Searches are performed for nonresonant and resonant di-Higgs boson production in the $b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma$ final state. The data set used corresponds to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ of proton-proton collisions at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV recorded by the ATLAS detector at the CERN Large Hadron Collider. No excess above the expected background is found and upper limits on the di-Higgs boson production cross sections are set. A 95% confidence-level upper limit of 4.2 times the cross section predicted by the Standard Model is set on $pp \rightarrow HH$ nonresonant production, where the expected limit is 5.7 times the Standard Model predicted value. The expected constraints are obtained for a background hypothesis excluding $pp \rightarrow HH$ production. The observed (expected) constraints on the Higgs boson trilinear coupling modifier $\kappa_{\lambda}$ are determined to be $[-1.5, 6.7]$ $([-2.4, 7.7])$ at 95% confidence level, where the expected constraints on $\kappa_{\lambda}$ are obtained excluding $pp \rightarrow HH$ production from the background hypothesis. For resonant production of a new hypothetical scalar particle $X$ ($X \rightarrow HH \rightarrow b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma$), limits on the cross section for $pp \to X \to HH$ are presented in the narrow-width approximation as a function of $m_{X}$ in the range $251 \leq m_{X} \leq 1000$ GeV. The observed (expected) limits on the cross section for $pp \to X \to HH$ range from 640 fb to 44 fb (391 fb to 46 fb) over the considered mass range.
The BDT distribution of the di-Higgs ggF signal for two different values of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ and the main backgrounds in the low mass region ($m^{*}_{b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma} < 350$ GeV). Distributions are normalized to unit area. The dotted lines denote the category boundaries. Events with a BDT score below 0.881 in the low mass region are discarded.
The BDT distribution (with x-axis zoomed in) of the di-Higgs ggF signal for two different values of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ and the main backgrounds in the low mass region ($m^{*}_{b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma} < 350$ GeV). Distributions are normalized to unit area. The dotted lines denote the category boundaries. Events with a BDT score below 0.881 in the low mass region are discarded. The range of BDT scores is from 0.8 to 1.
The BDT distribution of the di-Higgs ggF signal for two different values of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ and the main backgrounds in the high mass region ($m^{*}_{b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma} > 350$ GeV). Distributions are normalized to unit area. The dotted lines denote the category boundaries. Events with a BDT score below 0.857 in the high mass region are discarded.
This paper reports constraints on Higgs boson production with transverse momentum above 1 TeV. The analyzed data from proton-proton collisions at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV were recorded with the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider from 2015 to 2018 and correspond to an integrated luminosity of 136 fb$^{-1}$. Higgs bosons decaying into $b\bar{b}$ are reconstructed as single large-radius jets recoiling against a hadronic system and identified by the experimental signature of two $b$-hadron decays. The experimental techniques are validated in the same kinematic regime using the $Z\rightarrow b\bar{b}$ process.The 95$\% $ confidence-level upper limit on the cross section for Higgs boson production with transverse momentum above 450 GeV is 115 fb, and above 1 TeV it is 9.6 fb. The Standard Model cross section predictions for a Higgs boson with a mass of 125 GeV in the same kinematic regions are 18.4 fb and 0.13 fb, respectively.
- - - - - - - - Overview of HEPData Record - - - - - - - - <br/><br/> <b>Standard Model cross sections:</b> <a href="102183?table=SMcrosssections">table</a><br/><br/> <b>Cutflow ggF:</b> <a href="102183?table=CutflowggF">table</a><br/><br/> <b>Cutflow VBF:</b> <a href="102183?table=CutflowVBF">table</a><br/><br/> <b>Cutflow VH:</b> <a href="102183?table=CutflowVH">table</a><br/><br/> <b>Cutflow ttH:</b> <a href="102183?table=CutflowttH">table</a><br/><br/> <b>Production mode fractional contributions::</b> <a href="102183?table=Fractionalcontribution">table</a><br/><br/> <b>Acceptance times efficiency - fiducial:</b> <a href="102183?table=Acceptancetimesefficiency-fiducial">table</a><br/><br/> <b>Acceptance times efficiency - differential:</b> <a href="102183?table=Acceptancetimesefficiency-differential">table</a><br/><br/> <b>Yield table - fiducial:</b> <a href="102183?table=Eventyields-fiducial">table</a><br/><br/> <b>Yield table - differential:</b> <a href="102183?table=Eventyields-differential">table</a><br/><br/>
Predicted Higgs boson production cross sections within fiducial volumes obtained from the four production mode MC samples (ggF, VBF, VH, and ttH) described in Section 3 with and without higher order electroweak (EW) corrections. All μH values reported are with respect to cross section with EW corrections.
The efficiency for simulated ggF events to pass each analysis cut.
The azimuthal variation of jet yields in heavy-ion collisions provides information about the path-length dependence of the energy loss experienced by partons passing through the hot, dense nuclear matter known as the quark-gluon plasma. This paper presents the azimuthal anisotropy coefficients $v_2$, $v_3$, and $v_4$ measured for jets in Pb+Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 5.02 TeV using the ATLAS detector at the LHC. The measurement uses data collected in 2015 and 2018, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 2.2 nb$^{-1}$. The $v_n$ values are measured as a function of the transverse momentum of the jets between 71 GeV and 398 GeV and the event centrality. A nonzero value of $v_2$ is observed in all but the most central collisions. The value of $v_2$ is largest for jets with lower transverse momentum, with values up to 0.05 in mid-central collisions. A smaller, nonzero value of $v_3$ of approximately 0.01 is measured with no significant dependence on jet $p_T$ or centrality, suggesting that fluctuations in the initial state play a small but distinct role in jet energy loss. No significant deviation of $v_4$ from zero is observed in the measured kinematic region.
