A test of lepton flavor universality in B$^{\pm}$$\to$ K$^{\pm}\mu^+\mu^-$ and B$^{\pm}$$\to$ K$^{\pm}$e$^+$e$^-$ decays, as well as a measurement of differential and integrated branching fractions of a nonresonant B$^{\pm}$$\to$ K$^{\pm}\mu^+\mu^-$ decay are presented. The analysis is made possible by a dedicated data set of proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV recorded in 2018, by the CMS experiment at the LHC, using a special high-rate data stream designed for collecting about 10 billion unbiased b hadron decays. The ratio of the branching fractions $\mathcal{B}$(B$^{\pm}$$\to$ K$^{\pm}\mu^+\mu^-$) to $\mathcal{B}$(B$^{\pm}$$\to$ K$^{\pm}$e$^+$e$^-$) is determined from the measured double ratio $R$(K) of these decays to the respective branching fractions of the B$^\pm$$\to$ J/$\psi$K$^\pm$ with J/$\psi$$\to$$\mu^+\mu^-$ and e$^+$e$^-$ decays, which allow for significant cancellation of systematic uncertainties. The ratio $R$(K) is measured in the range 1.1 $\lt q^2 \lt$ 6.0 GeV$^2$, where $q$ is the invariant mass of the lepton pair, and is found to be $R$(K) = 0.78$^{+0.47}_{-0.23}$, in agreement with the standard model expectation $R$(K) $\approx$ 1. This measurement is limited by the statistical precision of the electron channel. The integrated branching fraction in the same $q^2$ range, $\mathcal{B}$(B$^{\pm}$$\to$ K$^{\pm}\mu^+\mu^-$) = (12.42 $\pm$ 0.68) $\times$ 10$^{-8}$, is consistent with the present world-average value and has a comparable precision.
The differential $\text{B}^+ \to \text{K}^+\mu^+\mu^-$ branching fraction measured in the individual $q^2$ bins. The uncertainties in the yields are statistical uncertainties from the fit, while the branching fraction uncertainties include both the statistical and systematic components.
Differential branching fraction $d\mathcal{B}/dq^2$, with theoretical predictions obtained with the HEPFiT, SuperIso, Flavio, and EOS packages. The HEPFiT predictions are available only for $q^2 < 8\ \mathrm{GeV}^2$.
Relative uncertainties in the differential branching fraction measurement of $\mathrm{B}^+\to\mathrm{K}^+\mu^+\mu^-$ per $q^2$ bin.
A test of CP invariance in Higgs boson production via vector-boson fusion is performed in the $H\rightarrow\tau\tau$ decay channel. This test uses the Optimal Observable method and is carried out using 36.1 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ of $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV proton$-$proton collision data collected by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC. Contributions from CP-violating interactions between the Higgs boson and electroweak gauge bosons are described by an effective field theory, in which the parameter $\tilde{d}$ governs the strength of CP violation. No sign of CP violation is observed in the distributions of the Optimal Observable, and $\tilde{d}$ is constrained to the interval $[-0.090, 0.035]$ at the 68% confidence level (CL), compared to an expected interval of $\tilde{d} \in [-0.035,0.033]$ based upon the Standard Model prediction. No constraints can be set on $\tilde{d}$ at 95% CL, while an expected 95% CL interval of $\tilde{d} \in [-0.21,0.15]$ for the Standard Model hypothesis was expected.
Post-fit BDT distributions in the $Z\to \ell\ell$ CR for the $\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}$ SF analysis channel. The size of the combined statistical, experimental, and theoretical uncertainties is given. The exact value of the $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ cut on the leptons depends on the trigger.
A search for nonresonant Higgs boson pair production in the $b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma$ final state is performed using 140 fb$^{-1}$ of proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV recorded by the ATLAS detector at the CERN Large Hadron Collider. This analysis supersedes and expands upon the previous nonresonant ATLAS results in this final state based on the same data sample. The analysis strategy is optimised to probe anomalous values not only of the Higgs ($H$) boson self-coupling modifier $\kappa_\lambda$ but also of the quartic $HHVV$ ($V=W,Z$) coupling modifier $\kappa_{2V}$. No significant excess above the expected background from Standard Model processes is observed. An observed upper limit $\mu_{HH}<4.0$ is set at 95% confidence level on the Higgs boson pair production cross-section normalised to its Standard Model prediction. The 95% confidence intervals for the coupling modifiers are $-1.4<\kappa_\lambda<6.9$ and $-0.5<\kappa_{2V}<2.7$, assuming all other Higgs boson couplings except the one under study are fixed to the Standard Model predictions. The results are interpreted in the Standard Model effective field theory and Higgs effective field theory frameworks in terms of constraints on the couplings of anomalous Higgs boson (self-)interactions.
