Search for heavy Majorana or Dirac neutrinos and right-handed $W$ gauge bosons in final states with charged leptons and jets in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV with the ATLAS detector

The ATLAS collaboration Aad, Georges ; Abbott, Braden Keim ; Abeling, Kira ; et al.
CERN-EP-2023-034, 2023.
Inspire Record 2652625 DOI 10.17182/hepdata.141277

A search for heavy right-handed Majorana or Dirac neutrinos $N_{\mathrm{R}}$ and heavy right-handed gauge bosons $W_{\mathrm{R}}$ is performed in events with energetic electrons or muons, with the same or opposite electric charge, and energetic jets. The search is carried out separately for topologies of clearly separated final-state products (``resolved'' channel) and topologies with boosted final states with hadronic products partially overlapping and reconstructed as a large-radius jet (``boosted'' channel). The events are selected from $pp$ collision data at the LHC with an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ collected by the ATLAS detector at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV. No significant deviations from the Standard Model predictions are observed. The results are interpreted within the theoretical framework of a left-right symmetric model, and lower limits are set on masses in the heavy right-handed $W_{\mathrm{R}}$ boson and $N_{\mathrm{R}}$ plane. The excluded region extends to about $m(W_{\mathrm{R}}) = 6.4$ TeV for both Majorana and Dirac $N_{\mathrm{R}}$ neutrinos at $m(N_{\mathrm{R}})<1$ TeV. $N_{\mathrm{R}}$ with masses of less than 3.5 (3.6) TeV are excluded in the electron (muon) channel at $m(W_{\mathrm{R}})=4.8$ TeV for the Majorana neutrinos, and limits of $m(N_{\mathrm{R}})$ up to 3.6 TeV for $m(W_{\mathrm{R}}) = 5.2$ ($5.0$) TeV in the electron (muon) channel are set for the Dirac neutrinos.

40 data tables match query

Observed 95% CL exclusion contours in the $(m(W_{R}), m(N_{R}))$ plane in the electron channel for boosted.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contours in the $(m(W_{R}), m(N_{R}))$ plane in the electron channel for boosted.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contours in the $(m(W_{R}), m(N_{R}))$ plane in the muon channel for boosted.

More…

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

The ATLAS collaboration Aad, Georges ; Aakvaag, Erlend ; Abbott, Braden Keim ; et al.
CERN-EP-2023-072, 2023.
Inspire Record 2661503 DOI 10.17182/hepdata.140433

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

70 data tables match query

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

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

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

More…

Search for direct production of winos and higgsinos in events with two same-charge leptons or three leptons in $pp$ collision data at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV with the ATLAS detector

The ATLAS collaboration Aad, Georges ; Abbott, Braden Keim ; Abbott, Dale ; et al.
CERN-EP-2023-063, 2023.
Inspire Record 2660233 DOI 10.17182/hepdata.134245

A search for supersymmetry targeting the direct production of winos and higgsinos is conducted in final states with either two leptons ($e$ or $\mu$) with the same electric charge, or three leptons. The analysis uses 139 fb$^{-1}$ of $pp$ collision data at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV collected with the ATLAS detector during Run 2 of the Large Hadron Collider. No significant excess over the Standard Model expectation is observed. Simplified and complete models with and without $R$-parity conservation are considered. In topologies with intermediate states including either $Wh$ or $WZ$ pairs, wino masses up to 525 GeV and 250 GeV are excluded, respectively, for a bino of vanishing mass. Higgsino masses smaller than 440 GeV are excluded in a natural $R$-parity-violating model with bilinear terms. Upper limits on the production cross section of generic events beyond the Standard Model as low as 40 ab are obtained in signal regions optimised for these models and also for an $R$-parity-violating scenario with baryon-number-violating higgsino decays into top quarks and jets. The analysis significantly improves sensitivity to supersymmetric models and other processes beyond the Standard Model that may contribute to the considered final states.

70 data tables match query

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL for the WZ-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production from Fig 13(b) and Fig 8(aux).

positive one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL for the WZ-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production from Fig 13(b) and Fig 8(aux).

negative $\sigma$ variation of observed exclusion limits at 95% CL for the WZ-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production from Fig 13(b) and Fig 8(aux).