The JES for R = 0.2 jets in Pb+Pb collisions as a function of $p_T^{truth}$ for centrality selections of 0-5%, 5-10%, 10-20%, 20-40% and 40-60%.
The JER for R = 0.2 jets in Pb+Pb collisions as a function of $p_T^{truth}$ for centrality selections of 0-5%, 5-10%, 10-20%, 20-40% and 40-60%.
The JES for R = 0.2 jets in Pb+Pb collisions as a function of $2|\Psi_2-\phi^{reco}|$ for centrality selections of 0-5%, 5-10%, 10-20%, 20-40% and 40-60%.
A measurement of the energy asymmetry in jet-associated top-quark pair production is presented using 139 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ of data collected by the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider during $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV. The observable measures the different probability of top and antitop quarks to have the higher energy as a function of the jet scattering angle with respect to the beam axis. The energy asymmetry is measured in the semileptonic $t\bar{t}$ decay channel, and the hadronically decaying top quark must have transverse momentum above $350$ GeV. The results are corrected for detector effects to particle level in three bins of the scattering angle of the associated jet. The measurement agrees with the SM prediction at next-to-leading-order accuracy in quantum chromodynamics in all three bins. In the bin with the largest expected asymmetry, where the jet is emitted perpendicular to the beam, the energy asymmetry is measured to be $-0.043\pm0.020$, in agreement with the SM prediction of $-0.037\pm0.003$. Interpreting this result in the framework of the Standard Model effective field theory (SMEFT), it is shown that the energy asymmetry is sensitive to the top-quark chirality in four-quark operators and is therefore a valuable new observable in global SMEFT fits.
Data Measurements and predictions of the energy asymmetry in three bins of the jet angle $\theta_j$. The SM prediction was obtained from simulations of $t\bar{t}j$ events with MadGraph5_aMC@NLO + Pythia 8 at NLO in QCD for $t\bar{t}j$ + PS, including MC statistical and scale uncertainties.
Data measurements and predictions of the energy asymmetry in three bins of the jet angle $\theta_j$. The SM prediction was obtained from simulations of $t\bar{t}j$ events with MadGraph5_aMC@NLO + Pythia 8 at NLO in QCD for $t\bar{t}j$ + PS, including MC statistical and scale uncertainties.
Correlation coefficients $\rho_{i,j}$ for the statistical and systematic uncertainties between the $i$-th and $j$-th bin of the differential $A_E$ measurement as a function of the jet scattering angle $\theta_j$
This paper presents a search for decays of the Higgs boson with a mass of 125 GeV into a pair of new pseudoscalar particles, $H\rightarrow aa$, where one $a$-boson decays into a $b$-quark pair and the other into a muon pair. The search uses 139 fb$^{-1}$ of proton-proton collision data at a center-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV recorded between 2015 and 2018 by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC. A narrow dimuon resonance is searched for in the invariant mass spectrum between 16 GeV and 62 GeV. The largest excess of events above the Standard Model backgrounds is observed at a dimuon invariant mass of 52 GeV and corresponds to a local (global) significance of $3.3 \sigma$ ($1.7 \sigma$). Upper limits at 95% confidence level are placed on the branching ratio of the Higgs boson to the $bb\mu\mu$ final state, $\mathcal{B}(H\rightarrow aa\rightarrow bb\mu\mu)$, and are in the range $\text{(0.2-4.0)} \times 10^{-4}$, depending on the signal mass hypothesis.
Post-fit number of background events in all SR bins (after applying the BDT cuts) that are tested for the presence of signal. The bins are 2 GeV (3 GeV) wide in mmumu for ma ≤ 45 GeV (ma > 45 GeV). Events in neighbouring bins partially overlap. Discontinuities in the background predictions appear when the BDT discriminant used for the selection changes from the one trained in the lower mass range to the one trained in the higher mass range.
Post-fit number of background events in all SR bins without applying the BDT cuts that are tested for the presence of signal. The bins are 2 GeV (3 GeV) wide in mµµ for $m_a$ ≤ 45 GeV ($m_a$ > 45 GeV). Events in neighbouring bins partially overlap. Discontinuities in the background predictions appear when the BDT discriminant used for the selection changes from the one trained in the lower mass range to the one trained in the higher mass range.
Probability that the observed spectrum is compatible with the background-only hypothesis. The local $p_0$-values are quantified in standard deviations $\sigma$.
This paper presents a measurement of the electroweak production of two jets in association with a $Z\gamma$ pair, with the $Z$ boson decaying into two neutrinos. It also presents a search for invisible or partially invisible decays of a Higgs boson with a mass of 125 GeV produced through vector-boson fusion with a photon in the final state. These results use data from LHC proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV collected with the ATLAS detector and corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. The event signature, shared by all benchmark processes considered for the measurements and searches, is characterized by a significant amount of unbalanced transverse momentum and a photon in the final state, in addition to a pair of forward jets. Electroweak $Z\gamma$ production in association with two jets is observed in this final state with a significance of 5.2 (5.1 expected) standard deviations. The measured fiducial cross-section for this process is 1.31$\pm$0.29 fb. An observed (expected) upper limit of 0.37 ($0.34^{+0.15}_{-0.10}$) at 95% confidence level is set on the branching ratio of a 125 GeV Higgs boson to invisible particles, assuming the Standard Model production cross-section. The signature is also interpreted in the context of decays of a Higgs boson into a photon and a dark photon. An observed (expected) 95% CL upper limit on the branching ratio for this decay is set at 0.018 ($0.017^{+0.007}_{-0.005}$), assuming the Standard Model production cross-section for a 125 GeV Higgs boson.
