Showing 10 of 1118 results
Dihadron correlations at high transverse momentum in d+Au collisions at sqrt(s_NN) = 200 GeV at midrapidity are measured by the PHENIX experiment at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC). From these correlations we extract several structural characteristics of jets; the root-mean-squared (RMS) transverse momentum of fragmenting hadrons with respect to the jet sqrt(<j_T^2>), the mean sine-squared angle between the scattered partons <sin^2(phi_jj)>, and the number of particles produced within the dijet that are associated with a high-p_T particle (dN/dx_E distributions). We observe that the fragmentation characteristics of jets in d+Au collisions are very similar to those in p+p collisions and that there is also little dependence on the centrality of the d+Au collision. This is consistent with the nuclear medium having little influence on the fragmentation process. Furthermore, there is no statistically significant increase in the value of <sin^2(phi_jj)> from p+p to d+Au collisions. This constrains the amount of multiple scattering that partons undergo in the cold nuclear medium before and after a hard-collision.
Measured $\gamma\gamma$ invariant mass distribution for 6 < $p_T$ < 7 GeV/$c$ in central $d$+Au collisions.
The comparison of near-side yield, near-side width, far-side yield, and far-side width as a function of $p_T$ of charged hadrons. These are obtained for $\pi^{\pm}$ - $h^{\pm}$ correlation from PYTHIA, with a trigger pion of 6 - 10 GeV/$c$.
Fully corrected assorted charged pion-hadron conditional pair distributions for $d$+Au collisions centrality 0-80% and $p$+$p$ collisions. The trigger $\pi^{\pm}$s are within 5 < $p_{T,trig}$ < 10 GeV/$c$ and are correlated with hadrons with $p_{T,assoc}$ 0.4-1.0 GeV/$c$, 1.0-2.0 GeV/$c$, 2.0-3.0 GeV/$c$, and 3.0-5.0 GeV/$c$.
Fully corrected assorted $\pi^{0}$-hadron conditional pair distributions for $d$+Au collisions centrality 0-88% and $p$+$p$ collisions. The trigger $\pi^0$s are within 5 < $p_{T,trig}$ < 10 GeV/$c$ and are correlated with hadrons with $p_{T,assoc}$ of 1.5-2 GeV/$c$, 2-3GeV/$c$, 3-4 GeV/$c$, and 4-5 GeV/$c$.
Near- and far-side widths as a function of $p_{T, assoc}$ for charged hadron azimuthal correlations from minimumbias $d$+Au collisions.
Near-side width, far-side width as a function of $p_{T,assoc}$ for a charged pion and neutral pion triggers from the $p_{T,trig}$ range of 5-10 GeV/$c$ in minimum bias $d$+Au collisions.
Near-side width, far-side width as a function of $p_{T,assoc}$ for a charged pion and neutral pion triggers from the $p_{T,trig}$ range of 5-10 GeV/$c$ in minimum bias $d$+Au collisions.
Near- and far-side conditional yields as a function of $p_{T, assoc}$ for charged hadron triggers (2.5−4 GeV/$c$) and associated charged hadrons from $d$+Au collisions.
Near- and far-side conditional yields as a function of $p_{T, assoc}$ for charged hadron triggers (4−6 GeV/$c$) and associated charged hadrons from $d$+Au collisions.
Near- and far-side conditional yields as a function of $p_{T, assoc}$ for charged pion triggers (5−10 GeV/$c$) and associated charged hadrons from minimum-bias $d$+Au collisions.
Near- and far-side conditional yields as a function of $p_{T, assoc}$ for neutral pion triggers (5−10 GeV/$c$) and associated charged hadrons from minimum-bias $d$+Au collisions.
Near- and far-side widths and conditional yields as a function of $N_{coll}$ for charged hadron triggers (2.5−4 GeV/$c$) and associated charged hadrons (1–2.5 GeV/$c$) from $d$+Au collisions.
Near- and far-side widths and conditional yields as a function of centrality for neutral pion triggers (5−10 GeV/$c$) and associated charged hadrons (2–3 GeV/$c$) from $d$+Au collisions.
The extracted $\sqrt{<j^2_T>}$ for minimum-bias $d$+Au collisions from all four dihadron correlations. The trigger $p_T$ ranges are 3 - 5 GeV/$c$, 5 - 10 GeV/$c$ and 5 - 10 GeV/$c$ for $h^{\pm}$ - $h^{\pm}$, $\pi^0$ - $h^{\pm}$ and $\pi^{\pm}$ - $h^{\pm}$ assorted-$p_T$ correlations.
The extracted $\sqrt{<j^2_T>}$ for minimum-bias $d$+Au collisions from all four dihadron correlations. The trigger $p_T$ ranges are 3 - 5 GeV/$c$, 5 - 10 GeV/$c$ and 5 - 10 GeV/$c$ for $h^{\pm}$ - $h^{\pm}$, $\pi^0$ - $h^{\pm}$ and $\pi^{\pm}$ - $h^{\pm}$ assorted-$p_T$ correlations.
The extracted $\sqrt{<j^2_T>}$ for minimum-bias $d$+Au collisions from all four dihadron correlations. The trigger $p_T$ ranges are 3 - 5 GeV/$c$, 5 - 10 GeV/$c$ and 5 - 10 GeV/$c$ for $h^{\pm}$ - $h^{\pm}$, $\pi^0$ - $h^{\pm}$ and $\pi^{\pm}$ - $h^{\pm}$ assorted-$p_T$ correlations.
The extracted $\sqrt{<j^2_T>}$ for minimum-bias $d$+Au collisions from all four dihadron correlations. The trigger $p_T$ ranges are 3 - 5 GeV/$c$, 5 - 10 GeV/$c$ and 5 - 10 GeV/$c$ for $h^{\pm}$ - $h^{\pm}$, $\pi^0$ - $h^{\pm}$ and $\pi^{\pm}$ - $h^{\pm}$ assorted-$p_T$ correlations.
$<sin^2(\phi_{jj})>$ for minimum bias $d$+Au collisions as function of associated particle $p_T$ for $\pi^{\pm}$ - $h^{\pm}$ and $\pi^0$ - $h^{\pm}$ correlations where the trigger particles have a $p_T$ between 5 - 10 GeV/$c$.
$<sin^2(\phi_{jj})>$ for minimum bias $d$+Au collisions as function of associated particle $p_T$ for $\pi^{\pm}$ - $h^{\pm}$ and $\pi^0$ - $h^{\pm}$ correlations where the trigger particles have a $p_T$ between 5 - 10 GeV/$c$.
$<sin^2(\phi_{jj})>$ for minimum bias $d$+Au collisions as function of trigger particle $p_T$ for $\pi^{\pm}$ - $h^{\pm}$ and $\pi^0$ - $h^{\pm}$ correlations.
$<sin^2(\phi_{jj})>$ for minimum bias $d$+Au collisions as function of trigger particle $p_T$ for $\pi^{\pm}$ - $h^{\pm}$ and $\pi^0$ - $h^{\pm}$ correlations.
Near-side and far-side $p_{out}$ distributions for minimum bias $d$+Au collisions obtained from $\pi^{\pm}$ - $h^{\pm}$ correlation. The trigger is 5 < $p_{T,trig}$ < 10 GeV/$c$, the associated particle is 0.5 < $p_{T,assoc}$ < 5.0 GeV/$c$.
Conditional yield as a function of $x_E$ for near-side and far-side for $\pi^{\pm}$ - $h^{\pm}$ and $\pi^0$ - $h^{\pm}$ from minimum-bias $d$+Au collisions.
Conditional yield as a function of $x_E$ for near-side and far-side for $\pi^{\pm}$ - $h^{\pm}$ and $\pi^0$ - $h^{\pm}$ from minimum-bias $d$+Au collisions.
Conditional yield as a function of $x_E$ for near-side and far-side correlations for $\pi^{\pm}$ - $h^{\pm}$ correlations from minimum-bias $d$+Au collisions. The trigger pions are 5 < $p_{T,trig}$ < 6 GeV/$c$.
Conditional yield as a function of $x_E$ for near-side and far-side correlation for $\pi^{\pm}$ - $h^{\pm}$ correlation for several different trigger $p_T$s for minimum-bias $d$+Au collisions.
Far-side conditional yield as a function of $p_{T,trig}$ for different ranges of $x_E$ for $\pi^{\pm}$ - $h^{\pm}$ correlation for minimum-bias $d$+Au collisions.
Far-side conditional yield as a function of $p_{T,trig}$ for different ranges of $x_E$ for $\pi^{\pm}$ - $h^{\pm}$ correlation for minimum-bias $d$+Au collisions.
Far-side conditional yield as a function of $p_{T,trig}$ for different ranges of $x_E$ for $\pi^{\pm}$ - $h^{\pm}$ correlation for minimum-bias $d$+Au collisions.
Far-side conditional yield as a function of $p_{T,trig}$ for different ranges of $x_E$ for $\pi^{\pm}$ - $h^{\pm}$ correlation for minimum-bias $d$+Au collisions.
The comparison of the $\sqrt{<j^2_T>}$ values between $d$+Au and $p$+$p$ for the $\pi^{\pm}$ - $h^{\pm}$ correlations and $\pi^0$ - $h^{\pm}$ correlations. The trigger pion range is 5 - 10 GeV/$c$.
The comparison of the $\sqrt{<j^2_T>}$ values between $d$+Au and $p$+$p$ for the $\pi^{\pm}$ - $h^{\pm}$ correlations and $\pi^0$ - $h^{\pm}$ correlations. The trigger pion range is 5 - 10 GeV/$c$.
Quadrature difference between minimum-bias $d$+Au and $p$+$p$ $<sin^2(\phi_{jj})>$ values.
Quadrature difference between minimum-bias $d$+Au and $p$+$p$ $<sin^2(\phi_{jj})>$ values.
The comparison of the $p_{out}$ distribution at the near-side and far-side between central $d$+Au collisions and $p$+$p$ collisions. Results are obtained for $\pi^{\pm}$ - $h^{\pm}$ correlations with the associated hadron range 0.5 < $p_{T,assoc}$ < 5 GeV/$c$ and trigger pion range of 5 < $p_{T,trig}$ < 10 GeV/$c$.
The comparison of the $x_E$ distribution from $\pi^{\pm}$ - $h^{\pm}$ correlation at the near-side and far-side between minimum bias $d$+Au collisions and $p$+$p$ collisions. The trigger $\pi^{\pm}$ are from 5 - 10 GeV/$c$.
Far-side conditional yield as a function of $p_{T,trig}$ for different ranges of $x_E$ from $p$+$p$ collisions, triggers are $\pi^{\pm}$ from 5 - 10 GeV/$c$.
Far-side conditional yield as a function of $p_{T,trig}$ for different ranges of $x_E$ from $p$+$p$ collisions, triggers are $\pi^{\pm}$ from 5 - 10 GeV/$c$.
Far-side conditional yield as a function of $p_{T,trig}$ for different ranges of $x_E$ from $p$+$p$ collisions, triggers are $\pi^{\pm}$ from 5 - 10 GeV/$c$.
The fitted fractional change in $dN/d_{x_E}$ per unit $p_{T,trig}$ of the far-side conditional yield for different ranges of $x_E$.
Centrality dependent near and far $CY(p_T)$ for $\pi^{\pm}$ - $h^{\pm}$ correlations and $\pi^0$ - $h^{\pm}$ correlations.
Centrality dependent near and far $CY(p_T)$ for $\pi^{\pm}$ - $h^{\pm}$ correlations and $\pi^0$ - $h^{\pm}$ correlations.
Centrality dependence to the ratio of near and far $CY(p_T)$ for $d$+Au to $p$+$p$.
Centrality dependence to the ratio of near and far $CY(p_T)$ for $d$+Au to $p$+$p$.
Near- and far-side widths as a function of $p_{T, trig}$ for charged pion triggers and associated charged hadrons (2–4.5 Gev/$c$) from minimum-bias $d$+Au collisions.
Near- and far-side widths as a function of $p_{T, trig}$ for neutral pion triggers and associated charged hadrons (2–4.5 Gev/$c$) from minimum-bias $d$+Au collisions.
A search for physics beyond the standard model (SM) in the final state with a hadronically decaying tau lepton and a neutrino is presented. This analysis is based on data recorded by the CMS experiment from proton-proton collisions at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV at the LHC, corresponding to a total integrated luminosity of 138 fb$^{=1}$. The transverse mass spectrum is analyzed for the presence of new physics. No significant deviation from the SM prediction is observed. Limits are set on the production cross section of a W' boson decaying into a tau lepton and a neutrino. Lower limits are set on the mass of the sequential SM-like heavy charged vector boson and the mass of a quantum black hole. Upper limits are placed on the couplings of a new boson to the SM fermions. Constraints are put on a nonuniversal gauge interaction model and an effective field theory model. For the first time, upper limits on the cross section of $t$-channel leptoquark (LQ) exchange are presented. These limits are translated into exclusion limits on the LQ mass and on its coupling in the $t$-channel. The sensitivity of this analysis extends into the parameter space of LQ models that attempt to explain the anomalies observed in B meson decays. The limits presented for the various interpretations are the most stringent to date. Additionally, a model-independent limit is provided.
The transverse mass distribution of $ au$ leptons and missing transverse momentum observed in the Run-2 data (black dots with statistical uncertainty) as well as the expectation from SM processes (stacked histograms). Different signal hypotheses normalized to 10 fb$^{-1}$ are illustrated as dashed lines for exemplary SSM W$\prime$ boson, QBH and EFT signal hypotheses. The ratios of the background-subtracted data yields to the expected background yields are presented in the lower panel. The combined statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background are represented by the grey shaded band in the ratio panel.
Bayesian upper exclusion limits at 95% CL on the product of the cross section and branching fraction of a W$\prime$ boson decaying to a $\tau$ lepton and a neutrino in the SSM model. For this model, W$\prime$ boson masses of up to 4.8 TeV can be excluded. The limit is given by the intersection of the observed (solid) limit and the theoretical cross section (blue dotted curve). The 68 and 95% quantiles of the limits are represented by the green and yellow bands, respectively. The $\sigma \mathcal{B}$ for an SSM W' boson, along with its associated uncertainty, calculated at NNLO precision in QCD is shown.