More…

Evidence for the Higgs boson decay to a $Z$ boson and a photon at the LHC

The CMS & ATLAS collaborations Aad, Georges ; Abbott, Braden Keim ; Abeling, Kira ; et al.
CERN-EP-2023-157, 2023.
Inspire Record 2666787 DOI 10.17182/hepdata.142406

The first evidence for the Higgs boson decay to a $Z$ boson and a photon is presented, with a statistical significance of 3.4 standard deviations. The result is derived from a combined analysis of the searches performed by the ATLAS and CMS Collaborations with proton-proton collision data sets collected at the CERN Large Hadron Collider (LHC) from 2015 to 2018. These correspond to integrated luminosities of around 140 fb$^{-1}$ for each experiment, at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV. The measured signal yield is $2.2\pm0.7$ times the Standard Model prediction, and agrees with the theoretical expectation within 1.9 standard deviations.

1 data table match query

The negative profile log-likelihood test statistic, where $\Lambda$ represents the likelihood ratio, as a function of the signal strength $\mu$ derived from the ATLAS data, the CMS data, and the combined result.


Version 2
Anomaly detection search for new resonances decaying into a Higgs boson and a generic new particle $X$ in hadronic final states using $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV $pp$ collisions with the ATLAS detector

The ATLAS collaboration Aad, Georges ; Abbott, Braden Keim ; Abbott, Dale ; et al.
CERN-EP-2023-045, 2023.
Inspire Record 2666488 DOI 10.17182/hepdata.135828

A search is presented for a heavy resonance $Y$ decaying into a Standard Model Higgs boson $H$ and a new particle $X$ in a fully hadronic final state. The full Large Hadron Collider Run 2 dataset of proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}= 13$ TeV collected by the ATLAS detector from 2015 to 2018 is used, and corresponds to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. The search targets the high $Y$-mass region, where the $H$ and $X$ have a significant Lorentz boost in the laboratory frame. A novel signal region is implemented using anomaly detection, where events are selected solely because of their incompatibility with a learned background-only model. It is defined using a jet-level tagger for signal-model-independent selection of the boosted $X$ particle, representing the first application of fully unsupervised machine learning to an ATLAS analysis. Two additional signal regions are implemented to target a benchmark $X$ decay into two quarks, covering topologies where the $X$ is reconstructed as either a single large-radius jet or two small-radius jets. The analysis selects Higgs boson decays into $b\bar{b}$, and a dedicated neural-network-based tagger provides sensitivity to the boosted heavy-flavor topology. No significant excess of data over the expected background is observed, and the results are presented as upper limits on the production cross section $\sigma(pp \rightarrow Y \rightarrow XH \rightarrow q\bar{q}b\bar{b}$) for signals with $m_Y$ between 1.5 and 6 TeV and $m_X$ between 65 and 3000 GeV.

6 data tables match query

Acceptance times efficiency for signal grid in anomaly signal region.

Acceptance times efficiency for signal grid in merged two-prong signal region.

Acceptance times efficiency for signal grid in resolved two-prong signal region.

More…

Version 2
Inclusive and differential cross-sections for dilepton $t\bar{t}$ production measured in $\sqrt{s}=13\;$TeV $pp$ collisions with the ATLAS detector

The ATLAS collaboration Aad, Georges ; Abbott, Braden Keim ; Abbott, Dale ; et al.
JHEP 07 (2023) 141, 2023.
Inspire Record 2648096 DOI 10.17182/hepdata.137888

Differential and double-differential distributions of kinematic variables of leptons from decays of top-quark pairs ($t\bar{t}$) are measured using the full LHC Run 2 data sample collected with the ATLAS detector. The data were collected at a $pp$ collision energy of $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV and correspond to an integrated luminosity of 140 fb$^{-1}$. The measurements use events containing an oppositely charged $e\mu$ pair and $b$-tagged jets. The results are compared with predictions from several Monte Carlo generators. While no prediction is found to be consistent with all distributions, a better agreement with measurements of the lepton $p_{\text{T}}$ distributions is obtained by reweighting the $t\bar{t}$ sample so as to reproduce the top-quark $p_{\text{T}}$ distribution from an NNLO calculation. The inclusive top-quark pair production cross-section is measured as well, both in a fiducial region and in the full phase-space. The total inclusive cross-section is found to be \[ \sigma_{t\bar{t}} = 829 \pm 1\;(\textrm{stat}) \pm 13\;(\textrm{syst}) \pm 8\;(\textrm{lumi}) \pm 2\; (\textrm{beam})\ \textrm{pb}, \] where the uncertainties are due to statistics, systematic effects, the integrated luminosity and the beam energy. This is in excellent agreement with the theoretical expectation.

154 data tables match query

Definition of the fiducial phase space with the lepton candidate, electron $e$ and muon $\mu$, and jets.

Definition of the fiducial phase space with the lepton candidate, electron $e$ and muon $\mu$, and jets.