Post-fit results for all $m_\text{jj}$ SR and CR bins in the EW $Z \gamma + \text{jets}$ cross-section measurement with the $\mu_{Z \gamma_\text{EW}}$ signal normalization floating. The post-fit uncertainties include statistical, experimental, and theory contributions.
Post-fit results for all DNN SR and CR bins in the search for $H \to \text{inv.}$ with the $\mathcal{B}_\text{inv}$ signal normalization set to zero. For the $Z_\text{Rev.Cen.}^\gamma$ CR, the third bin contains all events with DNN output score values of 0.6-1.0. The $H \to \text{inv.}$ signal is scaled to a $\mathcal{B}_\text{inv}$ of 37%. The post-fit uncertainties include statistical, experimental, and theoretical contributions.
Post-fit results for the ten [$m_\text{jj}$, $m_\text{T}$] bins constituting the SR and CRs defined for the dark photon search with the $\mathcal{B}(H \to \gamma \gamma_\text{d})$ signal normalization set to zero. A $H \to \gamma \gamma_\text{d}$ signal is shown for two different mass hypotheses (125 GeV, 500 GeV) and scaled to a branching ratio of 2% and 1%, respectively. The post-fit uncertainties include statistical, experimental, and theoretical contributions.
A search optimized for new heavy particles decaying to two $b$-quarks and produced in association with additional $b$-quarks is reported. The sensitivity is improved by $b$-tagging at least one lower-$p_{\rm{T}}$ jet in addition to the two highest-$p_{\rm{T}}$ jets. The data used in this search correspond to an integrated luminosity of 103 $\text{fb}^{-1}$ collected with a dedicated trijet trigger during the 2017 and 2018 $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV proton-proton collision runs with the ATLAS detector at the LHC. The search looks for resonant peaks in the $b$-tagged dijet invariant mass spectrum over a smoothly falling background. The background is estimated with an innovative data-driven method based on orthonormal functions. The observed $b$-tagged dijet invariant mass spectrum is compatible with the background-only hypothesis. Upper limits at 95% confidence level on a heavy vector-boson production cross section times branching ratio to a pair of $b$-quarks are derived.
Background estimate from the FD method with N=3 and data in the SR.
The observed (solid) and expected (dashed) 95% CL upper limits on the production of $Z' \to b\bar{b}$ in association with b-quarks.
Acceptance and Acceptance times efficiency for the LUV Z' model.
A search for new phenomena in final states with hadronically decaying tau leptons, $b$-jets, and missing transverse momentum is presented. The analyzed dataset comprises $pp$~collision data at a center-of-mass energy of $\sqrt s = 13$ TeV with an integrated luminosity of 139/fb, delivered by the Large Hadron Collider and recorded with the ATLAS detector from 2015 to 2018. The observed data are compatible with the expected Standard Model background. The results are interpreted in simplified models for two different scenarios. The first model is based on supersymmetry and considers pair production of top squarks, each of which decays into a $b$-quark, a neutrino and a tau slepton. Each tau slepton in turn decays into a tau lepton and a nearly massless gravitino. Within this model, top-squark masses up to 1.4 TeV can be excluded at the 95% confidence level over a wide range of tau-slepton masses. The second model considers pair production of leptoquarks with decays into third-generation leptons and quarks. Depending on the branching fraction into charged leptons, leptoquarks with masses up to around 1.25 TeV can be excluded at the 95% confidence level for the case of scalar leptoquarks and up to 1.8 TeV (1.5 TeV) for vector leptoquarks in a Yang--Mills (minimal-coupling) scenario. In addition, model-independent upper limits are set on the cross section of processes beyond the Standard Model.
Relative systematic uncertainties in the estimated number of background events in the signal regions. In the lower part of the table, a breakdown of the total uncertainty into different categories is given. For the multi-bin SR, the breakdown refers to the integral over all three $p_{\text{T}}(\tau)$ bins. As the individual uncertainties are correlated, they do not add in quadrature to equal the total background uncertainty.
Distributions of $m_{\text{T}2}(\tau_{1},\tau_{2})$ in the di-tau SR. The stacked histograms show the various SM background contributions. The hatched band indicates the total statistical and systematic uncertainty of the SM background. The $t\bar{t}$ (2 real $\tau$) and $t\bar{t}$ (1 real $\tau$) as well as the single-top background contributions are scaled with the normalization factors obtained from the background-only fit. Minor backgrounds are grouped together and denoted as 'Other'. This includes $t\bar{t}$-fake, single top, and other top (di-tau channel) or $t\bar{t}$-fake, $t\bar{t}+H$, multiboson, and other top (single-tau channel). The overlaid dotted lines show the additional contributions for signal scenarios close to the expected exclusion contour with the particle type and the mass and $\beta$ parameters for the simplified models indicated in the legend. For the leptoquark signal model the shapes of the distributions for $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$ and $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ (not shown) are similar to that of $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$. The rightmost bin includes the overflow.