The acceptance times efficiency for the signal ggF $HH$ process in each analysis category as a function of the $c_{{H}\boxed{}}$ SMEFT coefficients. The dashed lines denote values that are excluded at 95% CL. The bottom panels show the efficiency of the sum of all analysis categories.
Two related searches for phenomena beyond the standard model (BSM) are performed using events with hadronic jets and significant transverse momentum imbalance. The results are based on a sample of proton-proton collisions at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV, collected by the CMS experiment at the LHC in 2016-2018 and corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 137 fb$^{-1}$. The first search is inclusive, based on signal regions defined by the hadronic energy in the event, the jet multiplicity, the number of jets identified as originating from bottom quarks, and the value of the kinematic variable $M_\mathrm{T2}$ for events with at least two jets. For events with exactly one jet, the transverse momentum of the jet is used instead. The second search looks in addition for disappearing tracks produced by BSM long-lived charged particles that decay within the volume of the tracking detector. No excess event yield is observed above the predicted standard model background. This is used to constrain a range of BSM models that predict the following: the pair production of gluinos and squarks in the context of supersymmetry models conserving $R$-parity, with or without intermediate long-lived charginos produced in the decay chain; the resonant production of a colored scalar state decaying to a massive Dirac fermion and a quark; or the pair production of scalar and vector leptoquarks each decaying to a neutrino and a top, bottom, or light-flavor quark. In most of the cases, the results obtained are the most stringent constraints to date.
Predictions and observations for signal regions with $H_\mathrm{T} \geq 1500$ GeV and $N_\mathrm{j}<7$
Exclusion limits at 95% CL for direct gluino pair production, where the gluinos decay to light-flavor quarks and either the lightest neutralino, or the lightest chargino, and the chargino mass is O(100) MeV greater than the neutralino's mass. The chargino's lifetime is varied from $c\tau_{0} = 5$ to 1000 cm while the gluino mass is fixed to 1600 GeV and the neutralino's mass is fixed to 1575 GeV. Signal cross sections are calculated at approximately NNLO+NNLL order in $\alpha_S$.
Exclusion limits at 95% CL for direct squark pair production, where the squarks decay to light-flavor quarks and either the lightest neutralino, or the lightest chargino, and the chargino mass is O(100) MeV greater than the neutralino's mass. The chargino's lifetime is varied from $c\tau_{0} = 5$ to 1000 cm while the squark mass is fixed to 2000 GeV and the neutralino's mass is fixed to 1000 GeV. Signal cross sections are calculated at approximately NNLO+NNLL order in $\alpha_S$, and the eight light squarks' masses are assumed to be degenerate.
Searches for new phenomena inspired by supersymmetry in final states containing an $e^+e^-$ or $\mu^+\mu^-$ pair, jets, and missing transverse momentum are presented. These searches make use of proton-proton collision data with an integrated luminosity of 139 $\text{fb}^{-1}$, collected during 2015-2018 at a centre-of-mass energy $\sqrt{s}=13 $TeV by the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider. Two searches target the pair production of charginos and neutralinos. One uses the recursive-jigsaw reconstruction technique to follow up on excesses observed in 36.1 $\text{fb}^{-1}$ of data, and the other uses conventional event variables. The third search targets pair production of coloured supersymmetric particles (squarks or gluinos) decaying through the next-to-lightest neutralino $(\tilde\chi_2^0)$ via a slepton $(\tilde\ell)$ or $Z$ boson into $\ell^+\ell^-\tilde\chi_1^0$, resulting in a kinematic endpoint or peak in the dilepton invariant mass spectrum. The data are found to be consistent with the Standard Model expectations. Results are interpreted using simplified models and exclude masses up to 900 GeV for electroweakinos, 1550 GeV for squarks, and 2250 GeV for gluinos.
