The production cross-sections of $\Upsilon(1S)$, $\Upsilon(2S)$ and $\Upsilon(3S)$ mesons in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}$= 13 TeV are measured with a data sample corresponding to an integrated luminosity of $277 \pm 11$ $\rm pb^{-1}$ recorded by the LHCb experiment in 2015. The $\Upsilon$ mesons are reconstructed in the decay mode $\Upsilon\to\mu^{+}\mu^{-}$. The differential production cross-sections times the dimuon branching fractions are measured as a function of the $\Upsilon$ transverse momentum, $p_{\rm T}$, and rapidity, $y$, over the range $0 < p_{\rm T}< 30$ GeV/c and $2.0 < y < 4.5$. The ratios of the cross-sections with respect to the LHCb measurement at $\sqrt{s}$= 8 TeV are also determined. The measurements are compared with theoretical predictions based on NRQCD.
Double-differential cross-sections times dimuon branching fraction in different bins of $p_T$ and $y$ for $\Upsilon$(1S) (in pb). The first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic.
Double-differential cross-sections times dimuon branching fraction in different bins of $p_T$ and $y$ for $\Upsilon$(2S) (in pb). The first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic.
Double-differential cross-sections times dimuon branching fraction in different bins of $p_T$ and $y$ for $\Upsilon$(3S) (in pb). The first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic.
The production of $J/\psi$ mesons in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV is studied with the \lhcb detector. Cross-section measurements are performed as a function of the transverse momentum $p_\mathrm{T}$ and the rapidity $y$ of the $J/\psi$ meson in the region $p_\mathrm{T}<14\mathrm{GeV}/c$ and $2.0<y<4.5$, for both prompt $J/\psi$ mesons and $J/\psi$ mesons from $b$-hadron decays. The production cross-sections integrated over the kinematic coverage are $15.03\pm 0.03\pm 0.94$ $\mu$b for prompt $J/\psi$ and $2.25\pm 0.01\pm 0.14$ $\mu$b for $J/\psi$ from $b$-hadron decays, assuming zero polarization of the $J/\psi$ meson. The first uncertainties are statistical and the second systematic. The cross-section reported for $J/\psi$ mesons from $b$-hadron decays is used to extrapolate to a total $b\bar{b}$ cross-section. The ratios of the cross-sections with respect to $\sqrt{s}=8$ TeV are also determined.
Double differential cross-section for prompt $J/\psi$ mesons as a function of $p_\perp$ in bins of $y$. The first uncertainties are statistical, the second are the correlated systematic uncertainties shared between bins and the last are the uncorrelated systematic uncertainties.
Double differential cross-section for prompt $J/\psi$ mesons as a function of $p_\perp$ in bins of $y$. The first uncertainties are statistical, the second are the correlated systematic uncertainties shared between bins and the last are the uncorrelated systematic uncertainties.
Double differential cross-section for $J/\psi$-from-$b$ mesons as a function of $p_\perp$ in bins of $y$. The first uncertainties are statistical, the second are the correlated systematic uncertainties shared between bins and the last are the uncorrelated systematic uncertainties.
A narrow pentaquark state, $P_c(4312)^+$, decaying to $J/\psi p$ is discovered with a statistical significance of $7.3\sigma$ in a data sample of ${\Lambda_b^0\to J/\psi p K^-}$ decays which is an order of magnitude larger than that previously analyzed by the LHCb collaboration. The $P_c(4450)^+$ pentaquark structure formerly reported by LHCb is confirmed and observed to consist of two narrow overlapping peaks, $P_c(4440)^+$ and $P_c(4457)^+$, where the statistical significance of this two-peak interpretation is $5.4\sigma$. Proximity of the $\Sigma_c^+\bar{D}^{0}$ and $\Sigma_c^+\bar{D}^{*0}$ thresholds to the observed narrow peaks suggests that they play an important role in the dynamics of these states.
Distribution of $(J/\psi p)$ system invariant mass from the decay of $\Lambda_{b}^{0}$ candidates in the channel $\Lambda_{b}^{0} \to J/\psi p K^{-}$.
Distribution of $(J/\psi p)$ system invariant mass from the decay of $\Lambda_{b}^{0}$ candidates in the channel $\Lambda_{b}^{0} \to J/\psi p K^{-}$. $\Lambda_{b}^{0}$ candidates are selected after the suppression of the dominant $\Lambda^{*} \to p K^{-}$ contributions using the $m_{Kp} > 1.9$ GeV$/c^2$ requirement.
$\cos \theta_{P_c}$-weighted ditribution of $(J/\psi p)$ system invariant mass from the decay of $\Lambda_{b}^{0}$ candidates in the channel $\Lambda_{b}^{0} \to J/\psi p K^{-}$. Here $\theta_{P_c}$ is the helicity angle of the pentaquark exotic state (the angle between $K^-$ and $J/\psi$ in the pentaquark state rest frame).
Using a data sample corresponding to an integrated luminosity of $2.0\,fb^{-1}$, collected by the LHCb experiment, the production of the $\eta_c(1S)$ state in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s}=13 \text{ TeV}$ is studied in the rapidity range ${2.0 < y < 4.5}$ and in the transverse momentum range ${6.5 < p_{T} < 14.0\text{ GeV}}$. The cross-section for prompt production of $\eta_c(1S)$ mesons relative to that of the $J/\psi$ meson is measured using the ${p\bar{p}}$ decay mode and is found to be ${\sigma_{\eta_c(1S)}/\sigma_{J/\psi} = 1.69 \pm 0.15 \pm 0.10 \pm 0.18}$. The quoted uncertainties are, in order, statistical, systematic and due to uncertainties on the branching fractions of the ${J/\psi\to p \bar{p}}$ and ${\eta_c\to p \bar{p}}$ decays. The prompt $\eta_c(1S)$ production cross-section is determined to be ${\sigma_{\eta_c(1S)} = 1.26 \pm 0.11\pm 0.08 \pm 0.14 \,\mu b}$, where the last uncertainty includes that on the ${J/\psi}$ meson cross-section. The ratio of the branching fractions of $b$-hadron decays to the $\eta_c(1S)$ and ${J/\psi}$ states is measured to be ${\mathcal{B}_{b\to\eta_c X}/\mathcal{B}_{b\to J/\psi X} = 0.48 \pm 0.03 \pm 0.03 \pm 0.05}$, where the last uncertainty is due to those on the branching fractions of the ${J/\psi \to p \bar{p}}$ and ${\eta_c\to p \bar{p}}$ decays. The difference between the ${J/\psi}$ and $\eta_c(1S)$ masses is also determined to be ${113.0 \pm 0.7 \pm 0.1\text{ MeV}}$, which is the most precise single measurement of this quantity to date.
Relative $\eta_c$ to $J/\psi$ differential production cross-sections for prompt production. The uncertainties are statistical, systematic, and due to the ${\eta_c\to p\bar{p}}$ and ${J/\psi\to p\bar{p}}$ branching fractions, respectively.
Differential production cross-sections of $\eta_c$ for prompt production. The uncertainties are statistical, systematic, and due to the $\eta_c\to p \bar{p}$ and $J/\psi\to p \bar{p}$ branching fractions and $J/\psi$ production cross-section.
Relative $\eta_c$ to $J/\psi$ differential production cross-sections for production in $b$-hadron inclusive decays. The uncertainties are statistical, systematic, and due to the ${\eta_c\to p\bar{p}}$ and ${J/\psi\to p\bar{p}}$ branching fractions, respectively.
Production cross-sections of prompt charm mesons are measured with the first data from $pp$ collisions at the LHC at a centre-of-mass energy of $13\,\mathrm{TeV}$. The data sample corresponds to an integrated luminosity of $4.98 \pm 0.19\,\mathrm{pb}^{-1}$ collected by the LHCb experiment. The production cross-sections of $D^{0}$, $D^{+}$, $D_{s}^{+}$, and $D^{*+}$ mesons are measured in bins of charm meson transverse momentum, $p_{\mathrm{T}}$, and rapidity, $y$, and cover the range $0 < p_{\mathrm{T}} < 15\,\mathrm{GeV}/c$ and $2.0 < y < 4.5$. The inclusive cross-sections for the four mesons, including charge conjugation, within the range of $1 < p_{\mathrm{T}} < 8\,\mathrm{GeV}/c$ are found to be \begin{equation} \sigma(pp \to D^{0} X) = 2072 \pm 2 \pm 124\,\mu\mathrm{b}\\ \sigma(pp \to D^{+} X) = 834 \pm 2 \pm \phantom{1}78\,\mu\mathrm{b}\\ \sigma(pp \to D_{s}^{+} X) = 353 \pm 9 \pm \phantom{1}76\,\mu\mathrm{b}\\ \sigma(pp \to D^{*+} X) = 784 \pm 4 \pm \phantom{1}87\,\mu\mathrm{b} \end{equation} where the uncertainties are due to statistical and systematic uncertainties, respectively.
Differential production cross-sections in for prompt $D^{0} + \bar{D}^{0}$ mesons in bins of $(p_{\mathrm{T}}, y)$. The first uncertainty is statistical, and the second is the total systematic.
Differential production cross-sections for prompt $D^{0} + \bar{D}^{0}$ mesons in bins of $(p_{\mathrm{T}}, y)$. The first uncertainty is statistical, and the second is the total systematic.
Differential production cross-sections in for prompt $D^{+} + D^{-}$ mesons in bins of $(p_{\mathrm{T}}, y)$. The first uncertainty is statistical, and the second is the total systematic.
Production cross-sections of prompt charm mesons are measured using data from $pp$ collisions at the LHC at a centre-of-mass energy of $5\,$TeV. The data sample corresponds to an integrated luminosity of $8.60\pm0.33\,$pb$^{-1}$ collected by the LHCb experiment. The production cross-sections of $D^0$, $D^+$, $D_s^+$, and $D^{*+}$ mesons are measured in bins of charm meson transverse momentum, $p_{\text{T}}$, and rapidity, $y$. They cover the rapidity range $2.0<y<4.5$ and transverse momentum ranges $0 < p_{\text{T}} < 10\, \text{GeV}/c$ for $D^0$ and $D^+$ and $1 < p_{\text{T}} < 10\, \text{GeV}/c$ for $D_s^+$ and $D^{*+}$ mesons. The inclusive cross-sections for the four mesons, including charge-conjugate states, within the range of $1 < p_{\text{T}} < 8\, \text{GeV}/c$ are determined to be \sigma(pp\rightarrow D^0 X) = 1004 \pm 3 \pm 54\,\mu\text{b} \sigma(pp\rightarrow D^+ X) = 402 \pm 2 \pm 30\,\mu\text{b} \sigma(pp\rightarrow D_s^+ X) = 170 \pm 4 \pm 16\,\mu\text{b} \sigma(pp\rightarrow D^{*+} X)= 421 \pm 5 \pm 36\,\mu\text{b} where the uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.
Differential production cross-sections for prompt $D^{0} + \bar{D}^{0}$ mesons in bins of $(p_{\mathrm{T}}, y)$. The first uncertainty is statistical, and the second is the total systematic.
Differential production cross-sections for prompt $D^{0} + \bar{D}^{0}$ mesons in bins of $(p_{\mathrm{T}}, y)$. The first uncertainty is statistical, and the second is the total systematic.
Differential production cross-sections for prompt $D^{+} + D^{-}$ mesons in bins of $(p_{\mathrm{T}}, y)$. The first uncertainty is statistical, and the second is the total systematic.
