Date

Collaboration

Subject_areas

Search for narrow trijet resonances in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV

The CMS collaboration Hayrapetyan, Aram ; Tumasyan, Armen ; Adam, Wolfgang ; et al.
Phys.Rev.Lett. 133 (2024) 011801, 2024.
Inspire Record 2713513 DOI 10.17182/hepdata.144165

The first search for singly produced narrow resonances decaying to three well-separated hadronic jets is presented. The search uses proton-proton collision data corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 138 fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV, collected at the CERN LHC. No significant deviations from the background predictions are observed between 1.75-9.00 TeV. The results provide the first mass limits on a right-handed boson Z$_{\mathrm{R}}$ decaying to three gluons and on an excited quark decaying via a vector boson to three quarks, as well as updated limits on a Kaluza-Klein gluon decaying via a radion to three gluons.

35 data tables

Observed and expected (background-only fitted) invariant mass spectra of trijet events. Data spectra from three years are fitted separately and the sum is shown in the figure. The fitting function used is ${ d N}/{ d m} = p_{0}(1-x)^{p_{1}}/x^{\sum_{i=2}^{3} p_{i}\log^{i-2}(x)}$. The fitted parameters are $p_{1} = 7.350, p_{2} = 6.926, p_{3} = 0.388$ for 2016, $p_{1} = 8.308, p_{2} = 5.931, p_{3} = 0.167$ for 2017 and $p_{1} = 8.770, p_{2} = 5.617, p_{3} = 0.106$ for 2018. $p_{0}$ is the normalization parameter and its exact value is irrelevant.

Expected and observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to ggg) \mathcal{A}$ for a 3-body decay trijet resonance with $\Gamma_{X}\sim 3\% m_{X}$. The acceptance $\mathcal{A}$ is defined as $\mathcal{A} = N$(events with $m_{X}^{GEN} > 85\% m_{X}^{input}$) / $N$(events generated in the full phase space defined by the CMS default generator settings). Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Theoretical predictions assuming SM-like couplings are depicted with the red curve.

Expected and observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to ggg) \mathcal{A}$ for a 3-body decay trijet resonance with $\Gamma_{X}\sim 0.01\% m_{X}$. The acceptance $\mathcal{A}$ is defined as $\mathcal{A} = N$(events with $m_{X}^{GEN} > 85\% m_{X}^{input}$) / $N$(events generated in the full phase space defined by the CMS default generator settings). Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Theoretical predictions are depicted with the red curve.

More…

Search for dark matter produced in association with a Higgs boson decaying to tau leptons at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV with the ATLAS detector

The ATLAS collaboration Aad, Georges ; Aakvaag, Erlend ; Abbott, Braden Keim ; et al.
JHEP 09 (2023) 189, 2023.
Inspire Record 2661503 DOI 10.17182/hepdata.140433

A search for dark matter produced in association with a Higgs boson in final states with two hadronically decaying $\tau$-leptons and missing transverse momentum is presented. The analysis uses $139$ fb$^{-1}$ of proton-proton collision data at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV collected by the ATLAS experiment at the Large Hadron Collider between 2015 and 2018. No evidence for physics beyond the Standard Model is found. The results are interpreted in terms of a 2HDM+$a$ model. Exclusion limits at 95% confidence level are derived. Model-independent limits are also set on the visible cross section for processes beyond the Standard Model producing missing transverse momentum in association with a Higgs boson decaying to $\tau$-leptons.