Bayesian 95% CL model-independent upper limit on the product of signal cross sections and branching fraction for the $\tau+\nu$ decay for a back-to-back $\tau$ lepton plus $p_{T}^{miss}$ topology. To calculate this limit, all events for signal, background, and data are summed starting from a minimum $m_{T}$ threshold and then divided by the total number of events. No assumption on signal shape is included in this limit. The expected (dashed line) and observed (solid line) limits are shown as well as the 68% and 95% CL uncertainty bands (green and yellow, respectively).
Bayesian upper exclusion limits on the ratio $g_{W'}/g_{W}$ for an SSM-like W$\prime$ boson are shown. The unity coupling ratio (blue dotted curve) corresponds to the SSM common benchmark. The 68 and 95% quantiles of the limits are represented by the green and yellow bands, respectively.
Bayesian lower exclusion limits on the NUGIM G(221) mixing angle $\cot(\theta_{E})$ are shown as a function of the W$\prime$ boson mass. The theoretically excluded region is shaded in grey. The 68 and 95% quantiles of the limits are represented by the green and yellow bands, respectively.
Bayesian upper exclusion limits at 95% CL on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of a QBH in an associated $ au$ lepton and neutrino final state. Minimum threshold masses $m_{th}$ of up to 6.6 TeV are excluded at 95% CL. The observed limit (solid line) is obtained from the intersection with the LO QBH cross section (blue dotted curve). The 68 and 95% quantiles of the limits are represented by the green and yellow bands, respectively.
Bayesian upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section of the process $pp\rightarrow\tau\nu$ mediated via LQ exchange in the t-channel. The inner (green) band and the outer (yellow) band indicate the regions containing 68 and 95%, respectively, of the distribution of limits expected under the background-only hypothesis. The predicted LQ cross section at LO in the three coupling benchmark scenarios is depicted in different colors for $g_{U}=1$. The uncertainty bandy correspond to the sum in quadrature of PDF and scale variations. The first benchmark scenario considers only couplings to left-handed SM fermions (i.e. $\beta_{\text{R}}^{ij}=0$) and is referred to as "best fit LH". The second benchmark, referred to as "best fit LH+RH", considers $|\beta_{\text{R}}^{\text{b}\tau}|=1$ and all other $\beta_{\text{R}}^{ij}=0$. In the third "democratic" benchmark, equal couplings only to LH fermions are assumed, i.e. $\beta_{\text{L}}^{ij}=1$ and $\beta_{\text{R}}^{ij}=0$ for all $i$ and $j$.
Expected and observed lower limits of the LQ mass as a function of the coupling $g_{U}$ in the LH scenario. The blue band shows the 68% and 95% regions of $g_{U}$ preferred by the fit to the b anomalies data.
Expected and observed lower limits of the LQ mass as a function of the coupling $g_{U}$ in the LH+RH scenario. The blue band shows the 68% and 95% regions of $g_{U}$ preferred by the fit to the b anomalies data.
Expected and observed lower limits of the LQ mass as a function of the coupling $g_{U}$ in the democratic scenario. The blue band shows the 68% and 95% regions of $g_{U}$ preferred by the fit to the b anomalies data.
Bayesian upper exclusion limits at 95% CL on each of the Wilson coefficients described by the EFT model based on 2016-2018 data. The three different coupling types represent a left-handed vector coupling ($\epsilon^{cb}_{L}$), tensor-like coupling ($\epsilon^{cb}_{T}$), and scalar-tensor-like coupling ($\epsilon^{cb}_{S_{L}}$). The 68 and 95% quantiles of the limits are represented by the green and yellow bands, respectively.
Summary of exclusion limits (expected and observed) calculated at 95% CL for full Run-2 CMS data.
Background prediction and observed data yields in the signal region bins. The background yields are obtained from the background-only fit and serve as input to the simplified likelihood reinterpretation scheme. The naming of the bins is "year_binnumber", following the binning from Figure 4.
Matrix of covariance coefficients between signal region bins. The coefficients are obtained from the background-only fit and serve as input to the simplified likelihood reinterpretation scheme. The naming of the bins is "year_binnumber", following the binning used in Figure 4.
Predicted signal yields for the 2017 data-taking period, corresponding to 41.3 fb$^{-1}$, after the application of each search requirement (cumulative) for various signal hypothesis. The requirements listed are presented as total efficiencies w.r.t. the previous selection step.
We have studied the dependence of azimuthal anisotropy $v_2$ for inclusive and identified charged hadrons in Au$+$Au and Cu$+$Cu collisions on collision energy, species, and centrality. The values of $v_2$ as a function of transverse momentum $p_T$ and centrality in Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{_{NN}}}$=200 GeV and 62.4 GeV are the same within uncertainties. However, in Cu$+$Cu collisions we observe a decrease in $v_2$ values as the collision energy is reduced from 200 to 62.4 GeV. The decrease is larger in the more peripheral collisions. By examining both Au$+$Au and Cu$+$Cu collisions we find that $v_2$ depends both on eccentricity and the number of participants, $N_{\rm part}$. We observe that $v_2$ divided by eccentricity ($\varepsilon$) monotonically increases with $N_{\rm part}$ and scales as ${N_{\rm part}^{1/3}}$. The Cu$+$Cu data at 62.4 GeV falls below the other scaled $v_{2}$ data. For identified hadrons, $v_2$ divided by the number of constituent quarks $n_q$ is independent of hadron species as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_T=m_T-m$ between $0.1<KE_T/n_q<1$ GeV. Combining all of the above scaling and normalizations, we observe a near-universal scaling, with the exception of the Cu$+$Cu data at 62.4 GeV, of $v_2/(n_q\cdot\varepsilon\cdot N^{1/3}_{\rm part})$ vs $KE_T/n_q$ for all measured particles.
$v_2$ for inclusive charged hadrons in Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.
$v_2$ for inclusive charged hadrons in Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.
$v_2$ for inclusive charged hadrons in Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.
$v_2$ for inclusive charged hadrons in Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.
$v_2$ for inclusive charged hadrons in Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.
$v_2$ for inclusive charged hadrons in Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.
$v_2$ for inclusive charged hadrons in Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.
$v_2$ for inclusive charged hadrons in Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.
$v_2$ for inclusive charged hadrons in Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV.
$v_2$ for inclusive charged hadrons in Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV.
$v_2$ for inclusive charged hadrons in Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV compared with 200 GeV.
$v_2$ for inclusive charged hadrons in Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV compared with 200 GeV.
$v_2$ for inclusive charged hadrons in Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV compared with 200 GeV.
Comparison of integrated $v_2$ at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 and 200 GeV. Au+Au reaction.
Comparison of integrated $v_2$ at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 and 200 GeV. Au+Au reaction.
Comparison of integrated $v_2$ at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 and 200 GeV. Cu+Cu reaction.
Comparison of integrated $v_2$ at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 and 200 GeV. Cu+Cu reaction.
The comparison of integrated $v_2$ as a function of centrality.
The comparison of the normalized $v_2$/$\epsilon$ vs. centrality.
The comparison of integrated $v_2$ as a function of centrality.
The comparison of the normalized $v_2$/$\epsilon$ vs. centrality.
The comparison of integrated $v_2$ as a function of centrality.
The comparison of the normalized $v_2$/$\epsilon$ vs. centrality.
The comparison of integrated $v_2$ as a function of centrality.
The comparison of the normalized $v_2$/$\epsilon$ vs. centrality.
Comparison of $v_2$ ($p_T$) at 200 GeV for two example systems with different collision size.
Comparison of $v_2$ ($p_T$) at 200 GeV for two example systems with different collision size.
Comparison of $v_2$ ($p_T$) at 200 GeV for two example systems with different collision size.
$v_2$ vs. $p_T$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 62.4 and 200 GeV for centralities given.
$v_2$ vs. $p_T$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 62.4 and 200 GeV for centralities given.
$v_2$ vs. $p_T$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 62.4 and 200 GeV for centralities given.
$v_2$ vs. $p_T$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 62.4 and 200 GeV for centralities given.
$v_2$ vs. $p_T$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 62.4 and 200 GeV for centralities given.
$v_2$ vs. $p_T$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 62.4 and 200 GeV for centralities given.
$v_2$ vs. $p_T$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 62.4 and 200 GeV for centralities given.
$v_2$ vs. $p_T$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 62.4 and 200 GeV for centralities given.
$v_2$ vs. $p_T$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 62.4 and 200 GeV for centralities given.
$v_2$ vs. $p_T$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 62.4 and 200 GeV for centralities given.
Comparison of $v_2$ between $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV and 200 GeV for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from central Au+Au collisions.
Comparison of $v_2$ between $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV and 200 GeV for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from central Au+Au collisions.
Comparison of $v_2$ between $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV and 200 GeV for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from central Au+Au collisions.
Comparison of $v_2$ between $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV and 200 GeV for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from central Au+Au collisions.
Comparison of $v_2$ between $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV and 200 GeV for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from central Au+Au collisions.
Comparison of $v_2$ between $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV and 200 GeV for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from central Au+Au collisions.
Comparison of $v_2$ between $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV and 200 GeV for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from central Au+Au collisions.
Comparison of the $v_2$ of particles, antiparticles, for a minimum bias sample at 200 GeV and central 62.4 GeV Au+Au collisions.
Comparison of the $v_2$ of particles, antiparticles, for a minimum bias sample at 200 GeV and central 62.4 GeV Au+Au collisions.
Comparison of the $v_2$ of particles, antiparticles, for a minimum bias sample at 200 GeV and central 62.4 GeV Au+Au collisions.
Comparison of the $v_2$ of particles, antiparticles, for a minimum bias sample at 200 GeV and central 62.4 GeV Au+Au collisions.
Comparison of the $v_2$ of particles, antiparticles, for a minimum bias sample at 200 GeV and central 62.4 GeV Au+Au collisions.
Comparison of the $v_2$ of particles, antiparticles, for a minimum bias sample at 200 GeV and central 62.4 GeV Au+Au collisions.
The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. $p_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.
The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. $p_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.
The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. $p_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.
The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. $p_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.
The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. $p_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.
The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. $p_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.
The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. $p_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.
The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. $p_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.
The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. $p_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.
The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. $p_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.
The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. ${KE}_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.
The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. ${KE}_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.
The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. ${KE}_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.
The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. ${KE}_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.
The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. ${KE}_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.
The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. ${KE}_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.
The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. ${KE}_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.
The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. ${KE}_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.
The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. ${KE}_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.
The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. ${KE}_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.
The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. ${KE}_T$/$n_q$ for the indicated hadrons emitted from central Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV.
The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. ${KE}_T$/$n_q$ for the indicated hadrons emitted from central Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV.
The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. ${KE}_T$/$n_q$ for the indicated hadrons emitted from central Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV.
$v_2$ vs. $p_T$ and $v_2$/($\epsilon * N^{1/3}_{part} * n_q$) vs. ${KE}_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ in Au+Au at 200 GeV, in Au+Au at 62.4 GeV, and in Cu+Cu at 200 GeV. The values of $v_2$ and $p_T$ in Au+Au at 200 GeV, in Au+Au at 62.4 GeV, and in Cu+Cu at 200 GeV are the same for as figure 14, and the values of $v_2$, $n_q$, and $KE_T$ in Au+Au at 200 GeV, in Au+Au at 62.4 GeV, and in Cu+Cu at 200 GeV are the same for as figure 18.
Transverse momentum spectra and yields of hadrons are measured by the PHENIX collaboration in Au + Au collisions at sqrt(s_NN) = 130 GeV at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC). The time-of-flight resolution allows identification of pions to transverse momenta of 2 GeV/c and protons and antiprotons to 4 GeV/c. The yield of pions rises approximately linearly with the number of nucleons participating in the collision, while the number of kaons, protons, and antiprotons increases more rapidly. The shape of the momentum distribution changes between peripheral and central collisions. Simultaneous analysis of all the p_T spectra indicates radial collective expansion, consistent with predictions of hydrodynamic models. Hydrodynamic analysis of the spectra shows that the expansion velocity increases with collision centrality and collision energy. This expansion boosts the particle momenta, causing the yield from soft processes to exceed that for hard to large transverse momentum, perhaps as large as 3 GeV/c.
The sources of systematic uncertainties in $\langle p_T \rangle$ and $dN$/$dy$.
The $dN$/$dy$ at midrapidity for hadrons produced at midrapidity in each centrality class.
The resulting inverse slopes in MeV after fitting an $m_T$ exponential to the spectra in the range $m_T$-$m_0$ < 1 GeV in each event centrality classes. The pion resonance region is excluded in the fits. The equivalent $p_T$ fit range for each particle is shown accordingly.
The minimum $\chi^2$ and the parameters $T_{fo}$ and $\beta^{max}_T$ for each of the five centrality selections. The best fit parameters are determined by averaging all parameter pairs within the 1$\sigma$ contour. The errors correspond to the standard deviation of the parameter pairs within the 1$\sigma$ $\chi^2$ contour.
Fit parameters for each particle species using Equations $\frac{dN}{dy}$ = $C \cdot$ ($N_{part}$)$^{\alpha_{part}}$ and $\frac{dN}{dy}$ = $C^{\prime} \cdot$ ($N_{coll}$)$^{\alpha_{coll}}$.
Values of the parameters $n_{pp}$ and $x$ from fitting Equation $R \equiv \frac{dN/dy}{N_{part}}$ = (1-$x$) $\cdot n_{pp} \frac{1}{2}$ + $x \cdot n_{pp} \frac{N_{coll}}{N_{part}}$ = $n_{pp}$ [$\frac{1}{2}$ + $x$($\frac{N_{coll}}{N_{part}}$ - $\frac{1}{2})$]to the observed $dN$/$dy$ per $N_{part}$.
Invariant yields for $\pi^{\pm}$ measured in minimum-bias events at midrapidity and normalized to one rapidity unit.
Invariant yields for $K^{\pm}$ measured in minimum-bias events at midrapidity and normalized to one rapidity unit.
Invariant yields for (anti)$p$ measured in minimum-bias events at midrapidity and normalized to one rapidity unit.
Pion invariant yields in each event centrality and $p_T$ bin measured at midrapidity, normalized to one rapidity unit.
Pion invariant yields in each event centrality and $p_T$ bin measured at midrapidity, normalized to one rapidity unit.
Kaon invariant yields in each event centrality and $p_T$ bin measured at midrapidity, normalized to one rapidity unit.
