 160 GeV.
Expected and observed 95% CL upper limits for $\mathcal{B}$($t \rightarrow uX$) $\times$ $\mathcal{B}$($X \rightarrow b\bar{b}$). The bands surrounding the expected limits show the 68% and 95% confidence intervals, respectively.
Expected and observed 95% CL upper limits for $\mathcal{B}$($t \rightarrow cX$) $\times$ $\mathcal{B}$($X \rightarrow b\bar{b}$). The bands surrounding the expected limits show the 68% and 95% confidence intervals, respectively.
Expected and observed 95% CL upper limits for $\mathcal{B}$($t \rightarrow uH$) $\times$ $\mathcal{B}$($X \rightarrow b\bar{b}$) and $\mathcal{B}$($t \rightarrow cH$) $\times$ $\mathcal{B}$($X \rightarrow b\bar{b}$).
A search for the leptonic charge asymmetry ($A_\text{c}^{\ell}$) of top-quark$-$antiquark pair production in association with a $W$ boson ($t\bar{t}W$) is presented. The search is performed using final states with exactly three charged light leptons (electrons or muons) and is based on $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV proton$-$proton collision data collected with the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider at CERN during the years 2015$-$2018, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. A profile-likelihood fit to the event yields in multiple regions corresponding to positive and negative differences between the pseudorapidities of the charged leptons from top-quark and top-antiquark decays is used to extract the charge asymmetry. At reconstruction level, the asymmetry is found to be $-0.123 \pm 0.136$ (stat.) $\pm \, 0.051$ (syst.). An unfolding procedure is applied to convert the result at reconstruction level into a charge-asymmetry value in a fiducial volume at particle level with the result of $-0.112 \pm 0.170$ (stat.) $\pm \, 0.054$ (syst.). The Standard Model expectations for these two observables are calculated using Monte Carlo simulations with next-to-leading-order plus parton shower precision in quantum chromodynamics and including next-to-leading-order electroweak corrections. They are $-0.084 \, ^{+0.005}_{-0.003}$ (scale) $\pm\, 0.006$ (MC stat.) and $-0.063 \, ^{+0.007}_{-0.004}$ (scale) $\pm\, 0.004$ (MC stat.) respectively, and in agreement with the measurements.
Measured values of the leptonic charge asymmetry ($A_c^{\ell}$) in ttW production in the three lepton channel. Results are given at reconstruction level and at particle level. Expected values are obtained using the Sherpa MC generator.
Definition of the fiducial phase space at particle level with the light lepton candidates $(\ell=e,\mu)$, jets ($j$) and invariant mass of the opposite sign same flavour lepton pair ($m_{OSSF}^{ll}$).
Correlation matrix between the Normalisation Factors and the Nuisance Parameters (NP) in the fit using using both statistical and systematic uncertainties to data in all analysis regions.
Differential cross-section measurements of $Z\gamma$ production in association with hadronic jets are presented, using the full 139 fb$^{-1}$ dataset of $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV proton-proton collisions collected by the ATLAS detector during Run 2 of the LHC. Distributions are measured using events in which the $Z$ boson decays leptonically and the photon is usually radiated from an initial-state quark. Measurements are made in both one and two observables, including those sensitive to the hard scattering in the event and others which probe additional soft and collinear radiation. Different Standard Model predictions, from both parton-shower Monte Carlo simulation and fixed-order QCD calculations, are compared with the measurements. In general, good agreement is observed between data and predictions from MATRIX and MiNNLO$_\text{PS}$, as well as next-to-leading-order predictions from MadGraph5_aMC@NLO and Sherpa.
Measured differential cross section as a function of observable $ p_{T}^{ll}$. Error on the measured cross-section include all the systematic uncertainties. SM predictions are produced with the event generators at particle level: Sherpa 2.2.4, Sherpa 2.2.11, MadGraph5_aMC@NLO, and MiNNLO$_{PS}$. Fixed order calculations results use MATRIX NNLO. Error represent statistical uncertainty and theoretical uncertainty (PDF and Scale variations).
Measured differential cross section as a function of observable $ p_{T}^{ll}$. Error on the measured cross-section include all the systematic uncertainties. SM predictions are produced with the event generators at particle level: Sherpa 2.2.4, Sherpa 2.2.11, MadGraph5_aMC@NLO, and MiNNLO$_{PS}$. Fixed order calculations results use MATRIX NNLO. Error represent statistical uncertainty and theoretical uncertainty (PDF and Scale variations).