Measurements of the cross-section for producing \bquark quarks in the reaction $pp\to b\bar{b} X$ are reported in 7 and 13 TeV collisions at the LHC as a function of the pseudorapidity $\eta$ in the range $2<\eta<5$ covered by the acceptance of the LHCb experiment. The measurements are done using semileptonic decays of $b$-flavored hadrons decaying into a ground-state charmed hadron in association with a muon. The cross-sections in the covered $\eta$ range are $72.0\pm 0.3\pm6.8~\mu$b and $144\pm 1\pm 21~\mu$b for 7 and 13 TeV. The ratio is $2.00\pm0.02\pm0.26$, where the quoted uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively. The agreement with theoretical expectation is good at 7 TeV, but differs somewhat at 13 TeV. The measured ratio of cross-sections is larger at lower $\eta$ than the model prediction.
The cross-section as a function of $\eta$ for $pp \to H_b X$, where $H_b$ is a hadron that contains either a $b$ or a $\bar{b}$ quark, but not both, at center-of-mass energy of 7 TeV. The first uncertainty is statistical and the second systematic. To get the differential cross-section in each interval multiply by a factor two.
The cross-section as a function of $\eta$ for $pp \to H_b X$, where $H_b$ is a hadron that contains either a $b$ or a $\bar{b}$ quark, but not both, at center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV. The first uncertainty is statistical and the second systematic. To get the differential cross-section in each interval multiply by a factor two.
The ration of the cross-sections as a function of $\eta$ for $pp \to H_b X$, where $H_b$ is a hadron that contains either a $b$ or a $\bar{b}$ quark, but not both, for center-of-mass energies of 13 and 7 TeV. The first uncertainty is statistical and the second systematic.
The production cross-section of $J/\psi$ pairs is measured using a data sample of $pp$ collisions collected by the LHCb experiment at a centre-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s} = 13 \,{\mathrm{TeV}}$, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of $279 \pm 11 \,{\mathrm{pb^{-1}}}$. The measurement is performed for $J/\psi$ mesons with a transverse momentum of less than $10 \,{\mathrm{GeV}}/c$ in the rapidity range $2.0<y<4.5$. The production cross-section is measured to be $15.2 \pm 1.0 \pm 0.9 \,{\mathrm{nb}}$. The first uncertainty is statistical, and the second is systematic. The differential cross-sections as functions of several kinematic variables of the $J/\psi$ pair are measured and compared to theoretical predictions.
Differential cross-section of $J/\psi$ pair as a function of $p_{T}(J/\psi J/\psi)$.
Differential cross-section of $J/\psi$ pair as a function of $p_{T}(J/\psi)$.
Differential cross-section of $J/\psi$ pair as a function of $y(J/\psi J/\psi)$.
The cross-section for inelastic proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13\,TeV is measured with the LHCb detector. The fiducial cross-section for inelastic interactions producing at least one prompt long-lived charged particle with momentum $p>2$\,GeV/$c$ in the pseudorapidity range $2<\eta<5$ is determined to be $\sigma_{\rm acc}= 62.2 \pm 0.2 \pm 2.5$\,mb. The first uncertainty is the intrinsic systematic uncertainty of the measurement, the second is due to the uncertainty on the integrated luminosity. The statistical uncertainty is negligible. Extrapolation to full phase space yields the total inelastic proton-proton cross-section $\sigma_{\rm inel}= 75.4 \pm 3.0 \pm 4.5$\,mb, where the first uncertainty is experimental and the second due to the extrapolation. An updated value of the inelastic cross-section at a centre-of-mass energy of 7\,TeV is also reported.
The cross-section for inelastic $pp$ collisions at a centre-of-mass energy $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV, yielding one or more prompt long-lived charged particles in the kinematic range $p > 2.0$ GeV/$c$ and $2.0 < \eta < 5.0$ (LHCb acceptance). The quoted uncertainty that is almost completely systematic in nature as the purely statistical uncertainty is found negligible. A particle is long-lived if its proper (mean) lifetime is larger than 30 ps, and it is prompt if it is produced directly in the $pp$ interaction or if none of its ancestors is long-lived.
The total cross-section for inelastic $pp$ collisions at a centre-of-mass energy $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV, extrapolated from Monte Carlo in similar way to measurement at $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV.
Update of the total cross-section for inelastic $pp$ collisions at a centre-of-mass energy $\sqrt{s} = 7$ TeV due to improved calibration of the luminosity scale.
Forward top quark pair production is studied in $pp$ collisions in the $\mu eb$ final state using a data sample corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 1.93 fb$^{-1}$ collected with the LHCb experiment at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV. The cross-section is measured in a fiducial region where both leptons have a transverse momentum greater than 20 GeV and a pseudorapidity between 2.0 and 4.5. The quadrature sum of the azimuthal separation and the difference in pseudorapidities, denoted $\Delta R$, between the two leptons must be larger than 0.1. The $b$-jet axis is required to be separated from both leptons by a $\Delta R$ of 0.5, and to have a transverse momentum in excess of 20 GeV and a pseudorapidity between 2.2 and 4.2. The cross-section is measured to be $$\sigma_{t\bar{t}}= 126\pm19\,(\mathrm{stat})\pm16\,(\mathrm{syst})\pm5\,(\mathrm{lumi})\,\,\mathrm{ fb}$$ where the first uncertainty is statistical, the second is systematic, and the third is due to the luminosity determination. The measurement is compatible with the Standard Model prediction.
The measured fiducial cross section. The uncertainty is split into statistical, systematic and uncertainty due to luminosity.
An exotic narrow state in the $D^0D^0\pi^+$ mass spectrum just below the $D^{*+}D^0$ mass threshold is studied using a data set corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 9 fb$^{-1}$ acquired with the LHCb detector in proton-proton collisions at centre-of-mass energies of 7, 8 and 13 TeV. The state is consistent with the ground isoscalar $T^+_{cc}$ tetraquark with a quark content of $cc\bar{u}\bar{d}$ and spin-parity quantum numbers $\mathrm{J}^{\mathrm{P}}=1^+$. Study of the $DD$ mass spectra disfavours interpretation of the resonance as the isovector state. The decay structure via intermediate off-shell $D^{*+}$ mesons is confirmed by the $D^0\pi^+$ mass distribution. The mass of the resonance and its coupling to the $D^{*}D$ system are analysed. Resonance parameters including the pole position, scattering length, effective range and compositeness are measured to reveal important information about the nature of the $T^+_{cc}$ state. In addition, an unexpected dependence of the production rate on track multiplicity is observed.
Distribution of $D^0 D^0 \pi^+$ mass where the contribution of the non-$D^0$ background has been statistically subtracted. Uncertainties on the data points are statistical only and represent one standard deviation, calculated as a sum in quadrature of the assigned weights from the background-subtraction procedure.
Mass distribution for $D^0 \pi^+$ pairs from selected $D^0 D^0 \pi^+$ candidates with a mass below the $D^{*+}D^0$ mass threshold with non-$D^0$ background subtracted. Uncertainties on the data points are statistical only and represent one standard deviation, calculated as a sum in quadrature of the assigned weights from the background-subtraction procedure.
$D^0 D^0$~mass distributions for selected candidates with the $D^0$ background subtracted. Uncertainties on the data points are statistical only and represent one standard deviation, calculated as a sum in quadrature of the assigned weights from the background-subtraction procedure.
A measurement of the production cross-section of Z bosons in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV is presented using dimuon and dielectron final states in LHCb data. The cross-section is measured for leptons with pseudorapidities in the range $2.0 < \eta < 4.5$, transverse momenta $p_\text{T} > 20$ GeV and dilepton invariant mass in the range $60<m(\ell\ell)<120$ GeV. The integrated cross-section from averaging the two final states is \begin{equation*}\sigma_{\text{Z}}^{\ell\ell} = 194.3 \pm 0.9 \pm 3.3 \pm 7.6\text{ pb,}\end{equation*} where the first uncertainty is statistical, the second is due to systematic effects, and the third is due to the luminosity determination. In addition, differential cross-sections are measured as functions of the Z boson rapidity, transverse momentum and the angular variable $\phi^*_\eta$.
The FSR correction applied as a function of the boson rapidity for muons.
The FSR correction applied as a function of the boson rapidity for electrons.
The FSR correction applied as a function of $\phi ^ * _ \eta$ for muons.
The Standard Model of particle physics currently provides our best description of fundamental particles and their interactions. The theory predicts that the different charged leptons, the electron, muon and tau, have identical electroweak interaction strengths. Previous measurements have shown a wide range of particle decays are consistent with this principle of lepton universality. This article presents evidence for the breaking of lepton universality in beauty-quark decays, with a significance of 3.1 standard deviations, based on proton-proton collision data collected with the LHCb detector at CERN's Large Hadron Collider. The measurements are of processes in which a beauty meson transforms into a strange meson with the emission of either an electron and a positron, or a muon and an antimuon. If confirmed by future measurements, this violation of lepton universality would imply physics beyond the Standard Model, such as a new fundamental interaction between quarks and leptons.
Likelihood function from the fit to the nonresonant $B^+$ --> $K^+\ell^+ \ell^−$ candidates profiled as a function of $R_K$.
We present an angular analysis of the $B^{+}\rightarrow K^{\ast+}(\rightarrow K_{S}^{0}\pi^{+})\mu^{+}\mu^{-}$ decay using 9$\,\mbox{fb}^{-1}$ of $pp$ collision data collected with the LHCb experiment. For the first time, the full set of CP-averaged angular observables is measured in intervals of the dimuon invariant mass squared. Local deviations from Standard Model predictions are observed, similar to those in previous LHCb analyses of the isospin-partner $B^{0}\rightarrow K^{\ast0}\mu^{+}\mu^{-}$ decay. The global tension is dependent on which effective couplings are considered and on the choice of theory nuisance parameters.
Results for the CP-averaged observables Fl, Afb and S3–S9. The first uncertainties are statistical and the second systematic.
Results for the optimised observables FL and P1–P'8. The first uncertainties are statistical and the second systematic.
The CP-averaged observable Fl versus q2. The first (second) error bars represent the statistical (total) uncertainties.
The differential cross-section of prompt inclusive production of long-lived charged particles in proton-proton collisions is measured using a data sample recorded by the LHCb experiment at a centre-of-mass energy of ${\sqrt{s} = 13\,\mathrm{TeV}}$. The data sample, collected with an unbiased trigger, corresponds to an integrated luminosity of ${5.4\,\mathrm{nb}^{-1}}$. The differential cross-section is measured as a function of transverse momentum and pseudorapidity in the ranges ${p_\mathrm{T} \in [0.08, 10)\,\mathrm{GeV}\,c^{-1}}$ and ${\eta \in [2.0, 4.8)}$ and is determined separately for positively and negatively charged particles. The results are compared with predictions from various hadronic-interaction models.
Double differential cross-sections of prompt inclusive production of long-lived negatively charged particles as a function of transverse momentum and pseudorapidity.
Double differential cross-sections of prompt inclusive production of long-lived positively charged particles as a function of transverse momentum and pseudorapidity.
Correlation for the uncertainties of the differential cross-section of prompt inclusive production of long-lived charged particles.
The inclusive $b \bar{b}$- and $c \bar{c}$-dijet production cross-sections in the forward region of $pp$ collisions are measured using a data sample collected with the LHCb detector at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV in 2016. The data sample corresponds to an integrated luminosity of 1.6 fb$^{-1}$. Differential cross-sections are measured as a function of the transverse momentum and of the pseudorapidity of the leading jet, of the rapidity difference between the jets, and of the dijet invariant mass. A fiducial region for the measurement is defined by requiring that the two jets originating from the two $b$ or $c$ quarks are emitted with transverse momentum greater than 20 GeV$/c$, pseudorapidity in the range $2.2 < \eta < 4.2$, and with a difference in the azimuthal angle between the two jets greater than 1.5. The integrated $b \bar{b}$-dijet cross-section is measured to be $53.0 \pm 9.7$ nb, and the total $c \bar{c}$-dijet cross-section is measured to be $73 \pm 16$ nb. The ratio between $c \bar{c}$- and $b \bar{b}$-dijet cross-sections is also measured and found to be $1.37 \pm 0.27$. The results are in agreement with theoretical predictions at next-to-leading order.