Kaon invariant yields in each event centrality and $p_T$ bin measured at midrapidity, normalized to one rapidity unit.
(Anti)proton invariant yields in each event centrality and $p_T$ bin measured at midrapidity, normalized to one rapidity unit.
(Anti)proton invariant yields in each event centrality and $p_T$ bin measured at midrapidity, normalized to one rapidity unit.
(Anti)proton invariant yields in each event centrality and $p_T$ bin measured at midrapidity, normalized to one rapidity unit.
(Anti)proton invariant yields in each event centrality and $p_T$ bin measured at midrapidity, normalized to one rapidity unit.
(Anti)proton invariant yields in each event centrality and $p_T$ bin measured at midrapidity, normalized to one rapidity unit.
(Anti)proton invariant yields in each event centrality and $p_T$ bin measured at midrapidity, normalized to one rapidity unit.
(Anti)proton invariant yields in each event centrality and $p_T$ bin measured at midrapidity, normalized to one rapidity unit.
Minimum-bias invariant yields for $\pi^{\pm}$ in equal $p_T$ bins.
Minimum-bias invariant yields for $K^{\pm}$ in equal $p_T$ bins.
Minimum-bias invariant yields for (anti)$p$ in equal $p_T$ bins.
Pion invariant yields in each event centrality normalized to one rapidity unit at midrapidity.
Pion invariant yields in each event centrality normalized to one rapidity unit at midrapidity.
Kaon invariant yields in each event centrality normalized to one rapidity unit at midrapidity.
(Anti)proton invariant yields in each event centrality normalized to one rapidity unit at midrapidity.
(Anti)proton invariant yields in each event centrality normalized to one rapidity unit at midrapidity.
The integrated mean $p_T$ for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons produced in the five different classes of event centrality.
The expansion parameters $T_{fo}$ and $\beta^{max}_T$ as a function of the number of participants.
We present transverse momentum (p_T) spectra of charged hadrons measured in deuteron-gold and nucleon-gold collisions at \sqrts = 200 GeV for four centrality classes. Nucleon-gold collisions were selected by tagging events in which a spectator nucleon was observed in one of two forward rapidity detectors. The spectra and yields were investigated as a function of the number of binary nucleon-nucleon collisions, \nu, suffered by deuteron nucleons. A comparison of charged particle yields to those in p+p collisions show that the yield per nucleon-nucleon collision saturates with \nu for high momentum particles. We also present the charged hadron to neutral pion ratios as a function of p_T.
<p>Charged hadron spectra for centrality selected d+Au collisions.</p>
<p>Charged hadron spectra for centrality selected d+Au collisions.</p>
<p>Charged hadron spectra for centrality selected d+Au collisions.</p>
<p>Charged hadron spectra for centrality selected d+Au collisions.</p>
<p>Charged hadron spectra for centrality selected d+Au collisions.</p>
<p>Charged hadron spectra for centrality selected N+Au collisions. All centralities.</p>
<p>Charged hadron spectra for centrality selected N+Au collisions. Centrality A (Central).</p>
<p>Charged hadron spectra for centrality selected N+Au collisions. Centrality B.</p>
<p>Charged hadron spectra for centrality selected N+Au collisions. Centrality C.</p>
<p>Charged hadron spectra for centrality selected N+Au collisions. Centrality D (Peripheral).</p>
<p>$R_{dAu}$ as a function of $p_T$.</p>
<p>$R_{dAu}$ as a function of $p_T$.</p>
<p>$R_{dAu}$ as a function of $p_T$.</p>
<p>$R_{dAu}$ as a function of $p_T$.</p>
<p>$R_{NAu}$ as a function of $p_T$. Centrality A (Peripheral).</p>
<p>$R_{NAu}$ as a function of $p_T$. Centrality B.</p>
<p>$R_{dAu}$ as a function of $p_T$. Centrality C.</p>
<p>$R_{dAu}$ as a function of $p_T$. Centrality D (Central).</p>
<p>$R_{dAu}$ values averaged in three momentum ranges as functions of $\nu−1$. Horizontal bars show the uncertainty in the value of $\nu$ for each centrality class.</p>
<p>$R_{NAu}$ values averaged in three momentum ranges as functions of $\nu−1$. Horizontal bars show the uncertainty in the value of $\nu$ for each centrality class.</p>
<p>Charged hadron spectra for centrality selected d+Au collisions.</p>
This Letter presents a search for direct production of charginos and neutralinos via electroweak interactions. The results are based on data from proton-proton collisions at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV collected with the CMS detector at the LHC, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 137 fb$^{-1}$. The search considers final states with large missing transverse momentum and pairs of hadronically decaying bosons WW, WZ, and WH, where H is the Higgs boson. These bosons are identified using novel algorithms. No significant excess of events is observed relative to the expectations from the standard model. Limits at the 95% confidence level are placed on the cross section for production of mass-degenerate wino-like supersymmetric particles $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm$ and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0$, and mass-degenerate higgsino-like supersymmetric particles $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm$, $\tilde{\chi}_2^0$, and $\tilde{\chi}_3^0$. In the limit of a nearly-massless lightest supersymmetric particle $\tilde{\chi}_1^0$, wino-like particles with masses up to 870 and 960 GeV are excluded in the cases of $\tilde{\chi}_2^0$ $\to$ Z$\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0$ $\to$ H$\tilde{\chi}_1^0$, respectively, and higgsino-like particles are excluded between 300 and 650 GeV.
SM background prediction vs. observation in the b-veto signal region
SM background observation/prediction in the bVeto signal region
SM background prediction vs. observation in the WH signal region
SM background observation/prediction in the WH signal region
SM background prediction vs. observation in the W signal region
SM background observation/prediction in the W signal region
SM background prediction vs. observation in the H signal region
SM background observation/prediction in the H signal region
Observed exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NLO+NLL cross sections
Expected exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NLO+NLL cross sections
The 95% CL observed upper limits on the production cross sections for $\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_1$ $\widetilde{\chi}^\mp_1$ assuming that each $\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_1$ decays to a W boson and $\widetilde{\chi}^0_1$
Observed exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NLO+NLL cross sections
Expected exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NLO+NLL cross sections
The 95% CL observed upper limits on the production cross sections for $\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_1$ $\widetilde{\chi}^0_2$ assuming that each $\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_1$ decays to a W boson and $\widetilde{\chi}^0_1$ and the $\widetilde{\chi}^0_2$ decays to a Z boson and $\widetilde{\chi}^0_1$
Observed exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NLO+NLL cross sections
Expected exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NLO+NLL cross sections
The 95% CL observed upper limits on the production cross sections for $\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_1$ $\widetilde{\chi}^0_2$ assuming that each $\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_1$ decays to a W boson and $\widetilde{\chi}^0_1$ and the $\widetilde{\chi}^0_2$ decays to a H boson and $\widetilde{\chi}^0_1$
Observed exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NLO+NLL cross sections
Expected exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NLO+NLL cross sections
Observed exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NLO+NLL cross sections
Expected exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NLO+NLL cross sections
Observed exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NLO+NLL cross sections
Expected exclusion limits assuming the approximate-NLO+NLL cross sections
The 95% CL observed upper limits on the production cross sections for mass-degenerate higgsino-like$\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_1$ $\widetilde{\chi}^\mp_1$, $\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_1$ $\widetilde{\chi}^0_2$, $\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_1$ $\widetilde{\chi}^0_3$ and $\widetilde{\chi}^0_2$ $\widetilde{\chi}^0_3$ as functions of the NLSP and LSP masses.
Efficiency of bb-tagger for H(bb), Z(bb) and Z(cc) decays.
Efficiency of W- and V-tagger for W(qq) and Z(qq) decays.
Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainties for TChiWW in the b-Veto region.
Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainties for TChiWZ in the b-Veto region.
Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainties for TChiWH in the b-Veto region.
Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainties for TChiHZ in the b-Veto region.
Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainties for TChiWW in the WHSR region.
Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainties for TChiWW in the WSR region.
Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainties for TChiWW in the HSR region.
Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainties for TChiWZ in the WHSR region.
Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainties for TChiWZ in the WSR region.
Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainties for TChiWZ in the HSR region.
Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainties for TChiWH in the WHSR region.
Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainties for TChiWH in the WSR region.
Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainties for TChiWH in the HSR region.
Acceptance times efficiency values with uncertainties for TChiHZ in the WHSR region.
Acceptance times efficiency values with uncertainties for TChiHZ in the WSR region.
Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainties for TChiHZ in the HSR region.
Covariance matrix for the signal regions, derived from a fit to the control regions only under the background-only hypothesis.
Correlation matrix for the signal regions, derived from a fit to the control regions only under the background-only hypothesis.
The first measurement of the cross section for incoherent photonuclear production of J/$\psi$ vector meson as a function of the Mandelstam $|t|$ variable is presented. The measurement was carried out with the ALICE detector at midrapidity, $|y|<0.8$, using ultra-peripheral collisions of Pb nuclei at a centre-of-mass energy per nucleon pair $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.02$ TeV. This rapidity interval corresponds to a Bjorken-$x$ range $(0.3$$-$$1.4)\times 10^{-3}$. Cross sections are reported in five $|t|$ intervals in the range $0.04<|t|<1$~GeV$^2$ and compared to the predictions of different models. Models that ignore quantum fluctuations of the gluon density in the colliding hadron predict a $|t|$-dependence of the cross section much steeper than in data. The inclusion of such fluctuations in the same models provides a better description of the data.
|t|-dependence of incoherent J/Psi photonuclear production cross section in Pb-Pb UPCs measured at midrapidity, |y| < 0.8
A combination of measurements of the inclusive top-quark pair production cross-section performed by ATLAS and CMS in proton-proton collisions at centre-of-mass energies of 7 and 8 TeV at the LHC is presented. The cross-sections are obtained using top-quark pair decays with an opposite-charge electron-muon pair in the final state and with data corresponding to an integrated luminosity of about 5 fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV and about 20 fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}=8$ TeV for each experiment. The combined cross-sections are determined to be $178.5 \pm 4.7$ pb at $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV and $243.3^{+6.0}_{-5.9}$ pb at $\sqrt{s}=8$ TeV with a correlation of 0.41, using a reference top-quark mass value of 172.5 GeV. The ratio of the combined cross-sections is determined to be $R_{8/7}= 1.363\pm 0.032$. The combined measured cross-sections and their ratio agree well with theory calculations using several parton distribution function (PDF) sets. The values of the top-quark pole mass (with the strong coupling fixed at 0.118) and the strong coupling (with the top-quark pole mass fixed at 172.5 GeV) are extracted from the combined results by fitting a next-to-next-to-leading-order plus next-to-next-to-leading-log QCD prediction to the measurements. Using a version of the NNPDF3.1 PDF set containing no top-quark measurements, the results obtained are $m_t^\text{pole} = 173.4^{+1.8}_{-2.0}$ GeV and $\alpha_\text{s}(m_Z)= 0.1170^{+ 0.0021}_{-0.0018}$.
Full covariance matrix including all systematic uncertainties expressed as nuisance parameters. With the exception of the cross section parameters, all parameters were normalised to 1 before the fit. Therefore, the diagonal elements represent the constraint in quadrature.
Full covariance matrix including all systematic uncertainties expressed as nuisance parameters. With the exception of the cross section parameters, all parameters were normalised to 1 before the fit. Therefore, the diagonal elements represent the constraint in quadrature.
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.
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.
The distribution of $\mathrm{p_{T}^{miss}}$ (GeV) in 2L1T 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 distribution of $\mathrm{M_{T}}$ (GeV) in 3L OnZ 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 distribution of $\mathrm{H_{T}}$ (GeV) in 3L ttZ 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.
Distribution of BDT score from the SS-M ($\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$) BDT for the 3L+2L1T CR events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The 3L+2L1T CR consists of the 3L OnZ, 3L Z$\mathrm{\gamma}$, and 2L1T MisID CRs. 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 distribution of visible diboson $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ (GeV) in 4L ZZ 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.
Distribution of BDT score from the SS-M ($\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$) BDT for the 4L ZZ CR events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. 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 distribution of $\mathrm{L_{T}}$ in all seven multilepton channels 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. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton of $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 1 TeV in the doublet scenario, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The distribution of $\mathrm{p_{T}^{miss}}$ in all seven multilepton channels 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. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermion of $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 1 TeV in the flavor-democratic scenario, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The distribution of $\mathrm{H_{T}}$ in all seven multilepton channels 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. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark of $mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1 TeV coupled to a top quark and a $\tau$ lepton, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The distribution of $\mathrm{M_{OSSF}}$ in channels with at least one light lepton pair (4L, 3L1T, 3L, 2L2T, and 2L1T) 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. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermion of $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 1 TeV in the flavor-democratic scenario, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The $\mathrm{N_{b}}$ distribution in 4L, 3L1T, 3L, 2L2T, 2L1T, 1L3T, and 1L2T 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 invariant mass distribution of the opposite-sign same-flavor ($\mathrm{M_{OSSF}}$) tau lepton pair distribution in 2L2T, 1L3T, and 1L2T 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 $\mathrm{M_{T}^{12}}$ distribution in 4L, 3L1T, 3L, 2L2T, 2L1T, 1L3T, and 1L2T 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 $\mathrm{N_{b}}$ distribution in 3L, 2L1T, and 1L2T events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties on the SM background predictions.
The $\mathrm{L_{T}}$ distribution in 3L, 2L1T, and 1L2T events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties on the SM background predictions.
The $\mathrm{p_{T}^{miss}}$ distribution in 3L, 2L1T, and 1L2T events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties on the SM background predictions.
The $\mathrm{H_{T}}$ distribution in 3L, 2L1T, and 1L2T events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties on the SM background predictions.
The $\mathrm{M_{OSSF}}$ distribution in 3L, and 2L1T events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties on the SM background predictions.
The invariant mass distribution of the opposite-sign different-flavor ($\mathrm{M_{OSDF}}$) light lepton pair distribution in 3L, and 2L1T events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties on the SM background predictions.
The invariant mass distribution of the opposite-sign same-flavor ($\mathrm{M_{OSSF}}$) tau lepton pair distribution in 1L2T events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties on the SM background predictions.