- - - - - - - - Overview of HEPData Record - - - - - - - - <br/><br/> <b>EWK SR distributions:</b> <a href="116034?version=1&table=Figure 11a">SR-High_8-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Figure 11b">SR-ℓℓ𝑏𝑏-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Figure 11c">SR-Int-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Figure 11d">SR-Low-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Figure 11e">SR-OffShell-EWK</a><br/><br/> <b>Strong SR distributions:</b> <a href="116034?version=1&table=Figure 13a">SRC-STR</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Figure 13b">SRLow-STR</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Figure 13c">SRMed-STR</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Figure 13d">SRHigh-STR</a><br/><br/> <b>RJR SR Yields:</b> <a href="116034?version=1&table=Table 16">SR2l-Low-RJR, SR2l-ISR-RJR</a><br/><br/> <b>EWK SR Yields:</b> <a href="116034?version=1&table=Table 18">SR-High_16a-EWK, SR-High_8a-EWK, SR-1J-High-EWK, SR-ℓℓ𝑏𝑏-EWK, SR-High_16b-EWK, SR-High_8b-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Table 19">SR-Int_a-EWK, SR-Low_a-EWK, SR-Low-2-EWK, SR-OffShell_a-EWK, SR-Int_b-EWK, SR-Low_b-EWK, SR-OffShell_b-EWK </a><br/><br/> <b>Strong SR Yields:</b> <a href="116034?version=1&table=Table 21">SRC-STR, SRLow-STR, SRMed-STR, SRHigh-STR</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Table 22">SRZLow-STR, SRZMed-STR, SRZHigh-STR</a><br/><br/> <b>C1N2 Model Limits:</b> <a href="116034?version=1&table=Table 15a C1N2 Observed Limit">Obs</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Table 15a C1N2 Expected Limit">Exp</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Figure 34a C1N2 Expected XS Upper Limit">Upper Limits</a><br/><br/> <b>GMSB Model Limits:</b> <a href="116034?version=1&table=Table 15b GMSB Observed Limit">Obs</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Table 15b GMSB Expected Limit">Exp</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Figure 34b GMSB Expected XS Upper Limit">Upper Limits</a><br/><br/> <b>Gluon-Slepton Model Limits:</b> <a href="116034?version=1&table=Figure 16a Observed Limit">Obs</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Figure 16a Expected Limit">Exp</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Figure 23a XS Upper Limit">Upper Limits</a><br/><br/> <b>Gluon-Z* Model Limits:</b> <a href="116034?version=1&table=Figure 16b Observed Limit">Obs</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Figure 16b Expected Limit">Exp</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Figure 23b XS Upper Limit">Upper Limits</a><br/><br/> <b>Squark-Z* Model Limits:</b> <a href="116034?version=1&table=Figure 16c Observed Limit">Obs</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Figure 16c Expected Limit">Exp</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Figure 23c XS Upper Limit">Upper Limits</a><br/><br/> <b>EWK VR distributions:</b> <a href="116034?version=1&table=Figure 4a S_ETmiss in VR-High-Sideband-EWK">VR-High-Sideband-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Figure 4b S_Etmiss in VR-High-R-EWK">VR-High-R-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Figure 4c S_Etmiss in VR-1J-High-EWK">VR-1J-High-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Figure 4d S_Etmiss in VR-llbb-EWK">VR-ℓℓ𝑏𝑏-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Figure 5a S_Etmiss in VR-Int-EWK">VR-Int-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Figure 5b S_Etmiss in VR-Low-EWK">VR-Low-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Figure 5c S_Etmiss in VR-Low-2-EWK">VR-Low-2-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Figure 5d S_Etmiss in VR-OffShell-EWK">VR-OffShell-EWK</a><br/><br/> <b>Strong VR distributions:</b> <a href="116034?version=1&table=Figure 6a">VRC-STR</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Figure 6b">VRLow-STR</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Figure 6c">VRMed-STR</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Figure 6d">VRHigh-STR</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Figure 8">VR3L-STR</a><br/><br/> <b>Other Strong distributions:</b> <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Figure 