Distributions of $E_{\text{T}}^{\text{miss}}$ in the di-tau SR. The stacked histograms show the various SM background contributions. The hatched band indicates the total statistical and systematic uncertainty of the SM background. The $t\bar{t}$ (2 real $\tau$) and $t\bar{t}$ (1 real $\tau$) as well as the single-top background contributions are scaled with the normalization factors obtained from the background-only fit. Minor backgrounds are grouped together and denoted as 'Other'. This includes $t\bar{t}$-fake, single top, and other top (di-tau channel) or $t\bar{t}$-fake, $t\bar{t}+H$, multiboson, and other top (single-tau channel). The overlaid dotted lines show the additional contributions for signal scenarios close to the expected exclusion contour with the particle type and the mass and $\beta$ parameters for the simplified models indicated in the legend. For the leptoquark signal model the shapes of the distributions for $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$ and $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ (not shown) are similar to that of $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$. The rightmost bin includes the overflow.
A search for charginos and neutralinos at the Large Hadron Collider is reported using fully hadronic final states and missing transverse momentum. Pair-produced charginos or neutralinos are explored, each decaying into a high-$p_{\text{T}}$ Standard Model weak boson. Fully-hadronic final states are studied to exploit the advantage of the large branching ratio, and the efficient background rejection by identifying the high-$p_{\text{T}}$ bosons using large-radius jets and jet substructure information. An integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ of proton-proton collision data collected by the ATLAS detector at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV is used. No significant excess is found beyond the Standard Model expectation. The 95% confidence level exclusion limits are set on wino or higgsino production with varying assumptions in the decay branching ratios and the type of the lightest supersymmetric particle. A wino (higgsino) mass up to 1060 (900) GeV is excluded when the lightest SUSY particle mass is below 400 (240) GeV and the mass splitting is larger than 400 (450) GeV. The sensitivity to high-mass wino and higgsino is significantly extended compared with the previous LHC searches using the other final states.
- - - - - - - - Overview of HEPData Record - - - - - - - - <br/><br/> <b>Cutflow:</b> <a href="104458?version=3&table=Cut flows for the representative signals">table</a><br/><br/> <b>Boson tagging:</b> <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=%24W%2FZ%5Crightarrow%20qq%24%20tagging%20efficiency">$W/Z\rightarrow qq$ tagging efficiency</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=%24W%2FZ%5Crightarrow%20qq%24%20tagging%20rejection">$W/Z\rightarrow qq$ tagging rejection</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=%24Z%2Fh%20%5Crightarrow%20bb%24%20tagging%20efficiency">$Z/h\rightarrow bb$ tagging efficiency</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=%24Z%2Fh%20%5Crightarrow%20bb%24%20tagging%20rejection">$Z/h\rightarrow bb$ tagging rejection</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=%24W%5Crightarrow%20qq%24%20tagging%20efficiency%20(vs%20official%20WP)">$W\rightarrow qq$ tagging efficiency (vs official WP)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=%24W%5Crightarrow%20qq%24%20tagging%20rejection%20(vs%20official%20WP)">$W\rightarrow qq$ tagging rejection (vs official WP)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=%24Z%5Crightarrow%20qq%24%20tagging%20efficiency%20(vs%20official%20WP)">$Z\rightarrow qq$ tagging efficiency (vs official WP)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=%24Z%5Crightarrow%20qq%24%20tagging%20rejection%20(vs%20official%20WP)">$Z\rightarrow qq$ tagging rejection (vs official WP)</a> </ul> <b>Systematic uncertainty:</b> <a href="104458?version=3&table=Total%20systematic%20uncertainties">table</a><br/><br/> <b>Summary of SR yields:</b> <a href="104458?version=3&table=Data%20yields%20and%20background%20expectation%20in%20the%20SRs">table</a><br/><br/> <b>Expected background yields and the breakdown:</b> <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Data%20yields%20and%20background%20breakdown%20in%20SR">CR0L / SR</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Data%20yields%20and%20background%20breakdown%20in%20CR%2FVR%201L(1Y)">CR1L / VR1L /CR1Y / VR1Y</a> </ul> <b>SR distributions:</b> <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Effective mass distribution in SR-4Q-VV">SR-4Q-VV: Effective mass</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Leading large-$R$ jet mass distribution in SR-4Q-VV">SR-4Q-VV: Leading jet mass</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Leading large-$R$ jet $D_{2}$ distribution in SR-4Q-VV">SR-4Q-VV: Leading jet $D_{2}$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Sub-leading large-$R$ jet mass distribution in SR-4Q-VV">SR-4Q-VV: Sub-leading jet mass</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Sub-leading large-$R$ jet $D_{2}$ distribution in SR-4Q-VV">SR-4Q-VV: Sub-leading jet $D_{2}$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=$m_{T2}$ distribution in SR-2B2Q-VZ">SR-2B2Q-VZ: $m_{\textrm{T2}}$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=bb-tagged jet mass distribution in SR-2B2Q-VZ">SR-2B2Q-VZ: bb-tagged jet mass</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Effective mass distribution in SR-2B2Q-VZ">SR-2B2Q-VZ: Effective mass</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=$m_{T2}$ distribution in SR-2B2Q-Vh">SR-2B2Q-Vh: $m_{\textrm{T2}}$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=bb-tagged jet mass distribution in SR-2B2Q-Vh">SR-2B2Q-Vh: bb-tagged jet mass</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Effective mass distribution in SR-2B2Q-Vh">SR-2B2Q-Vh: Effective mass</a> </ul> <b>Exclusion limit:</b> <ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1C1-WW): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (W~, B~) simplified model (C1C1-WW)">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1C1-WW)">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li>Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$): (No mass point could be excluded) <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (W~, B~) simplified model (C1C1-WW)">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1C1-WW)">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1C1-WW)">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-WZ): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-WZ)">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-WZ)">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-WZ)">Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-WZ)">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-WZ)">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-WZ)">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-Wh): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-Wh)">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-Wh)">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-Wh)">Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-Wh)">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-Wh)">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-Wh)">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$ model ($\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})=0\%$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (W~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 0%">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (W~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 0%">Observed limit</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$ model ($\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})=25\%$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (W~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 25%">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (W~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 25%">Observed limit</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$ model ($\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})=50\%$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (W~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 50%">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20B~)%20B(N2-%3EZN1)%20%3D%2050%25">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20B~)%20B(N2-%3EZN1)%20%3D%2050%25">Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (W~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 50%">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20B~)%20B(N2-%3EZN1)%20%3D%2050%">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20B~)%20B(N2-%3EZN1)%20%3D%2050%25">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$ model ($\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})=75\%$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (W~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 75%">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (W~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 75%">Observed limit</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$ model ($\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})=100\%$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (W~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 100%">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (W~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 100%">Observed limit</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{B})$ model ($\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})=50\%$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (H~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 50%">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20B~)%20B(N2-%3EZN1)%20%3D%2050%25">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li>Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$): (No mass point could be excluded) <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (H~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 50%">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20B~)%20B(N2-%3EZN1)%20%3D%2050%">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20B~)%20B(N2-%3EZN1)%20%3D%2050%25">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{H})$ model ($\textrm{tan}\beta=10,~\mu>0$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (W~, H~), tanb = 10, mu>0">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20mu%3E0">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20mu%3E0">Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (W~, H~), tanb = 10, mu>0">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20mu%3E0">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20mu%3E0">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{W})$ model ($\textrm{tan}\beta=10,~\mu>0$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (H~, W~), tanb = 10, mu>0">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20mu%3E0">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li>Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$): (No mass point could be excluded) <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (H~, W~), tanb = 10, mu>0">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20mu%3E0">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20mu%3E0">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{H})$ model ($\textrm{tan}\beta=10$) on ($\mu$,$M_{2}$) plane: <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (W~, H~), tanb = 10, M2 vs mu">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20M2%20vs%20mu">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20M2%20vs%20mu">Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (W~, H~), tanb = 10, M2 vs mu">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20M2%20vs%20mu">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20M2%20vs%20mu">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{W})$ model ($\textrm{tan}\beta=10$) on ($\mu$,$M_{2}$) plane: <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (H~, W~), tanb = 10, M2 vs mu">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20M2%20vs%20mu">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li>Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$): (No mass point could be excluded) <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (H~, W~), tanb = 10, M2 vs mu">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20M2%20vs%20mu">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20M2%20vs%20mu">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{G})$ model: <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (H~, G~)">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20G~)">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20G~)">Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (H~, G~)">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20G~)">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20G~)">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{a})$ model ($\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{a})=100\%$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (H~, a~) B(N1->Za~) = 100%">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20a~)%20B(N1-%3EZa~)%20%3D%20100%25">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20a~)%20B(N1-%3EZa~)%20%3D%20100%25">Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (H~, a~) B(N1->Za~) = 100%">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20a~)%20B(N1-%3EZa~)%20%3D%20100%25">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20a~)%20B(N1-%3EZa~)%20%3D%20100%">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{a})$ model ($\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{a})=75\%$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (H~, a~) B(N1->Za~) = 75%">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (H~, a~) B(N1->Za~) = 75%">Observed limit</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{a})$ model ($\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{a})=50\%$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (H~, a~) B(N1->Za~) = 50%">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (H~, a~) B(N1->Za~) = 50%">Observed limit</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{a})$ model ($\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{a})=25\%$): <ul> <li>Expected limit : (No mass point could be excluded) <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (H~, a~) B(N1->Za~) = 25%">Observed limit</a> </ul> </ul> <b>EWKino branching ratios:</b> <ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{H})$ model: <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=B(C2-%3EW%2BN1%2CN2)%20in%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{\pm}\rightarrow W\tilde{\chi}_{1,2}^{0})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=B(C2-%3EZ%2BC1)%20in%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb=10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{\pm}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=B(C2-%3Eh%2BC1)%20in%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb=10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{\pm}\rightarrow h\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=B(N3-%3EW%2BC1)%20in%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb=10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{3}^{0}\rightarrow W\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=B(N3-%3EZ%2BN1%2CN2)%20in%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{3}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1,2}^{0})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=B(N3-%3Eh%2BN1%2CN2)%20in%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{3}^{0}\rightarrow