The invariant mass distribution of the opposite-sign different-flavor ($\mathrm{M_{OSDF}}$) light lepton and tau lepton pair distribution in 2L1T, and 1L2T events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties on the SM background predictions.
The $\mathrm{M_{T}^{1}}$ distribution in 3L, 2L1T, and 1L2T events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties on the SM background predictions.
The $\mathrm{M_{T}^{12}}$ distribution in 3L, 2L1T, and 1L2T events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties on the SM background predictions.
The model independent fundamental table categories for the combined 2016-2018 data set, as defined in Table 1. The gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties on the SM background predictions.
The $\mathrm{N_{b}}$ distribution in 4L, 3L1T, 2L2T, and 1L3T events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties on the SM background predictions.
The SR distributions of the fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table in 3L channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SR distributions of the fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table in 2L1T and 1L2T channels for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SR distributions of the fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table in 3L channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SR distributions of the fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table in 2L1T and 1L2T channels for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SR distributions of the fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table in 4L, 3L1T, 2L2T, and 1L3T channels for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SR distributions of the fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table in 4L, 3L1T, 2L2T, and 1L3T channels for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SR distributions of the fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 3L channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SR distributions of the fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 2L1T and 1L2T channels for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SR distributions of the fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 3L channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SR distributions of the fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 2L1T and 1L2T channels for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SR distributions of the fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 4L, 3L1T, 2L2T, and 1L3T channels for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SR distributions of the fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 4L, 3L1T, 2L2T, and 1L3T channels for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 3L 0B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 3L 1B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 3L 2B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 2L1T 0B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 2L1T 1B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 2L1T 2B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 1L2T channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. An example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid. For this category, the signal yield is negligible and is not visible in the figure.
The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 3L 0B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 3L 1B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 3L 2B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 2L1T 0B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 2L1T 1B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 2L1T 2B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 1L2T channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. An example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid. For this category, the signal yield is negligible and is not visible in the figure.
The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 4L 0B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 4L 1B/2B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 3L1T, 2L2T, and 1L3T channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 4L 0B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 4L 1B/2B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 3L1T, 2L2T, and 1L3T channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The VLL-L BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The VLL-L BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The VLL-L BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The VLL-M BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The VLL-M BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The VLL-M BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The VLL-H BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 900 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The VLL-H BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 900 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The VLL-H BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 900 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The VLL-L BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The VLL-L BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The VLL-L BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The VLL-M BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The VLL-M BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The VLL-M BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The VLL-H BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 900 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The VLL-H BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 900 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The VLL-H BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 900 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-VL $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 100 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-VL $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 100 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-VL $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 100 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-L $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 300 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-L $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 300 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-L $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 300 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-M $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 550 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-M $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 550 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-M $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 550 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-H $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-H $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-H $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-VL $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 100 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-VL $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 100 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-VL $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 100 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-L $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 300 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-L $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 300 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-L $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 300 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-M $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 550 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-M $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 550 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-M $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 550 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-H $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 850 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-H $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 850 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-H $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 850 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-VL $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 100 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-VL $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 100 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-VL $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 100 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-L $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 300 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-L $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 300 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-L $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 300 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-M $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 550 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-M $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 550 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-M $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 550 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-H $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-H $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-H $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-VL $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 100 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-VL $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 100 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-VL $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 100 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-L $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 300 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-L $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 300 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-L $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 300 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-M $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 550 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-M $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 550 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-M $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 550 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-H $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 850 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-H $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 850 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SS-H $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 850 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-VL $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-VL $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-VL $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-L $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and an electron for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-L $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and an electron for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-L $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and an electron for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-M $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 700 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-M $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 700 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-M $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 700 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-H $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and an electron for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-H $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and an electron for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-H $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and an electron for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-VL $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-VL $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-VL $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-L $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-L $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-L $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-M $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 700 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-M $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 700 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-M $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 700 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-H $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.2 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-H $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.2 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-H $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.2 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-VL $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-VL $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-VL $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-L $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and an electron for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-L $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and an electron for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-L $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and an electron for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-M $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 700 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-M $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 700 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-M $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 700 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-H $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and an electron for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.2 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-H $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and an electron for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.2 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-H $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and an electron for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.2 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-VL $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-VL $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-VL $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-L $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-L $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-L $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-M $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 700 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-M $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 700 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-M $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 700 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-H $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.2 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-H $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.2 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The LQ-H $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. 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 expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.2 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95%% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario using the table schemes and the BDT regions of the SS-M and the SS-H $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDTs. To the left of the vertical dashed gray line, the limits are shown from the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table, and to the right the limits are shown from the BDT regions.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95%% CL on the production cross section for the vector-like $\mathrm{\tau}$ leptons: doublet model. To the left of the vertical dashed gray line, the limits are shown from the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table, and to the right the limits are shown from the BDT regions.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the scalar leptoquarks: $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ and $\mathrm{\beta=1}$. To the left of the vertical dashed gray line, the limits are shown from the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table, and to the right the limits are shown from the BDT regions.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the scalar leptoquarks: $\mathrm{B_{e}=1}$ and $\mathrm{\beta=1}$. To the left of the vertical dashed gray line, the limits are shown from the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table, and to the right the limits are shown from the BDT regions.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the scalar leptoquarks: $\mathrm{B_{\mu}=1}$ and $\mathrm{\beta=1}$. To the left of the vertical dashed gray line, the limits are shown from the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table, and to the right the limits are shown from the BDT regions.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the vector-like $\mathrm{\tau}$ leptons: singlet model. The limit is shown from the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table for all masses.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ scenario using the BDT regions.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ scenario using the Advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{\mu}=1}$ scenario using the BDT regions.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{\mu}=1}$ scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{\mu}=1}$ scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{\mu}=1}$ scenario using the Advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{e}=1}$ scenario using the BDT regions.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{e}=1}$ scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{e}=1}$ scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{e}=1}$ scenario using the Advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ scenario using the BDT regions.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ scenario using the Advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the scalar leptoquarks with $\mathrm{\beta=1}$ in the $\mathrm{B_{\mu}=1}$ scenario using the BDT regions.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the scalar leptoquarks with $\mathrm{\beta=1}$ in the $\mathrm{B_{\mu}=1}$ scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the scalar leptoquarks with $\mathrm{\beta=1}$ in the $\mathrm{B_{\mu}=1}$ scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the scalar leptoquarks with $\mathrm{\beta=1}$ in the $\mathrm{B_{\mu}=1}$ scenario using the Advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the scalar leptoquarks with $\mathrm{\beta=1}$ in the $\mathrm{B_{e}=1}$ scenario using the BDT regions.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the scalar leptoquarks with $\mathrm{\beta=1}$ in the $\mathrm{B_{e}=1}$ scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the scalar leptoquarks with $\mathrm{\beta=1}$ in the $\mathrm{B_{e}=1}$ scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the scalar leptoquarks with $\mathrm{\beta=1}$ in the $\mathrm{B_{e}=1}$ scenario using the Advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the scalar leptoquarks with $\mathrm{\beta=1}$ in the $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ scenario using the BDT regions.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the scalar leptoquarks with $\mathrm{\beta=1}$ in the $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the scalar leptoquarks with $\mathrm{\beta=1}$ in the $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the scalar leptoquarks with $\mathrm{\beta=1}$ in the $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ scenario using the Advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the vector-like $\tau$ leptons in the doublet scenario using the BDT regions.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the vector-like $\tau$ leptons in the doublet scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the vector-like $\tau$ leptons in the doublet scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the vector-like $\tau$ leptons in the doublet scenario using the Advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the vector-like $\tau$ leptons in the singlet scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the vector-like $\tau$ leptons in the singlet scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.
Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the vector-like $\tau$ leptons in the singlet scenario using the Advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.
Observed lower limits at 95% CL on the mass of the type-III seesaw fermions in the plane defined by $\mathrm{B_{e}}$ and $\mathrm{B_{\tau}}$, with the constraint that $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}+B_{\tau}=1}$. These limits arise from the SS-H $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT when $\mathrm{B_{\tau}\geq0.9}$, and by the SS-H $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}+B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT for the other decay branching fraction combinations.
Median Expected lower limits at 95% CL on the mass of the type-III seesaw fermions in the plane defined by $\mathrm{B_{e}}$ and $\mathrm{B_{\tau}}$, with the constraint that $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}+B_{\tau}=1}$. These limits arise from the SS-H $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT when $\mathrm{B_{\tau}\geq0.9}$, and by the SS-H $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}+B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT for the other decay branching fraction combinations.
Acceptance times efficiency values for the major SM backgrounds WZ, ZZ, and ttZ in the signal regions of all seven multilepton channels. The product is defined as the ratio of the total reconstructed yield in a given channel (after all the corrections and scale factor implementation) to the product of luminosity and the production cross section of the given simulation sample. The statistical uncertainty on the acceptance times efficiency values is insignificant with respect to the quoted precision.
Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainty for the vector-like $\mathrm{\tau}$ lepton model in the doublet scenario in the signal regions of all seven multilepton channels. The product is defined as the ratio of the total reconstructed yield in a given channel (after all the corrections and scale factor implementation) to the product of luminosity and the production cross section of the given simulation sample.
Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainty for the vector-like $\mathrm{\tau}$ lepton model in the singlet scenario in the signal regions of all seven multilepton channels. The product is defined as the ratio of the total reconstructed yield in a given channel (after all the corrections and scale factor implementation) to the product of luminosity and the production cross section of the given simulation sample.
Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainty for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{(B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau})}$ scenario in the signal regions of all seven multilepton channels. The product is defined as the ratio of the total reconstructed yield in a given channel (after all the corrections and scale factor implementation) to the product of luminosity and the production cross section of the given simulation sample.
Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainty for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{(B_{e}=1)}$ scenario in the signal regions of all seven multilepton channels. The product is defined as the ratio of the total reconstructed yield in a given channel (after all the corrections and scale factor implementation) to the product of luminosity and the production cross section of the given simulation sample.
Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainty for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{(B_{\mu}=1)}$ scenario in the signal regions of all seven multilepton channels. The product is defined as the ratio of the total reconstructed yield in a given channel (after all the corrections and scale factor implementation) to the product of luminosity and the production cross section of the given simulation sample.
Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainty for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1)}$ scenario in the signal regions of all seven multilepton channels. The product is defined as the ratio of the total reconstructed yield in a given channel (after all the corrections and scale factor implementation) to the product of luminosity and the production cross section of the given simulation sample.
Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainty for the scalar leptoquarks with $\mathrm{\beta=1}$ in the $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ scenario in the signal regions of all seven multilepton channels. The product is defined as the ratio of the total reconstructed yield in a given channel (after all the corrections and scale factor implementation) to the product of luminosity and the production cross section of the given simulation sample.
Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainty for the scalar leptoquarks with $\mathrm{\beta=1}$ in the $\mathrm{B_{e}=1}$ scenario in the signal regions of all seven multilepton channels. The product is defined as the ratio of the total reconstructed yield in a given channel (after all the corrections and scale factor implementation) to the product of luminosity and the production cross section of the given simulation sample.
Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainty for the scalar leptoquarks with $\mathrm{\beta=1}$ in the $\mathrm{B_{\mu}=1}$ scenario in the signal regions of all seven multilepton channels. The product is defined as the ratio of the total reconstructed yield in a given channel (after all the corrections and scale factor implementation) to the product of luminosity and the production cross section of the given simulation sample.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.1}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for 0.2<dRmin<0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.1}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for dRmin>0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.1}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.1}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for 0.2<dRmin<0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for dRmin>0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{1.1<|\eta|<1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for 0.2<dRmin<0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{1.1<|\eta|<1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for dRmin>0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{1.1<|\eta|<1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{1.1<|\eta|<1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.1}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for 0.2<dRmin<0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.1}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for dRmin>0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.1}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.1}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for 0.2<dRmin<0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for dRmin>0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{1.1<|\eta|<1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for 0.2<dRmin<0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{1.1<|\eta|<1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for dRmin>0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{1.1<|\eta|<1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{1.1<|\eta|<1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for 0.2<dRmin<0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for dRmin>0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for 0.2<dRmin<0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for dRmin>0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for 0.2<dRmin<0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for dRmin>0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for 0.2<dRmin<0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for dRmin>0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 1-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.1}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for dRmin>0.2. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 1-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.1}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 1-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.1}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 1-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for dRmin>0.2. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 1-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 1-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 1-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{1.1<|\eta|<1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for dRmin>0.2. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 1-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{1.1<|\eta|<1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 1-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{1.1<|\eta|<1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 3-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.1}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for dRmin>0.2. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 3-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.1}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 3-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.1}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 3-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for dRmin>0.2. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 3-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 3-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 3-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{1.1<|\eta|<1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for dRmin>0.2. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 3-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{1.1<|\eta|<1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 3-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{1.1<|\eta|<1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.
The SR distributions of the Fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SR distributions of the Fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
The SR distributions of the Advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. 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 predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.
PHENIX has measured the e^+e^- pair continuum in sqrt(s_NN)=200 GeV Au+Au and p+p collisions over a wide range of mass and transverse momenta. The e^+e^- yield is compared to the expectations from hadronic sources, based on PHENIX measurements. In the intermediate mass region, between the masses of the phi and the J/psi meson, the yield is consistent with expectations from correlated c^bar-c production, though other mechanisms are not ruled out. In the low mass region (below the phi) the p+p inclusive mass spectrum is well described by known contributions from light meson decays. In contrast, the Au+Au minimum bias inclusive mass spectrum in this region shows an enhancement by a factor of 4.7+/-0.4(stat)+/-1.5(syst)+/-0.9(model) At low mass (m_ee<0.3 GeV/c^2) and high p_T (1<p_T<5 GeV/c) an enhanced e^+e^- pair yield is observed that is consistent with production of virtual direct photons. This excess is used to infer the yield of real direct photons. In central Au+Au collisions, the excess of the direct photon yield over the p+p is exponential in p_T, with inverse slope T=221+/-19(stat)+/-19(syst) MeV. Hydrodynamical models with initial temperatures ranging from T_init ~=300--600 MeV at times of 0.6--0.15 fm/c after the collision are in qualitative agreement with the direct photon data in Au+Au. For low p_T<1 GeV/c the low mass region shows a further significant enhancement that increases with centrality and has an inverse slope of T ~=100 MeV. Theoretical models under predict the low mass, low p_T enhancement.