17a">SRLow-STR + VRLow-STR</a><br/><br/> <b>Other EWK distributions:</b> <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Figure 33a Mjj in CR-Z-EWK and SR-Low-EWK">CR-Z-EWK + SR-Low-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Figure 33b S_ETmiss in CR-Z-met-EWK">CR-Z-met-EWK</a><br/><br/> <b>Strong Signal Cutflows:</b> <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 30-31 SRC-STR Cutflow">SRC-STR GG_N2_ZN1</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 30-31 SRMed-STR Cutflow">SRC-STR SS_N2_ZN1</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 30-31 SRLow-STR Cutflow">SRLow-STR GG_N2_SLN1</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 30-31 SRHigh-STR Cutflow">SRC-STR GG_N2_SLN1</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 30-31 SRZLow-STR Cutflow">SRZLow-STR SS_N2_ZN1</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 30-31 SRZMed-STR Cutflow">SRZMed-STR SS_N2_ZN1</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 30-31 SRZHigh-STR Cutflow">SRZHigh-STR SS_N2_ZN1</a><br/><br/> <b>EWK Signal Cutflows:</b> <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 36 SR-OffShell_a-EWK Cutflow"> SR-OffShell_a-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 37 SR-OffShell_b-EWK Cutflow"> SR-OffShell_b-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 38 SR-Low_a-EWK Cutflow"> SR-Low_a-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 39 SR-Low_b-EWK Cutflow"> SR-Low_b-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 40 SR-Low-2-EWK Cutflow"> SR-Low-2-E</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 41 SR-Int_a-EWK Cutflow"> SR-Int_a-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 42 SR-Int_b-EWK Cutflow"> SR-Int_b-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 43 SR-High_16a-EWK Cutflow"> SR-High_16a-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 44 SR-High_16b-EWK Cutflow"> SR-High_16b-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 45 SR-High_8a-EWK Cutflow"> SR-High_8a-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 46 SR-High_8b-EWK Cutflow"> SR-High_8b-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 47 SR-1J-High-EWK Cutflow"> SR-1J-Hig</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 48 SR-llbb-EWK Cutflow"> SR-llbb-EWK</a><br/><br/> <b>EWK Signal Number of MC Events:</b> <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 36 SR-OffShell_a-EWK Generated"> SR-OffShell_a-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 37 SR-OffShell_b-EWK Generated"> SR-OffShell_b-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 38 SR-Low_a-EWK Generated"> SR-Low_a-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 39 SR-Low_b-EWK Generated"> SR-Low_b-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 40 SR-Low-2-EWK Generated"> SR-Low-2-E</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 41 SR-Int_a-EWK Generated"> SR-Int_a-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 42 SR-Int_b-EWK Generated"> SR-Int_b-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 43 SR-High_16a-EWK Generated"> SR-High_16a-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 44 SR-High_16b-EWK Generated"> SR-High_16b-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 45 SR-High_8a-EWK Generated"> SR-High_8a-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 46 SR-High_8b-EWK Generated"> SR-High_8b-EWK</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 47 SR-1J-High-EWK Generated"> SR-1J-Hig</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=Auxiliary Table 48 SR-llbb-EWK Generated"> SR-llbb-EWK</a><br/><br/> <b>SRC-STR Signal Acceptance:</b> <a href="116034?version=1&table=GG_N2_SLN1 acc in SRC">GG_N2_SLN1</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=GG_N2_ZN1 acc in SRC">GG_N2_ZN1</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=SS_N2_ZN1 acc in SRC">SS_N2_ZN1</a><br/><br/> <b>SRLow-STR Signal Acceptance:</b> <a href="116034?version=1&table=GG_N2_SLN1 acc in SRLow">GG_N2_SLN1</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=GG_N2_ZN1 acc in SRLow">GG_N2_ZN1</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=SS_N2_ZN1 acc in SRLow">SS_N2_ZN1</a><br/><br/> <b>SRMed-STR Signal Acceptance:</b> <a href="116034?version=1&table=GG_N2_SLN1 