70 data tables

<b>- - - - - - - - Overview of HEPData Record - - - - - - - -</b> <br><br> <b>CLs and CLs+b values</b> <ul> <li><a href=?table=CLs_tanb_mA_grid_Expected>Expected CLs values in mA vs tanB grid, Low mA SR</a> <li><a href=?table=CLs_tanb_mA_grid_Observed>Observed CLs values in mA vs tanB grid, Low mA SR</a> <li><a href=?table=CLs_ma_mA_grid_HighmA_SR_Expected>Expected CLs values in mA vs ma grid, High mA SR</a> <li><a href=?table=CLs_ma_mA_grid_HighmA_SR_Observed>Observed CLs values in mA vs ma grid, High mA SR</a> <li><a href=?table=CLs_ma_mA_grid_LowmA_SR_Expected>Expected CLs values in mA vs ma grid, Low mA SR</a> <li><a href=?table=CLs_ma_mA_grid_LowmA_SR_Observed>Observed CLs values in mA vs ma grid, Low mA SR</a> <li><a href=?table=CLsplusb_tanb_mA_grid>CLs+b values in mA vs tanB grid, Low mA SR</a> <li><a href=?table=CLsplusb_ma_mA_grid_HighmA_SR>CLs+b values in mA vs ma grid, High mA SR</a> <li><a href=?table=CLsplusb_ma_mA_grid_LowmA_SR>CLs+b values in mA vs ma grid, Low mA SR</a> </ul> <b>Cutflow tables</b> <ul> <li><a href=?table=Cutflows_ggf_LowmA_SR>Low mA SR, ggF production</a> <li><a href=?table=Cutflows_ggf_HighmA_SR>High mA SR, ggF production</a> <li><a href=?table=Cutflows_bb_LowmA_SR>Low mA SR, bb production</a> <li><a href=?table=Cutflows_bb_HighmA_SR>High mA SR, bb production</a> </ul> <b>Kinematic Distributions</b> <ul> <li><a href=?table=KinDist_LowmA_SR>Low mA SR mTtau1+mTtau2 distribution</a> <li><a href=?table=KinDist_HighmA_SR>High mA SR mTtau1+mTtau2 distribution</a> </ul> <b>Limits</b> <ul> <li><a href=?table=Expected_95%_CL_exclusion_limit_mAma_grid>Expected 95% CL exclusion limit in mA vs ma grid</a> <li><a href=?table=Observed_95%_CL_exclusion_limit_mAma_grid>Observed 95% CL exclusion limit in mA vs ma grid</a> <li><a href=?table=Expected_pm1sigma_95%_CL_exclusion_limit_mAma_grid>Expected +-1 sigma 95% CL exclusion limit in mA vs ma grid</a> <li><a href=?table=Expected_95%_CL_exclusion_limit_mAtanB_grid>Expected 95% CL exclusion limit in mA vs tanB grid</a> <li><a href=?table=Observed_95%_CL_exclusion_limit_mAtanB_grid>Observed 95% CL exclusion limit in mA vs tanB grid</a> <li><a href=?table=Expected_pm1sigma_95%_CL_exclusion_limit_mAtanB_grid>Expected +-1 sigma 95% CL exclusion limit in tanB grid</a> </ul> <b>Acceptance and efficiency</b> <ul> <li><a href=?table=table1>Acceptance, High mA SR, mA vs tanB grid, 400-750 GeV, bb prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table2>Acceptance, High mA SR, mA vs tanB grid, >750 GeV, bb prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table3>Acceptance, Low mA SR, mA vs tanB grid, 100-250 GeV, bb prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table4>Acceptance, Low mA SR, mA vs tanB grid, 250-400 GeV, bb prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table5>Acceptance, Low mA SR, mA vs tanB grid, 400-550 GeV, bb prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table6>Acceptance, Low mA SR, mA vs tanB grid, >550 GeV, bb prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table7>Acceptance, High mA SR, mA vs ma grid, 400-750 GeV, bb prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table8>Acceptance, High mA SR, mA vs ma grid, >750 GeV, bb prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table9>Acceptance, Low mA SR, mA vs ma grid, 100-250 GeV, bb prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table10>Acceptance, Low mA SR, mA vs ma grid, 250-400 GeV, bb prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table11>Acceptance, Low mA SR, mA vs ma grid, 400-550 GeV, bb prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table12>Acceptance, Low mA SR, mA vs ma grid, >550 GeV, bb prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table13>Acceptance, High mA SR, mA vs tanB grid, 400-750 GeV, ggF prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table14>Acceptance, High mA SR, mA vs tanB grid, >750 GeV, ggF prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table15>Acceptance, Low mA SR, mA vs tanB grid, 100-250 GeV, ggF prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table16>Acceptance, Low mA SR, mA vs tanB grid, 250-400 GeV, ggF prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table17>Acceptance, Low mA SR, mA vs tanB grid, 400-550 GeV, ggF prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table18>Acceptance, Low mA SR, mA vs tanB grid, >550 GeV, ggF prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table19>Acceptance, High mA SR, mA vs ma grid, 400-750 GeV, ggF prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table20>Acceptance, High mA SR, mA vs ma grid, >750 GeV, ggF prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table21>Acceptance, Low mA SR, mA vs ma grid, 100-250 GeV, ggF prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table22>Acceptance, Low mA SR, mA vs ma grid, 250-400 GeV, ggF prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table23>Acceptance, Low mA SR, mA vs ma grid, 400-550 GeV, ggF prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table24>Acceptance, Low mA SR, mA vs ma grid, >550 GeV, ggF prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table25>Efficiency, High mA SR, mA vs tanB grid, 400-750 GeV, bb prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table26>Efficiency, High mA SR, mA vs tanB grid, >750 GeV, bb prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table27>Efficiency, Low mA SR, mA vs tanB grid, 100-250 GeV, bb prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table28>Efficiency, Low mA SR, mA vs tanB grid, 250-400 GeV, bb prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table29>Efficiency, Low mA SR, mA vs tanB grid, 400-550 GeV, bb prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table30>Efficiency, Low mA SR, mA vs tanB grid, >550 GeV, bb prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table31>Efficiency, High mA SR, mA vs ma grid, 400-750 GeV, bb prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table32>Efficiency, High mA SR, mA vs ma grid, >750 GeV, bb prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table33>Efficiency, Low mA SR, mA vs ma grid, 100-250 GeV, bb prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table34>Efficiency, Low mA SR, mA vs ma grid, 250-400 GeV, bb prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table35>Efficiency, Low mA SR, mA vs ma grid, 400-550 GeV, bb prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table36>Efficiency, Low mA SR, mA vs ma grid, >550 GeV, bb prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table37>Efficiency, High mA SR, mA vs tanB grid, 400-750 GeV, ggF prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table38>Efficiency, High mA SR, mA vs tanB grid, >750 GeV, ggF prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table39>Efficiency, Low mA SR, mA vs tanB grid, 100-250 GeV, ggF prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table40>Efficiency, Low mA SR, mA vs tanB grid, 250-400 GeV, ggF prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table41>Efficiency, Low mA SR, mA vs tanB grid, 400-550 GeV, ggF prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table42>Efficiency, Low mA SR, mA vs tanB grid, >550 GeV, ggF prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table43>Efficiency, High mA SR, mA vs ma grid, 400-750 GeV, ggF prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table44>Efficiency, High mA SR, mA vs ma grid, >750 GeV, ggF prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table45>Efficiency, Low mA SR, mA vs ma grid, 100-250 GeV, ggF prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table46>Efficiency, Low mA SR, mA vs ma grid, 250-400 GeV, ggF prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table47>Efficiency, Low mA SR, mA vs ma grid, 400-550 GeV, ggF prod</a> <li><a href=?table=table48>Efficiency, Low mA SR, mA vs ma grid, >550 GeV, ggF prod</a> </ul>