(Color online) Inclusive mass spectrum of $e^+e^-$ pairs in the PHENIX acceptance in $p$+$p$ collisions compared to the expectations from the decays of light hadrons and correlated decays of charm, bottom, and Drell-Yan. The contribution from hadron decays is independently normalized based on meson measurements in PHENIX. The bottom panel shows the ratio of data to the cocktail of known sources. The systematic uncertainties of the data are shown as boxes, while the uncertainty on the cocktail is shown as band around 1.
(Color online) Inclusive mass spectrum of $e^+e^-$ pairs in the PHENIX acceptance in minimum-bias Au+Au compared to expectations from the decays of light hadrons and correlated decays of charm, bottom, and Drell-Yan. The charm contribution expected if the dynamic correlation of $c$ and $\bar{c}$ is removed is shown separately. Statistical (bars) and systematic (boxes) uncertainties are shown separately. The contribution from hadron decays is independently normalized based on meson measurements in PHENIX. The bottom panel shows the ratio of data to the cocktail of known sources. The systematic uncertainties of the data are shown as boxes, while the uncertainty on the cocktail is shown as band around 1.
(Color online) Inclusive mass spectrum of $e^+e^-$ pairs in the PHENIX acceptance in minimum-bias Au+Au compared to expectations from the decays of light hadrons and correlated decays of charm, bottom, and Drell-Yan. The charm contribution expected if the dynamic correlation of $c$ and $\bar{c}$ is removed is shown separately. Statistical (bars) and systematic (boxes) uncertainties are shown separately. The contribution from hadron decays is independently normalized based on meson measurements in PHENIX. The bottom panel shows the ratio of data to the cocktail of known sources. The systematic uncertainties of the data are shown as boxes, while the uncertainty on the cocktail is shown as band around 1.
(Color online) Invariant mass spectrum of $e^+e^-$ pairs inclusive in $p_T$ compared to expectations from the model of hadron decays for $p$+$p$ and for different Au+Au centrality classes. The charmed meson decay contribution based on PYTHIA [55] is included in the sum of sources (solid black line). The dotted line shows the contribution from charm calculated assuming an isotropic angular distribution. Statistical (bars) and systematic (boxes) uncertainties are shown separately. The systematic uncertainty on the expected hadronic sources is not shown: it ranges from ~10% in the $\pi^o$ region to ~30% in the region of the vector mesons. The uncertainty on the charm cross section, which dominates the IMR, is ~30% in both $p$+$p$ and in Au+Au collisions.
(Color online) Invariant mass spectrum of $e^+e^-$ pairs inclusive in $p_T$ compared to expectations from the model of hadron decays for $p$+$p$ and for different Au+Au centrality classes. The charmed meson decay contribution based on PYTHIA [55] is included in the sum of sources (solid black line). The dotted line shows the contribution from charm calculated assuming an isotropic angular distribution. Statistical (bars) and systematic (boxes) uncertainties are shown separately. The systematic uncertainty on the expected hadronic sources is not shown: it ranges from ~10% in the $\pi^o$ region to ~30% in the region of the vector mesons. The uncertainty on the charm cross section, which dominates the IMR, is ~30% in both $p$+$p$ and in Au+Au collisions.
(Color online) Invariant mass spectrum of $e^+e^-$ pairs inclusive in $p_T$ compared to expectations from the model of hadron decays for $p$+$p$ and for different Au+Au centrality classes. The charmed meson decay contribution based on PYTHIA [55] is included in the sum of sources (solid black line). The dotted line shows the contribution from charm calculated assuming an isotropic angular distribution. Statistical (bars) and systematic (boxes) uncertainties are shown separately. The systematic uncertainty on the expected hadronic sources is not shown: it ranges from ~10% in the $\pi^o$ region to ~30% in the region of the vector mesons. The uncertainty on the charm cross section, which dominates the IMR, is ~30% in both $p$+$p$ and in Au+Au collisions.
(Color online) Invariant mass spectrum of $e^+e^-$ pairs inclusive in $p_T$ compared to expectations from the model of hadron decays for $p$+$p$ and for different Au+Au centrality classes. The charmed meson decay contribution based on PYTHIA [55] is included in the sum of sources (solid black line). The dotted line shows the contribution from charm calculated assuming an isotropic angular distribution. Statistical (bars) and systematic (boxes) uncertainties are shown separately. The systematic uncertainty on the expected hadronic sources is not shown: it ranges from ~10% in the $\pi^o$ region to ~30% in the region of the vector mesons. The uncertainty on the charm cross section, which dominates the IMR, is ~30% in both $p$+$p$ and in Au+Au collisions.
(Color online) Invariant mass spectrum of $e^+e^-$ pairs inclusive in $p_T$ compared to expectations from the model of hadron decays for $p$+$p$ and for different Au+Au centrality classes. The charmed meson decay contribution based on PYTHIA [55] is included in the sum of sources (solid black line). The dotted line shows the contribution from charm calculated assuming an isotropic angular distribution. Statistical (bars) and systematic (boxes) uncertainties are shown separately. The systematic uncertainty on the expected hadronic sources is not shown: it ranges from ~10% in the $\pi^o$ region to ~30% in the region of the vector mesons. The uncertainty on the charm cross section, which dominates the IMR, is ~30% in both $p$+$p$ and in Au+Au collisions.
(Color online) Invariant mass spectrum of $e^+e^-$ pairs inclusive in $p_T$ compared to expectations from the model of hadron decays for $p$+$p$ and for different Au+Au centrality classes. The charmed meson decay contribution based on PYTHIA [55] is included in the sum of sources (solid black line). The dotted line shows the contribution from charm calculated assuming an isotropic angular distribution. Statistical (bars) and systematic (boxes) uncertainties are shown separately. The systematic uncertainty on the expected hadronic sources is not shown: it ranges from ~10% in the $\pi^o$ region to ~30% in the region of the vector mesons. The uncertainty on the charm cross section, which dominates the IMR, is ~30% in both $p$+$p$ and in Au+Au collisions.
(Color online) Invariant mass spectrum of $e^+e^-$ pairs inclusive in $p_T$ compared to expectations from the model of hadron decays for $p$+$p$ and for different Au+Au centrality classes. The charmed meson decay contribution based on PYTHIA [55] is included in the sum of sources (solid black line). The dotted line shows the contribution from charm calculated assuming an isotropic angular distribution. Statistical (bars) and systematic (boxes) uncertainties are shown separately. The systematic uncertainty on the expected hadronic sources is not shown: it ranges from ~10% in the $\pi^o$ region to ~30% in the region of the vector mesons. The uncertainty on the charm cross section, which dominates the IMR, is ~30% in both $p$+$p$ and in Au+Au collisions.
(Color online) Invariant mass spectrum of $e^+e^-$ pairs inclusive in $p_T$ compared to expectations from the model of hadron decays for $p$+$p$ and for different Au+Au centrality classes. The charmed meson decay contribution based on PYTHIA [55] is included in the sum of sources (solid black line). The dotted line shows the contribution from charm calculated assuming an isotropic angular distribution. Statistical (bars) and systematic (boxes) uncertainties are shown separately. The systematic uncertainty on the expected hadronic sources is not shown: it ranges from ~10% in the $\pi^o$ region to ~30% in the region of the vector mesons. The uncertainty on the charm cross section, which dominates the IMR, is ~30% in both $p$+$p$ and in Au+Au collisions.
(Color online) Invariant mass spectrum of $e^+e^-$ pairs inclusive in $p_T$ compared to expectations from the model of hadron decays for $p$+$p$ and for different Au+Au centrality classes. The charmed meson decay contribution based on PYTHIA [55] is included in the sum of sources (solid black line). The dotted line shows the contribution from charm calculated assuming an isotropic angular distribution. Statistical (bars) and systematic (boxes) uncertainties are shown separately. The systematic uncertainty on the expected hadronic sources is not shown: it ranges from ~10% in the $\pi^o$ region to ~30% in the region of the vector mesons. The uncertainty on the charm cross section, which dominates the IMR, is ~30% in both $p$+$p$ and in Au+Au collisions.
(Color online) Invariant mass spectrum of $e^+e^-$ pairs inclusive in $p_T$ compared to expectations from the model of hadron decays for $p$+$p$ and for different Au+Au centrality classes. The charmed meson decay contribution based on PYTHIA [55] is included in the sum of sources (solid black line). The dotted line shows the contribution from charm calculated assuming an isotropic angular distribution. Statistical (bars) and systematic (boxes) uncertainties are shown separately. The systematic uncertainty on the expected hadronic sources is not shown: it ranges from ~10% in the $\pi^o$ region to ~30% in the region of the vector mesons. The uncertainty on the charm cross section, which dominates the IMR, is ~30% in both $p$+$p$ and in Au+Au collisions.
(Color online) Invariant mass spectrum of $e^+e^-$ pairs inclusive in $p_T$ compared to expectations from the model of hadron decays for $p$+$p$ and for different Au+Au centrality classes. The charmed meson decay contribution based on PYTHIA [55] is included in the sum of sources (solid black line). The dotted line shows the contribution from charm calculated assuming an isotropic angular distribution. Statistical (bars) and systematic (boxes) uncertainties are shown separately. The systematic uncertainty on the expected hadronic sources is not shown: it ranges from ~10% in the $\pi^o$ region to ~30% in the region of the vector mesons. The uncertainty on the charm cross section, which dominates the IMR, is ~30% in both $p$+$p$ and in Au+Au collisions.
(Color online) Dielectron yield per binary collision in the mass range 1.2 to 2.8 GeV/$c^2$ as a function of $N_{part}$. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown separately. Also shown are two bands corresponding to different estimates of the contribution from charmed meson decays. The width of the bands reflects the uncertainty of the charm cross section only.
(Color online) Dielectron yield per binary collision in the mass range 1.2 to 2.8 GeV/$c^2$ as a function of $N_{part}$. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown separately. Also shown are two bands corresponding to different estimates of the contribution from charmed meson decays. The width of the bands reflects the uncertainty of the charm cross section only.
(Color online) Dielectron yield per participating nucleon pair ($N_{part}/2$) as function of $N_{part}$ for two different mass ranges (a: $0.15<m_{ee}<0.75$ GeV/$c^2$, b: $0<m_{ee}<0.1$ GeV/$c^2$) compared to the expected yield from the hadron decay model. The two lines give the systematic uncertainty of the yield from cocktail and charmed hadron decays. For the data statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown separately.
(Color online) Dielectron yield per participating nucleon pair ($N_{part}/2$) as function of $N_{part}$ for two different mass ranges (a: $0.15<m_{ee}<0.75$ GeV/$c^2$, b: $0<m_{ee}<0.1$ GeV/$c^2$) compared to the expected yield from the hadron decay model. The two lines give the systematic uncertainty of the yield from cocktail and charmed hadron decays. For the data statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown separately.
(Color online) $e^+e^-$ pair invariant mass distributions in $p$+$p$ (left) and minimum bias Au+Au collisions (right). The $p_T$ ranges are shown in the legend. The solid curves represent the cocktail of hadronic sources (see Sec. IV) and include contribution from charm calculated by PYTHIA using the cross section from Ref. [48] scaled by $N_{coll}$.
(Color online) $e^+e^-$ pair invariant mass distributions in $p$+$p$ (left) and minimum bias Au+Au collisions (right). The $p_T$ ranges are shown in the legend. The solid curves represent the cocktail of hadronic sources (see Sec. IV) and include contribution from charm calculated by PYTHIA using the cross section from Ref. [48] scaled by $N_{coll}$.
(Color online) $e^+e^-$ pair invariant mass distributions in $p$+$p$ (left) and minimum bias Au+Au collisions (right). The $p_T$ ranges are shown in the legend. The solid curves represent the cocktail of hadronic sources (see Sec. IV) and include contribution from charm calculated by PYTHIA using the cross section from Ref. [48] scaled by $N_{coll}$.
(Color online) $e^+e^-$ pair invariant mass distributions in $p$+$p$ (left) and minimum bias Au+Au collisions (right). The $p_T$ ranges are shown in the legend. The solid curves represent the cocktail of hadronic sources (see Sec. IV) and include contribution from charm calculated by PYTHIA using the cross section from Ref. [48] scaled by $N_{coll}$.
(Color online) $e^+e^-$ pair invariant mass distributions in $p$+$p$ (left) and minimum bias Au+Au collisions (right). The $p_T$ ranges are shown in the legend. The solid curves represent the cocktail of hadronic sources (see Sec. IV) and include contribution from charm calculated by PYTHIA using the cross section from Ref. [48] scaled by $N_{coll}$.
(Color online) $e^+e^-$ pair invariant mass distributions in $p$+$p$ (left) and minimum bias Au+Au collisions (right). The $p_T$ ranges are shown in the legend. The solid curves represent the cocktail of hadronic sources (see Sec. IV) and include contribution from charm calculated by PYTHIA using the cross section from Ref. [48] scaled by $N_{coll}$.
(Color online) $e^+e^-$ pair invariant mass distributions in $p$+$p$ (left) and minimum bias Au+Au collisions (right). The $p_T$ ranges are shown in the legend. The solid curves represent the cocktail of hadronic sources (see Sec. IV) and include contribution from charm calculated by PYTHIA using the cross section from Ref. [48] scaled by $N_{coll}$.
(Color online) $e^+e^-$ pair invariant mass distributions in $p$+$p$ (left) and minimum bias Au+Au collisions (right). The $p_T$ ranges are shown in the legend. The solid curves represent the cocktail of hadronic sources (see Sec. IV) and include contribution from charm calculated by PYTHIA using the cross section from Ref. [48] scaled by $N_{coll}$.
(Color online) $e^+e^-$ pair invariant mass distributions in $p$+$p$ (left) and minimum bias Au+Au collisions (right). The $p_T$ ranges are shown in the legend. The solid curves represent the cocktail of hadronic sources (see Sec. IV) and include contribution from charm calculated by PYTHIA using the cross section from Ref. [48] scaled by $N_{coll}$.
(Color online) $e^+e^-$ pair invariant mass distributions in $p$+$p$ (left) and minimum bias Au+Au collisions (right). The $p_T$ ranges are shown in the legend. The solid curves represent the cocktail of hadronic sources (see Sec. IV) and include contribution from charm calculated by PYTHIA using the cross section from Ref. [48] scaled by $N_{coll}$.