The total $b \bar{b}$-dijet and $c \bar{c}$-dijet cross-sections and their ratio in the fiducial region, compared with the NLO predictions. The first uncertainty is the combined statistical and systematic uncertainty and the second is the uncertainty from the luminosity. For the predictions, the first uncertainty corresponds to the scale uncertainty, the second to the PDF uncertainty.
Numerical results of $b \bar{b}$- and $c \bar{c}$-dijet cross-sections, $c \bar{c}$/$b \bar{b}$ dijet cross-section ratios and their total uncertainties as a function of the leading jet $\eta$ (pseudorapidity).
Numerical results of $b \bar{b}$- and $c \bar{c}$-dijet cross-sections, $c \bar{c}$/$b \bar{b}$ dijet cross-section ratios and their total uncertainties as a function of $\Delta y^*$.
The production of $B^{\pm}$ mesons is studied in $pp$ collisions at centre-of-mass energies of 7 and 13 TeV, using $B^{\pm}\rightarrow J/\psi K^{\pm}$ decays and data samples corresponding to 1.0 fb$^{-1}$ and 0.3 fb$^{-1}$, respectively. The production cross-sections summed over both charges and integrated over the transverse momentum range $0<p_{\text{T}}< 40$ GeV/$c$ and the rapidity range $2.0<y<4.5$ are measured to be $\sigma(pp \rightarrow B^{\pm} X, \sqrt{s} = \text{7 TeV}) = 43.0 \pm 0.2 \pm 2.5 \pm 1.7\mu b,$ $\sigma(pp \rightarrow B^{\pm} X, \sqrt{s} = \text{13 TeV}) = 86.6 \pm 0.5 \pm 5.4 \pm 3.4\mu b,$ where the first uncertainties are statistical, the second are systematic, and the third are due to the limited knowledge of the $B^{\pm}\rightarrow J/\psi K^{\pm}$ branching fraction. The ratio of the cross-section at 13 TeV to that at 7 TeV is determined to be $2.02\pm0.02\text{(stat)}\pm0.12\text{(syst)}$. Differential cross-sections are also reported as functions of $p_{\text{T}}$ and $y$. All results are in agreement with theoretical calculations based on the state-of-art fixed next-to-leading order quantum chromodynamics.
Measured B$^\pm$ double-differential cross-section (in units of nb) at 7 TeV, as a function of $p_T$ and $y$.
Measured B$^\pm$ double-differential cross-section (in units of nb) at 13 TeV, as a function of $p_T$ and $y$.
Measured B$^\pm$ differential cross-sections (in units of nb) at 7 TeV and 13 TeV as functions of $p_T$ in the range $2.0<y<4.5$. The cross-section ratio between 13 TeV and 7TeV is also presented.
Conventional hadronic matter consists of baryons and mesons made of three quarks and quark-antiquark pairs, respectively. The observation of a new type of hadronic state, a doubly charmed tetraquark containing two charm quarks, an anti-$u$ and an anti-$d$ quark, is reported using data collected by the LHCb experiment at the Large Hadron Collider. This exotic state with a mass of about 3875 MeV$/c^2$ manifests itself as a narrow peak in the mass spectrum of $D^0D^0\pi^+$ mesons just below the $D^{*+}D^0$ mass threshold. The near threshold mass together with a strikingly narrow width reveals the resonance nature of the state.
Distribution of $D^0 D^0 \pi^+$ mass where the contribution of the non-$D^0$ background has been statistically subtracted. Uncertainties on the data points are statistical only and represent one standard deviation, calculated as a sum in quadrature of the assigned weights from the background-subtraction procedure.
Distribution of $D^0 D^0 \pi^+$ mass where the contribution of the non-$D^0$ background has been statistically subtracted by assigning the a weight to every candidate.
The production cross-sections of $J/\psi$ mesons in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s}=5$ TeV are measured using a data sample corresponding to an integrated luminosity of $9.13\pm0.18~\text{pb}^{-1}$, collected by the LHCb experiment. The cross-sections are measured differentially as a function of transverse momentum, $p_{\text{T}}$, and rapidity, $y$, and separately for $J/\psi$ mesons produced promptly and from beauty hadron decays (nonprompt). With the assumption of unpolarised $J/\psi$ mesons, the production cross-sections integrated over the kinematic range $0<p_{\text{T}}<20~\text{GeV}/c$ and $2.0<y<4.5$ are $8.154\pm0.010\pm0.283~\mu\text{b}$ for prompt $J/\psi$ mesons and $0.820\pm0.003\pm0.034~\mu\text{b}$ for nonprompt $J/\psi$ mesons, where the first uncertainties are statistical and the second systematic. These cross-sections are compared with those at $\sqrt{s}=8$ TeV and $13$ TeV, and are used to update the measurement of the nuclear modification factor in proton-lead collisions for $J/\psi$ mesons at a centre-of-mass energy per nucleon pair of $\sqrt{s_{\text{NN}}}=5$ TeV. The results are compared with theoretical predictions.
Double-differential production cross-sections for prompt $J/\psi$ mesons in ($p_\text{T},y$) intervals. The first uncertainties are statistical, the second are correlated systematic uncertainties shared between intervals, the third are uncorrelated systematic uncertainties, and the last are correlated between $p_\text{T}$ intervals and uncorrelated between $y$ intervals.
Double-differential production cross-sections for nonprompt $J/\psi$ mesons in ($p_\text{T},y$) intervals. The first uncertainties are statistical, the second are correlated systematic uncertainties shared between intervals, the third are uncorrelated systematic uncertainties, and the last are correlated between $p_\text{T}$ intervals and uncorrelated between $y$ intervals.
Single-differential production cross-sections for prompt $J/\psi$ mesons as a function of $p_\text{T}$. The first uncertainties are statistical, the second are correlated systematic uncertainties shared between intervals, and the last are uncorrelated systematic uncertainties.
A precision measurement of the $Z$ boson production cross-section at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV in the forward region is presented, using $pp$ collision data collected by the LHCb detector, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 5.1 fb$^{-1}$. The production cross-section is measured using $Z\rightarrow\mu^+\mu^-$ events within the fiducial region defined as pseudorapidity $2.0<\eta<4.5$ and transverse momentum $p_{T}>20$ GeV/$c$ for both muons and dimuon invariant mass $60<M_{\mu\mu}<120$ GeV/$c^2$. The integrated cross-section is determined to be $\sigma (Z \rightarrow \mu^+ \mu^-)$ = 196.4 $\pm$ 0.2 $\pm$ 1.6 $\pm$ 3.9~pb, where the first uncertainty is statistical, the second is systematic, and the third is due to the luminosity determination. The measured results are in agreement with theoretical predictions within uncertainties.
Relative uncertainty for the integrated $Z -> \mu^{+} \mu^{-}$ cross-section measurement. The total uncertainty is the quadratic sum of uncertainties from statistical, systematic and luminosity contributions.
Final state radiation correction used in the $y^{Z}$ cross-section measurement. The first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic.
Final state radiation correction used in the $p_{T}^{Z}$ cross-section measurement. The first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic.
The yields and average transverse momenta of pions, kaons, and antiprotons produced at the Fermilab p¯p collider at s=300, 540, 1000, and 1800 GeV are presented and compared with data from the energies reached at the CERN collider. We also present data on the dependence of average transverse momentum 〈pt〉 and particle ratios as a function of charged particle density dNcdη; data for particle densities as high as six times the average value, corresponding to a Bjorken energy density 6 GeV/fm3, are reported. These data are relevant to the search for quark-gluon phase of QCD.
PT RANGE FROM 0 TO INFINITY.
PT RANGE FROM 0 TO INFINITY.
No description provided.
A search optimized for new heavy particles decaying to two $b$-quarks and produced in association with additional $b$-quarks is reported. The sensitivity is improved by $b$-tagging at least one lower-$p_{\rm{T}}$ jet in addition to the two highest-$p_{\rm{T}}$ jets. The data used in this search correspond to an integrated luminosity of 103 $\text{fb}^{-1}$ collected with a dedicated trijet trigger during the 2017 and 2018 $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV proton-proton collision runs with the ATLAS detector at the LHC. The search looks for resonant peaks in the $b$-tagged dijet invariant mass spectrum over a smoothly falling background. The background is estimated with an innovative data-driven method based on orthonormal functions. The observed $b$-tagged dijet invariant mass spectrum is compatible with the background-only hypothesis. Upper limits at 95% confidence level on a heavy vector-boson production cross section times branching ratio to a pair of $b$-quarks are derived.
Background estimate from the FD method with N=3 and data in the SR.
The observed (solid) and expected (dashed) 95% CL upper limits on the production of $Z' \to b\bar{b}$ in association with b-quarks.
Acceptance and Acceptance times efficiency for the LUV Z' model.
A search for new phenomena in final states with hadronically decaying tau leptons, $b$-jets, and missing transverse momentum is presented. The analyzed dataset comprises $pp$~collision data at a center-of-mass energy of $\sqrt s = 13$ TeV with an integrated luminosity of 139/fb, delivered by the Large Hadron Collider and recorded with the ATLAS detector from 2015 to 2018. The observed data are compatible with the expected Standard Model background. The results are interpreted in simplified models for two different scenarios. The first model is based on supersymmetry and considers pair production of top squarks, each of which decays into a $b$-quark, a neutrino and a tau slepton. Each tau slepton in turn decays into a tau lepton and a nearly massless gravitino. Within this model, top-squark masses up to 1.4 TeV can be excluded at the 95% confidence level over a wide range of tau-slepton masses. The second model considers pair production of leptoquarks with decays into third-generation leptons and quarks. Depending on the branching fraction into charged leptons, leptoquarks with masses up to around 1.25 TeV can be excluded at the 95% confidence level for the case of scalar leptoquarks and up to 1.8 TeV (1.5 TeV) for vector leptoquarks in a Yang--Mills (minimal-coupling) scenario. In addition, model-independent upper limits are set on the cross section of processes beyond the Standard Model.
Relative systematic uncertainties in the estimated number of background events in the signal regions. In the lower part of the table, a breakdown of the total uncertainty into different categories is given. For the multi-bin SR, the breakdown refers to the integral over all three $p_{\text{T}}(\tau)$ bins. As the individual uncertainties are correlated, they do not add in quadrature to equal the total background uncertainty.
Distributions of $m_{\text{T}2}(\tau_{1},\tau_{2})$ in the di-tau SR. The stacked histograms show the various SM background contributions. The hatched band indicates the total statistical and systematic uncertainty of the SM background. The $t\bar{t}$ (2 real $\tau$) and $t\bar{t}$ (1 real $\tau$) as well as the single-top background contributions are scaled with the normalization factors obtained from the background-only fit. Minor backgrounds are grouped together and denoted as 'Other'. This includes $t\bar{t}$-fake, single top, and other top (di-tau channel) or $t\bar{t}$-fake, $t\bar{t}+H$, multiboson, and other top (single-tau channel). The overlaid dotted lines show the additional contributions for signal scenarios close to the expected exclusion contour with the particle type and the mass and $\beta$ parameters for the simplified models indicated in the legend. For the leptoquark signal model the shapes of the distributions for $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$ and $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ (not shown) are similar to that of $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$. The rightmost bin includes the overflow.