Breakdown of systematic uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross-section. The impact of the top-quark mass on the cross-section is included in the table and not counted in the total uncertainty entry in the paper.

More…

Version 2
Search for charginos and neutralinos in final states with two boosted hadronically decaying bosons and missing transverse momentum in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV with the ATLAS detector

The ATLAS collaboration Aad, Georges ; Abbott, Braden Keim ; Abbott, Dale ; et al.
Phys.Rev.D 104 (2021) 112010, 2021.
Inspire Record 1906174 DOI 10.17182/hepdata.104458

A search for charginos and neutralinos at the Large Hadron Collider is reported using fully hadronic final states and missing transverse momentum. Pair-produced charginos or neutralinos are explored, each decaying into a high-$p_{\text{T}}$ Standard Model weak boson. Fully-hadronic final states are studied to exploit the advantage of the large branching ratio, and the efficient background rejection by identifying the high-$p_{\text{T}}$ bosons using large-radius jets and jet substructure information. An integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ of proton-proton collision data collected by the ATLAS detector at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV is used. No significant excess is found beyond the Standard Model expectation. The 95% confidence level exclusion limits are set on wino or higgsino production with varying assumptions in the decay branching ratios and the type of the lightest supersymmetric particle. A wino (higgsino) mass up to 1060 (900) GeV is excluded when the lightest SUSY particle mass is below 400 (240) GeV and the mass splitting is larger than 400 (450) GeV. The sensitivity to high-mass wino and higgsino is significantly extended compared with the previous LHC searches using the other final states.