h\tilde{\chi}_{1,2}^{0})$</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{W})$ model: <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=B(C2-%3EW%2BN1)%20in%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{\pm}\rightarrow W\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=B(C2-%3EZ%2BC1)%20in%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{\pm}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=B(C2-%3Eh%2BC1)%20in%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{\pm}\rightarrow h\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=B(N2-%3EW%2BC1)%20in%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow W\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=B(N2-%3EZ%2BN1)%20in%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=B(N2-%3Eh%2BN1)%20in%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow h\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=B(N3-%3EW%2BC1)%20in%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{3}^{0}\rightarrow W\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=B(N3-%3EZ%2BN1)%20in%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{3}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=B(N3-%3Eh%2BN1)%20in%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{3}^{0}\rightarrow h\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})$</a> </ul> </ul> <b>Cross-section upper limit:</b> <ul> <li>Expected: <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Expected cross-section upper limit on C1C1-WW">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1C1-WW)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Expected cross-section upper limit on C1N2-WZ">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-WZ)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Expected cross-section upper limit on C1N2-Wh">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-Wh)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Expected cross-section upper limit on (H~, G~)">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{G})$ model</a> </ul> <li>Observed: <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Observed cross-section upper limit on C1C1-WW">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1C1-WW)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Observed cross-section upper limit on C1N2-WZ">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-WZ)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Observed cross-section upper limit on C1N2-Wh">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-Wh)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Observed cross-section upper limit on (H~, G~)">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{G})$ model</a> </ul> </ul> <b>Acceptance:</b> <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Acceptance of C1C1-WW signals by SR-4Q-VV">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1C1-WW) in SR-4Q-VV</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Acceptance of C1N2-WZ signals by SR-4Q-VV">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-WZ) in SR-4Q-VV</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Acceptance of C1N2-WZ signals by SR-2B2Q-VZ">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-WZ) in SR-2B2Q-VZ</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Acceptance of C1N2-Wh signals by SR-2B2Q-Vh">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-WZ) in SR-2B2Q-Vh</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Acceptance of N2N3-ZZ signals by SR-4Q-VV">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (N2N3-ZZ) in SR-4Q-VV</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Acceptance of N2N3-ZZ signals by SR-2B2Q-VZ">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (N2N3-ZZ) in SR-2B2Q-VZ</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Acceptance of N2N3-Zh signals by SR-2B2Q-Vh">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (N2N3-Zh) in SR-2B2Q-Vh</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Acceptance of N2N3-hh signals by SR-2B2Q-Vh">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (N2N3-hh) in SR-2B2Q-Vh</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Acceptance of (H~, G~) signals by SR-4Q-VV">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{G})$ model in SR-4Q-VV</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Acceptance of (H~, G~) signals by SR-2B2Q-VZ">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{G})$ model in SR-2B2Q-VZ</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Acceptance of (H~, G~) signals by SR-2B2Q-Vh">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{G})$ model in SR-2B2Q-Vh</a> </ul> <b>Efficiency:</b> <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Efficiency of C1C1-WW signals by SR-4Q-VV">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1C1-WW) in SR-4Q-VV</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Efficiency of C1N2-WZ signals by SR-4Q-VV">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-WZ) in SR-4Q-VV</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Efficiency of C1N2-WZ signals by SR-2B2Q-VZ">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-WZ) in SR-2B2Q-VZ</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Efficiency of C1N2-Wh signals by SR-2B2Q-Vh">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-Wh) in SR-2B2Q-Vh</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Efficiency of N2N3-ZZ signals by SR-4Q-VV">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (N2N3-ZZ) in SR-4Q-VV</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Efficiency of N2N3-ZZ signals by SR-2B2Q-VZ">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (N2N3-ZZ) in SR-2B2Q-VZ</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Efficiency of N2N3-Zh signals by SR-2B2Q-Vh">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (N2N3-Zh) in SR-2B2Q-Vh</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Efficiency of N2N3-hh signals by SR-2B2Q-Vh">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (N2N3-hh) in SR-2B2Q-Vh</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Efficiency of (H~, G~) signals by SR-4Q-VV">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{G})$ model in SR-4Q-VV</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Efficiency of (H~, G~) signals by SR-2B2Q-VZ">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{G})$ model in SR-2B2Q-VZ</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Efficiency of (H~, G~) signals by SR-2B2Q-Vh">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{G})$ model in SR-2B2Q-Vh</a> </ul>
Cut flows of some representative signals up to SR-4Q-VV, SR-2B2Q-VZ, and SR-2B2Q-Vh. One signal point from the $(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$ simplified models (C1C1-WW, C1N2-WZ, and C1N2-Wh) and $(\tilde{H},~\tilde{G})$ is chosen. The "preliminary event reduction" is a technical selection applied for reducing the sample size, which is fully efficient after the $n_{\textrm{Large}-R~\textrm{jets}}\geq 2$ selection.
The boson-tagging efficiency for jets arising from $W/Z$ bosons decaying into $q\bar{q}$ (signal jets) are shown. The signal jet efficiency of $W_{qq}$/$Z_{qq}$-tagging is evaluated using a sample of pre-selected large-$R$ jets ($p_{\textrm{T}}>200~\textrm{GeV}, |\eta|<2.0, m_{J} > 40~\textrm{GeV}$) in the simulated $(\tilde{W},\tilde{B})$ simplified model signal events with $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}_{\textrm{heavy}},~\tilde{\chi}_{\textrm{light}}) \ge 400~\textrm{GeV}$. The jets are matched with generator-level $W/Z$-bosons by $\Delta R<1.0$ which decay into $q\bar{q}$. The efficiency correction factors are applied on the signal efficiency rejection for the $W_{qq}$/$Z_{qq}$-tagging. The systematic uncertainty is represented by the hashed bands.