Measured differential cross section as a function of observable $ p_{T}^{ll} - p_{T}^{\gamma}$. Error on the measured cross-section include all the systematic uncertainties. SM predictions are produced with the event generators at particle level: Sherpa 2.2.4, Sherpa 2.2.11, MadGraph5_aMC@NLO, and MiNNLO$_{PS}$. Fixed order calculations results use MATRIX NNLO. Error represent statistical uncertainty and theoretical uncertainty (PDF and Scale variations).
This paper presents measurements of charged-hadron spectra obtained in $pp$, $p$+Pb, and Pb+Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ or $\sqrt{s_{_\text{NN}}}=5.02$ TeV, and in Xe+Xe collisions at $\sqrt{s_{_\text{NN}}}=5.44$ TeV. The data recorded by the ATLAS detector at the LHC have total integrated luminosities of 25 pb${}^{-1}$, 28 nb${}^{-1}$, 0.50 nb${}^{-1}$, and 3 $\mu$b${}^{-1}$, respectively. The nuclear modification factors $R_{p\text{Pb}}$ and $R_\text{AA}$ are obtained by comparing the spectra in heavy-ion and $pp$ collisions in a wide range of charged-particle transverse momenta and pseudorapidity. The nuclear modification factor $R_{p\text{Pb}}$ shows a moderate enhancement above unity with a maximum at $p_{\mathrm{T}} \approx 3$ GeV; the enhancement is stronger in the Pb-going direction. The nuclear modification factors in both Pb+Pb and Xe+Xe collisions feature a significant, centrality-dependent suppression. They show a similar distinct $p_{\mathrm{T}}$-dependence with a local maximum at $p_{\mathrm{T}} \approx 2$ GeV and a local minimum at $p_{\mathrm{T}} \approx 7$ GeV. This dependence is more distinguishable in more central collisions. No significant $|\eta|$-dependence is found. A comprehensive comparison with several theoretical predictions is also provided. They typically describe $R_\text{AA}$ better in central collisions and in the $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ range from about 10 to 100 GeV.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - <br><b>charged-hadron spectra:</b> <br><i>pp reference:</i> <a href="?version=1&table=Table1">for p+Pb</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table10">for Pb+Pb</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table19">for Xe+Xe</a> <br><i>p+Pb:</i> <a href="?version=1&table=Table2">0-5%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table3">5-10%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table4">10-20%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table5">20-30%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table6">30-40%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table7">40-60%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table8">60-90%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table9">0-90%</a> <br><i>Pb+Pb:</i> <a href="?version=1&table=Table11">0-5%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table12">5-10%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table13">10-20%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table14">20-30%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table15">30-40%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table16">40-50%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table17">50-60%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table18">60-80%</a> <br><i>Xe+Xe:</i> <a href="?version=1&table=Table20">0-5%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table21">5-10%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table22">10-20%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table23">20-30%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table24">30-40%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table25">40-50%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table26">50-60%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table27">60-80%</a> </br>- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - <br><b>nuclear modification factors (p<sub>T</sub>):</b> <br><i>R<sub>pPb</sub>:</i> <a href="?version=1&table=Table28">0-5%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table29">5-10%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table30">10-20%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table31">20-30%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table32">30-40%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table33">40-60%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table34">60-90%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table35">0-90%</a> <br><i>R<sub>AA</sub> (Pb+Pb):</i> <a href="?version=1&table=Table36">0-5%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table37">5-10%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table38">10-20%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table39">20-30%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table40">30-40%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table41">40-50%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table42">50-60%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table43">60-80%</a> <br><i>R<sub>AA</sub> (Xe+Xe):</i> <a href="?version=1&table=Table44">0-5%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table45">5-10%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table46">10-20%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table47">20-30%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table48">30-40%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table49">40-50%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table50">50-60%</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table51">60-80%</a> </br>- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - <br><b>nuclear modification factors (y*/eta):</b> <br><i>R<sub>pPb</sub>:</i> <br> 0-5%: <a href="?version=1&table=Table52">0.66-0.755GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table53">2.95-3.35GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table54">7.65-8.8GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table55">15.1-17.3GeV</a> <br> 5-10%: <a href="?version=1&table=Table56">0.66-0.755GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table57">2.95-3.35GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table58">7.65-8.8GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table59">15.1-17.3GeV</a> <br> 10-20%: <a href="?version=1&table=Table60">0.66-0.755GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table61">2.95-3.35GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table62">7.65-8.8GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table63">15.1-17.3GeV</a> <br> 