Distributions of $E_{\text{T}}^{\text{miss}}$ in the di-tau SR. The stacked histograms show the various SM background contributions. The hatched band indicates the total statistical and systematic uncertainty of the SM background. The $t\bar{t}$ (2 real $\tau$) and $t\bar{t}$ (1 real $\tau$) as well as the single-top background contributions are scaled with the normalization factors obtained from the background-only fit. Minor backgrounds are grouped together and denoted as 'Other'. This includes $t\bar{t}$-fake, single top, and other top (di-tau channel) or $t\bar{t}$-fake, $t\bar{t}+H$, multiboson, and other top (single-tau channel). The overlaid dotted lines show the additional contributions for signal scenarios close to the expected exclusion contour with the particle type and the mass and $\beta$ parameters for the simplified models indicated in the legend. For the leptoquark signal model the shapes of the distributions for $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$ and $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ (not shown) are similar to that of $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$. The rightmost bin includes the overflow.
This paper presents a measurement of the electroweak production of two jets in association with a $Z\gamma$ pair, with the $Z$ boson decaying into two neutrinos. It also presents a search for invisible or partially invisible decays of a Higgs boson with a mass of 125 GeV produced through vector-boson fusion with a photon in the final state. These results use data from LHC proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV collected with the ATLAS detector and corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. The event signature, shared by all benchmark processes considered for the measurements and searches, is characterized by a significant amount of unbalanced transverse momentum and a photon in the final state, in addition to a pair of forward jets. Electroweak $Z\gamma$ production in association with two jets is observed in this final state with a significance of 5.2 (5.1 expected) standard deviations. The measured fiducial cross-section for this process is 1.31$\pm$0.29 fb. An observed (expected) upper limit of 0.37 ($0.34^{+0.15}_{-0.10}$) at 95% confidence level is set on the branching ratio of a 125 GeV Higgs boson to invisible particles, assuming the Standard Model production cross-section. The signature is also interpreted in the context of decays of a Higgs boson into a photon and a dark photon. An observed (expected) 95% CL upper limit on the branching ratio for this decay is set at 0.018 ($0.017^{+0.007}_{-0.005}$), assuming the Standard Model production cross-section for a 125 GeV Higgs boson.
Post-fit results for all $m_\text{jj}$ SR and CR bins in the EW $Z \gamma + \text{jets}$ cross-section measurement with the $\mu_{Z \gamma_\text{EW}}$ signal normalization floating. The post-fit uncertainties include statistical, experimental, and theory contributions.
Post-fit results for all DNN SR and CR bins in the search for $H \to \text{inv.}$ with the $\mathcal{B}_\text{inv}$ signal normalization set to zero. For the $Z_\text{Rev.Cen.}^\gamma$ CR, the third bin contains all events with DNN output score values of 0.6-1.0. The $H \to \text{inv.}$ signal is scaled to a $\mathcal{B}_\text{inv}$ of 37%. The post-fit uncertainties include statistical, experimental, and theoretical contributions.
Post-fit results for the ten [$m_\text{jj}$, $m_\text{T}$] bins constituting the SR and CRs defined for the dark photon search with the $\mathcal{B}(H \to \gamma \gamma_\text{d})$ signal normalization set to zero. A $H \to \gamma \gamma_\text{d}$ signal is shown for two different mass hypotheses (125 GeV, 500 GeV) and scaled to a branching ratio of 2% and 1%, respectively. The post-fit uncertainties include statistical, experimental, and theoretical contributions.
A search 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.
Average timing distributions for SR data and the estimated background as determined by the background-only fit, in each of the five exclusive $\rho$ categories. For comparison, the expected timing shapes for a few different signal models are superimposed, with each model labeled by the values of the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass and lifetime, as well as decay mode. To provide some indication of the variations in signal yield and shape, three signal models are shown for each of the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decay modes, namely $\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow$ $H \tilde G$ and $\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow$ $Z \tilde G$. The models shown include a rather low $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass value of 135 GeV for lifetimes of either 2 ns or 10 ns, and a higher $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass value which is near the 95% CL exclusion limit for each decay mode for a lifetime of 2 ns. Each signal model is shown with the signal normalization corresponding to a BR value of unity for the decay mode in question.
Average timing distributions for SR data and the estimated background as determined by the background-only fit, in each of the five exclusive $\rho$ categories. For comparison, the expected timing shapes for a few different signal models are superimposed, with each model labeled by the values of the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass and lifetime, as well as decay mode. To provide some indication of the variations in signal yield and shape, three signal models are shown for each of the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decay modes, namely $\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow$ $H \tilde G$ and $\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow$ $Z \tilde G$. The models shown include a rather low $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass value of 135 GeV for lifetimes of either 2 ns or 10 ns, and a higher $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass value which is near the 95% CL exclusion limit for each decay mode for a lifetime of 2 ns. Each signal model is shown with the signal normalization corresponding to a BR value of unity for the decay mode in question.
Average timing distributions for SR data and the estimated background as determined by the background-only fit, in each of the five exclusive $\rho$ categories. For comparison, the expected timing shapes for a few different signal models are superimposed, with each model labeled by the values of the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass and lifetime, as well as decay mode. To provide some indication of the variations in signal yield and shape, three signal models are shown for each of the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decay modes, namely $\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow$ $H \tilde G$ and $\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow$ $Z \tilde G$. The models shown include a rather low $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass value of 135 GeV for lifetimes of either 2 ns or 10 ns, and a higher $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass value which is near the 95% CL exclusion limit for each decay mode for a lifetime of 2 ns. Each signal model is shown with the signal normalization corresponding to a BR value of unity for the decay mode in question.
Searches are performed for nonresonant and resonant di-Higgs boson production in the $b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma$ final state. The data set used corresponds to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ of proton-proton collisions at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV recorded by the ATLAS detector at the CERN Large Hadron Collider. No excess above the expected background is found and upper limits on the di-Higgs boson production cross sections are set. A 95% confidence-level upper limit of 4.2 times the cross section predicted by the Standard Model is set on $pp \rightarrow HH$ nonresonant production, where the expected limit is 5.7 times the Standard Model predicted value. The expected constraints are obtained for a background hypothesis excluding $pp \rightarrow HH$ production. The observed (expected) constraints on the Higgs boson trilinear coupling modifier $\kappa_{\lambda}$ are determined to be $[-1.5, 6.7]$ $([-2.4, 7.7])$ at 95% confidence level, where the expected constraints on $\kappa_{\lambda}$ are obtained excluding $pp \rightarrow HH$ production from the background hypothesis. For resonant production of a new hypothetical scalar particle $X$ ($X \rightarrow HH \rightarrow b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma$), limits on the cross section for $pp \to X \to HH$ are presented in the narrow-width approximation as a function of $m_{X}$ in the range $251 \leq m_{X} \leq 1000$ GeV. The observed (expected) limits on the cross section for $pp \to X \to HH$ range from 640 fb to 44 fb (391 fb to 46 fb) over the considered mass range.
The BDT distribution of the di-Higgs ggF signal for two different values of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ and the main backgrounds in the low mass region ($m^{*}_{b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma} < 350$ GeV). Distributions are normalized to unit area. The dotted lines denote the category boundaries. Events with a BDT score below 0.881 in the low mass region are discarded.
The BDT distribution of the di-Higgs ggF signal for two different values of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ and the main backgrounds in the low mass region ($m^{*}_{b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma} < 350$ GeV). Distributions are normalized to unit area. The dotted lines denote the category boundaries. Events with a BDT score below 0.881 in the low mass region are discarded.
The BDT distribution of the di-Higgs ggF signal for two different values of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ and the main backgrounds in the low mass region ($m^{*}_{b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma} < 350$ GeV). Distributions are normalized to unit area. The dotted lines denote the category boundaries. Events with a BDT score below 0.881 in the low mass region are discarded.
A measurement of observables sensitive to effects of colour reconnection in top-quark pair-production events is presented using 139 fb$^{-1}$ of 13$\,$TeV proton-proton collision data collected by the ATLAS detector at the LHC. Events are selected by requiring exactly one isolated electron and one isolated muon with opposite charge and two or three jets, where exactly two jets are required to be $b$-tagged. For the selected events, measurements are presented for the charged-particle multiplicity, the scalar sum of the transverse momenta of the charged particles, and the same scalar sum in bins of charged-particle multiplicity. These observables are unfolded to the stable-particle level, thereby correcting for migration effects due to finite detector resolution, acceptance and efficiency effects. The particle-level measurements are compared with different colour reconnection models in Monte Carlo generators. These measurements disfavour some of the colour reconnection models and provide inputs to future optimisation of the parameters in Monte Carlo generators.
Binning used for the measured $\sum_{n_{\text{ch}}} p_{\text{T}}$ in bins of $n_\text{ch}$ observable.
Event yields obtained after the event selection. The expected event yields from $t\bar{t}$ production and the various background processes are compared with the observed event yield. The fractional contributions from $t\bar{t}$ production and the background processes to the expected event yield is given in %. The processes labelled by `Others' include production of $Z$+jets and diboson background events. The uncertainties include the MC statistical uncertainty and the normalisation uncertainty.
Summary of the estimated pile-up scale factors $c_{\text{PU}}$, parameterisd in $\mu$ and $n_{\text{trk,out}}$. All values have a statistical precision of 0.01.
A search for pair production of doubly charged Higgs bosons ($H^{\pm \pm}$), each decaying into a pair of prompt, isolated, highly energetic leptons with the same electric charge, is presented. The search uses a proton-proton collision data sample at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ recorded by the ATLAS detector during Run 2 of the Large Hadron Collider. This analysis focuses on same-charge leptonic decays, $H^{\pm \pm} \rightarrow \ell^{\pm} \ell^{\prime \pm}$ where $\ell, \ell^\prime=e, \mu, \tau$, in two-, three-, and four-lepton channels, but only considers final states which include electrons or muons. No evidence of a signal is observed. Corresponding limits on the production cross-section and consequently a lower limit on $m(H^{\pm \pm})$ are derived at 95% confidence level. Assuming that the branching ratios to each of the possible leptonic final states are equal, $\mathcal{B}(H^{\pm \pm} \rightarrow e^\pm e^\pm) = \mathcal{B}(H^{\pm \pm} \rightarrow e^\pm \mu^\pm) = \mathcal{B}(H^{\pm \pm} \rightarrow \mu^\pm \mu^\pm) = \mathcal{B}(H^{\pm \pm} \rightarrow e^\pm \tau^\pm) = \mathcal{B}(H^{\pm \pm} \rightarrow \mu^\pm \tau^\pm) = \mathcal{B}(H^{\pm \pm} \rightarrow \tau^\pm \tau^\pm) = 1/6$, the observed lower limit on the mass of a doubly charged Higgs boson is 1080 GeV within the left-right symmetric type-II seesaw model, which is an improvement over previous limits. Additionally, a lower limit of $m(H^{\pm \pm})$ = 900 GeV is obtained in the context of the Zee-Babu neutrino mass model.
LO, NLO cross-sections and K-factors for the pair-production of doubly charged Higgs bosons in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV. The K-factors (K=$\sigma_{NLO}/\sigma_{LO}$) are identical for $H^{\pm\pm}_L$, $H^{\pm\pm}_R$, and $k^{\pm\pm}$. The values are calculated using the NNPDF3.1NLO and NNPDF2.3LO PDF sets.
Observed (solid line) and expected (dashed line) 95% CL upper limits on the $H^{\pm\pm}$ pair production cross-section as a function of $m(H^{\pm\pm})$ resulting from the combination of all analysis channels, assuming $\sum_{\ell \ell^\prime} \mathcal{B}(H^{\pm\pm} \rightarrow \ell^{\pm} \ell^{\prime \pm})=100%$, where $\ell, \ell^\prime = e, \mu, \tau$.
Distribution of $m(e^{\pm},e^{\pm})_{\mathrm{lead}}$ in the electron-electron signal region after the background-only fit.