acc in SRMed">GG_N2_SLN1</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=GG_N2_ZN1 acc in SRMed">GG_N2_ZN1</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=SS_N2_ZN1 acc in SRMed">SS_N2_ZN1</a><br/><br/> <b>SRHigh-STR Signal Acceptance:</b> <a href="116034?version=1&table=GG_N2_SLN1 acc in SRHigh">GG_N2_SLN1</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=GG_N2_ZN1 acc in SRHigh">GG_N2_ZN1</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=SS_N2_ZN1 acc in SRHigh">SS_N2_ZN1</a><br/><br/> <b>SRZLow-STR Signal Acceptance:</b> <a href="116034?version=1&table=GG_N2_ZN1 acc in SRZLow">GG_N2_ZN1</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=SS_N2_ZN1 acc in SRZLow">SS_N2_ZN1</a><br/><br/> <b>SRZMed-STR Signal Acceptance:</b> <a href="116034?version=1&table=GG_N2_ZN1 acc in SRZMed">GG_N2_ZN1</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=SS_N2_ZN1 acc in SRZMed">SS_N2_ZN1</a><br/><br/> <b>SRZHigh-STR Signal Acceptance:</b> <a href="116034?version=1&table=GG_N2_ZN1 acc in SRZHigh">GG_N2_ZN1</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=SS_N2_ZN1 acc in SRZHigh">SS_N2_ZN1</a><br/><br/> <b>SRC-STR Signal Efficiency:</b> <a href="116034?version=1&table=GG_N2_SLN1 eff in SRC">GG_N2_SLN1</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=GG_N2_ZN1 eff in SRC">GG_N2_ZN1</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=SS_N2_ZN1 eff in SRC">SS_N2_ZN1</a><br/><br/> <b>SRLow-STR Signal Efficiency:</b> <a href="116034?version=1&table=GG_N2_SLN1 eff in SRLow">GG_N2_SLN1</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=GG_N2_ZN1 eff in SRLow">GG_N2_ZN1</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=SS_N2_ZN1 eff in SRLow">SS_N2_ZN1</a><br/><br/> <b>SRMed-STR Signal Efficiency:</b> <a href="116034?version=1&table=GG_N2_SLN1 eff in SRMed">GG_N2_SLN1</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=GG_N2_ZN1 eff in SRMed">GG_N2_ZN1</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=SS_N2_ZN1 eff in SRMed">SS_N2_ZN1</a><br/><br/> <b>SRHigh-STR Signal Efficiency:</b> <a href="116034?version=1&table=GG_N2_SLN1 eff in SRHigh">GG_N2_SLN1</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=GG_N2_ZN1 eff in SRHigh">GG_N2_ZN1</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=SS_N2_ZN1 eff in SRHigh">SS_N2_ZN1</a><br/><br/> <b>SRZLow-STR Signal Efficiency:</b> <a href="116034?version=1&table=GG_N2_ZN1 eff in SRZLow">GG_N2_ZN1</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=SS_N2_ZN1 eff in SRZLow">SS_N2_ZN1</a><br/><br/> <b>SRZMed-STR Signal Efficiency:</b> <a href="116034?version=1&table=GG_N2_ZN1 eff in SRZMed">GG_N2_ZN1</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=SS_N2_ZN1 eff in SRZMed">SS_N2_ZN1</a><br/><br/> <b>SRZHigh-STR Signal Efficiency:</b> <a href="116034?version=1&table=GG_N2_ZN1 eff in SRZHigh">GG_N2_ZN1</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=SS_N2_ZN1 eff in SRZHigh">SS_N2_ZN1</a><br/><br/> <b>SR-OffShell_a-EWK Signal Acceptance:</b><a href="116034?version=1&table=GMSB acc in SR-OffShell_a-EWK">GMSB</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=C1N2 acc in SR-OffShell_a-EWK">C1N2</a>; <br/><br/> <b>SR-OffShell_b-EWK Signal Acceptance:</b><a href="116034?version=1&table=GMSB acc in SR-OffShell_b-EWK">GMSB</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=C1N2 acc in SR-OffShell_b-EWK">C1N2</a>; <br/><br/> <b>SR-Low_a-EWK Signal Acceptance:</b><a href="116034?version=1&table=GMSB acc in C1N2 acc in SR-Low_a-EWK">GMSB</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=C1N2 acc in C1N2 acc in SR-Low_a-EWK">C1N2</a>; <br/><br/> <b>SR-Low_b-EWK Signal Acceptance:</b><a href="116034?version=1&table=GMSB acc in SR-Low_b-EWK">GMSB</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=C1N2 acc in SR-Low_b-EWK">C1N2</a>; <br/><br/> <b>SR-Int_a-EWK Signal Acceptance:</b><a href="116034?version=1&table=GMSB acc in SR-Int_a-EWK">GMSB</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=C1N2 acc in SR-Int_a-EWK">C1N2</a>; <br/><br/> <b>SR-Int_b-EWK Signal Acceptance:</b><a href="116034?version=1&table=GMSB acc in SR-Int_b-EWK">GMSB</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=C1N2 acc in SR-Int_b-EWK">C1N2</a>; <br/><br/> <b>SR-High_16a-EWK