20-30%: <a href="?version=1&table=Table64">0.66-0.755GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table65">2.95-3.35GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table66">7.65-8.8GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table67">15.1-17.3GeV</a> <br> 30-40%: <a href="?version=1&table=Table68">0.66-0.755GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table69">2.95-3.35GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table70">7.65-8.8GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table71">15.1-17.3GeV</a> <br> 40-60%: <a href="?version=1&table=Table72">0.66-0.755GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table73">2.95-3.35GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table74">7.65-8.8GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table75">15.1-17.3GeV</a> <br> 60-90%: <a href="?version=1&table=Table76">0.66-0.755GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table77">2.95-3.35GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table78">7.65-8.8GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table79">15.1-17.3GeV</a> <br> 0-90%: <a href="?version=1&table=Table80">0.66-0.755GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table81">2.95-3.35GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table82">7.65-8.8GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table83">15.1-17.3GeV</a> <br><i>R<sub>AA</sub> (Pb+Pb):</i> <br> 0-5%: <a href="?version=1&table=Table84">1.7-1.95GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table85">6.7-7.65GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table86">20-23GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table87">60-95GeV</a> <br> 5-10%: <a href="?version=1&table=Table88">1.7-1.95GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table89">6.7-7.65GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table90">20-23GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table91">60-95GeV</a> <br> 10-20%: <a href="?version=1&table=Table92">1.7-1.95GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table93">6.7-7.65GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table94">20-23GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table95">60-95GeV</a> <br> 20-30%: <a href="?version=1&table=Table96">1.7-1.95GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table97">6.7-7.65GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table98">20-23GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table99">60-95GeV</a> <br> 30-40%: <a href="?version=1&table=Table100">1.7-1.95GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table101">6.7-7.65GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table102">20-23GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table103">60-95GeV</a> <br> 40-50%: <a href="?version=1&table=Table104">1.7-1.95GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table105">6.7-7.65GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table106">20-23GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table107">60-95GeV</a> <br> 50-60%: <a href="?version=1&table=Table108">1.7-1.95GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table109">6.7-7.65GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table110">20-23GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table111">60-95GeV</a> <br> 60-80%: <a href="?version=1&table=Table112">1.7-1.95GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table113">6.7-7.65GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table114">20-23GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table115">60-95GeV</a> <br><i>R<sub>AA</sub> (Xe+Xe):</i> <br> 0-5%: <a href="?version=1&table=Table116">1.7-1.95GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table117">6.7-7.65GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table118">20-23GeV</a> <br> 5-10%: <a href="?version=1&table=Table119">1.7-1.95GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table120">6.7-7.65GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table121">20-23GeV</a> <br> 10-20%: <a href="?version=1&table=Table122">1.7-1.95GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table123">6.7-7.65GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table124">20-23GeV</a> <br> 20-30%: <a href="?version=1&table=Table125">1.7-1.95GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table126">6.7-7.65GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table127">20-23GeV</a> <br> 30-40%: <a href="?version=1&table=Table128">1.7-1.95GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table129">6.7-7.65GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table130">20-23GeV</a> <br> 40-50%: <a href="?version=1&table=Table131">1.7-1.95GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table132">6.7-7.65GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table133">20-23GeV</a> <br> 50-60%: <a href="?version=1&table=Table134">1.7-1.95GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table135">6.7-7.65GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table136">20-23GeV</a> <br> 60-80%: <a href="?version=1&table=Table137">1.7-1.95GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table138">6.7-7.65GeV</a> <a href="?version=1&table=Table139">20-23GeV</a> <br>- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Charged-hadron cross-section in pp collisions. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.
Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 0-5% for p+Pb, divided by 〈TPPB〉. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.
Several extensions of the Standard Model predict the production of dark matter particles at the LHC. A search for dark matter particles produced in association with a dark Higgs boson decaying into $W^{+}W^{-}$ in the $\ell^\pm\nu q \bar q'$ final states with $\ell=e,\mu$ is presented. This analysis uses 139 fb$^{-1}$ of $pp$ collisions recorded by the ATLAS detector at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV. The $W^\pm \to q\bar q'$ decays are reconstructed from pairs of calorimeter-measured jets or from track-assisted reclustered jets, a technique aimed at resolving the dense topology from a pair of boosted quarks using jets in the calorimeter and tracking information. The observed data are found to agree with Standard Model predictions. Scenarios with dark Higgs boson masses ranging between 140 and 390 GeV are excluded.