This paper presents a search for dark matter, $\chi$, using events with a single top quark and an energetic $W$ boson. The analysis is based on proton-proton collision data collected with the ATLAS experiment at $\sqrt{s}=$ 13 TeV during LHC Run 2 (2015-2018), corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. The search considers final states with zero or one charged lepton (electron or muon), at least one $b$-jet and large missing transverse momentum. In addition, a result from a previous search considering two-charged-lepton final states is included in the interpretation of the results. The data are found to be in good agreement with the Standard Model predictions and the results are interpreted in terms of 95% confidence-level exclusion limits in the context of a class of dark matter models involving an extended two-Higgs-doublet sector together with a pseudoscalar mediator particle. The search is particularly sensitive to on-shell production of the charged Higgs boson state, $H^{\pm}$, arising from the two-Higgs-doublet mixing, and its semi-invisible decays via the mediator particle, $a$: $H^{\pm} \rightarrow W^\pm a (\rightarrow \chi\chi)$. Signal models with $H^{\pm}$ masses up to 1.5 TeV and $a$ masses up to 350 GeV are excluded assuming a tan$\beta$ value of 1. For masses of $a$ of 150 (250) GeV, tan$\beta$ values up to 2 are excluded for $H^{\pm}$ masses between 200 (400) GeV and 1.5 TeV. Signals with tan$\beta$ values between 20 and 30 are excluded for $H^{\pm}$ masses between 500 and 800 GeV.
<b>- - - - - - - - Overview of HEPData Record - - - - - - - -</b> <br><br> <b>Exclusion contours:</b> <ul> <li><a href="?table=highst_mamh_obs">Combined sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=highst_mamh_exp">Combined sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=highst_mhtb_lowma_obs">Combined sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 150 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=highst_mhtb_lowma_exp">Combined sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 150 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=highst_mhtb_highma_obs">Combined sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 250 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=highst_mhtb_highma_exp">Combined sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 250 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=lowst_mamh_obs">Combined sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=lowst_mamh_exp">Combined sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=lowst_mhtb_lowma_obs">Combined sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 150 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=lowst_mhtb_lowma_exp">Combined sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 150 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=lowst_mhtb_highma_obs">Combined sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 250 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=lowst_mhtb_highma_exp">Combined sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 250 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=0LBoosted_highst_mamh_obs">0L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=0LBoosted_highst_mamh_exp">0L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=0LBoosted_highst_mhtb_lowma_obs">0L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 150 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=0LBoosted_highst_mhtb_lowma_exp">0L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 150 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=0LBoosted_highst_mhtb_highma_obs">0L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 250 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=0LBoosted_highst_mhtb_highma_exp">0L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 250 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=0LBoosted_lowst_mamh_obs">0L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=0LBoosted_lowst_mamh_exp">0L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=0LBoosted_lowst_mhtb_lowma_obs">0L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 150 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=0LBoosted_lowst_mhtb_lowma_exp">0L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 150 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=0LBoosted_lowst_mhtb_highma_obs">0L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 250 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=0LBoosted_lowst_mhtb_highma_exp">0L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 250 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=1LBoosted_highst_mamh_obs">1L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=1LBoosted_highst_mamh_exp">1L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=1LBoosted_highst_mhtb_lowma_obs">1L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 150 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=1LBoosted_highst_mhtb_lowma_exp">1L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 150 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=1LBoosted_highst_mhtb_highma_obs">1L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 250 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=1LBoosted_highst_mhtb_highma_exp">1L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 250 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=1LBoosted_lowst_mamh_obs">1L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=1LBoosted_lowst_mamh_exp">1L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=1LBoosted_lowst_mhtb_lowma_obs">1L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 150 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=1LBoosted_lowst_mhtb_lowma_exp">1L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 150 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=1LBoosted_lowst_mhtb_highma_exp">1L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 250 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=2L_highst_mamh_obs">2L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=2L_highst_mamh_exp">2L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=2L_highst_mhtb_lowma_obs">2L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 150 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=2L_highst_mhtb_lowma_exp">2L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 150 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=2L_highst_mhtb_highma_obs">2L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 250 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=2L_highst_mhtb_highma_exp">2L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 250 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=2L_lowst_mamh_exp">2L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=2L_lowst_mhtb_lowma_exp">2L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 150 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=2L_lowst_mhtb_highma_exp">2L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 250 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=highst_dmtt_mamh_obs">Combined sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=highst_dmtt_mamh_exp">Combined sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=highst_dmtt_mhtb_lowma_obs">Combined sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 150 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=highst_dmtt_mhtb_lowma_exp">Combined sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 150 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=highst_dmtt_mhtb_highma_obs">Combined sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 250 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=highst_dmtt_mhtb_highma_exp">Combined sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 250 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=lowst_dmtt_mamh_obs">Combined sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=lowst_dmtt_mamh_exp">Combined sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=lowst_dmtt_mhtb_lowma_obs">Combined sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 150 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=lowst_dmtt_mhtb_lowma_exp">Combined sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 150 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=lowst_dmtt_mhtb_highma_obs">Combined sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 250 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=lowst_dmtt_mhtb_highma_exp">Combined sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 250 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=0LBoosted_highst_dmtt_mamh_obs">0L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=0LBoosted_highst_dmtt_mamh_exp">0L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=0LBoosted_highst_dmtt_mhtb_lowma_obs">0L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 150 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=0LBoosted_highst_dmtt_mhtb_lowma_exp">0L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 150 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=0LBoosted_highst_dmtt_mhtb_highma_obs">0L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 250 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=0LBoosted_highst_dmtt_mhtb_highma_exp">0L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 250 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=0LBoosted_lowst_dmtt_mamh_obs">0L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=0LBoosted_lowst_dmtt_mamh_exp">0L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=0LBoosted_lowst_dmtt_mhtb_lowma_obs">0L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 150 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=0LBoosted_lowst_dmtt_mhtb_lowma_exp">0L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 150 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=0LBoosted_lowst_dmtt_mhtb_highma_obs">0L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 250 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=0LBoosted_lowst_dmtt_mhtb_highma_exp">0L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 250 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=1LBoosted_highst_dmtt_mamh_obs">1L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=1LBoosted_highst_dmtt_mamh_exp">1L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=1LBoosted_highst_dmtt_mhtb_lowma_obs">1L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 150 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=1LBoosted_highst_dmtt_mhtb_lowma_exp">1L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 150 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=1LBoosted_highst_dmtt_mhtb_highma_obs">1L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 250 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=1LBoosted_highst_dmtt_mhtb_highma_exp">1L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 250 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=1LBoosted_lowst_dmtt_mamh_obs">1L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=1LBoosted_lowst_dmtt_mamh_exp">1L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=1LBoosted_lowst_dmtt_mhtb_lowma_obs">1L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 150 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=1LBoosted_lowst_dmtt_mhtb_lowma_exp">1L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 150 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=1LBoosted_lowst_dmtt_mhtb_highma_obs">1L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 250 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=1LBoosted_lowst_dmtt_mhtb_highma_exp">1L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 250 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=2L_highst_dmtt_mamh_obs">2L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=2L_highst_dmtt_mamh_exp">2L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=2L_highst_dmtt_mhtb_lowma_obs">2L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 150 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=2L_highst_dmtt_mhtb_lowma_exp">2L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 150 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=2L_highst_dmtt_mhtb_highma_obs">2L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 250 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=2L_highst_dmtt_mhtb_highma_exp">2L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.7 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 250 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=2L_lowst_dmtt_mamh_exp">2L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=2L_lowst_dmtt_mhtb_lowma_obs">2L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 150 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=2L_lowst_dmtt_mhtb_lowma_exp">2L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 150 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Exp.)</a> <li><a href="?table=2L_lowst_dmtt_mhtb_highma_obs">2L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 250 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Obs.)</a> <li><a href="?table=2L_lowst_dmtt_mhtb_highma_exp">2L channel sin$\theta$ = 0.35 $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ ($m_{a}$ = 250 GeV) exclusion contour using DMtW+DMtt signals (Exp.)