145 data tables match query

- - - - - - - - Overview of HEPData Record - - - - - - - - <br/><br/> <b>Cutflow:</b> <a href="104458?version=2&table=Cut flows for the representative signals">table</a><br/><br/> <b>Boson tagging:</b> <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=%24W%2FZ%5Crightarrow%20qq%24%20tagging%20efficiency">$W/Z\rightarrow qq$ tagging efficiency</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=%24W%2FZ%5Crightarrow%20qq%24%20tagging%20rejection">$W/Z\rightarrow qq$ tagging rejection</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=%24Z%2Fh%20%5Crightarrow%20bb%24%20tagging%20efficiency">$Z/h\rightarrow bb$ tagging efficiency</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=%24Z%2Fh%20%5Crightarrow%20bb%24%20tagging%20rejection">$Z/h\rightarrow bb$ tagging rejection</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=%24W%5Crightarrow%20qq%24%20tagging%20efficiency%20(vs%20official%20WP)">$W\rightarrow qq$ tagging efficiency (vs official WP)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=%24W%5Crightarrow%20qq%24%20tagging%20rejection%20(vs%20official%20WP)">$W\rightarrow qq$ tagging rejection (vs official WP)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=%24Z%5Crightarrow%20qq%24%20tagging%20efficiency%20(vs%20official%20WP)">$Z\rightarrow qq$ tagging efficiency (vs official WP)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=%24Z%5Crightarrow%20qq%24%20tagging%20rejection%20(vs%20official%20WP)">$Z\rightarrow qq$ tagging rejection (vs official WP)</a> </ul> <b>Systematic uncertainty:</b> <a href="104458?version=2&table=Total%20systematic%20uncertainties">table</a><br/><br/> <b>Summary of SR yields:</b> <a href="104458?version=2&table=Data%20yields%20and%20background%20expectation%20in%20the%20SRs">table</a><br/><br/> <b>Expected background yields and the breakdown:</b> <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Data%20yields%20and%20background%20breakdown%20in%20SR">CR0L / SR</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Data%20yields%20and%20background%20breakdown%20in%20CR%2FVR%201L(1Y)">CR1L / VR1L /CR1Y / VR1Y</a> </ul> <b>SR distributions:</b> <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Effective mass distribution in SR-4Q-VV">SR-4Q-VV: Effective mass</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Leading large-$R$ jet mass distribution in SR-4Q-VV">SR-4Q-VV: Leading jet mass</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Leading large-$R$ jet $D_{2}$ distribution in SR-4Q-VV">SR-4Q-VV: Leading jet $D_{2}$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Sub-leading large-$R$ jet mass distribution in SR-4Q-VV">SR-4Q-VV: Sub-leading jet mass</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Sub-leading large-$R$ jet $D_{2}$ distribution in SR-4Q-VV">SR-4Q-VV: Sub-leading jet $D_{2}$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=$m_{T2}$ distribution in SR-2B2Q-VZ">SR-2B2Q-VZ: $m_{\textrm{T2}}$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=bb-tagged jet mass distribution in SR-2B2Q-VZ">SR-2B2Q-VZ: bb-tagged jet mass</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Effective mass distribution in SR-2B2Q-VZ">SR-2B2Q-VZ: Effective mass</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=$m_{T2}$ distribution in SR-2B2Q-Vh">SR-2B2Q-Vh: $m_{\textrm{T2}}$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=bb-tagged jet mass distribution in SR-2B2Q-Vh">SR-2B2Q-Vh: bb-tagged jet mass</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Effective mass distribution in SR-2B2Q-Vh">SR-2B2Q-Vh: Effective mass</a> </ul> <b>Exclusion limit:</b> <ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1C1-WW): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp limit on (W~, B~) simplified model (C1C1-WW)">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1C1-WW)">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li>Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$): (No mass point could be excluded) <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs limit on (W~, B~) simplified model (C1C1-WW)">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1C1-WW)">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1C1-WW)">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-WZ): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp limit on (W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-WZ)">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-WZ)">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-WZ)">Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs limit on (W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-WZ)">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-WZ)">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-WZ)">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-Wh): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp limit on (W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-Wh)">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-Wh)">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-Wh)">Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs limit on (W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-Wh)">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-Wh)">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-Wh)">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$ model ($\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})=0\%$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp limit on (W~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 0%">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs limit on (W~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 0%">Observed limit</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$ model ($\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})=25\%$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp limit on (W~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 25%">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs limit on (W~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 25%">Observed limit</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$ model ($\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})=50\%$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp limit on (W~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 50%">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20B~)%20B(N2-%3EZN1)%20%3D%2050%25">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20B~)%20B(N2-%3EZN1)%20%3D%2050%25">Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs limit on (W~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 50%">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20B~)%20B(N2-%3EZN1)%20%3D%2050%">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20B~)%20B(N2-%3EZN1)%20%3D%2050%25">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$ model ($\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})=75\%$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp limit on (W~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 75%">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs limit on (W~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 75%">Observed limit</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$ model ($\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})=100\%$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp limit on (W~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 100%">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs limit on (W~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 100%">Observed limit</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{B})$ model ($\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})=50\%$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp limit on (H~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 50%">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20B~)%20B(N2-%3EZN1)%20%3D%2050%25">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li>Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$): (No mass point could be excluded) <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs limit on (H~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 50%">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20B~)%20B(N2-%3EZN1)%20%3D%2050%">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20B~)%20B(N2-%3EZN1)%20%3D%2050%25">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{H})$ model ($\textrm{tan}\beta=10,~\mu>0$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp limit on (W~, H~), tanb = 10, mu>0">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20mu%3E0">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20mu%3E0">Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs limit on (W~, H~), tanb = 10, mu>0">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20mu%3E0">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20mu%3E0">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{W})$ model ($\textrm{tan}\beta=10,~\mu>0$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp limit on (H~, W~), tanb = 10, mu>0">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20mu%3E0">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li>Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$): (No mass point could be excluded) <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs limit on (H~, W~), tanb = 10, mu>0">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20mu%3E0">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20mu%3E0">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{H})$ model ($\textrm{tan}\beta=10$) on ($\mu$,$M_{2}$) plane: <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp limit on (W~, H~), tanb = 10, M2 vs mu">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20M2%20vs%20mu">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20M2%20vs%20mu">Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs limit on (W~, H~), tanb = 10, M2 vs mu">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20M2%20vs%20mu">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20M2%20vs%20mu">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{W})$ model ($\textrm{tan}\beta=10$) on ($\mu$,$M_{2}$) plane: <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp limit on (H~, W~), tanb = 10, M2 vs