Probability of finding at least one TAR jet, where the p<sub>T</sub>-leading TAR jet passes the m<sub>Wcand</sub> and D<sub>2</sub><sup>β=1</sup> requirements, as a function of m<sub>s</sub>. The probability is determined in a sample of signal events with m<sub>Z'</sub>=500 GeV, with the preselections applied.
Probability of finding at least one TAR jet, where the p<sub>T</sub>-leading TAR jet passes the m<sub>Wcand</sub> and D<sub>2</sub><sup>β=1</sup> requirements, as a function of m<sub>s</sub>. The probability is determined in a sample of signal events with m<sub>Z'</sub>=1000 GeV, with the preselections applied.
Probability of finding at least one TAR jet, where the p<sub>T</sub>-leading TAR jet passes the m<sub>Wcand</sub> and D<sub>2</sub><sup>β=1</sup> requirements, as a function of m<sub>s</sub>. The probability is determined in a sample of signal events with m<sub>Z'</sub>=1700 GeV, with the preselections applied.
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 heavy Higgs bosons produced in association with a vector boson and decaying into a pair of vector bosons is performed in final states with two leptons (electrons or muons) of the same electric charge, missing transverse momentum and jets. A data sample of proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV recorded with the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider between 2015 and 2018 is used. The data correspond to a total integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. The observed data are in agreement with Standard Model background expectations. The results are interpreted using higher-dimensional operators in an effective field theory. Upper limits on the production cross-section are calculated at 95% confidence level as a function of the heavy Higgs boson's mass and coupling strengths to vector bosons. Limits are set in the Higgs boson mass range from 300 to 1500 GeV, and depend on the assumed couplings. The highest excluded mass for a heavy Higgs boson with the coupling combinations explored is 900 GeV. Limits on coupling strengths are also provided.
Comparison between data and SM predictions for the meff distributions in the boosted SR. The background predictions are obtained through a background-only simultaneous fit and are shown as filled histograms. The entries in overflow are included in the last bin. The size of the combined statistical and systematic uncertainty for the sum of the fitted background is indicated by the hatched band. The ratio of the data to the sum of the fitted background is shown in the lower panel. Two benchmark signal samples, as indicated in the legend, are also shown as unstacked unfilled histograms normalised to the integrated luminosity of the data using the theoretical cross-sections.
Comparison between data and SM predictions for the meff distributions in the resolved SR. The background predictions are obtained through a background-only simultaneous fit and are shown as filled histograms. The entries in overflow are included in the last bin. The size of the combined statistical and systematic uncertainty for the sum of the fitted background is indicated by the hatched band. The ratio of the data to the sum of the fitted background is shown in the lower panel. Two benchmark signal samples, as indicated in the legend, are also shown as unstacked unfilled histograms normalised to the integrated luminosity of the data using the theoretical cross-sections.
Expected 95% CL upper limits on the production of a heavy Higgs boson as functions of fw and fww with mass equal to 300 GeV.
A search for a new heavy scalar or pseudo-scalar Higgs boson ($H/A$) produced in association with a pair of top quarks, with the Higgs boson decaying into a pair of top quarks ($H/A\rightarrow t\bar{t}$) is reported. The search targets a final state with exactly two leptons with same-sign electric charges or at least three leptons. The analysed dataset 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. Two multivariate classifiers are used to separate the signal from the background. No significant excess of events over the Standard Model expectation is observed. The results are interpreted in the context of a type-II two-Higgs-doublet model. The observed (expected) upper limits at 95% confidence level on the $t\bar{t}H/A$ production cross-section times the branching ratio of $H/A\rightarrow t\bar{t}$ range between 14 (10) fb and 6 (5) fb for a heavy Higgs boson with mass between 400 GeV and 1000 GeV, respectively. Assuming that only one particle, either the scalar $H$ or the pseudo-scalar $A$, contributes to the $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ final state, values of $\tan\beta$ below 1.2 or 0.5 are excluded for a mass of 400 GeV or 1000 GeV, respectively. These exclusion ranges increase to $\tan\beta$ below 1.6 or 0.6 when both particles are considered.
Pre-fit comparison between data and background in the baseline SR for two of the variables used as input for the SM BDT: the sum of the leading four jets b-tagging scores.
Pre-fit comparison between data and background in the baseline SR for two of the variables used as input for the SM BDT: the number of jets.
Pre-fit comparison between data and background in the baseline SR for two of the variables used as input for the BSM pBDT: SM BDT.