</a> </ul> <b>Upper limits:</b> <ul> <li><a href="?table=mamH_xSecUpperLimit_Comb_st0p7">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM (sin$\theta$ = 0.7) cross-sections from combined (0L+1L+2L) fit in the $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mHtblow_xSecUpperLimit_Comb_st0p7">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM (sin$\theta$ = 0.7) cross-sections from combined (0L+1L+2L) fit in the low $m_a$ $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mHtbhigh_xSecUpperLimit_Comb_st0p7">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM (sin$\theta$ = 0.7) cross-sections from combined (0L+1L+2L) fit in the high $m_a$ $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mamH_xSecUpperLimit_Comb_st0p7_DMtt">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM + tt+DM(sin$\theta$ = 0.7) cross-sections from combined (0L+1L+2L) fit in the $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mHtblow_xSecUpperLimit_Comb_st0p7_DMtt">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM +tt+DM (sin$\theta$ = 0.7) cross-sections from combined (0L+1L+2L) fit in the low $m_a$ $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mHtbhigh_xSecUpperLimit_Comb_st0p7_DMtt">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM + tt+DM (sin$\theta$ = 0.7) cross-sections from combined (0L+1L+2L) fit in the high $m_a$ $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mamH_xSecUpperLimit_Comb_st0p35">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM (sin$\theta$ = 0.35) cross-sections from combined (0L+1L+2L) fit in the $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mHtblow_xSecUpperLimit_Comb_st0p35">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM (sin$\theta$ = 0.35) cross-sections from combined (0L+1L+2L) fit in the low $m_a$ $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mHtbhigh_xSecUpperLimit_Comb_st0p35">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM (sin$\theta$ = 0.35) cross-sections from combined (0L+1L+2L) fit in the high $m_a$ $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mamH_xSecUpperLimit_Comb_st0p35_DMtt">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM + tt+DM(sin$\theta$ = 0.35) cross-sections from combined (0L+1L+2L) fit in the $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mHtblow_xSecUpperLimit_Comb_st0p35_DMtt">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM +tt+DM (sin$\theta$ = 0.35) cross-sections from combined (0L+1L+2L) fit in the low $m_a$ $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mHtbhigh_xSecUpperLimit_Comb_st0p35_DMtt">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM + tt+DM (sin$\theta$ = 0.35) cross-sections from combined (0L+1L+2L) fit in the high $m_a$ $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mamH_xSecUpperLimit_0L_st0p7">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM (sin$\theta$ = 0.7) cross-sections from 0L individual fit in the $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mHtblow_xSecUpperLimit_0L_st0p7">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM (sin$\theta$ = 0.7) cross-sections from 0L individual fit in the low $m_a$ $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mHtbhigh_xSecUpperLimit_0L_st0p7">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM (sin$\theta$ = 0.7) cross-sections from 0L individual fit in the high $m_a$ $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mamH_xSecUpperLimit_0L_st0p7_DMtt">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM + tt+DM(sin$\theta$ = 0.7) cross-sections from 0L individual fit in the $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mHtblow_xSecUpperLimit_0L_st0p7_DMtt">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM +tt+DM (sin$\theta$ = 0.7) cross-sections from 0L individual fit in the low $m_a$ $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mHtbhigh_xSecUpperLimit_0L_st0p7_DMtt">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM + tt+DM (sin$\theta$ = 0.7) cross-sections from 0L individual fit in the high $m_a$ $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mamH_xSecUpperLimit_0L_st0p35">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM (sin$\theta$ = 0.35) cross-sections from 0L individual fit in the $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mHtblow_xSecUpperLimit_0L_st0p35">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM (sin$\theta$ = 0.35) cross-sections from 0L individual fit in the low $m_a$ $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mHtbhigh_xSecUpperLimit_0L_st0p35">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM (sin$\theta$ = 0.35) cross-sections from 0L individual fit in the high $m_a$ $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mamH_xSecUpperLimit_0L_st0p35_DMtt">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM + tt+DM(sin$\theta$ = 0.35) cross-sections from 0L individual fit in the $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mHtblow_xSecUpperLimit_0L_st0p35_DMtt">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM +tt+DM (sin$\theta$ = 0.35) cross-sections from 0L individual fit in the low $m_a$ $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mHtbhigh_xSecUpperLimit_0L_st0p35_DMtt">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM + tt+DM (sin$\theta$ = 0.35) cross-sections from 0L individual fit in the high $m_a$ $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mamH_xSecUpperLimit_1L_st0p7">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM (sin$\theta$ = 0.7) cross-sections from 1L individual fit in the $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mHtblow_xSecUpperLimit_1L_st0p7">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM (sin$\theta$ = 0.7) cross-sections from 1L individual fit in the low $m_a$ $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mHtbhigh_xSecUpperLimit_1L_st0p7">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM (sin$\theta$ = 0.7) cross-sections from 1L individual fit in the high $m_a$ $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mamH_xSecUpperLimit_1L_st0p7_DMtt">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM + tt+DM(sin$\theta$ = 0.7) cross-sections from 1L individual fit in the $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mHtblow_xSecUpperLimit_1L_st0p7_DMtt">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM +tt+DM (sin$\theta$ = 0.7) cross-sections from 1L individual fit in the low $m_a$ $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mHtbhigh_xSecUpperLimit_1L_st0p7_DMtt">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM + tt+DM (sin$\theta$ = 0.7) cross-sections from 1L individual fit in the high $m_a$ $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mamH_xSecUpperLimit_1L_st0p35">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM (sin$\theta$ = 0.35) cross-sections from 1L individual fit in the $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mHtblow_xSecUpperLimit_1L_st0p35">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM (sin$\theta$ = 0.35) cross-sections from 1L individual fit in the low $m_a$ $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mHtbhigh_xSecUpperLimit_1L_st0p35">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM (sin$\theta$ = 0.35) cross-sections from 1L individual fit in the high $m_a$ $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mamH_xSecUpperLimit_1L_st0p35_DMtt">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM + tt+DM(sin$\theta$ = 0.35) cross-sections from 1L individual fit in the $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mHtblow_xSecUpperLimit_1L_st0p35_DMtt">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM +tt+DM (sin$\theta$ = 0.35) cross-sections from 1L individual fit in the low $m_a$ $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane.</a> <li><a href="?table=mHtbhigh_xSecUpperLimit_1L_st0p35_DMtt">Observed upper limit on the 2HDM+a tW+DM + tt+DM (sin$\theta$ = 0.35) cross-sections from 1L individual fit in the high $m_a$ $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane.</a> </ul> <b>Kinematic distributions:</b> <ul> <li><a href="?table=SR0L_mwtagged">0L region m(b1,W-tagged)</a> <li><a href="?table=SR0L_mtbmet">0L region m_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{b,E_{\mathrm{T}^{\mathrm{miss}}}}}</a> <li><a href="?table=SR0L_nwtagged">0L region N_{\mathrm{W-tagged}}</a> <li><a href="?table=SR1L_Had_mbj">1L hadronic top $m_{\mathrm{b1},\mathrm{\cancel{b1}}}$</a> <li><a href="?table=SR1L_Lep_mbj">1L leptonic top $m_{\mathrm{b1},\mathrm{\cancel{b1}}}$</a> <li><a href="?table=SR1L_Lep_nwtaggged">1L leptonic top region N_{\mathrm{W-tagged}}</a> </ul> <b>Cut flows:</b> <ul> <li><a href="?table=cutflow_SR0L">Cutflow of 4 signal points in the 0L regions.</a> <li><a href="?table=cutflow_SR1L_Had">Cutflow of 4 signal points in the 1L hadronic top regions.</a> <li><a href="?table=cutflow_SR1L_Lep">Cutflow of 4 signal points in the 1L leptonic top region.</a> </ul> <b>Acceptance and efficiencies:</b> <ul> <li> <b>highst_grid1_0L:</b> <a href="?table=highst_grid1_Acc_0L">Acceptance table of the 0L SRs in the $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ plane for 2HDM+a signals with sin$\theta$ = 0.7, $m_{\chi}$ = 10 GeV and tan$\beta$ = 1.</a> <a href="?table=highst_grid1_Eff_0L">Efficiency table of the 0L SRs in the $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ plane for 2HDM+a signals with sin$\theta$ = 0.7, $m_{\chi}$ = 10 GeV and tan$\beta$ = 1.</a> <li> <b>highst_grid2_0L:</b> <a href="?table=highst_grid2_Acc_0L">Acceptance table of the 0L SRs in the $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane for 2HDM+a signals with sin$\theta$ = 0.7, $m_{\chi}$ = 10 GeV and $m_a$ = 150 GeV.</a> <a href="?table=highst_grid2_Eff_0L">Efficiency table of the 0L SRs in the $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane for 2HDM+a signals with sin$\theta$ = 0.7, $m_{\chi}$ = 10 GeV and $m_a$ = 150 GeV.</a> <li> <b>highst_grid3_0L:</b> <a href="?table=highst_grid3_Acc_0L">Acceptance table of the 0L SRs in the $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane for 2HDM+a signals with sin$\theta$ = 0.7, $m_{\chi}$ = 10 GeV and $m_a$ = 250 GeV.</a> <a href="?table=highst_grid3_Eff_0L">Efficiency table of the 0L SRs in the $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane for 2HDM+a signals with sin$\theta$ = 0.7, $m_{\chi}$ = 10 GeV and $m_a$ = 250 GeV.</a> <li> <b>highst_grid1_1L:</b> <a href="?table=highst_grid1_Acc_1L">Acceptance table of the 1L SRs in the $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ plane for 2HDM+a signals with sin$\theta$ = 0.7, $m_{\chi}$ = 10 GeV and tan$\beta$ = 1.</a> <a href="?table=highst_grid1_Eff_1L">Efficiency table of the 1L SRs in the $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ plane for 2HDM+a signals with sin$\theta$ = 0.7, $m_{\chi}$ = 10 GeV and tan$\beta$ = 1.</a> <li> <b>highst_grid2_1L:</b> <a href="?table=highst_grid2_Acc_1L">Acceptance table of the 1L SRs in the $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane for 2HDM+a signals with sin$\theta$ = 0.7, $m_{\chi}$ = 10 GeV and $m_a$ = 150 GeV.</a> <a href="?table=highst_grid2_Eff_1L">Efficiency table of the 1L SRs in the $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane for 2HDM+a signals with sin$\theta$ = 0.7, $m_{\chi}$ = 10 GeV and $m_a$ = 150 GeV.</a> <li> <b>highst_grid3_1L:</b> <a href="?table=highst_grid3_Acc_1L">Acceptance table of the 1L SRs in the $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane for 2HDM+a signals with sin$\theta$ = 0.7, $m_{\chi}$ = 10 GeV and $m_a$ = 250 GeV.</a> <a href="?table=highst_grid3_Eff_1L">Efficiency table of the 1L SRs in the $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane for 2HDM+a signals with sin$\theta$ = 0.7, $m_{\chi}$ = 10 GeV and $m_a$ = 250 GeV.</a> <li> <b>lowst_grid1_0L:</b> <a href="?table=lowst_grid1_Acc_0L">Acceptance table of the 0L SRs in the $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ plane for 2HDM+a signals with sin$\theta$ = 0.35, $m_{\chi}$ = 10 GeV and tan$\beta$ = 1.</a> <a href="?table=lowst_grid1_Eff_0L">Efficiency table of the 0L SRs in the $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ plane for 2HDM+a signals with sin$\theta$ = 0.35, $m_{\chi}$ = 10 GeV and tan$\beta$ = 1.</a> <li> <b>lowst_grid2_0L:</b> <a href="?table=lowst_grid2_Acc_0L">Acceptance table of the 0L SRs in the $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane for 2HDM+a signals with sin$\theta$ = 0.35, $m_{\chi}$ = 10 GeV and $m_a$ = 150 GeV.</a> <a href="?table=lowst_grid2_Eff_0L">Efficiency table of the 0L SRs in the $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane for 2HDM+a signals with sin$\theta$ = 0.35, $m_{\chi}$ = 10 GeV and $m_a$ = 150 GeV.</a> <li> <b>lowst_grid3_0L:</b> <a href="?table=lowst_grid3_Acc_0L">Acceptance table of the 0L SRs in the $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane for 2HDM+a signals with sin$\theta$ = 0.35, $m_{\chi}$ = 10 GeV and $m_a$ = 250 GeV.</a> <a href="?table=lowst_grid3_Eff_0L">Efficiency table of the 0L SRs in the $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane for 2HDM+a signals with sin$\theta$ = 0.35, $m_{\chi}$ = 10 GeV and $m_a$ = 250 GeV.</a> <li> <b>lowst_grid1_1L:</b> <a href="?table=lowst_grid1_Acc_1L">Acceptance table of the 1L SRs in the $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ plane for 2HDM+a signals with sin$\theta$ = 0.35, $m_{\chi}$ = 10 GeV and tan$\beta$ = 1.</a> <a href="?table=lowst_grid1_Eff_1L">Efficiency table of the 1L SRs in the $m_a$-$m_{H^{\pm}}$ plane for 2HDM+a signals with sin$\theta$ = 0.35, $m_{\chi}$ = 10 GeV and tan$\beta$ = 1.</a> <li> <b>lowst_grid2_1L:</b> <a href="?table=lowst_grid2_Acc_1L">Acceptance table of the 1L SRs in the $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane for 2HDM+a signals with sin$\theta$ = 0.35, $m_{\chi}$ = 10 GeV and $m_a$ = 150 GeV.</a> <a href="?table=lowst_grid2_Eff_1L">Efficiency table of the 1L SRs in the $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane for 2HDM+a signals with sin$\theta$ = 0.35, $m_{\chi}$ = 10 GeV and $m_a$ = 150 GeV.</a> <li> <b>lowst_grid3_1L:</b> <a href="?table=lowst_grid3_Acc_1L">Acceptance table of the 1L SRs in the $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane for 2HDM+a signals with sin$\theta$ = 0.35, $m_{\chi}$ = 10 GeV and $m_a$ = 250 GeV.</a> <a href="?table=lowst_grid3_Eff_1L">Efficiency table of the 1L SRs in the $m_{H^{\pm}}$-tan$\beta$ plane for 2HDM+a signals with sin$\theta$ = 0.35, $m_{\chi}$ = 10 GeV and $m_a$ = 250 GeV.</a> </ul> <b>Truth Code snippets</b> are available under "Resources" (purple button on the left)
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour.
This paper reports constraints on Higgs boson production with transverse momentum above 1 TeV. The analyzed data from proton-proton collisions at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV were recorded with the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider from 2015 to 2018 and correspond to an integrated luminosity of 136 fb$^{-1}$. Higgs bosons decaying into $b\bar{b}$ are reconstructed as single large-radius jets recoiling against a hadronic system and identified by the experimental signature of two $b$-hadron decays. The experimental techniques are validated in the same kinematic regime using the $Z\rightarrow b\bar{b}$ process.The 95$\% $ confidence-level upper limit on the cross section for Higgs boson production with transverse momentum above 450 GeV is 115 fb, and above 1 TeV it is 9.6 fb. The Standard Model cross section predictions for a Higgs boson with a mass of 125 GeV in the same kinematic regions are 18.4 fb and 0.13 fb, respectively.