mu">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20M2%20vs%20mu">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li>Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$): (No mass point could be excluded) <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs limit on (H~, W~), tanb = 10, M2 vs mu">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20M2%20vs%20mu">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20M2%20vs%20mu">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{G})$ model: <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp limit on (H~, G~)">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20G~)">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20G~)">Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs limit on (H~, G~)">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20G~)">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20G~)">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{a})$ model ($\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{a})=100\%$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp limit on (H~, a~) B(N1->Za~) = 100%">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20a~)%20B(N1-%3EZa~)%20%3D%20100%25">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20a~)%20B(N1-%3EZa~)%20%3D%20100%25">Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs limit on (H~, a~) B(N1->Za~) = 100%">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20a~)%20B(N1-%3EZa~)%20%3D%20100%25">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20a~)%20B(N1-%3EZa~)%20%3D%20100%">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{a})$ model ($\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{a})=75\%$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp limit on (H~, a~) B(N1->Za~) = 75%">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs limit on (H~, a~) B(N1->Za~) = 75%">Observed limit</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{a})$ model ($\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{a})=50\%$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Exp limit on (H~, a~) B(N1->Za~) = 50%">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs limit on (H~, a~) B(N1->Za~) = 50%">Observed limit</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{a})$ model ($\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{a})=25\%$): <ul> <li>Expected limit : (No mass point could be excluded) <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Obs limit on (H~, a~) B(N1->Za~) = 25%">Observed limit</a> </ul> </ul> <b>EWKino branching ratios:</b> <ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{H})$ model: <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=B(C2-%3EW%2BN1%2CN2)%20in%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{\pm}\rightarrow W\tilde{\chi}_{1,2}^{0})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=B(C2-%3EZ%2BC1)%20in%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb=10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{\pm}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=B(C2-%3Eh%2BC1)%20in%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb=10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{\pm}\rightarrow h\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=B(N3-%3EW%2BC1)%20in%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb=10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{3}^{0}\rightarrow W\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=B(N3-%3EZ%2BN1%2CN2)%20in%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{3}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1,2}^{0})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=B(N3-%3Eh%2BN1%2CN2)%20in%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{3}^{0}\rightarrow h\tilde{\chi}_{1,2}^{0})$</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{W})$ model: <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=B(C2-%3EW%2BN1)%20in%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{\pm}\rightarrow W\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=B(C2-%3EZ%2BC1)%20in%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{\pm}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=B(C2-%3Eh%2BC1)%20in%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{\pm}\rightarrow h\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=B(N2-%3EW%2BC1)%20in%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow W\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=B(N2-%3EZ%2BN1)%20in%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=B(N2-%3Eh%2BN1)%20in%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow h\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=B(N3-%3EW%2BC1)%20in%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{3}^{0}\rightarrow W\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=B(N3-%3EZ%2BN1)%20in%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{3}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=B(N3-%3Eh%2BN1)%20in%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{3}^{0}\rightarrow h\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})$</a> </ul> </ul> <b>Cross-section upper limit:</b> <ul> <li>Expected: <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Expected cross-section upper limit on C1C1-WW">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1C1-WW)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Expected cross-section upper limit on C1N2-WZ">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-WZ)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Expected cross-section upper limit on C1N2-Wh">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-Wh)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Expected cross-section upper limit on (H~, G~)">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{G})$ model</a> </ul> <li>Observed: <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Observed cross-section upper limit on C1C1-WW">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1C1-WW)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Observed cross-section upper limit on C1N2-WZ">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-WZ)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Observed cross-section upper limit on C1N2-Wh">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-Wh)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Observed cross-section upper limit on (H~, G~)">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{G})$ model</a> </ul> </ul> <b>Acceptance:</b> <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Acceptance of C1C1-WW signals by SR-4Q-VV">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1C1-WW) in SR-4Q-VV</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Acceptance of C1N2-WZ signals by SR-4Q-VV">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-WZ) in SR-4Q-VV</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Acceptance of C1N2-WZ signals by SR-2B2Q-VZ">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-WZ) in SR-2B2Q-VZ</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Acceptance of C1N2-Wh signals by SR-2B2Q-Vh">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-WZ) in SR-2B2Q-Vh</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Acceptance of N2N3-ZZ signals by SR-4Q-VV">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (N2N3-ZZ) in SR-4Q-VV</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Acceptance of N2N3-ZZ signals by SR-2B2Q-VZ">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (N2N3-ZZ) in SR-2B2Q-VZ</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Acceptance of N2N3-Zh signals by SR-2B2Q-Vh">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (N2N3-Zh) in SR-2B2Q-Vh</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Acceptance of N2N3-hh signals by SR-2B2Q-Vh">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (N2N3-hh) in SR-2B2Q-Vh</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Acceptance of (H~, G~) signals by SR-4Q-VV">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{G})$ model in SR-4Q-VV</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Acceptance of (H~, G~) signals by SR-2B2Q-VZ">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{G})$ model in SR-2B2Q-VZ</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Acceptance of (H~, G~) signals by SR-2B2Q-Vh">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{G})$ model in SR-2B2Q-Vh</a> </ul> <b>Efficiency:</b> <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Efficiency of C1C1-WW signals by SR-4Q-VV">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1C1-WW) in SR-4Q-VV</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Efficiency of C1N2-WZ signals by SR-4Q-VV">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-WZ) in SR-4Q-VV</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Efficiency of C1N2-WZ signals by SR-2B2Q-VZ">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-WZ) in SR-2B2Q-VZ</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Efficiency of C1N2-Wh signals by SR-2B2Q-Vh">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-Wh) in SR-2B2Q-Vh</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Efficiency of N2N3-ZZ signals by SR-4Q-VV">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (N2N3-ZZ) in SR-4Q-VV</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Efficiency of N2N3-ZZ signals by SR-2B2Q-VZ">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (N2N3-ZZ) in SR-2B2Q-VZ</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Efficiency of N2N3-Zh signals by SR-2B2Q-Vh">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (N2N3-Zh) in SR-2B2Q-Vh</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Efficiency of N2N3-hh signals by SR-2B2Q-Vh">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (N2N3-hh) in SR-2B2Q-Vh</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Efficiency of (H~, G~) signals by SR-4Q-VV">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{G})$ model in SR-4Q-VV</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Efficiency of (H~, G~) signals by SR-2B2Q-VZ">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{G})$ model in SR-2B2Q-VZ</a> <li><a href="104458?version=2&table=Efficiency of (H~, G~) signals by SR-2B2Q-Vh">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{G})$ model in SR-2B2Q-Vh</a> </ul>