A search for pair-produced scalar and vector leptoquarks decaying into quarks and leptons of different generations is presented. It uses the full LHC Run 2 (2015-2018) data set of 139 fb$^{-1}$ collected with the ATLAS detector in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV. Scalar leptoquarks with charge -(1/3)e as well as scalar and vector leptoquarks with charge +(2/3)e are considered. All possible decays of the pair-produced leptoquarks into quarks of the third generation (t, b) and charged or neutral leptons of the first or second generation ($e, \mu, \nu$) with exactly one electron or muon in the final state are investigated. No significant deviations from the Standard Model expectation are observed. Upper limits on the production cross-section are provided for eight models as a function of the leptoquark mass and the branching ratio of the leptoquark into the charged or neutral lepton. In addition, lower limits on the leptoquark masses are derived for all models across a range of branching ratios. Two of these models have the goal of providing an explanation for the recent B-anomalies. In both models, a vector leptoquark decays into charged and neutral leptons of the second generation with a similar branching fraction. Lower limits of 1980 GeV and 1710 GeV are set on the leptoquark mass for these two models.
- - - - - - - - Overview of HEPData Record - - - - - - - - <br/><br/> <b>95% CL limits on the production cross-section for:</b> <ul> <li><a href="135703?version=1&table=%24LQ_u%20%5Crightarrow%20t%5Cnu%2Fb%5Cmu%24%20observed%20limits">scalar up-type LQs decaying into a top quark and a neutrino or a bottom quark and a muon (observed)</a> <li><a href="135703?version=1&table=%24LQ_u%20%5Crightarrow%20t%5Cnu%2Fb%5Cmu%24%20expected%20limits">scalar up-type LQs decaying into a top quark and a neutrino or a bottom quark and a muon (expected)</a> <li><a href="135703?version=1&table=%24LQ_u%20%5Crightarrow%20t%5Cnu%2Fbe%24%20observed%20limits">scalar up-type LQs decaying into a top quark and a neutrino or a bottom quark and an electron (observed)</a> <li><a href="135703?version=1&table=%24LQ_u%20%5Crightarrow%20t%5Cnu%2Fbe%24%20expected%20limits">scalar up-type LQs decaying into a top quark and a neutrino or a bottom quark and an electron (expected)</a> <li><a href="135703?version=1&table=%24LQ_d%20%5Crightarrow%20t%5Cmu%2Fb%5Cnu%24%20observed%20limits">scalar down-type LQs decaying into a bottom quark and a neutrino or a top quark and a muon (observed)</a> <li><a href="135703?version=1&table=%24LQ_d%20%5Crightarrow%20t%5Cmu%2Fb%5Cnu%24%20expected%20limits">scalar down-type LQs decaying into a bottom quark and a neutrino or a top quark and a muon (expected)</a> <li><a href="135703?version=1&table=%24LQ_d%20%5Crightarrow%20te%2Fb%5Cnu%24%20observed%20limits">scalar down-type LQs decaying into a bottom quark and a neutrino or a top quark and an electron (observed)</a> <li><a href="135703?version=1&table=%24LQ_d%20%5Crightarrow%20te%2Fb%5Cnu%24%20expected%20limits">scalar down-type LQs decaying into a bottom quark and a neutrino or a top quark and an electron (expected)</a> <li><a href="135703?version=1&table=%24vLQ_%7BYM%7D%20%5Crightarrow%20t%5Cnu%2Fb%5Cmu%24%20observed%20limits">vector up-type LQs in the Yang-Mills coupling scenario decaying into a top quark and a neutrino or a bottom quark and a muon (observed)</a> <li><a href="135703?version=1&table=%24vLQ_%7BYM%7D%20%5Crightarrow%20t%5Cnu%2Fb%5Cmu%24%20expected%20limits">vector up-type LQs in the Yang-Mills coupling scenario decaying into a top quark and a neutrino or a bottom quark and a muon (expected)</a> <li><a href="135703?version=1&table=%24vLQ_%7BYM%7D%20%5Crightarrow%20t%5Cnu%2Fbe%24%20observed%20limits">vector up-type LQs