(Color online) $e^+e^-$ pair invariant mass distributions in $p$+$p$ (left) and minimum bias Au+Au collisions (right). The $p_T$ ranges are shown in the legend. The solid curves represent the cocktail of hadronic sources (see Sec. IV) and include contribution from charm calculated by PYTHIA using the cross section from Ref. [48] scaled by $N_{coll}$.
(Color online) $e^+e^-$ pair invariant mass distributions in $p$+$p$ (left) and minimum bias Au+Au collisions (right). The $p_T$ ranges are shown in the legend. The solid curves represent the cocktail of hadronic sources (see Sec. IV) and include contribution from charm calculated by PYTHIA using the cross section from Ref. [48] scaled by $N_{coll}$.
(Color online) $e^+e^-$ pair invariant mass distributions in $p$+$p$ (left) and minimum bias Au+Au collisions (right). The $p_T$ ranges are shown in the legend. The solid curves represent the cocktail of hadronic sources (see Sec. IV) and include contribution from charm calculated by PYTHIA using the cross section from Ref. [48] scaled by $N_{coll}$.
(Color online) $e^+e^-$ pair invariant mass distributions in $p$+$p$ (left) and minimum bias Au+Au collisions (right). The $p_T$ ranges are shown in the legend. The solid curves represent the cocktail of hadronic sources (see Sec. IV) and include contribution from charm calculated by PYTHIA using the cross section from Ref. [48] scaled by $N_{coll}$.
(Color online) $e^+e^-$ pair invariant mass distributions in $p$+$p$ (left) and minimum bias Au+Au collisions (right). The $p_T$ ranges are shown in the legend. The solid curves represent the cocktail of hadronic sources (see Sec. IV) and include contribution from charm calculated by PYTHIA using the cross section from Ref. [48] scaled by $N_{coll}$.
(Color online) $e^+e^-$ pair invariant mass distributions in $p$+$p$ (left) and minimum bias Au+Au collisions (right). The $p_T$ ranges are shown in the legend. The solid curves represent the cocktail of hadronic sources (see Sec. IV) and include contribution from charm calculated by PYTHIA using the cross section from Ref. [48] scaled by $N_{coll}$.
(Color online) $e^+e^-$ pair invariant mass distributions in $p$+$p$ (left) and minimum bias Au+Au collisions (right). The $p_T$ ranges are shown in the legend. The solid curves represent the cocktail of hadronic sources (see Sec. IV) and include contribution from charm calculated by PYTHIA using the cross section from Ref. [48] scaled by $N_{coll}$.
(Color online) $e^+e^-$ pair invariant mass distributions in $p$+$p$ (left) and minimum bias Au+Au collisions (right). The $p_T$ ranges are shown in the legend. The solid curves represent the cocktail of hadronic sources (see Sec. IV) and include contribution from charm calculated by PYTHIA using the cross section from Ref. [48] scaled by $N_{coll}$.
(Color online) $e^+e^-$ pair invariant mass distributions in $p$+$p$ (left) and minimum bias Au+Au collisions (right). The $p_T$ ranges are shown in the legend. The solid curves represent the cocktail of hadronic sources (see Sec. IV) and include contribution from charm calculated by PYTHIA using the cross section from Ref. [48] scaled by $N_{coll}$.
(Color online) $e^+e^-$ pair invariant mass distributions in $p$+$p$ (left) and minimum bias Au+Au collisions (right). The $p_T$ ranges are shown in the legend. The solid curves represent the cocktail of hadronic sources (see Sec. IV) and include contribution from charm calculated by PYTHIA using the cross section from Ref. [48] scaled by $N_{coll}$.
(Color online) Electron pair mass distribution for Au+Au (Min.Bias) for $1.0<p_T<1.5$ GeV/$c$. The two component fit is explained in the text. The fit range is $0.12<m_{ee}<0.3$ GeV/$c^2$. The dashed (black) curve at greater $m_{ee}$ shows $f(m_{ee})$ outside of the fit range.
(Color online) Electron pair mass distribution for Au+Au (Min.Bias) for $1.0<p_T<1.5$ GeV/$c$. The two component fit is explained in the text. The fit range is $0.12<m_{ee}<0.3$ GeV/$c^2$. The dashed (black) curve at greater $m_{ee}$ shows $f(m_{ee})$ outside of the fit range.
(Color online) Electron pair mass distribution for Au+Au (Min.Bias) for $1.0<p_T<1.5$ GeV/$c$. The two component fit is explained in the text. The fit range is $0.12<m_{ee}<0.3$ GeV/$c^2$. The dashed (black) curve at greater $m_{ee}$ shows $f(m_{ee})$ outside of the fit range.
(Color online) Electron pair mass distribution for Au+Au (Min.Bias) for $1.0<p_T<1.5$ GeV/$c$. The two component fit is explained in the text. The fit range is $0.12<m_{ee}<0.3$ GeV/$c^2$. The dashed (black) curve at greater $m_{ee}$ shows $f(m_{ee})$ outside of the fit range.
(Color online) Ratio R=(data-cocktail)/$f_{dir}(m_{ee})$ of electron pairs for different $p_T$ bins in Min.Bias Au+Au collisions. The $p_T$ range of each panel is indicated in the figure.
(Color online) The fraction of the direct photon component as a function of $p_T$. The error bars and the error band represent statistical and systematic uncertainties, respectively. The curves are from a NLO pQCD calculation (see text).
(Color online) The fraction of the direct photon component as a function of $p_T$. The error bars and the error band represent statistical and systematic uncertainties, respectively. The curves are from a NLO pQCD calculation (see text).
(Color online) Invariant cross section ($p$+$p$) and invariant yield (Au+Au) of direct photons as a function of $p_T$. The filled points are from this analysis and open points are from [81,82]. The three curves on the $p$+$p$ data represent NLO pQCD calculations, and the dashed curves show a modified power-law fit to the $p$+$p$ data, scaled by $T_{AA}$. The dashed (black) curves are exponential plus the $T_{AA}$ scaled $p$+$p$ fit.
(Color online) Invariant cross section ($p$+$p$) and invariant yield (Au+Au) of direct photons as a function of $p_T$. The filled points are from this analysis and open points are from [81,82]. The three curves on the $p$+$p$ data represent NLO pQCD calculations, and the dashed curves show a modified power-law fit to the $p$+$p$ data, scaled by $T_{AA}$. The dashed (black) curves are exponential plus the $T_{AA}$ scaled $p$+$p$ fit.
(Color online) Invariant cross section ($p$+$p$) and invariant yield (Au+Au) of direct photons as a function of $p_T$. The filled points are from this analysis and open points are from [81,82]. The three curves on the $p$+$p$ data represent NLO pQCD calculations, and the dashed curves show a modified power-law fit to the $p$+$p$ data, scaled by $T_{AA}$. The dashed (black) curves are exponential plus the $T_{AA}$ scaled $p$+$p$ fit.
(Color online) Invariant cross section ($p$+$p$) and invariant yield (Au+Au) of direct photons as a function of $p_T$. The filled points are from this analysis and open points are from [81,82]. The three curves on the $p$+$p$ data represent NLO pQCD calculations, and the dashed curves show a modified power-law fit to the $p$+$p$ data, scaled by $T_{AA}$. The dashed (black) curves are exponential plus the $T_{AA}$ scaled $p$+$p$ fit.
(Color online) The $e^+e^-$ pair invariant mass distributions in minimum bias Au+Au collisions for the low-$p_T$ range. The solid curves represent the cocktail of hadronic sources (see Sec. IV) and include contribution from charm calculated by PYTHIA using the cross section from Ref. [48] scaled by $N_{coll}$.
(Color online) The $e^+e^-$ pair invariant mass distributions in minimum bias Au+Au collisions for the low-$p_T$ range. The solid curves represent the cocktail of hadronic sources (see Sec. IV) and include contribution from charm calculated by PYTHIA using the cross section from Ref. [48] scaled by $N_{coll}$.
(Color online) The $e^+e^-$ pair invariant mass distributions in minimum bias Au+Au collisions for the low-$p_T$ range. The solid curves represent the cocktail of hadronic sources (see Sec. IV) and include contribution from charm calculated by PYTHIA using the cross section from Ref. [48] scaled by $N_{coll}$.
(Color online) The $e^+e^-$ pair invariant mass distributions in minimum bias Au+Au collisions for the low-$p_T$ range. The solid curves represent the cocktail of hadronic sources (see Sec. IV) and include contribution from charm calculated by PYTHIA using the cross section from Ref. [48] scaled by $N_{coll}$.
(Color online) The $e^+e^-$ pair invariant mass distributions in minimum bias Au+Au collisions for the low-$p_T$ range. The solid curves represent the cocktail of hadronic sources (see Sec. IV) and include contribution from charm calculated by PYTHIA using the cross section from Ref. [48] scaled by $N_{coll}$.
(Color online) The $e^+e^-$ pair invariant mass distributions in minimum bias Au+Au collisions for the low-$p_T$ range. The solid curves represent the cocktail of hadronic sources (see Sec. IV) and include contribution from charm calculated by PYTHIA using the cross section from Ref. [48] scaled by $N_{coll}$.
(Color online) The $e^+e^-$ pair invariant mass distributions in minimum bias Au+Au collisions for the low-$p_T$ range. The solid curves represent the cocktail of hadronic sources (see Sec. IV) and include contribution from charm calculated by PYTHIA using the cross section from Ref. [48] scaled by $N_{coll}$.
Ratio of R = (data − cocktail)/$f_{dir}(m_{ee})$ for 0.8 $< p_T <$ 1.0 GeV/c in minimum bias Au$+$Au collisions. The yellow band in each panel shows $\pm1\sigma$ band of a constant fit value to the data points.
Ratio of R = (data − cocktail)/$f_{dir}(m_{ee})$ for 0.6 $< p_T <$ 0.8 GeV/c in minimum bias Au$+$Au collisions. The yellow band in each panel shows $\pm1\sigma$ band of a constant fit value to the data points.
Ratio of R = (data − cocktail)/$f_{dir}(m_{ee})$ for 0.4 $ < p_T <$ 0.6 GeV/c in minimum bias Au$+$Au collisions. The yellow band in each panel shows $\pm1\sigma$ band of a constant fit value to the data points.
(Color online) $p_T$ spectra of $e^+e^-$ pairs in $p$+$p$ (left) and Au+Au (right) collisions for different mass bins, which are fully acceptance corrected. Au+Au spectra are divided by $N_{part}/2$. The solid curves show the expectations from the sum of the hadronic decay cocktail and the contribution from charmed mesons. The dashed curves show the sum of the cocktail and charmed meson contributions plus the contribution from direct photons calculated by converting the photon yield from Fig. 34 to the $e^+e^-$ pair yield using Eqs. (31) and (B14). $p$$+$$p$ collision data shown.
(Color online) $p_T$ spectra of $e^+e^-$ pairs in $p$+$p$ (left) and Au+Au (right) collisions for different mass bins, which are fully acceptance corrected. Au+Au spectra are divided by $N_{part}/2$. The solid curves show the expectations from the sum of the hadronic decay cocktail and the contribution from charmed mesons. The dashed curves show the sum of the cocktail and charmed meson contributions plus the contribution from direct photons calculated by converting the photon yield from Fig. 34 to the $e^+e^-$ pair yield using Eqs. (31) and (B14). $p$$+$$p$ collision data shown.
(Color online) $p_T$ spectra of $e^+e^-$ pairs in $p$+$p$ (left) and Au+Au (right) collisions for different mass bins, which are fully acceptance corrected. Au+Au spectra are divided by $N_{part}/2$. The solid curves show the expectations from the sum of the hadronic decay cocktail and the contribution from charmed mesons. The dashed curves show the sum of the cocktail and charmed meson contributions plus the contribution from direct photons calculated by converting the photon yield from Fig. 34 to the $e^+e^-$ pair yield using Eqs. (31) and (B14). $p$$+$$p$ collision data shown.
(Color online) $p_T$ spectra of $e^+e^-$ pairs in $p$+$p$ (left) and Au+Au (right) collisions for different mass bins, which are fully acceptance corrected. Au+Au spectra are divided by $N_{part}/2$. The solid curves show the expectations from the sum of the hadronic decay cocktail and the contribution from charmed mesons. The dashed curves show the sum of the cocktail and charmed meson contributions plus the contribution from direct photons calculated by converting the photon yield from Fig. 34 to the $e^+e^-$ pair yield using Eqs. (31) and (B14). $p$$+$$p$ collision data shown.
(Color online) $p_T$ spectra of $e^+e^-$ pairs in $p$+$p$ (left) and Au+Au (right) collisions for different mass bins, which are fully acceptance corrected. Au+Au spectra are divided by $N_{part}/2$. The solid curves show the expectations from the sum of the hadronic decay cocktail and the contribution from charmed mesons. The dashed curves show the sum of the cocktail and charmed meson contributions plus the contribution from direct photons calculated by converting the photon yield from Fig. 34 to the $e^+e^-$ pair yield using Eqs. (31) and (B14). $p$$+$$p$ collision data shown.
(Color online) $p_T$ spectra of $e^+e^-$ pairs in $p$+$p$ (left) and Au+Au (right) collisions for different mass bins, which are fully acceptance corrected. Au+Au spectra are divided by $N_{part}/2$. The solid curves show the expectations from the sum of the hadronic decay cocktail and the contribution from charmed mesons. The dashed curves show the sum of the cocktail and charmed meson contributions plus the contribution from direct photons calculated by converting the photon yield from Fig. 34 to the $e^+e^-$ pair yield using Eqs. (31) and (B14). $p$$+$$p$ collision data shown.
(Color online) $p_T$ spectra of $e^+e^-$ pairs in $p$+$p$ (left) and Au+Au (right) collisions for different mass bins, which are fully acceptance corrected. Au+Au spectra are divided by $N_{part}/2$. The solid curves show the expectations from the sum of the hadronic decay cocktail and the contribution from charmed mesons. The dashed curves show the sum of the cocktail and charmed meson contributions plus the contribution from direct photons calculated by converting the photon yield from Fig. 34 to the $e^+e^-$ pair yield using Eqs. (31) and (B14). Au$+$Au collision data shown.