Cut flows of some representative signals up to SR-4Q-VV, SR-2B2Q-VZ, and SR-2B2Q-Vh. One signal point from the $(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$ simplified models (C1C1-WW, C1N2-WZ, and C1N2-Wh) and $(\tilde{H},~\tilde{G})$ is chosen. The "preliminary event reduction" is a technical selection applied for reducing the sample size, which is fully efficient after the $n_{\textrm{Large}-R~\textrm{jets}}\geq 2$ selection.

The boson-tagging efficiency for jets arising from $W/Z$ bosons decaying into $q\bar{q}$ (signal jets) are shown. The signal jet efficiency of $W_{qq}$/$Z_{qq}$-tagging is evaluated using a sample of pre-selected large-$R$ jets ($p_{\textrm{T}}>200~\textrm{GeV}, |\eta|<2.0, m_{J} > 40~\textrm{GeV}$) in the simulated $(\tilde{W},\tilde{B})$ simplified model signal events with $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}_{\textrm{heavy}},~\tilde{\chi}_{\textrm{light}}) \ge 400~\textrm{GeV}$. The jets are matched with generator-level $W/Z$-bosons by $\Delta R<1.0$ which decay into $q\bar{q}$. The efficiency correction factors are applied on the signal efficiency rejection for the $W_{qq}$/$Z_{qq}$-tagging. The systematic uncertainty is represented by the hashed bands.

More…

Search for vector-boson resonances decaying into a top quark and a bottom quark using $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV with the ATLAS detector

The ATLAS collaboration Aad, Georges ; Abbott, Braden Keim ; Abeling, Kira ; et al.
CERN-EP-2023-149, 2023.
Inspire Record 2688749 DOI 10.17182/hepdata.142662

A search for a new massive charged gauge boson, $W'$, is performed with the ATLAS detector at the LHC. The dataset used in this analysis was collected from proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s} =13$ TeV, and corresponds to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. The reconstructed $tb$ invariant mass is used to search for a $W'$ boson decaying into a top quark and a bottom quark. The result is interpreted in terms of a $W'$ boson with purely right-handed or left-handed chirality in a mass range of 0.5-6 TeV. Different values for the coupling of the $W'$ boson to the top and bottom quarks are considered, taking into account interference with single-top-quark production in the $s$-channel. No significant deviation from the background prediction is observed. The results are expressed as upper limits on the $W' \rightarrow tb$ production cross-section times branching ratio as a function of the $W'$-boson mass and in the plane of the coupling vs the $W'$-boson mass.