Expected CLs values in the Low mA SR, mA vs tanB signal grid.

Observed CLs values in the Low mA SR, mA vs tanB signal grid.

More…

Version 2
Inclusive nonresonant multilepton probes of new phenomena at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV

The CMS collaboration Tumasyan, Armen ; Adam, Wolfgang ; Andrejkovic, Janik Walter ; et al.
Phys.Rev.D 105 (2022) 112007, 2022.
Inspire Record 2034279 DOI 10.17182/hepdata.110691

An inclusive search for nonresonant signatures of beyond the standard model (SM) phenomena in events with three or more charged leptons, including hadronically decaying $\tau$ leptons, is presented. The analysis is based on a data sample corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 138 fb$^{-1}$ of proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} =$ 13 TeV, collected by the CMS experiment at the LHC in 2016-2018. Events are categorized based on the lepton and b-tagged jet multiplicities and various kinematic variables. Three scenarios of physics beyond the SM are probed, and signal-specific boosted decision trees are used for enhancing sensitivity. No significant deviations from the background expectations are observed. Lower limits are set at 95% confidence level on the mass of type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the range 845-1065 GeV for various decay branching fraction combinations to SM leptons. Doublet and singlet vector-like $\tau$ lepton extensions of the SM are excluded for masses below 1045 GeV and in the mass range 125-150 GeV, respectively. Scalar leptoquarks decaying exclusively to a top quark and a lepton are excluded below 1.12-1.42 TeV, depending on the lepton flavor. For the type-III seesaw as well as the vector-like doublet model, these constraints are the most stringent to date. For the vector-like singlet model, these are the first constraints from the LHC experiments. Detailed results are also presented to facilitate alternative theoretical interpretations.

288 data tables

The minimum lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ (GeV) distribution in 3L MisID CR events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction.

The $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ (GeV) distribution in 3L WZ CR events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction.

The $\mathrm{DR_{min}}$ distribution in 3L Z$\mathrm{\gamma}$ CR events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction.

More…

Version 3
Search for W$\gamma$ resonances in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} =$ 13 TeV using hadronic decays of Lorentz-boosted W bosons

The CMS collaboration Tumasyan, Armen ; Adam, Wolfgang ; Andrejkovic, Janik Walter ; et al.
Phys.Lett.B 826 (2022) 136888, 2022.
Inspire Record 1869502 DOI 10.17182/hepdata.106162

A search for W$\gamma$ resonances in the mass range between 0.7 and 6.0 TeV is presented. The W boson is reconstructed via its hadronic decays, with the final-state products forming a single large-radius jet, owing to a high Lorentz boost of the W boson. The search is based on proton-proton collision data at $\sqrt{s} =$ 13 TeV, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 137 fb$^{-1}$, collected with the CMS detector at the LHC in 2016-2018. The W$\gamma$ mass spectrum is parameterized with a smoothly falling background function and examined for the presence of resonance-like signals. No significant excess above the predicted background is observed. Model-specific upper limits at 95% confidence level on the product of the cross section and branching fraction to the W$\gamma$ channel are set. Limits for narrow resonances and for resonances with an intrinsic width equal to 5% of their mass, for spin-0 and spin-1 hypotheses, range between 0.17 fb at 6.0 TeV and 55 fb at 0.7 TeV. These are the most restrictive limits to date on the existence of such resonances over a large range of probed masses. In specific heavy scalar (vector) triplet benchmark models, narrow resonances with masses between 0.75 (1.15) and 1.40 (1.36) TeV are excluded for a range of model parameters. Model-independent limits on the product of the cross section, signal acceptance, and branching fraction to the W$\gamma$ channel are set for minimum W$\gamma$ mass thresholds between 1.5 and 8.0 TeV.

10 data tables

Fitted 4th order polynomials to the signal acceptance for narrow and broad, scalar and vector Wgamma resonances. This quantity is defined as the ratio between the number of signal events falling within the analysis acceptance at the generator level to the number of signal events generated. The fitting function is $ A = p0 + p1*m + p2*m^2 + p3*m^3 + p4*m^4$, where $ A$ is the acceptance and m is the signal mass.

Fitted 4th order polynomials to the product of the signal efficiency and acceptance for narrow and broad, scalar and vector Wgamma resonances. This quantity is defined as the ratio between the number of signal events passing full analysis cuts to the number of signal events generated. The fitting function is $ A \epsilon = p0 + p1*m + p2*m^2 + p3*m^3 + p4*m^4$, where $ A \epsilon$ is the product of the signal efficiency and acceptance, m is the signal mass.

W tagging efficiency, averaged for different spin and width hypotheses. The Standard deviation shown below is the standard deviation between the W tagging efficiencies for different spin and width hypotheses.

More…