We study the spin-exotic $J^{PC} = 1^{-+}$ amplitude in single-diffractive dissociation of 190 GeV$/c$ pions into $\pi^-\pi^-\pi^+$ using a hydrogen target and confirm the $\pi_1(1600) \to \rho(770) \pi$ amplitude, which interferes with a nonresonant $1^{-+}$ amplitude. We demonstrate that conflicting conclusions from previous studies on these amplitudes can be attributed to different analysis models and different treatment of the dependence of the amplitudes on the squared four-momentum transfer and we thus reconcile their experimental findings. We study the nonresonant contributions to the $\pi^-\pi^-\pi^+$ final state using pseudo-data generated on the basis of a Deck model. Subjecting pseudo-data and real data to the same partial-wave analysis, we find good agreement concerning the spectral shape and its dependence on the squared four-momentum transfer for the $J^{PC} = 1^{-+}$ amplitude and also for amplitudes with other $J^{PC}$ quantum numbers. We investigate for the first time the amplitude of the $\pi^-\pi^+$ subsystem with $J^{PC} = 1^{--}$ in the $3\pi$ amplitude with $J^{PC} = 1^{-+}$ employing the novel freed-isobar analysis scheme. We reveal this $\pi^-\pi^+$ amplitude to be dominated by the $\rho(770)$ for both the $\pi_1(1600)$ and the nonresonant contribution. We determine the $\rho(770)$ resonance parameters within the three-pion final state. These findings largely confirm the underlying assumptions for the isobar model used in all previous partial-wave analyses addressing the $J^{PC} = 1^{-+}$ amplitude.
Results for the spin-exotic $1^{-+}1^+[\pi\pi]_{1^{-\,-}}\pi P$ wave from the free-isobar partial-wave analysis performed in the first $t^\prime$ bin from $0.100$ to $0.141\;(\text{GeV}/c)^2$. The plotted values represent the intensity of the coherent sum of the dynamic isobar amplitudes $\{\mathcal{T}_k^\text{fit}\}$ as a function of $m_{3\pi}$, where the coherent sums run over all $m_{\pi^-\pi^+}$ bins indexed by $k$. These intensity values are given in number of events per $40\;\text{MeV}/c^2$ $m_{3\pi}$ interval and correspond to the orange points in Fig. 8(a). In the "Resources" section of this $t^\prime$ bin, we provide the JSON file named <code>transition_amplitudes_tBin_0.json</code> for download, which contains for each $m_{3\pi}$ bin the values of the transition amplitudes $\{\mathcal{T}_k^\text{fit}\}$ for all $m_{\pi^-\pi^+}$ bins, their covariances, and further information. The data in this JSON file are organized in independent bins of $m_{3\pi}$. The information in these bins can be accessed via the key <code>m3pi_bin_<#>_t_prime_bin_0</code>. Each independent $m_{3\pi}$ bin contains <ul> <li>the kinematic ranges of the $(m_{3\pi}, t^\prime)$ cell, which are accessible via the keys <code>m3pi_lower_limit</code>, <code>m3pi_upper_limit</code>, <code>t_prime_lower_limit</code>, and <code>t_prime_upper_limit</code>.</li> <li>the $m_{\pi^-\pi^+}$ bin borders, which are accessible via the keys <code>m2pi_lower_limits</code> and <code>m2pi_upper_limits</code>.</li> <li>the real and imaginary parts of the transition amplitudes $\{\mathcal{T}_k^\text{fit}\}$ for all $m_{\pi^-\pi^+}$ bins, which are accessible via the keys <code>transition_amplitudes_real_part</code> and <code>transition_amplitudes_imag_part</code>, respectively.</li> <li>the covariance matrix of the real and imaginary parts of the $\{\mathcal{T}_k^\text{fit}\}$ for all $m_{\pi^-\pi^+}$ bins, which is accessible via the key <code>covariance_matrix</code>. Note that this matrix is real-valued and that its rows and columns are indexed such that $(\Re,\Im)$ pairs of the transition amplitudes are arranged with increasing $k$.</li> <li>the normalization factors $\mathcal{N}_a$ in Eq. (13) for all $m_{\pi^-\pi^+}$ bins, which are accessible via the key <code>normalization_factors</code>.</li> <li>the shape of the zero mode, i.e., the values of $\tilde\Delta_k$ for all $m_{\pi^-\pi^+}$ bins, which is accessible via the key <code>zero_mode_shape</code>.</li> <li>the reference wave, which is accessible via the key <code>reference_wave</code>. Note that this is always the $4^{++}1^+\rho(770)\pi G$ wave.</li> </ul>