in the Yang-Mills coupling scenario decaying into a top quark and a neutrino or a bottom quark and an electron (observed)</a> <li><a href="135703?version=1&table=%24vLQ_%7BYM%7D%20%5Crightarrow%20t%5Cnu%2Fbe%24%20expected%20limits">vector up-type LQs in the Yang-Mills coupling scenario decaying into a top quark and a neutrino or a bottom quark and an electron (expected)</a> <li><a href="135703?version=1&table=%24vLQ_%7Bmin%7D%20%5Crightarrow%20t%5Cnu%2Fb%5Cmu%24%20observed%20limits">vector up-type LQs in the minimal coupling scenario decaying into a top quark and a neutrino or a bottom quark and a muon (observed)</a> <li><a href="135703?version=1&table=%24vLQ_%7Bmin%7D%20%5Crightarrow%20t%5Cnu%2Fb%5Cmu%24%20expected%20limits">vector up-type LQs in the minimal coupling scenario decaying into a top quark and a neutrino or a bottom quark and a muon (expected)</a> <li><a href="135703?version=1&table=%24vLQ_%7Bmin%7D%20%5Crightarrow%20t%5Cnu%2Fbe%24%20observed%20limits">vector up-type LQs in the minimal coupling scenario decaying into a top quark and a neutrino or a bottom quark and an electron (observed)</a> <li><a href="135703?version=1&table=%24vLQ_%7Bmin%7D%20%5Crightarrow%20t%5Cnu%2Fbe%24%20expected%20limits">vector up-type LQs in the minimal coupling scenario decaying into a top quark and a neutrino or a bottom quark and an electron (expected)</a> </ul> <b>Product of signal acceptance and efficiency in the training region for:</b> <ul> <li><a href="135703?version=1&table=%24LQ_u%20%5Crightarrow%20t%5Cnu%2Fb%5Cmu%24%20Acceptance%20times%20Efficiency">scalar up-type LQs decaying into top quarks and neutrinos or bottom quarks and muons</a> <li><a href="135703?version=1&table=%24LQ_u%20%5Crightarrow%20t%5Cnu%2Fbe%24%20Acceptance%20times%20Efficiency">scalar up-type LQs decaying into top quarks and neutrinos or bottom quarks and electrons</a> <li><a href="135703?version=1&table=%24LQ_d%20%5Crightarrow%20t%5Cmu%2Fb%5Cnu%24%20Acceptance%20times%20Efficiency">scalar down-type LQs decaying into bottom quarks and neutrinos or top quarks and muons</a> <li><a href="135703?version=1&table=%24LQ_d%20%5Crightarrow%20te%2Fb%5Cnu%24%20Acceptance%20times%20Efficiency">scalar down-type LQs decaying into bottom quarks and neutrinos or top quarks and electrons</a> <li><a href="135703?version=1&table=%24vLQ_%7BYM%7D%20%5Crightarrow%20t%5Cnu%2Fb%5Cmu%24%20Acceptance%20times%20Efficiency">vector up-type LQs in the Yang-Mills coupling scenario decaying into top quarks and neutrinos or bottom quarks and muons</a> <li><a href="135703?version=1&table=%24vLQ_%7BYM%7D%20%5Crightarrow%20t%5Cnu%2Fbe%24%20Acceptance%20times%20Efficiency">vector up-type LQs in the Yang-Mills coupling scenario decaying into top quarks and neutrinos or bottom quarks and electrons</a> <li><a href="135703?version=1&table=%24vLQ_%7Bmin%7D%20%5Crightarrow%20t%5Cnu%2Fb%5Cmu%24%20Acceptance%20times%20Efficiency">vector up-type LQs in the minimal coupling scenario decaying into top quarks and neutrinos or bottom quarks and muons</a> <li><a href="135703?version=1&table=%24vLQ_%7Bmin%7D%20%5Crightarrow%20t%5Cnu%2Fbe%24%20Acceptance%20times%20Efficiency">vector up-type LQs in the minimal coupling scenario decaying into top quarks and neutrinos or bottom quarks and electrons</a> </ul> <b>Cut-flow for:</b> <ul> <li><a href="135703?version=1&table=Scalar%20LQs%20cut-flow">scalar LQs</a> <li><a href="135703?version=1&table=Vector%20LQs%20cut-flow">vector LQs</a> </ul>
Observed 95% CL limits on the production cross-section for scalar up-type LQs decaying into a top quark and a neutrino or a bottom quark and a muon.
Expected 95% CL limits on the production cross-section for scalar up-type LQs decaying into a top quark and a neutrino or a bottom quark and a muon.