(Color online) $p_T$ spectra of $e^+e^-$ pairs in $p$+$p$ (left) and Au+Au (right) collisions for different mass bins, which are fully acceptance corrected. Au+Au spectra are divided by $N_{part}/2$. The solid curves show the expectations from the sum of the hadronic decay cocktail and the contribution from charmed mesons. The dashed curves show the sum of the cocktail and charmed meson contributions plus the contribution from direct photons calculated by converting the photon yield from Fig. 34 to the $e^+e^-$ pair yield using Eqs. (31) and (B14). Au$+$Au collision data shown.
(Color online) $p_T$ spectra of $e^+e^-$ pairs in $p$+$p$ (left) and Au+Au (right) collisions for different mass bins, which are fully acceptance corrected. Au+Au spectra are divided by $N_{part}/2$. The solid curves show the expectations from the sum of the hadronic decay cocktail and the contribution from charmed mesons. The dashed curves show the sum of the cocktail and charmed meson contributions plus the contribution from direct photons calculated by converting the photon yield from Fig. 34 to the $e^+e^-$ pair yield using Eqs. (31) and (B14). Au$+$Au collision data shown.
(Color online) $p_T$ spectra of $e^+e^-$ pairs in $p$+$p$ (left) and Au+Au (right) collisions for different mass bins, which are fully acceptance corrected. Au+Au spectra are divided by $N_{part}/2$. The solid curves show the expectations from the sum of the hadronic decay cocktail and the contribution from charmed mesons. The dashed curves show the sum of the cocktail and charmed meson contributions plus the contribution from direct photons calculated by converting the photon yield from Fig. 34 to the $e^+e^-$ pair yield using Eqs. (31) and (B14). Au$+$Au collision data shown.
(Color online) $p_T$ spectra of $e^+e^-$ pairs in $p$+$p$ (left) and Au+Au (right) collisions for different mass bins, which are fully acceptance corrected. Au+Au spectra are divided by $N_{part}/2$. The solid curves show the expectations from the sum of the hadronic decay cocktail and the contribution from charmed mesons. The dashed curves show the sum of the cocktail and charmed meson contributions plus the contribution from direct photons calculated by converting the photon yield from Fig. 34 to the $e^+e^-$ pair yield using Eqs. (31) and (B14). Au$+$Au collision data shown.
(Color online) $p_T$ spectra of $e^+e^-$ pairs in $p$+$p$ (left) and Au+Au (right) collisions for different mass bins, which are fully acceptance corrected. Au+Au spectra are divided by $N_{part}/2$. The solid curves show the expectations from the sum of the hadronic decay cocktail and the contribution from charmed mesons. The dashed curves show the sum of the cocktail and charmed meson contributions plus the contribution from direct photons calculated by converting the photon yield from Fig. 34 to the $e^+e^-$ pair yield using Eqs. (31) and (B14). Au$+$Au collision data shown.
(Color online) $p_T$ spectra of $e^+e^-$ pairs in $p$+$p$ (left) and Au+Au (right) collisions for different mass bins, which are fully acceptance corrected. Au+Au spectra are divided by $N_{part}/2$. The solid curves show the expectations from the sum of the hadronic decay cocktail and the contribution from charmed mesons. The dashed curves show the sum of the cocktail and charmed meson contributions plus the contribution from direct photons calculated by converting the photon yield from Fig. 34 to the $e^+e^-$ pair yield using Eqs. (31) and (B14). Au$+$Au collision data shown.
(Color online) $p_T$ spectra of $e^+e^-$ pairs in $p$+$p$ (left) and Au+Au (right) collisions for different mass bins, which are fully acceptance corrected. Au+Au spectra are divided by $N_{part}/2$. The solid curves show the expectations from the sum of the hadronic decay cocktail and the contribution from charmed mesons. The dashed curves show the sum of the cocktail and charmed meson contributions plus the contribution from direct photons calculated by converting the photon yield from Fig. 34 to the $e^+e^-$ pair yield using Eqs. (31) and (B14). Au$+$Au collision data shown.
(Color online) $p_T$ spectra of $e^+e^-$ pairs in $p$+$p$ (left) and Au+Au (right) collisions for different mass bins, which are fully acceptance corrected. Au+Au spectra are divided by $N_{part}/2$. The solid curves show the expectations from the sum of the hadronic decay cocktail and the contribution from charmed mesons. The dashed curves show the sum of the cocktail and charmed meson contributions plus the contribution from direct photons calculated by converting the photon yield from Fig. 34 to the $e^+e^-$ pair yield using Eqs. (31) and (B14). Au$+$Au collision data shown.
(Color online) $p_T$ spectra of $e^+e^-$ pairs in $p$+$p$ (left) and Au+Au (right) collisions for different mass bins, which are fully acceptance corrected. Au+Au spectra are divided by $N_{part}/2$. The solid curves show the expectations from the sum of the hadronic decay cocktail and the contribution from charmed mesons. The dashed curves show the sum of the cocktail and charmed meson contributions plus the contribution from direct photons calculated by converting the photon yield from Fig. 34 to the $e^+e^-$ pair yield using Eqs. (31) and (B14). Au$+$Au collision data shown.
The $m_{T} - m_{0}$ spectrum for the mass range 0.3 < $m_{ee}$ < 0.75 GeV/$c^{2}$ after subtracting contributions from cocktail and charm. The spectrum is fully acceptance corrected. The systematic error band includes the difference in charm yields in this mass range. The spectrum is fit to the sum of two exponential functions which are also shown separately as the dashed and dotted lines. The solid line is the sum.
Local inverse slope of the $m_{T}$ spectra of electron pairs, after subtracting the cocktail and the charm contribution, for different mass bins. The local slope is calculated in different mass ranges, 0 < $m_{T} - m_{0}$ < 0.6 GeV/$c^{2}$ and 0.6 < $m_{T} - m_{0}$ < 2.5 GeV/$c^{2}$. The solid and dashed lines show the local slope of the cocktail for the corresponding mass ranges.
Local inverse slope of the $m_{T}$ spectra of electron pairs, after subtracting the cocktail and the charm contribution, for different mass bins. The local slope is calculated in different mass ranges, 0 < $m_{T} - m_{0}$ < 0.6 GeV/$c^{2}$ and 0.6 < $m_{T} - m_{0}$ < 2.5 GeV/$c^{2}$. The solid and dashed lines show the local slope of the cocktail for the corresponding mass ranges.
Invariant mass spectrum of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in MB Au+Au compared to predictions from Ralf Rapp. Invariant mass spectra of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in Min. Bias Au + Au collisions in the IMR. (top left) The data are compared to the sum of cocktail+charm. The data are also compared to the sum of cocktail+charm and partonic contributions from different models. The calculations are from (center) Rapp and van Hees [15, 18, 83] and (right) Dusling and Zahed [19, 84, 85]. The partonic yields (PY) have been added to the two scenarios for charmed mesons decays, i.e. (i) $PYTHIA$ and (ii) random $c\bar{c}$ correlation.
Invariant mass spectrum of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in MB Au+Au compared to predictions from Kevin Dusling. Invariant mass spectra of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in Min. Bias Au + Au collisions in the IMR. (top left) The data are compared to the sum of cocktail+charm. The data are also compared to the sum of cocktail+charm and partonic contributions from different models. The calculations are from (center) Rapp and van Hees [15, 18, 83] and (right) Dusling and Zahed [19, 84, 85]. The partonic yields (PY) have been added to the two scenarios for charmed mesons decays, i.e. (i) $PYTHIA$ and (ii) random $c\bar{c}$ correlation.
Invariant mass spectrum of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in MB Au+Au compared to predictions from Elena Bratkovskaya. Invariant mass spectra of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in Min. Bias Au + Au collisions in the IMR. (top left) The data are compared to the sum of cocktail+charm. The data are also compared to the sum of cocktail+charm and partonic contributions from different models. The calculations are from (center) Rapp and van Hees [15, 18, 83] and (right) Dusling and Zahed [19, 84, 85]. The partonic yields (PY) have been added to the two scenarios for charmed mesons decays, i.e. (i) $PYTHIA$ and (ii) random $c\bar{c}$ correlation.
invariant mass spectrum of e+e- pairs in MB Au+Au compared to predictions from Ralf Rapp.
invariant mass spectrum of e+e- pairs in MB Au+Au compared to predictions from Ralf Rapp.
Invariant mass spectrum of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in MB Au+Au for different $p_{T}$ ranges compared to predictions from Kevin Dusling. Invariant mass spectra of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in Au + Au collisions in the LMR. The data are compared to the sum of cocktail+charm (top left). The data are also compared to the sum of cocktail+charm and hadronic+partonic contributions from different models. The calculations are from The calculations are from (top right) Rapp and van Hees [15, 18, 83], (bottom right) Dusling and Zahed [19, 84, 85], and Cassing and Bratkovskaya [20, 27, 86, 87].
Invariant mass spectrum of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in MB Au+Au for different $p_{T}$ ranges compared to predictions from Kevin Dusling. Invariant mass spectra of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in Au + Au collisions in the LMR. The data are compared to the sum of cocktail+charm (top left). The data are also compared to the sum of cocktail+charm and hadronic+partonic contributions from different models. The calculations are from The calculations are from (top right) Rapp and van Hees [15, 18, 83], (bottom right) Dusling and Zahed [19, 84, 85], and Cassing and Bratkovskaya [20, 27, 86, 87].
Invariant mass spectrum of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in MB Au+Au for different $p_{T}$ ranges compared to predictions from Elena Bratkovskaya. Invariant mass spectra of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in Au + Au collisions in the LMR. The data are compared to the sum of cocktail+charm (top left). The data are also compared to the sum of cocktail+charm and hadronic+partonic contributions from different models. The calculations are from The calculations are from (top right) Rapp and van Hees [15, 18, 83], (bottom right) Dusling and Zahed [19, 84, 85], and Cassing and Bratkovskaya [20, 27, 86, 87].
Invariant mass spectrum of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in MB Au+Au for different $p_{T}$ ranges compared to predictions from Elena Bratkovskaya. Invariant mass spectra of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in Au + Au collisions in the LMR. The data are compared to the sum of cocktail+charm (top left). The data are also compared to the sum of cocktail+charm and hadronic+partonic contributions from different models. The calculations are from The calculations are from (top right) Rapp and van Hees [15, 18, 83], (bottom right) Dusling and Zahed [19, 84, 85], and Cassing and Bratkovskaya [20, 27, 86, 87].
Invariant mass spectrum of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in MB Au+Au for different $p_{T}$ ranges compared to predictions from Ralf Rapp (0<$p_{T}$<0.5 GeV/$c$). Invariant mass spectra of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in Min. Bias Au + Au collisions for different $p_{T}$ windows compared to the expectations from the calculations of Rapp and van Hees [15, 18, 83], separately showing the partonic and the hadronic yields and the different scenarios for the $\rho$ spectral function, namely “Hadron Many Body Theory” (HMBT) and “Dropping Mass” (DM). The calculations have been added to the cocktail of hadronic decays (where the contribution of the freeze-out $\rho$ meson is subtracted) and charmed meson decays products.
Invariant mass spectrum of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in MB Au+Au for different $p_{T}$ ranges compared to predictions from Ralf Rapp (0<$p_{T}$<0.5 GeV/$c$). Invariant mass spectra of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in Min. Bias Au + Au collisions for different $p_{T}$ windows compared to the expectations from the calculations of Rapp and van Hees [15, 18, 83], separately showing the partonic and the hadronic yields and the different scenarios for the $\rho$ spectral function, namely “Hadron Many Body Theory” (HMBT) and “Dropping Mass” (DM). The calculations have been added to the cocktail of hadronic decays (where the contribution of the freeze-out $\rho$ meson is subtracted) and charmed meson decays products.
Invariant mass spectrum of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in MB Au+Au for different $p_{T}$ ranges compared to predictions from Ralf Rapp (0<$p_{T}$<0.5 GeV/$c$). Invariant mass spectra of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in Min. Bias Au + Au collisions for different $p_{T}$ windows compared to the expectations from the calculations of Rapp and van Hees [15, 18, 83], separately showing the partonic and the hadronic yields and the different scenarios for the $\rho$ spectral function, namely “Hadron Many Body Theory” (HMBT) and “Dropping Mass” (DM). The calculations have been added to the cocktail of hadronic decays (where the contribution of the freeze-out $\rho$ meson is subtracted) and charmed meson decays products.
Invariant mass spectrum of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in MB Au+Au for different $p_{T}$ ranges compared to predictions from Ralf Rapp (0<$p_{T}$<0.5 GeV/$c$). Invariant mass spectra of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in Min. Bias Au + Au collisions for different $p_{T}$ windows compared to the expectations from the calculations of Rapp and van Hees [15, 18, 83], separately showing the partonic and the hadronic yields and the different scenarios for the $\rho$ spectral function, namely “Hadron Many Body Theory” (HMBT) and “Dropping Mass” (DM). The calculations have been added to the cocktail of hadronic decays (where the contribution of the freeze-out $\rho$ meson is subtracted) and charmed meson decays products.
Invariant mass spectrum of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in MB Au+Au for different $p_{T}$ ranges compared to predictions from Kevin Dusling (0<$p_{T}$<0.5 GeV/$c$). Invariant mass spectra of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in Min. Bias Au + Au collisions for different $p_{T}$ windows compared to the expectations from the calculations of Dusling and Zahed [19, 84, 85], separately showing the partonic and the hadronic yields. The calculations have been added to the cocktail of hadronic decays (where the contribution of the freeze-out $\rho$ meson is subtracted) and charmed meson decays products.
Invariant mass spectrum of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in MB Au+Au for different $p_{T}$ ranges compared to predictions from Kevin Dusling (0<$p_{T}$<0.5 GeV/$c$). Invariant mass spectra of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in Min. Bias Au + Au collisions for different $p_{T}$ windows compared to the expectations from the calculations of Dusling and Zahed [19, 84, 85], separately showing the partonic and the hadronic yields. The calculations have been added to the cocktail of hadronic decays (where the contribution of the freeze-out $\rho$ meson is subtracted) and charmed meson decays products.