- - - - - - - - Overview of HEPData Record - - - - - - - - <br/><br/> <b>Standard Model cross sections:</b> <a href="102183?table=SMcrosssections">table</a><br/><br/> <b>Cutflow ggF:</b> <a href="102183?table=CutflowggF">table</a><br/><br/> <b>Cutflow VBF:</b> <a href="102183?table=CutflowVBF">table</a><br/><br/> <b>Cutflow VH:</b> <a href="102183?table=CutflowVH">table</a><br/><br/> <b>Cutflow ttH:</b> <a href="102183?table=CutflowttH">table</a><br/><br/> <b>Production mode fractional contributions::</b> <a href="102183?table=Fractionalcontribution">table</a><br/><br/> <b>Acceptance times efficiency - fiducial:</b> <a href="102183?table=Acceptancetimesefficiency-fiducial">table</a><br/><br/> <b>Acceptance times efficiency - differential:</b> <a href="102183?table=Acceptancetimesefficiency-differential">table</a><br/><br/> <b>Yield table - fiducial:</b> <a href="102183?table=Eventyields-fiducial">table</a><br/><br/> <b>Yield table - differential:</b> <a href="102183?table=Eventyields-differential">table</a><br/><br/>
Predicted Higgs boson production cross sections within fiducial volumes obtained from the four production mode MC samples (ggF, VBF, VH, and ttH) described in Section 3 with and without higher order electroweak (EW) corrections. All μH values reported are with respect to cross section with EW corrections.
The efficiency for simulated ggF events to pass each analysis cut.
This paper reports a search for Higgs boson pair ($hh$) production in association with a vector boson ($W$ or $Z$) using 139 $fb^{-1}$ of proton-proton collision data at $\sqrt{s}=$ 13 TeV recorded with the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider. The search is performed in final states in which the vector boson decays leptonically ($W\to\ell\nu, Z\to\ell\ell,\nu\nu$ with $\ell=e, \mu$) and the Higgs bosons each decay into a pair of $b$-quarks. It targets $Vhh$ signals from both non-resonant $hh$ production, present in the Standard Model (SM), and resonant $hh$ production, as predicted in some SM extensions. A 95% confidence-level upper limit of 183 (87) times the SM cross-section is observed (expected) for non-resonant $Vhh$ production when assuming the kinematics are as expected in the SM. Constraints are also placed on Higgs boson coupling modifiers. For the resonant search, upper limits on the production cross-sections are derived for two specific models: one is the production of a vector boson along with a neutral heavy scalar resonance $H$, in the mass range 260-1000 GeV, that decays into $hh$, and the other is the production of a heavier neutral pseudoscalar resonance $A$ that decays into a $Z$ boson and $H$ boson, where the $A$ boson mass is 360-800 GeV and the $H$ boson mass is 260-400 GeV. Constraints are also derived in the parameter space of two-Higgs-doublet models.
Acceptance times efficiency as a function of resonant mass for each event selection step in the search for a neutral heavy scalar resonance produced in association with a Z boson decaying to neutrinos.
Acceptance times efficiency as a function of resonant mass for each event selection step in the search for a neutral heavy scalar resonance produced in association with a Z boson decaying to neutrinos.
Acceptance times efficiency as a function of resonant mass for each event selection step in the search for a neutral heavy scalar resonance produced in association with a W boson decaying to a charged lepton and a neutrino.
A search for a new pseudoscalar $a$-boson produced in events with a top-quark pair, where the $a$-boson decays into a pair of muons, is performed using $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV $pp$ collision data collected with the ATLAS detector at the LHC, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of $139\, \mathrm{fb}^{-1}$. The search targets the final state where only one top quark decays to an electron or muon, resulting in a signature with three leptons $e\mu\mu$ and $\mu\mu\mu$. No significant excess of events above the Standard Model expectation is observed and upper limits are set on two signal models: $pp \rightarrow t\bar{t}a$ and $pp \rightarrow t\bar{t}$ with $t \rightarrow H^\pm b$, $H^\pm \rightarrow W^\pm a$, where $a\rightarrow\mu\mu$, in the mass ranges $15$ GeV $ < m_a < 72$ GeV and $120$ GeV $ \leq m_{H^{\pm}} \leq 160$ GeV.
Comparison between data and expected background for the on-$Z$-boson control region in the $e\mu\mu$ final state. The bins correspond to different jet and $b$-jet multiplicities. Rare background processes include $ZZ+$jets, $WWZ$, $WZZ$, $ZZZ$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$.
Comparison between data and expected background for the on-$Z$boson control region in the $\mu\mu\mu$ final state. The bins correspond to different jet and $b$-jet multiplicities. Rare background processes include $ZZ+$jets, $WWZ$, $WZZ$, $ZZZ$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$.
Di-muon mass distribution for the $e\mu\mu$ signal region for data and expected background. The expected signal distribution for $m_a = 35$ GeV is shown assuming $\sigma(t\bar{t}a)\times \text{Br}(a\rightarrow\mu\mu) = 4$ fb. Rare background processes include $ZZ+$jets, $WWZ$, $WZZ$, $ZZZ$, and $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$.
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 and/or leptonic 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. These constitute the most stringent exclusion limits to date for the model considered.
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.
A search for a $WZ$ resonance, in the fully leptonic final state (electrons and muons), is performed using 139 fb$^{-1}$ of data collected at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV by the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider. The results are interpreted in terms of a singly charged Higgs boson of the Georgi$-$Machacek model, produced by $WZ$ fusion, and of a Heavy Vector Triplet, with the resonance produced by $WZ$ fusion or the Drell$-$Yan process. No significant excess over the Standard Model predictions is observed and limits are set on the production cross-section times branching ratio as a function of the resonance mass for these processes.
Comparisons of the data and the expected background distributions of the WZ invariant mass in the Drell-Yan signal region. The background predictions are obtained through a background-only simultaneous fit to the Drell-Yan signal region and the WZ-QCD Drell-Yan and ZZ Drell-Yan control regions. The yields are normalized to the bin width.
Comparisons of the data and the expected background distributions of the WZ invariant mass in the Drell-Yan signal region. The background predictions are obtained through a background-only simultaneous fit to the Drell-Yan signal region and the WZ-QCD Drell-Yan and ZZ Drell-Yan control regions. The yields are normalized to the bin width.
Comparisons of the data and the expected background distributions of the WZ invariant mass in the ANN-based VBF signal region. The background predictions are obtained through a background-only simultaneous fit to the VBF signal region and the WZ-QCD and ZZ VBF control regions. The yields are normalized to the bin width
Searches for the exclusive decays of Higgs and $Z$ bosons into a vector quarkonium state and a photon are performed in the $\mu^+\mu^- \gamma$ final state with a proton$-$proton collision data sample corresponding to an integrated luminosity of $139$ fb$^{-1}$ collected at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV with the ATLAS detector at the CERN Large Hadron Collider. The observed data are compatible with the expected backgrounds. The 95% confidence-level upper limits on the branching fractions of the Higgs boson decays into $J/\psi \gamma$, $\psi(2S) \gamma$, and $\Upsilon(1S,2S,3S) \gamma$ are found to be $2.0\times10^{-4}$, $10.5\times10^{-4}$, and $(2.5,4.2,3.4)\times10^{-4}$, respectively, assuming Standard Model production of the Higgs boson. The corresponding 95% CL upper limits on the branching fractions of the $Z$ boson decays are $1.2\times10^{-6}$, $2.4\times10^{-6}$, and $(1.1,1.3,2.4)\times10^{-6}$. An observed 95% CL interval of $(-133,175)$ is obtained for the $\kappa_c/\kappa_\gamma$ ratio of Higgs boson coupling modifiers, and a 95% CL interval of $(-37,40)$ is obtained for $\kappa_b/\kappa_\gamma$.
Numbers of observed and expected background events for the $m_{\mu^+\mu^-\gamma}$ ranges of interest. Each expected background and the corresponding uncertainty of its mean is obtained from a background-only fit to the data; the uncertainty does not take into account statistical fluctuations in each mass range. Expected $Z$ and Higgs boson signal contributions, with their corresponding total systematic uncertainty, are shown for reference branching fractions of $10^{-6}$ and $10^{-3}$, respectively. The ranges in $m_{\mu^+\mu^-}$ are centred around each quarkonium resonance, with a width driven by the resolution of the detector; in particular, the ranges for the $\Upsilon(nS)$ resonances are based on the resolution in the endcaps. It is noted that the discrepancy between the observed and expected backgrounds for $m_{\mu^+\mu^-} = 9.0$-$9.8$ GeV in the endcaps was found to have a small impact on the observed limit for $Z\rightarrow\Upsilon(1S)\,\gamma$.
Numbers of observed and expected background events for the $m_{\mu^+\mu^-\gamma}$ ranges of interest. Each expected background and the corresponding uncertainty of its mean is obtained from a background-only fit to the data; the uncertainty does not take into account statistical fluctuations in each mass range. Expected $Z$ and Higgs boson signal contributions, with their corresponding total systematic uncertainty, are shown for reference branching fractions of $10^{-6}$ and $10^{-3}$, respectively. The ranges in $m_{\mu^+\mu^-}$ are centred around each quarkonium resonance, with a width driven by the resolution of the detector; in particular, the ranges for the $\Upsilon(nS)$ resonances are based on the resolution in the endcaps. It is noted that the discrepancy between the observed and expected backgrounds for $m_{\mu^+\mu^-} = 9.0$-$9.8$ GeV in the endcaps was found to have a small impact on the observed limit for $Z\rightarrow\Upsilon(1S)\,\gamma$.
Expected, with the corresponding $\pm 1\sigma$ intervals, and observed 95% CL branching fraction upper limits for the Higgs and $Z$ boson decays into a quarkonium state and a photon. Standard Model production of the Higgs boson is assumed. The corresponding upper limits on the production cross section times branching fraction $\sigma\times\mathcal{B}$ are also shown.
A measurement of the energy asymmetry in jet-associated top-quark pair production is presented using 139 $\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ of data collected by the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider during $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV. The observable measures the different probability of top and antitop quarks to have the higher energy as a function of the jet scattering angle with respect to the beam axis. The energy asymmetry is measured in the semileptonic $t\bar{t}$ decay channel, and the hadronically decaying top quark must have transverse momentum above $350$ GeV. The results are corrected for detector effects to particle level in three bins of the scattering angle of the associated jet. The measurement agrees with the SM prediction at next-to-leading-order accuracy in quantum chromodynamics in all three bins. In the bin with the largest expected asymmetry, where the jet is emitted perpendicular to the beam, the energy asymmetry is measured to be $-0.043\pm0.020$, in agreement with the SM prediction of $-0.037\pm0.003$. Interpreting this result in the framework of the Standard Model effective field theory (SMEFT), it is shown that the energy asymmetry is sensitive to the top-quark chirality in four-quark operators and is therefore a valuable new observable in global SMEFT fits.
Data Measurements and predictions of the energy asymmetry in three bins of the jet angle $\theta_j$. The SM prediction was obtained from simulations of $t\bar{t}j$ events with MadGraph5_aMC@NLO + Pythia 8 at NLO in QCD for $t\bar{t}j$ + PS, including MC statistical and scale uncertainties.
Data measurements and predictions of the energy asymmetry in three bins of the jet angle $\theta_j$. The SM prediction was obtained from simulations of $t\bar{t}j$ events with MadGraph5_aMC@NLO + Pythia 8 at NLO in QCD for $t\bar{t}j$ + PS, including MC statistical and scale uncertainties.