A generic search for resonances is performed with events containing a $Z$ boson with transverse momentum greater than 100 GeV, decaying into $e^+e^-$ or $\mu^+\mu^-$. The analysed data collected with the ATLAS detector in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV at the Large Hadron Collider correspond to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. Two invariant mass distributions are examined for a localised excess relative to the expected Standard Model background in six independent event categories (and their inclusive sum) to increase the sensitivity. No significant excess is observed. Exclusion limits at 95% confidence level are derived for two cases: a model-independent interpretation of Gaussian-shaped resonances with the mass width between 3% and 10% of the resonance mass, and a specific heavy vector triplet model with the decay mode $W'\to ZW \to \ell\ell qq$.
Results of applying the BH algorithm to the mass spectra in the leading small-R jet category, using the fitted background estimations from the initial step
Results of applying the BH algorithm to the mass spectra in the leading bjet category, using the fitted background estimations from the initial step
Results of applying the BH algorithm to the mass spectra in the leading large-R jet category, using the fitted background estimations from the initial step
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 Higgs boson pair production in events with two $b$-jets and two $\tau$-leptons is presented, using a proton-proton collision dataset with an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ collected at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC. Higgs boson pairs produced non-resonantly or in the decay of a narrow scalar resonance in the mass range from 251 to 1600 GeV are targeted. Events in which at least one $\tau$-lepton decays hadronically are considered, and multivariate discriminants are used to reject the backgrounds. No significant excess of events above the expected background is observed in the non-resonant search. The largest excess in the resonant search is observed at a resonance mass of 1 TeV, with a local (global) significance of $3.1\sigma$ ($2.0\sigma$). Observed (expected) 95% confidence-level upper limits are set on the non-resonant Higgs boson pair-production cross-section at 4.7 (3.9) times the Standard Model prediction, assuming Standard Model kinematics, and on the resonant Higgs boson pair-production cross-section at between 21 and 900 fb (12 and 840 fb), depending on the mass of the narrow scalar resonance.
Breakdown of the relative contributions to the uncertainty in the extracted signal cross-sections, as determined in the likelihood fit (described in Section 8) to data. These are obtained by fixing the relevant nuisance parameters in the likelihood fit, and subtracting the obtained uncertainty on the fitted signal cross-sections in quadrature from the total uncertainty, and then dividing the result by the total uncertainty. The sum in quadrature of the individual components differs from the total uncertainty due to correlations between uncertainties in the different groups.
Post-fit expected number of signal and background events and observed number of data events in the last two bins of the non-resonant BDT score distribution of the SM signal after applying the selection criteria and requiring exactly 2 b-tagged jets and assuming a background-only hypothesis
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the cross-section of non-resonant HH production according to SM-like kinematics, and on the cross-section of non-resonant HH production divided by the SM prediction. The 1 sigma and 2 sigma variations around the expected limit are also shown.
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.
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.
Inclusive and differential measurements of the top-antitop ($t\bar{t}$) charge asymmetry $A_\text{C}^{t\bar{t}}$ and the leptonic asymmetry $A_\text{C}^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ are presented in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV recorded by the ATLAS experiment at the CERN Large Hadron Collider. The measurement uses the complete Run 2 dataset, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$, combines data in the single-lepton and dilepton channels, and employs reconstruction techniques adapted to both the resolved and boosted topologies. A Bayesian unfolding procedure is performed to correct for detector resolution and acceptance effects. The combined inclusive $t\bar{t}$ charge asymmetry is measured to be $A_\text{C}^{t\bar{t}} = 0.0068 \pm 0.0015$, which differs from zero by 4.7 standard deviations. Differential measurements are performed as a function of the invariant mass, transverse momentum and longitudinal boost of the $t\bar{t}$ system. Both the inclusive and differential measurements are found to be compatible with the Standard Model predictions, at next-to-next-to-leading order in quantum chromodynamics perturbation theory with next-to-leading-order electroweak corrections. The measurements are interpreted in the framework of the Standard Model effective field theory, placing competitive bounds on several Wilson coefficients.