Signal Acceptance:</b><a href="116034?version=1&table=GMSB acc in SR-High_16a-EWK">GMSB</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=C1N2 acc in SR-High_16a-EWK">C1N2</a>; <br/><br/> <b>SR-High_16b-EWK Signal Acceptance:</b><a href="116034?version=1&table=GMSB acc in SR-High_16b-EWK">GMSB</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=C1N2 acc in SR-High_16b-EWK">C1N2</a>; <br/><br/> <b>SR-High_8a-EWK Signal Acceptance:</b><a href="116034?version=1&table=GMSB acc in SR-High_8a-EWK">GMSB</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=C1N2 acc in SR-High_8a-EWK">C1N2</a>; <br/><br/> <b>SR-High_8b-EWK Signal Acceptance:</b><a href="116034?version=1&table=GMSB acc in SR-High_8b-EWK">GMSB</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=C1N2 acc in SR-High_8b-EWK">C1N2</a>; <br/><br/> <b>SR-1J-High-EWK Signal Acceptance:</b><a href="116034?version=1&table=GMSB acc in SR-1J-High-EWK">GMSB</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=C1N2 acc in SR-1J-High-EWK">C1N2</a>; <br/><br/> <b>SR-llbb-EWK Signal Acceptance:</b><a href="116034?version=1&table=GMSB acc in SR-llbb-EWK">GMSB</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=C1N2 acc in SR-llbb-EWK">C1N2</a>; <br/><br/> <b>SR-OffShell_a-EWK Signal Efficiency:</b><a href="116034?version=1&table=GMSB eff in SR-OffShell_a-EWK">GMSB</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=C1N2 eff in SR-OffShell_a-EWK">C1N2</a>; <br/><br/> <b>SR-OffShell_b-EWK Signal Efficiency:</b><a href="116034?version=1&table=GMSB eff in SR-OffShell_b-EWK">GMSB</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=C1N2 eff in SR-OffShell_b-EWK">C1N2</a>; <br/><br/> <b>SR-Low_a-EWK Signal Efficiency:</b><a href="116034?version=1&table=GMSB eff in C1N2 eff in SR-Low_a-EWK">GMSB</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=C1N2 eff in C1N2 eff in SR-Low_a-EWK">C1N2</a>; <br/><br/> <b>SR-Low_b-EWK Signal Efficiency:</b><a href="116034?version=1&table=GMSB eff in SR-Low_b-EWK">GMSB</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=C1N2 eff in SR-Low_b-EWK">C1N2</a>; <br/><br/> <b>SR-Int_a-EWK Signal Efficiency:</b><a href="116034?version=1&table=GMSB eff in SR-Int_a-EWK">GMSB</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=C1N2 eff in SR-Int_a-EWK">C1N2</a>; <br/><br/> <b>SR-Int_b-EWK Signal Efficiency:</b><a href="116034?version=1&table=GMSB eff in SR-Int_b-EWK">GMSB</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=C1N2 eff in SR-Int_b-EWK">C1N2</a>; <br/><br/> <b>SR-High_16a-EWK Signal Efficiency:</b><a href="116034?version=1&table=GMSB eff in SR-High_16a-EWK">GMSB</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=C1N2 eff in SR-High_16a-EWK">C1N2</a>; <br/><br/> <b>SR-High_16b-EWK Signal Efficiency:</b><a href="116034?version=1&table=GMSB eff in SR-High_16b-EWK">GMSB</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=C1N2 eff in SR-High_16b-EWK">C1N2</a>; <br/><br/> <b>SR-High_8a-EWK Signal Efficiency:</b><a href="116034?version=1&table=GMSB eff in SR-High_8a-EWK">GMSB</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=C1N2 eff in SR-High_8a-EWK">C1N2</a>; <br/><br/> <b>SR-High_8b-EWK Signal Efficiency:</b><a href="116034?version=1&table=GMSB eff in SR-High_8b-EWK">GMSB</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=C1N2 eff in SR-High_8b-EWK">C1N2</a>; <br/><br/> <b>SR-1J-High-EWK Signal Efficiency:</b><a href="116034?version=1&table=GMSB eff in SR-1J-High-EWK">GMSB</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=C1N2 eff in SR-1J-High-EWK">C1N2</a>; <br/><br/> <b>SR-llbb-EWK Signal Efficiency:</b><a href="116034?version=1&table=GMSB eff in SR-llbb-EWK">GMSB</a>; <a href="116034?version=1&table=C1N2 eff in SR-llbb-EWK">C1N2</a>; <br/><br/> <b>Truth Code snippets</b>, <b>SLHA files</b>, and <b>PYHF json likelihoods</b> are available under "Resources" (purple button on the left) ---- Record created with hepdata_lib 0.7.0: https://zenodo.org/record/4946277 and PYHF: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.1169739
Breakdown of expected and observed yields in the three on-$Z$ signal regions after a separate simultaneous fit to each signal region and control region pair. The uncertainties include both the statistical and systematic sources.
