A search for pair production of doubly charged Higgs bosons ($H^{\pm \pm}$), each decaying into a pair of prompt, isolated, highly energetic leptons with the same electric charge, is presented. The search uses a proton-proton collision data sample at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ recorded by the ATLAS detector during Run 2 of the Large Hadron Collider. This analysis focuses on same-charge leptonic decays, $H^{\pm \pm} \rightarrow \ell^{\pm} \ell^{\prime \pm}$ where $\ell, \ell^\prime=e, \mu, \tau$, in two-, three-, and four-lepton channels, but only considers final states which include electrons or muons. No evidence of a signal is observed. Corresponding limits on the production cross-section and consequently a lower limit on $m(H^{\pm \pm})$ are derived at 95% confidence level. Assuming that the branching ratios to each of the possible leptonic final states are equal, $\mathcal{B}(H^{\pm \pm} \rightarrow e^\pm e^\pm) = \mathcal{B}(H^{\pm \pm} \rightarrow e^\pm \mu^\pm) = \mathcal{B}(H^{\pm \pm} \rightarrow \mu^\pm \mu^\pm) = \mathcal{B}(H^{\pm \pm} \rightarrow e^\pm \tau^\pm) = \mathcal{B}(H^{\pm \pm} \rightarrow \mu^\pm \tau^\pm) = \mathcal{B}(H^{\pm \pm} \rightarrow \tau^\pm \tau^\pm) = 1/6$, the observed lower limit on the mass of a doubly charged Higgs boson is 1080 GeV within the left-right symmetric type-II seesaw model, which is an improvement over previous limits. Additionally, a lower limit of $m(H^{\pm \pm})$ = 900 GeV is obtained in the context of the Zee-Babu neutrino mass model.
LO, NLO cross-sections and K-factors for the pair-production of doubly charged Higgs bosons in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV. The K-factors (K=$\sigma_{NLO}/\sigma_{LO}$) are identical for $H^{\pm\pm}_L$, $H^{\pm\pm}_R$, and $k^{\pm\pm}$. The values are calculated using the NNPDF3.1NLO and NNPDF2.3LO PDF sets.
Observed (solid line) and expected (dashed line) 95% CL upper limits on the $H^{\pm\pm}$ pair production cross-section as a function of $m(H^{\pm\pm})$ resulting from the combination of all analysis channels, assuming $\sum_{\ell \ell^\prime} \mathcal{B}(H^{\pm\pm} \rightarrow \ell^{\pm} \ell^{\prime \pm})=100%$, where $\ell, \ell^\prime = e, \mu, \tau$.
Distribution of $m(e^{\pm},e^{\pm})_{\mathrm{lead}}$ in the electron-electron signal region after the background-only fit.
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.
This paper presents a statistical combination of searches targeting final states with two top quarks and invisible particles, characterised by the presence of zero, one or two leptons, at least one jet originating from a $b$-quark and missing transverse momentum. The analyses are searches for phenomena beyond the Standard Model consistent with the direct production of dark matter in $pp$ collisions at the LHC, using 139 fb$^{-\text{1}}$ of data collected with the ATLAS detector at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV. The results are interpreted in terms of simplified dark matter models with a spin-0 scalar or pseudoscalar mediator particle. In addition, the results are interpreted in terms of upper limits on the Higgs boson invisible branching ratio, where the Higgs boson is produced according to the Standard Model in association with a pair of top quarks. For scalar (pseudoscalar) dark matter models, with all couplings set to unity, the statistical combination extends the mass range excluded by the best of the individual channels by 50 (25) GeV, excluding mediator masses up to 370 GeV. In addition, the statistical combination improves the expected coupling exclusion reach by 14% (24%), assuming a scalar (pseudoscalar) mediator mass of 10 GeV. An upper limit on the Higgs boson invisible branching ratio of 0.38 (0.30$^{+\text{0.13}}_{-\text{0.09}}$) is observed (expected) at 95% confidence level.
Post-fit signal region yields for the tt0L-high and the tt0L-low analyses. The bottom panel shows the statistical significance of the difference between the SM prediction and the observed data in each region. '$t\bar{t}$ (other)' represents $t\bar{t}$ events without extra jets or events with extra light-flavour jets. 'Other' includes contributions from $t\bar{t}W$, $tZ$ and $tWZ$ processes. The total uncertainty in the SM expectation is represented with hatched bands and the expected distributions for selected signal models are shown as dashed lines.
Representative fit distribution in the signal region for the tt1L analysis: each bin of such distribution corresponds to a single SR included in the fit. 'Other' includes contributions from $t\bar{t}W$, $tZ$, $tWZ$ and $t\bar{t}$ (semileptonic) processes. The total uncertainty in the SM expectation is represented with hatched bands and the expected distributions for selected signal models are shown as dashed lines.
Representative fit distribution in the same flavour leptons signal region for the tt2L analysis: each bin of such distribution, starting from the red arrow, corresponds to a single SR included in the fit. 'FNP' includes the contribution from fake/non-prompt lepton background arising from jets (mainly $\pi/K$, heavy-flavour hadron decays and photon conversion) misidentified as leptons, estimated in a purely data-driven way. 'Other' includes contributions from $t\bar{t}W$, $tZ$ and $tWZ$ processes. The total uncertainty in the SM expectation is represented with hatched bands and the expected distributions for selected signal models are shown as dashed lines.
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.
This paper reports a search for Higgs boson pair ($hh$) production in association with a vector boson ($W$ or $Z$) using 139 $fb^{-1}$ of proton-proton collision data at $\sqrt{s}=$ 13 TeV recorded with the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider. The search is performed in final states in which the vector boson decays leptonically ($W\to\ell\nu, Z\to\ell\ell,\nu\nu$ with $\ell=e, \mu$) and the Higgs bosons each decay into a pair of $b$-quarks. It targets $Vhh$ signals from both non-resonant $hh$ production, present in the Standard Model (SM), and resonant $hh$ production, as predicted in some SM extensions. A 95% confidence-level upper limit of 183 (87) times the SM cross-section is observed (expected) for non-resonant $Vhh$ production when assuming the kinematics are as expected in the SM. Constraints are also placed on Higgs boson coupling modifiers. For the resonant search, upper limits on the production cross-sections are derived for two specific models: one is the production of a vector boson along with a neutral heavy scalar resonance $H$, in the mass range 260-1000 GeV, that decays into $hh$, and the other is the production of a heavier neutral pseudoscalar resonance $A$ that decays into a $Z$ boson and $H$ boson, where the $A$ boson mass is 360-800 GeV and the $H$ boson mass is 260-400 GeV. Constraints are also derived in the parameter space of two-Higgs-doublet models.
Acceptance times efficiency as a function of resonant mass for each event selection step in the search for a neutral heavy scalar resonance produced in association with a Z boson decaying to neutrinos.
Acceptance times efficiency as a function of resonant mass for each event selection step in the search for a neutral heavy scalar resonance produced in association with a Z boson decaying to neutrinos.
Acceptance times efficiency as a function of resonant mass for each event selection step in the search for a neutral heavy scalar resonance produced in association with a W boson decaying to a charged lepton and a neutrino.
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.
Forum