- - - - - - - - Overview of HEPData Record - - - - - - - - <br/><br/> <b>Results:</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Resultsforchargeasymmetryinclusive">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Resultsforchargeasymmetryvsmtt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Resultsforchargeasymmetryvspttt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Resultsforchargeasymmetryvsbetatt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Resultsforleptonicchargeasymmetryinclusive">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Resultsforchargeasymmetryvsllmll">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Resultsforchargeasymmetryvsllptll">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Resultsforchargeasymmetryvsllbetall">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> </ul> <b>Bounds on the Wilson coefficients:</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=BoundsonWilsoncoefficientschargeasymmetryinclusive">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=BoundsonWilsoncoefficientschargeasymmetryvsmtt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$</a> </ul> <b>Ranking of systematic uncertainties:</b></br> Inclusive:<a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryinclusive">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$</a></br> <b>$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$:</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsbetattbin0">$\beta_{z,t\bar{t}} \in[0,0.3]$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsbetattbin1">$\beta_{z,t\bar{t}} \in[0.3,0.6]$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsbetattbin2">$\beta_{z,t\bar{t}} \in[0.6,0.8]$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsbetattbin3">$\beta_{z,t\bar{t}} \in[0.8,1]$</a> </ul> <b>$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$:</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsmttbin0">$m_{t\bar{t}}$ < $500$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsmttbin1">$m_{t\bar{t}} \in [500,750]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsmttbin2">$m_{t\bar{t}} \in [750,1000]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsmttbin3">$m_{t\bar{t}} \in [1000,1500]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsmttbin4">$m_{t\bar{t}}$ > $1500$GeV</a> </ul> <b>$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$:</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsptttbin0">$p_{T,t\bar{t}} \in [0,30]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsptttbin1">$p_{T,t\bar{t}} \in[30,120]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsptttbin2">$p_{T,t\bar{t}}$ > $120$GeV</a> </ul> Inclusive leptonic:<a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingleptonicchargeasymmetryinclusive">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a></br> <b>$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=1&tableNPrankingchargeasymmetry=vsllbetallbin0">$\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}} \in [0,0.3]$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&tableNPrankingchargeasymmetry=vsllbetallbin1">$\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}} \in [0.3,0.6]$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&tableNPrankingchargeasymmetry=vsllbetallbin2">$\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}} \in [0.6,0.8]$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&tableNPrankingchargeasymmetry=vsllbetallbin3">$\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}} \in [0.8,1]$</a> </ul> <b>$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsllmllbin0">$m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ < $200$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsllmllbin1">$m_{\ell\bar{\ell}} \in [200,300]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsllmllbin2">$m_{\ell\bar{\ell}} \in [300,400]$Ge$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsllmllbin3">$m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ > $400$GeV</a> </ul> <b>$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsllptllbin0">$p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}\in [0,20]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsllptllbin1">$p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}\in[20,70]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsllptllbin2">$p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ > $70$GeV</a> </ul> <b>NP correlations:</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPcorrelationschargeasymmetryinclusive">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPcorrelationschargeasymmetryvsmtt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPcorrelationschargeasymmetryvspttt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPcorrelationschargeasymmetryvsbetatt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPcorrelationsleptonicchargeasymmetryinclusive">$A_c^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPcorrelationschargeasymmetryvsllmll">$A_c^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPcorrelationschargeasymmetryvsllptll">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPcorrelationschargeasymmetryvsllbetall">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> </ul> <b>Covariance matrices:</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Covariancematrixchargeasymmetryvsmtt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Covariancematrixchargeasymmetryvspttt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Covariancematrixchargeasymmetryvsbetatt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Covariancematrixleptonicchargeasymmetryvsllmll">$A_c^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Covariancematrixleptonicchargeasymmetryvsllptll">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Covariancematrixleptonicchargeasymmetryvsllbetall">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> </ul>
The unfolded inclusive charge asymmetry. The measured values are given with statistical and systematic uncertainties. The SM theory predictions calculated at NNLO in QCD and NLO in EW theory are listed, and the impact of the linear term of the Wilson coefficient on the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ prediction is shown for two different values. The scale uncertainty is obtained by varying renormalisation and factorisation scales independently by a factor of 2 or 0.5 around $\mu_0$ to calculate the maximum and minimum value of the asymmetry, respectively. The nominal value $\mu_0$ is chosen as $H_T/4$. The variations in which one scale is multiplied by 2 while the other scale is divided by 2 are excluded. Finally, the scale and MC integration uncertainties are added in quadrature.
The unfolded differential charge asymmetry as a function of the invariant mass of the top pair system. The measured values are given with statistical and systematic uncertainties. The SM theory predictions calculated at NNLO in QCD and NLO in EW theory are listed, and the impact of the linear term of the Wilson coefficient on the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ prediction is shown for two different values. The scale uncertainty is obtained by varying renormalisation and factorisation scales independently by a factor of 2 or 0.5 around $\mu_0$ to calculate the maximum and minimum value of the asymmetry, respectively. The nominal value $\mu_0$ is chosen as $H_T/4$. The variations in which one scale is multiplied by 2 while the other scale is divided by 2 are excluded. Finally, the scale and MC integration uncertainties are added in quadrature.
Forum