This paper presents results of searches for electroweak production of supersymmetric particles in models with compressed mass spectra. The searches use 139 fb$^{-1}$ of $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV proton-proton collision data collected by the ATLAS experiment at the Large Hadron Collider. Events with missing transverse momentum and two same-flavor, oppositely charged, low transverse momentum leptons are selected, and are further categorized by the presence of hadronic activity from initial-state radiation or a topology compatible with vector-boson fusion processes. The data are found to be consistent with predictions from the Standard Model. The results are interpreted using simplified models of $R$-parity-conserving supersymmetry in which the lightest supersymmetric partner is a neutralino with a mass similar to the lightest chargino, the second-to-lightest neutralino or the slepton. Lower limits on the masses of charginos in different simplified models range from 193 GeV to 240 GeV for moderate mass splittings, and extend down to mass splittings of 1.5 GeV to 2.4 GeV at the LEP chargino bounds (92.4 GeV). Similar lower limits on degenerate light-flavor sleptons extend up to masses of 251 GeV and down to mass splittings of 550 MeV. Constraints on vector-boson fusion production of electroweak SUSY states are also presented.
Number of signal events in SR-S-high for the (m($\tilde{\ell}$),m($\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$)) = (150 GeV, 140 GeV) Slepton signal model at different stages of selection before and after weighting events to correspond to 140/fb.
Number of signal events in SR-S-high for the (m($\tilde{\ell}$),m($\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$)) = (150 GeV, 140 GeV) Slepton signal model at different stages of selection before and after weighting events to correspond to 140/fb.
Number of signal events in SR-S-high for the (m($\tilde{\ell}$),m($\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$)) = (150 GeV, 140 GeV) Slepton signal model at different stages of selection before and after weighting events to correspond to 140/fb.
Three searches are presented for signatures of physics beyond the standard model (SM) in $\tau\tau$ final states in proton-proton collisions at the LHC, using a data sample collected with the CMS detector at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 138 fb$^{-1}$. Upper limits at 95% confidence level (CL) are set on the products of the branching fraction for the decay into $\tau$ leptons and the cross sections for the production of a new boson $\phi$, in addition to the H(125) boson, via gluon fusion (gg$\phi$) or in association with b quarks, ranging from $\mathcal{O}$(10 pb) for a mass of 60 GeV to 0.3 fb for a mass of 3.5 TeV each. The data reveal two excesses for gg$\phi$ production with local $p$-values equivalent to about three standard deviations at $m_\phi$ = 0.1 and 1.2 TeV. In a search for $t$-channel exchange of a vector leptoquark U$_1$, 95% CL upper limits are set on the dimensionless U$_1$ leptoquark coupling to quarks and $\tau$ leptons ranging from 1 for a mass of 1 TeV to 6 for a mass of 5 TeV, depending on the scenario. In the interpretations of the $M_\mathrm{h}^{125}$ and $M_\mathrm{h, EFT}^{125}$ minimal supersymmetric SM benchmark scenarios, additional Higgs bosons with masses below 350 GeV are excluded at 95% CL.
Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the low-mass analysis $m_{\tau\tau}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 22 of the auxilliary material of the publication, but restricted to 2016 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.
Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the low-mass analysis $m_{\tau\tau}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 22 of the auxilliary material of the publication, but restricted to 2017 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.
Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the low-mass analysis $m_{\tau\tau}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 22 of the auxilliary material of the publication, but restricted to 2018 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.