Results for the spin-exotic $1^{-+}1^+[\pi\pi]_{1^{-\,-}}\pi P$ wave from the free-isobar partial-wave analysis performed in the second $t^\prime$ bin from $0.141$ to $0.194\;(\text{GeV}/c)^2$. The plotted values represent the intensity of the coherent sum of the dynamic isobar amplitudes $\{\mathcal{T}_k^\text{fit}\}$ as a function of $m_{3\pi}$, where the coherent sums run over all $m_{\pi^-\pi^+}$ bins indexed by $k$. These intensity values are given in number of events per $40\;\text{MeV}/c^2$ $m_{3\pi}$ interval and correspond to the orange points in Fig. 15(a) in the supplemental material of the paper. In the "Resources" section of this $t^\prime$ bin, we provide the JSON file named <code>transition_amplitudes_tBin_1.json</code> for download, which contains for each $m_{3\pi}$ bin the values of the transition amplitudes $\{\mathcal{T}_k^\text{fit}\}$ for all $m_{\pi^-\pi^+}$ bins, their covariances, and further information. The data in this JSON file are organized in independent bins of $m_{3\pi}$. The information in these bins can be accessed via the key <code>m3pi_bin_<#>_t_prime_bin_1</code>. Each independent $m_{3\pi}$ bin contains <ul> <li>the kinematic ranges of the $(m_{3\pi}, t^\prime)$ cell, which are accessible via the keys <code>m3pi_lower_limit</code>, <code>m3pi_upper_limit</code>, <code>t_prime_lower_limit</code>, and <code>t_prime_upper_limit</code>.</li> <li>the $m_{\pi^-\pi^+}$ bin borders, which are accessible via the keys <code>m2pi_lower_limits</code> and <code>m2pi_upper_limits</code>.</li> <li>the real and imaginary parts of the transition amplitudes $\{\mathcal{T}_k^\text{fit}\}$ for all $m_{\pi^-\pi^+}$ bins, which are accessible via the keys <code>transition_amplitudes_real_part</code> and <code>transition_amplitudes_imag_part</code>, respectively.</li> <li>the covariance matrix of the real and imaginary parts of the $\{\mathcal{T}_k^\text{fit}\}$ for all $m_{\pi^-\pi^+}$ bins, which is accessible via the key <code>covariance_matrix</code>. Note that this matrix is real-valued and that its rows and columns are indexed such that $(\Re,\Im)$ pairs of the transition amplitudes are arranged with increasing $k$.</li> <li>the normalization factors $\mathcal{N}_a$ in Eq. (13) for all $m_{\pi^-\pi^+}$ bins, which are accessible via the key <code>normalization_factors</code>.</li> <li>the shape of the zero mode, i.e., the values of $\tilde\Delta_k$ for all $m_{\pi^-\pi^+}$ bins, which is accessible via the key <code>zero_mode_shape</code>.</li> <li>the reference wave, which is accessible via the key <code>reference_wave</code>. Note that this is always the $4^{++}1^+\rho(770)\pi G$ wave.</li> </ul>
Results for the spin-exotic $1^{-+}1^+[\pi\pi]_{1^{-\,-}}\pi P$ wave from the free-isobar partial-wave analysis performed in the third $t^\prime$ bin from $0.194$ to $0.326\;(\text{GeV}/c)^2$. The plotted values represent the intensity of the coherent sum of the dynamic isobar amplitudes $\{\mathcal{T}_k^\text{fit}\}$ as a function of $m_{3\pi}$, where the coherent sums run over all $m_{\pi^-\pi^+}$ bins indexed by $k$. These intensity values are given in number of events per $40\;\text{MeV}/c^2$ $m_{3\pi}$ interval and correspond to the orange points in Fig. 15(b) in the supplemental material of the paper. In the "Resources" section of this $t^\prime$ bin, we provide the JSON file named <code>transition_amplitudes_tBin_2.json</code> for download, which contains for each $m_{3\pi}$ bin the values of the transition amplitudes $\{\mathcal{T}_k^\text{fit}\}$ for all $m_{\pi^-\pi^+}$ bins, their covariances, and further information. The data in this JSON file are organized in independent bins of $m_{3\pi}$. The information in these bins can be accessed via the key <code>m3pi_bin_<#>_t_prime_bin_2</code>. Each independent $m_{3\pi}$ bin contains <ul> <li>the kinematic ranges of the $(m_{3\pi}, t^\prime)$ cell, which are accessible via the keys <code>m3pi_lower_limit</code>, <code>m3pi_upper_limit</code>, <code>t_prime_lower_limit</code>, and <code>t_prime_upper_limit</code>.</li> <li>the $m_{\pi^-\pi^+}$ bin borders, which are accessible via the keys <code>m2pi_lower_limits</code> and <code>m2pi_upper_limits</code>.</li> <li>the real and imaginary parts of the transition amplitudes $\{\mathcal{T}_k^\text{fit}\}$ for all $m_{\pi^-\pi^+}$ bins, which are accessible via the keys <code>transition_amplitudes_real_part</code> and <code>transition_amplitudes_imag_part</code>, respectively.</li> <li>the covariance matrix of the real and imaginary parts of the $\{\mathcal{T}_k^\text{fit}\}$ for all $m_{\pi^-\pi^+}$ bins, which is accessible via the key <code>covariance_matrix</code>. Note that this matrix is real-valued and that its rows and columns are indexed such that $(\Re,\Im)$ pairs of the transition amplitudes are arranged with increasing $k$.</li> <li>the normalization factors $\mathcal{N}_a$ in Eq. (13) for all $m_{\pi^-\pi^+}$ bins, which are accessible via the key <code>normalization_factors</code>.</li> <li>the shape of the zero mode, i.e., the values of $\tilde\Delta_k$ for all $m_{\pi^-\pi^+}$ bins, which is accessible via the key <code>zero_mode_shape</code>.</li> <li>the reference wave, which is accessible via the key <code>reference_wave</code>. Note that this is always the $4^{++}1^+\rho(770)\pi G$ wave.</li> </ul>
Forum