Invariant mass spectrum of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in MB Au+Au for different $p_{T}$ ranges compared to predictions from Kevin Dusling (0.5<$p_{T}$<1.0 GeV/$c$). Invariant mass spectra of $e^{+}e^{−}$ pairs in Min. Bias Au + Au collisions for different $p_{T}$ windows compared to the expectations from the calculations of Dusling and Zahed [19, 84, 85], separately showing the partonic and the hadronic yields. The calculations have been added to the cocktail of hadronic decays (where the contribution of the freeze-out $\rho$ meson is subtracted) and charmed meson decays products.
Invariant mass spectrum of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in MB Au+Au for different $p_{T}$ ranges compared to predictions from Kevin Dusling (0.5<$p_{T}$<1.0 GeV/$c$). Invariant mass spectra of $e^{+}e^{−}$ pairs in Min. Bias Au + Au collisions for different $p_{T}$ windows compared to the expectations from the calculations of Dusling and Zahed [19, 84, 85], separately showing the partonic and the hadronic yields. The calculations have been added to the cocktail of hadronic decays (where the contribution of the freeze-out $\rho$ meson is subtracted) and charmed meson decays products.
Invariant mass spectrum of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in MB Au+Au for different $p_{T}$ ranges compared to predictions from Kevin Dusling 1.0<$p_{T}$<1.5 GeV/$c$. Invariant mass spectra of $e^{+}e^{−}$ pairs in Min. Bias Au + Au collisions for different $p_{T}$ windows compared to the expectations from the calculations of Dusling and Zahed [19, 84, 85], separately showing the partonic and the hadronic yields. The calculations have been added to the cocktail of hadronic decays (where the contribution of the freeze-out $\rho$ meson is subtracted) and charmed meson decays products.
Invariant mass spectrum of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in MB Au+Au for different $p_{T}$ ranges compared to predictions from Kevin Dusling 1.0<$p_{T}$<1.5 GeV/$c$. Invariant mass spectra of $e^{+}e^{−}$ pairs in Min. Bias Au + Au collisions for different $p_{T}$ windows compared to the expectations from the calculations of Dusling and Zahed [19, 84, 85], separately showing the partonic and the hadronic yields. The calculations have been added to the cocktail of hadronic decays (where the contribution of the freeze-out $\rho$ meson is subtracted) and charmed meson decays products.
Invariant mass spectrum of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in MB Au+Au for different $p_{T}$ ranges compared to predictions from Kevin Dusling (1.5<$p_{T}$<2.0 GeV/$c$). Invariant mass spectra of $e^{+}e^{−}$ pairs in Min. Bias Au + Au collisions for different $p_{T}$ windows compared to the expectations from the calculations of Dusling and Zahed [19, 84, 85], separately showing the partonic and the hadronic yields. The calculations have been added to the cocktail of hadronic decays (where the contribution of the freeze-out $\rho$ meson is subtracted) and charmed meson decays products.
Invariant mass spectrum of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in MB Au+Au for different $p_{T}$ ranges compared to predictions from Kevin Dusling (1.5<$p_{T}$<2.0 GeV/$c$). Invariant mass spectra of $e^{+}e^{−}$ pairs in Min. Bias Au + Au collisions for different $p_{T}$ windows compared to the expectations from the calculations of Dusling and Zahed [19, 84, 85], separately showing the partonic and the hadronic yields. The calculations have been added to the cocktail of hadronic decays (where the contribution of the freeze-out $\rho$ meson is subtracted) and charmed meson decays products.
Invariant mass spectrum of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in MB Au+Au for different $p_{T}$ ranges compared to predictions from Elena Bratkovskaya (0<$p_{T}$<0.5 GeV/$c$). Invariant mass spectra of $e^{+}e^{−}$ pairs in Min. Bias Au + Au collisions for different $p_{T}$ windows collisions compared to the expectations from the calculations of Cassing and Bratkovskaya [20, 27, 86, 87], separately showing the partonic and the hadronic yields calculated with different implementations of the $\rho$ spectral function, namely according to collisional broadening, with or without a dropping mass scenario. The calculations which include the dropping mass scenario have been added to the cocktail of hadronic decays (which is calculated by the HSD model itself) and charmed meson decays products.
Invariant mass spectrum of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in MB Au+Au for different $p_{T}$ ranges compared to predictions from Elena Bratkovskaya (0<$p_{T}$<0.5 GeV/$c$). Invariant mass spectra of $e^{+}e^{−}$ pairs in Min. Bias Au + Au collisions for different $p_{T}$ windows collisions compared to the expectations from the calculations of Cassing and Bratkovskaya [20, 27, 86, 87], separately showing the partonic and the hadronic yields calculated with different implementations of the $\rho$ spectral function, namely according to collisional broadening, with or without a dropping mass scenario. The calculations which include the dropping mass scenario have been added to the cocktail of hadronic decays (which is calculated by the HSD model itself) and charmed meson decays products.
Invariant mass spectrum of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in MB Au+Au for different $p_{T}$ ranges compared to predictions from Elena Bratkovskaya (0<$p_{T}$<0.5 GeV/$c$). Invariant mass spectra of $e^{+}e^{−}$ pairs in Min. Bias Au + Au collisions for different $p_{T}$ windows collisions compared to the expectations from the calculations of Cassing and Bratkovskaya [20, 27, 86, 87], separately showing the partonic and the hadronic yields calculated with different implementations of the $\rho$ spectral function, namely according to collisional broadening, with or without a dropping mass scenario. The calculations which include the dropping mass scenario have been added to the cocktail of hadronic decays (which is calculated by the HSD model itself) and charmed meson decays products.
Invariant mass spectrum of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in MB Au+Au for different $p_{T}$ ranges compared to predictions from Elena Bratkovskaya (0.5<$p_{T}$<1.0 GeV/$c$). Invariant mass spectra of $e^{+}e^{−}$ pairs in Min. Bias Au + Au collisions for different $p_{T}$ windows collisions compared to the expectations from the calculations of Cassing and Bratkovskaya [20, 27, 86, 87], separately showing the partonic and the hadronic yields calculated with different implementations of the $\rho$ spectral function, namely according to collisional broadening, with or without a dropping mass scenario. The calculations which include the dropping mass scenario have been added to the cocktail of hadronic decays (which is calculated by the HSD model itself) and charmed meson decays products.
Invariant mass spectrum of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in MB Au+Au for different $p_{T}$ ranges compared to predictions from Elena Bratkovskaya (0.5<$p_{T}$<1.0 GeV/$c$). Invariant mass spectra of $e^{+}e^{−}$ pairs in Min. Bias Au + Au collisions for different $p_{T}$ windows collisions compared to the expectations from the calculations of Cassing and Bratkovskaya [20, 27, 86, 87], separately showing the partonic and the hadronic yields calculated with different implementations of the $\rho$ spectral function, namely according to collisional broadening, with or without a dropping mass scenario. The calculations which include the dropping mass scenario have been added to the cocktail of hadronic decays (which is calculated by the HSD model itself) and charmed meson decays products.
Invariant mass spectrum of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in MB Au+Au for different $p_{T}$ ranges compared to predictions from Elena Bratkovskaya (0.5<$p_{T}$<1.0 GeV/$c$). Invariant mass spectra of $e^{+}e^{−}$ pairs in Min. Bias Au + Au collisions for different $p_{T}$ windows collisions compared to the expectations from the calculations of Cassing and Bratkovskaya [20, 27, 86, 87], separately showing the partonic and the hadronic yields calculated with different implementations of the $\rho$ spectral function, namely according to collisional broadening, with or without a dropping mass scenario. The calculations which include the dropping mass scenario have been added to the cocktail of hadronic decays (which is calculated by the HSD model itself) and charmed meson decays products.
Invariant mass spectrum of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in MB Au+Au for different $p_{T}$ ranges compared to predictions from Elena Bratkovskaya (1.0<$p_{T}$<1.5 GeV/$c$). Invariant mass spectra of $e^{+}e^{−}$ pairs in Min. Bias Au + Au collisions for different $p_{T}$ windows collisions compared to the expectations from the calculations of Cassing and Bratkovskaya [20, 27, 86, 87], separately showing the partonic and the hadronic yields calculated with different implementations of the $\rho$ spectral function, namely according to collisional broadening, with or without a dropping mass scenario. The calculations which include the dropping mass scenario have been added to the cocktail of hadronic decays (which is calculated by the HSD model itself) and charmed meson decays products.
Invariant mass spectrum of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in MB Au+Au for different $p_{T}$ ranges compared to predictions from Elena Bratkovskaya (1.0<$p_{T}$<1.5 GeV/$c$). Invariant mass spectra of $e^{+}e^{−}$ pairs in Min. Bias Au + Au collisions for different $p_{T}$ windows collisions compared to the expectations from the calculations of Cassing and Bratkovskaya [20, 27, 86, 87], separately showing the partonic and the hadronic yields calculated with different implementations of the $\rho$ spectral function, namely according to collisional broadening, with or without a dropping mass scenario. The calculations which include the dropping mass scenario have been added to the cocktail of hadronic decays (which is calculated by the HSD model itself) and charmed meson decays products.
Invariant mass spectrum of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in MB Au+Au for different $p_{T}$ ranges compared to predictions from Elena Bratkovskaya (1.5<$p_{T}$<2.0 GeV/$c$). Invariant mass spectra of $e^{+}e^{−}$ pairs in Min. Bias Au + Au collisions for different $p_{T}$ windows collisions compared to the expectations from the calculations of Cassing and Bratkovskaya [20, 27, 86, 87], separately showing the partonic and the hadronic yields calculated with different implementations of the $\rho$ spectral function, namely according to collisional broadening, with or without a dropping mass scenario. The calculations which include the dropping mass scenario have been added to the cocktail of hadronic decays (which is calculated by the HSD model itself) and charmed meson decays products.
Invariant mass spectrum of $e^{+}e^{-}$ pairs in MB Au+Au for different $p_{T}$ ranges compared to predictions from Elena Bratkovskaya (1.5<$p_{T}$<2.0 GeV/$c$). Invariant mass spectra of $e^{+}e^{−}$ pairs in Min. Bias Au + Au collisions for different $p_{T}$ windows collisions compared to the expectations from the calculations of Cassing and Bratkovskaya [20, 27, 86, 87], separately showing the partonic and the hadronic yields calculated with different implementations of the $\rho$ spectral function, namely according to collisional broadening, with or without a dropping mass scenario. The calculations which include the dropping mass scenario have been added to the cocktail of hadronic decays (which is calculated by the HSD model itself) and charmed meson decays products.
Subtracted $p_{T}$ spectrum in 300-750 compared to calculations from Ralf Rapp. $p_{T}$ spectra of $e^{+}e^{−}$ pairs for 0.3 < $m_{ee}$ < 0.75 GeV/$c^{2}$ in Min. Bias Au + Au collisions compared to the expectations from the calculations of respectively R. Rapp and van Hees [15, 18, 83], Dusling and Zahed [19, 84, 85], Cassing and Bratkovskaya [20, 27, 86, 87]. The spectra are fully acceptance corrected. The curves show separately partonic and hadronic yields. For the curves of Rapp and van Hees [15, 18, 83] the two scenarios: Hadron Many Body Theory (HMBT) and Dropping Mass (DM) are shown. The sum is calculated with HMBT. The calculations are compared to the data from which the contributions of the cocktail of hadronic decays and charmed meson decays have been subtracted.
Subtracted $p_{T}$ spectrum in 300-750 compared to calculations from Kevin Dusling. $p_{T}$ spectra of $e^{+}e^{−}$ pairs for 0.3 < $m_{ee}$ < 0.75 GeV/$c^{2}$ in Min. Bias Au + Au collisions compared to the expectations from the calculations of respectively R. Rapp and van Hees [15, 18, 83], Dusling and Zahed [19, 84, 85], Cassing and Bratkovskaya [20, 27, 86, 87]. The spectra are fully acceptance corrected. The curves show separately partonic and hadronic yields. For the curves of Rapp and van Hees [15, 18, 83] the two scenarios: Hadron Many Body Theory (HMBT) and Dropping Mass (DM) are shown. The sum is calculated with HMBT. The calculations are compared to the data from which the contributions of the cocktail of hadronic decays and charmed meson decays have been subtracted.
Subtracted $p_{T}$ spectrum in 300-750 compared to calculations from Elena Bratkovskaya. $p_{T}$ spectra of $e^{+}e^{−}$ pairs for 0.3 < $m_{ee}$ < 0.75 GeV/$c^{2}$ in Min. Bias Au + Au collisions compared to the expectations from the calculations of respectively R. Rapp and van Hees [15, 18, 83], Dusling and Zahed [19, 84, 85], Cassing and Bratkovskaya [20, 27, 86, 87]. The spectra are fully acceptance corrected. The curves show separately partonic and hadronic yields. For the curves of Rapp and van Hees [15, 18, 83] the two scenarios: Hadron Many Body Theory (HMBT) and Dropping Mass (DM) are shown. The sum is calculated with HMBT. The calculations are compared to the data from which the contributions of the cocktail of hadronic decays and charmed meson decays have been subtracted.
Subtracted $p_{T}$ spectrum in 300-750 compared to calculations from Elena Bratkovskaya. $p_{T}$ spectra of $e^{+}e^{−}$ pairs for 0.3 < $m_{ee}$ < 0.75 GeV/$c^{2}$ in Min. Bias Au + Au collisions compared to the expectations from the calculations of respectively R. Rapp and van Hees [15, 18, 83], Dusling and Zahed [19, 84, 85], Cassing and Bratkovskaya [20, 27, 86, 87]. The spectra are fully acceptance corrected. The curves show separately partonic and hadronic yields. For the curves of Rapp and van Hees [15, 18, 83] the two scenarios: Hadron Many Body Theory (HMBT) and Dropping Mass (DM) are shown. The sum is calculated with HMBT. The calculations are compared to the data from which the contributions of the cocktail of hadronic decays and charmed meson decays have been subtracted.
When you search on a word, e.g. 'collisions', we will automatically search across everything we store about a record. But, sometimes you may wish to be more specific. Here we show you how.
Guidance and examples on the query string syntax can be found in the Elasticsearch documentation.
About HEPData Submitting to HEPData HEPData File Formats HEPData Coordinators HEPData Terms of Use HEPData Cookie Policy
Status
Email
Forum
Twitter
GitHub
Copyright ~1975-Present, HEPData | Powered by Invenio, funded by STFC, hosted and originally developed at CERN, supported and further developed at IPPP Durham.