33 data tables match query

<b>- - - - - - - - Overview of HEPData Record - - - - - - - -</b> <br><br> <b>Exclusion contours:</b> <ul> <li><a href="?table=contour_lh">$W^{\prime}_L$ exclusion contour</a> <li><a href="?table=contour_rh">$W^{\prime}_R$ exclusion contour</a> </ul> <b>Upper limits:</b> <ul> <li><a href="?table=limit_lh_gf05">$W^{\prime}_L$ $g^{\prime}/g$ = 0.5 upper limit</a> <li><a href="?table=limit_lh_gf10">$W^{\prime}_L$ $g^{\prime}/g$ = 1.0 upper limit</a> <li><a href="?table=limit_lh_gf20">$W^{\prime}_L$ $g^{\prime}/g$ = 2.0 upper limit</a> <li><a href="?table=limit_rh_gf05">$W^{\prime}_R$ $g^{\prime}/g$ = 0.5 upper limit</a> <li><a href="?table=limit_rh_gf10">$W^{\prime}_R$ $g^{\prime}/g$ = 1.0 upper limit</a> <li><a href="?table=limit_rh_gf20">$W^{\prime}_R$ $g^{\prime}/g$ = 2.0 upper limit</a> </ul> <b>Kinematic distributions:</b> <ul> <li><a href="?table=0l_sr1">0L channel Signal Region 1</a> <li><a href="?table=0l_sr2">0L channel Signal Region 2</a> <li><a href="?table=0l_sr3">0L channel Signal Region 3</a> <li><a href="?table=0l_vr">0L channel Validation Region</a> <li><a href="?table=1l_sr_2j1b">1L channel 2j1b Signal Region</a> <li><a href="?table=1l_sr_3j1b">1L channel 3j1b Signal Region</a> <li><a href="?table=1l_sr_2j2b">1L channel 2j2b Signal Region</a> <li><a href="?table=1l_sr_3j2b">1L channel 3j2b Signal Region</a> <li><a href="?table=1l_cr_2j1b">1L channel 2j1b Control Region</a> <li><a href="?table=1l_cr_3j1b">1L channel 3j1b Control Region</a> <li><a href="?table=1l_vr_2j1b">1L channel 2j1b Validation Region</a> <li><a href="?table=1l_vr_3j1b">1L channel 3j1b Validation Region</a> </ul> <b>Acceptance and efficiencies:</b> <ul> <li><a href="?table=acc_0l_lh_gf10">0L channel $W^{\prime}_L$ $g^{\prime}/g$ = 1.0 Acc. X Eff.</a> <li><a href="?table=acc_0l_lh_gf05">0L channel $W^{\prime}_L$ $g^{\prime}/g$ = 0.5 Acc. X Eff.</a> <li><a href="?table=acc_0l_lh_gf20">0L channel $W^{\prime}_L$ $g^{\prime}/g$ = 2.0 Acc. X Eff.</a> <li><a href="?table=acc_1l_lh_gf10">1L channel $W^{\prime}_L$ $g^{\prime}/g$ = 1.0 Acc. X Eff.</a> <li><a href="?table=acc_1l_lh_gf05">1L channel $W^{\prime}_L$ $g^{\prime}/g$ = 0.5 Acc. X Eff.</a> <li><a href="?table=acc_1l_lh_gf20">1L channel $W^{\prime}_L$ $g^{\prime}/g$ = 2.0 Acc. X Eff.</a> <li><a href="?table=acc_0l_rh_gf10">0L channel $W^{\prime}_R$ $g^{\prime}/g$ = 1.0 Acc. X Eff.</a> <li><a href="?table=acc_0l_rh_gf05">0L channel $W^{\prime}_R$ $g^{\prime}/g$ = 0.5 Acc. X Eff.</a> <li><a href="?table=acc_0l_rh_gf20">0L channel $W^{\prime}_R$ $g^{\prime}/g$ = 2.0 Acc. X Eff.</a> <li><a href="?table=acc_1l_rh_gf10">1L channel $W^{\prime}_R$ $g^{\prime}/g$ = 1.0 Acc. X Eff.</a> <li><a href="?table=acc_1l_rh_gf05">1L channel $W^{\prime}_R$ $g^{\prime}/g$ = 0.5 Acc. X Eff.</a> <li><a href="?table=acc_1l_rh_gf20">1L channel $W^{\prime}_R$ $g^{\prime}/g$ = 2.0 Acc. X Eff.</a> </ul>

Distribution (events/100 GeV) of the reconstructed $m_{tb}$ for data and backgrounds in the 0-lepton channel's signal region 1 after the background-only fit to data. The systematics uncertainty is shown for the post-fit background sum, including the background statistical uncertainty. The individual background components are obtained after the fit, too. There are also the pre-fit background sum and the expected signal distribution. The distribution of the $W^{\prime}$ boson signal for a mass of 3 TeV is normalised to the predicted cross-section. The last bin in each distribution includes overflow.

Distribution (events/100 GeV) of the reconstructed $m_{tb}$ for data and backgrounds in the 0-lepton channel's signal region 2 after the background-only fit to data. The systematics uncertainty is shown for the post-fit background sum, including the background statistical uncertainty. The individual background components are obtained after the fit, too. There are also the pre-fit background sum and the expected signal distribution. The distribution of the $W^{\prime}$ boson signal for a mass of 3 TeV is normalised to the predicted cross-section. The last bin in each distribution includes overflow.