A search is presented for displaced production of Higgs bosons or $Z$ bosons, originating from the decay of a neutral long-lived particle (LLP) and reconstructed in the decay modes $H\rightarrow \gamma\gamma$ and $Z\rightarrow ee$. The analysis uses the full Run 2 data set of proton$-$proton collisions delivered by the LHC at an energy of $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV between 2015 and 2018 and recorded by the ATLAS detector, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. Exploiting the capabilities of the ATLAS liquid argon calorimeter to precisely measure the arrival times and trajectories of electromagnetic objects, the analysis searches for the signature of pairs of photons or electrons which arise from a common displaced vertex and which arrive after some delay at the calorimeter. The results are interpreted in a gauge-mediated supersymmetry breaking model with pair-produced higgsinos that decay to LLPs, and each LLP subsequently decays into either a Higgs boson or a $Z$ boson. The final state includes at least two particles that escape direct detection, giving rise to missing transverse momentum. No significant excess is observed above the background expectation. The results are used to set upper limits on the cross section for higgsino pair production, up to a $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass of 369 (704) GeV for decays with 100% branching ratio of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ to Higgs ($Z$) bosons for a $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime of 2 ns. A model-independent limit is also set on the production of pairs of photons or electrons with a significant delay in arrival at the calorimeter.
The 95% CL limits on $\sigma(pp \rightarrow \tilde\chi^0_1 \tilde\chi^0_1$) in fb as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ branching ratio to the SM Higgs boson, where the assumed cross-section is for higgsino production, and $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow Z +\tilde{G}$) = 1 - $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow H + \tilde{G}$). Several signal hypotheses are overlaid that are labelled by the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass, all with a fixed $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime of 2 ns.
A search for the pair production of heavy leptons as predicted by the type-III seesaw mechanism is presented. The search uses proton-proton collision data at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV, corresponding to 139 fb$^{-1}$ of integrated luminosity recorded by the ATLAS detector during Run 2 of the Large Hadron Collider. The analysis focuses on final states with three or four electrons or muons from the possible decays of new heavy leptons via intermediate electroweak bosons. No significant deviations above the Standard Model expectation are observed; upper and lower limits on the heavy lepton production cross-section and masses are derived respectively. These results are then combined for the first time with the ones already published by ATLAS using the channel with two leptons in the final state. The observed lower limit on the mass of the type-III seesaw heavy leptons combining two, three and four lepton channels together is 910 GeV at the 95% confidence level.
Expected signal and background yields after each of the analysis selection cuts for the 800 GeV mass hypothesis in the Q0-RT CR. Preselection represents events with at least three leptons.
The results of a search for the direct pair production of top squarks, the supersymmetric partner of the top quark, in final states with one isolated electron or muon, several energetic jets, and missing transverse momentum are reported. The analysis also targets spin-0 mediator models, where the mediator decays into a pair of dark-matter particles and is produced in association with a pair of top quarks. The search uses data from proton-proton collisions delivered by the Large Hadron Collider in 2015 and 2016 at a centre-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV and recorded by the ATLAS detector, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 36 fb$^{-1}$. A wide range of signal scenarios with different mass-splittings between the top squark, the lightest neutralino and possible intermediate supersymmetric particles are considered, including cases where the W bosons or the top quarks produced in the decay chain are off-shell. No significant excess over the Standard Model prediction is observed. The null results are used to set exclusion limits at 95% confidence level in several supersymmetry benchmark models. For pair-produced top-squarks decaying into top quarks, top-squark masses up to 940 GeV are excluded. Stringent exclusion limits are also derived for all other considered top-squark decay scenarios. For the spin-0 mediator models, upper limits are set on the visible cross-section.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 3 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the wino NLSP model under the hypothesis of mq3L < mtR and mu < 0, where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, sbottom -> t C1, sbottom -> b N1, and sbottom -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratios for each signal point. N2 decays to N1 predominantly via either Z boson or Higgs boson depending on the sign of the μ parameter.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 3 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the wino NLSP model under the hypothesis of mq3L < mtR and mu < 0, where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, sbottom -> t C1, sbottom -> b N1, and sbottom -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratios for each signal point. N2 decays to N1 predominantly via either Z boson or Higgs boson depending on the sign of the μ parameter.
$\textbf{Exclusion contour 3 (exp.) } -$ Expected 95% excluded regions in the plane of m(STOP) versus m(NEUTRALINO) for the direct stop/sbottom pair production in the wino NLSP model under the hypothesis of mq3L < mtR and mu < 0, where various decay modes (stop -> b C1, stop -> t N1, stop -> t N2, sbottom -> t C1, sbottom -> b N1, and sbottom -> b N2) are considered with different branching ratios for each signal point. N2 decays to N1 predominantly via either Z boson or Higgs boson depending on the sign of the μ parameter.
Forum