More…

Search for excited $\tau$-leptons and leptoquarks in the final state with $\tau$-leptons and jets in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV with the ATLAS detector

The ATLAS collaboration Aad, Georges ; Abbott, Braden Keim ; Abeling, Kira ; et al.
JHEP 06 (2023) 199, 2023.
Inspire Record 2643456 DOI 10.17182/hepdata.141537

A search is reported for excited $\tau$-leptons and leptoquarks in events with two hadronically decaying $\tau$-leptons and two or more jets. The search uses proton-proton (pp) collision data at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV recorded by the ATLAS experiment during the Run 2 of the Large Hadron Collider in 2015-2018. The total integrated luminosity is 139 fb$^{-1}$. The excited $\tau$-lepton is assumed to be produced and to decay via a four-fermion contact interaction into an ordinary $\tau$-lepton and a quark-antiquark pair. The leptoquarks are assumed to be produced in pairs via the strong interaction, and each leptoquark is assumed to couple to a charm or lighter quark and a $\tau$-lepton. No excess over the background prediction is observed. Excited $\tau$-leptons with masses below 2.8 TeV are excluded at 95% CL in scenarios with the contact interaction scale $\Lambda$ set to 10 TeV. At the extreme limit of model validity where $\Lambda$ is set equal to the excited $\tau$-lepton mass, excited $\tau$-leptons with masses below 4.6 TeV are excluded. Leptoquarks with masses below 1.3 TeV are excluded at 95% CL if their branching ratio to a charm quark and a $\tau$-lepton equals 1. The analysis does not exploit flavour-tagging in the signal region.

6 data tables match query

Observed and expected upper 95% CL limit on the $\tau^\ast$ production cross-section as a function of $m_{\tau^\ast}$ for a fixed value of the contact interaction scale, $\Lambda = 10$ TeV.

Observed and expected lower 95% CL limit on the contact interaction scale $\Lambda$ as a function of $m_{\tau^\ast}$.

Observed and expected upper 95% CL limit on the LQ production cross-section as a function of $m_\mathrm{LQ}$. The LQ couples to a tau lepton and a c-quark. The limits are also valid for scenarios in which the LQ couples to lighter quarks.

More…

Measurement of single top-quark production in the s-channel in proton$-$proton collisions at $\mathrm{\sqrt{s}=13}$ TeV with the ATLAS detector

The ATLAS collaboration Aad, Georges ; Abbott, Braden Keim ; Abbott, D.C. ; et al.
JHEP 06 (2023) 191, 2023.
Inspire Record 2153660 DOI 10.17182/hepdata.133620

A measurement of single top-quark production in the s-channel is performed in proton$-$proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector at the CERN Large Hadron Collider. The dataset corresponds to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. The analysis is performed on events with an electron or muon, missing transverse momentum and exactly two $b$-tagged jets in the final state. A discriminant based on matrix element calculations is used to separate single-top-quark s-channel events from the main background contributions, which are top-quark pair production and $W$-boson production in association with jets. The observed (expected) signal significance over the background-only hypothesis is 3.3 (3.9) standard deviations, and the measured cross-section is $\sigma=8.2^{+3.5}_{-2.9}$ pb, consistent with the Standard Model prediction of $\sigma^{\mathrm{SM}}=10.32^{+0.40}_{-0.36}$ pb.

35 data tables match query

Result of the s-channel single-top cross-section measurement, in pb. The statistical and systematic uncertainties are given, as well as the total uncertainty. The normalisation factors for the $t\bar{t}$ and $W$+jets backgrounds are also shown, with their total uncertainties.

Distribution of ${E}_{T}^{miss}$ after the fit of the multijet backgrounds, in the electron channel, in the signal region, without applying the cut on ${E}_{T}^{miss}$. Simulated events are normalised to the expected number of events given the integrated luminosity, after applying the normalisation factors obtained in the multijet fit. The last bin includes the overflow. The uncertainty band indicates the simulation's statistical uncertainty, the normalisation uncertainties for different processes ($40$ % for $W$+jets production, $30$ % for multijet background and $6$ % for top-quark processes) and the multijet background shape uncertainty in each bin, summed in quadrature. The lower panel of the figure shows the ratio of the data to the prediction.

Distribution of ${E}_{T}^{miss}$ after the fit of the multijet backgrounds, in the electron channel, in the $W$+jets VR, without applying the cut on ${E}_{T}^{miss}$. Simulated events are normalised to the expected number of events given the integrated luminosity, after applying the normalisation factors obtained in the multijet fit. The last bin includes the overflow. The uncertainty band indicates the simulation's statistical uncertainty, the normalisation uncertainties for different processes ($40$ % for $W$+jets production, $30$ % for multijet background and $6$ % for top-quark processes) and the multijet background shape uncertainty in each bin, summed in quadrature. The lower panel of the figure shows the ratio of the data to the prediction.