Correlation coefficients $\rho_{i,j}$ for the statistical and systematic uncertainties between the $i$-th and $j$-th bin of the differential $A_E$ measurement as a function of the jet scattering angle $\theta_j$
This article presents the results of two studies of Higgs boson properties using the $WW^*(\rightarrow e\nu\mu\nu)jj$ final state, based on a dataset corresponding to 36.1/fb of $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV proton$-$proton collisions recorded by the ATLAS experiment at the Large Hadron Collider. The first study targets Higgs boson production via gluon$-$gluon fusion and constrains the CP properties of the effective Higgs$-$gluon interaction. Using angular distributions and the overall rate, a value of $\tan(\alpha) = 0.0 \pm 0.4$ stat. $ \pm 0.3$ syst is obtained for the tangent of the mixing angle for CP-even and CP-odd contributions. The second study exploits the vector-boson fusion production mechanism to probe the Higgs boson couplings to longitudinally and transversely polarised $W$ and $Z$ bosons in both the production and the decay of the Higgs boson; these couplings have not been directly constrained previously. The polarisation-dependent coupling-strength scale factors are defined as the ratios of the measured polarisation-dependent coupling strengths to those predicted by the Standard Model, and are determined using rate and kinematic information to be $a_L=0.91^{+0.10}_{-0.18}$(stat.)$^{+0.09}_{-0.17}$(syst.) and $a_{T}=1.2 \pm 0.4 $(stat.)$ ^{+0.2}_{-0.3} $(syst.). These coupling strengths are translated into pseudo-observables, resulting in $\kappa_{VV}= 0.91^{+0.10}_{-0.18}$(stat.)$^{+0.09}_{-0.17}$(syst.) and $\epsilon_{VV} =0.13^{+0.28}_{-0.20}$ (stat.)$^{+0.08}_{-0.10}$(syst.). All results are consistent with the Standard Model predictions.
Post-fit NFs and their uncertainties for the Z+jets, top and WW backgrounds. Both sets of normalisation factors differ slightly depending on which (B)SM model is tested, but are consistent within their total uncertainties.
Post-fit event yields in the signal and control regions obtained from the study of the signal strength parameter $\mu^{\text{ggF+2jets}}$. The quoted uncertainties include the theoretical and experimental systematic sources and those due to sample statistics. The fit constrains the total expected yield to the observed yield. The diboson background is split into $W W$ and non-$W W$ contributions.
Breakdown of the main contributions to the total uncertainty on $\tan \alpha$ based on the fit that exploits both shape and rate information. Individual sources of systematic uncertainty are grouped into either the theoretical or the experimental uncertainty. The sum in quadrature of the individual components differs from the total uncertainty due to correlations between the components.
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 two recursive-jigsaw reconstruction signal regions after a simultaneous fit of the the CRs. The two sets of regions are fit separately. The uncertainties include both statistical and systematic sources.
Breakdown of expected and observed yields in the electroweak search High and $\ell\ell bb$ signal regions after a simultaneous fit to the signal regions and control regions. All statistical and systematic uncertainties are included.
This paper presents a statistical combination of searches targeting final states with two top quarks and invisible particles, characterised by the presence of zero, one or two leptons, at least one jet originating from a $b$-quark and missing transverse momentum. The analyses are searches for phenomena beyond the Standard Model consistent with the direct production of dark matter in $pp$ collisions at the LHC, using 139 fb$^{-\text{1}}$ of data collected with the ATLAS detector at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV. The results are interpreted in terms of simplified dark matter models with a spin-0 scalar or pseudoscalar mediator particle. In addition, the results are interpreted in terms of upper limits on the Higgs boson invisible branching ratio, where the Higgs boson is produced according to the Standard Model in association with a pair of top quarks. For scalar (pseudoscalar) dark matter models, with all couplings set to unity, the statistical combination extends the mass range excluded by the best of the individual channels by 50 (25) GeV, excluding mediator masses up to 370 GeV. In addition, the statistical combination improves the expected coupling exclusion reach by 14% (24%), assuming a scalar (pseudoscalar) mediator mass of 10 GeV. An upper limit on the Higgs boson invisible branching ratio of 0.38 (0.30$^{+\text{0.13}}_{-\text{0.09}}$) is observed (expected) at 95% confidence level.
Post-fit signal region yields for the tt0L-high and the tt0L-low analyses. The bottom panel shows the statistical significance of the difference between the SM prediction and the observed data in each region. '$t\bar{t}$ (other)' represents $t\bar{t}$ events without extra jets or events with extra light-flavour jets. 'Other' includes contributions from $t\bar{t}W$, $tZ$ and $tWZ$ processes. The total uncertainty in the SM expectation is represented with hatched bands and the expected distributions for selected signal models are shown as dashed lines.
Representative fit distribution in the signal region for the tt1L analysis: each bin of such distribution corresponds to a single SR included in the fit. 'Other' includes contributions from $t\bar{t}W$, $tZ$, $tWZ$ and $t\bar{t}$ (semileptonic) processes. The total uncertainty in the SM expectation is represented with hatched bands and the expected distributions for selected signal models are shown as dashed lines.
Representative fit distribution in the same flavour leptons signal region for the tt2L analysis: each bin of such distribution, starting from the red arrow, corresponds to a single SR included in the fit. 'FNP' includes the contribution from fake/non-prompt lepton background arising from jets (mainly $\pi/K$, heavy-flavour hadron decays and photon conversion) misidentified as leptons, estimated in a purely data-driven way. 'Other' includes contributions from $t\bar{t}W$, $tZ$ and $tWZ$ processes. The total uncertainty in the SM expectation is represented with hatched bands and the expected distributions for selected signal models are shown as dashed lines.
A search for resonant Higgs boson pair production in the $b\bar{b}b\bar{b}$ final state is presented. The analysis uses 126-139 fb$^{-1}$ of $pp$ collision data at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV collected with the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider. The analysis is divided into two channels, targeting Higgs boson decays which are reconstructed as pairs of small-radius jets or as individual large-radius jets. Spin-0 and spin-2 benchmark signal models are considered, both of which correspond to resonant $HH$ production via gluon$-$gluon fusion. The data are consistent with Standard Model predictions. Upper limits are set on the production cross-section times branching ratio to Higgs boson pairs of a new resonance in the mass range from 251 GeV to 5 TeV.
Cumulative acceptance times efficiency as a function of resonance mass for each event selection step in the resolved channel for the spin-0 signal models. The local maximum at 251 GeV is a consequence of the near-threshold kinematics.
Cumulative acceptance times efficiency as a function of resonance mass for each event selection step in the resolved channel for the spin-2 signal models. The local maximum at 251 GeV is a consequence of the near-threshold kinematics.
Corrected $m(HH)$ distribution in the resolved $4b$ validation region (dots), compared with the reweighted distribution in $2b$ validation region (teal histogram). The error bars on the $4b$ points represent the Poisson uncertainties corresponding to their event yields. The final bin includes overflow. The background uncertainty (gray band) is computed by adding all individual components in quadrature. The bottom panel shows the difference between the $4b$ and reweighted $2b$ distributions, relative to the $2b$ distribution.
A search for charginos and neutralinos at the Large Hadron Collider is reported using fully hadronic final states and missing transverse momentum. Pair-produced charginos or neutralinos are explored, each decaying into a high-$p_{\text{T}}$ Standard Model weak boson. Fully-hadronic final states are studied to exploit the advantage of the large branching ratio, and the efficient background rejection by identifying the high-$p_{\text{T}}$ bosons using large-radius jets and jet substructure information. An integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ of proton-proton collision data collected by the ATLAS detector at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV is used. No significant excess is found beyond the Standard Model expectation. The 95% confidence level exclusion limits are set on wino or higgsino production with varying assumptions in the decay branching ratios and the type of the lightest supersymmetric particle. A wino (higgsino) mass up to 1060 (900) GeV is excluded when the lightest SUSY particle mass is below 400 (240) GeV and the mass splitting is larger than 400 (450) GeV. The sensitivity to high-mass wino and higgsino is significantly extended compared with the previous LHC searches using the other final states.
- - - - - - - - Overview of HEPData Record - - - - - - - - <br/><br/> <b>Cutflow:</b> <a href="104458?version=3&table=Cut flows for the representative signals">table</a><br/><br/> <b>Boson tagging:</b> <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=%24W%2FZ%5Crightarrow%20qq%24%20tagging%20efficiency">$W/Z\rightarrow qq$ tagging efficiency</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=%24W%2FZ%5Crightarrow%20qq%24%20tagging%20rejection">$W/Z\rightarrow qq$ tagging rejection</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=%24Z%2Fh%20%5Crightarrow%20bb%24%20tagging%20efficiency">$Z/h\rightarrow bb$ tagging efficiency</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=%24Z%2Fh%20%5Crightarrow%20bb%24%20tagging%20rejection">$Z/h\rightarrow bb$ tagging rejection</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=%24W%5Crightarrow%20qq%24%20tagging%20efficiency%20(vs%20official%20WP)">$W\rightarrow qq$ tagging efficiency (vs official WP)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=%24W%5Crightarrow%20qq%24%20tagging%20rejection%20(vs%20official%20WP)">$W\rightarrow qq$ tagging rejection (vs official WP)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=%24Z%5Crightarrow%20qq%24%20tagging%20efficiency%20(vs%20official%20WP)">$Z\rightarrow qq$ tagging efficiency (vs official WP)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=%24Z%5Crightarrow%20qq%24%20tagging%20rejection%20(vs%20official%20WP)">$Z\rightarrow qq$ tagging rejection (vs official WP)</a> </ul> <b>Systematic uncertainty:</b> <a href="104458?version=3&table=Total%20systematic%20uncertainties">table</a><br/><br/> <b>Summary of SR yields:</b> <a href="104458?version=3&table=Data%20yields%20and%20background%20expectation%20in%20the%20SRs">table</a><br/><br/> <b>Expected background yields and the breakdown:</b> <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Data%20yields%20and%20background%20breakdown%20in%20SR">CR0L / SR</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Data%20yields%20and%20background%20breakdown%20in%20CR%2FVR%201L(1Y)">CR1L / VR1L /CR1Y / VR1Y</a> </ul> <b>SR distributions:</b> <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Effective mass distribution in SR-4Q-VV">SR-4Q-VV: Effective mass</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Leading large-$R$ jet mass distribution in SR-4Q-VV">SR-4Q-VV: Leading jet mass</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Leading large-$R$ jet $D_{2}$ distribution in SR-4Q-VV">SR-4Q-VV: Leading jet $D_{2}$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Sub-leading large-$R$ jet mass distribution in SR-4Q-VV">SR-4Q-VV: Sub-leading jet mass</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Sub-leading large-$R$ jet $D_{2}$ distribution in SR-4Q-VV">SR-4Q-VV: Sub-leading jet $D_{2}$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=$m_{T2}$ distribution in SR-2B2Q-VZ">SR-2B2Q-VZ: $m_{\textrm{T2}}$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=bb-tagged jet mass distribution in SR-2B2Q-VZ">SR-2B2Q-VZ: bb-tagged jet mass</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Effective mass distribution in SR-2B2Q-VZ">SR-2B2Q-VZ: Effective mass</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=$m_{T2}$ distribution in SR-2B2Q-Vh">SR-2B2Q-Vh: $m_{\textrm{T2}}$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=bb-tagged jet mass distribution in SR-2B2Q-Vh">SR-2B2Q-Vh: bb-tagged jet mass</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Effective mass distribution in SR-2B2Q-Vh">SR-2B2Q-Vh: Effective mass</a> </ul> <b>Exclusion limit:</b> <ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1C1-WW): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (W~, B~) simplified model (C1C1-WW)">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1C1-WW)">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li>Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$): (No mass point could be excluded) <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (W~, B~) simplified model (C1C1-WW)">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1C1-WW)">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1C1-WW)">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-WZ): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-WZ)">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-WZ)">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-WZ)">Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-WZ)">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-WZ)">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-WZ)">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-Wh): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-Wh)">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-Wh)">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-Wh)">Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-Wh)">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-Wh)">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~, B~) simplified model (C1N2-Wh)">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$ model ($\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})=0\%$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (W~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 0%">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (W~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 0%">Observed limit</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$ model ($\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})=25\%$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (W~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 25%">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (W~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 25%">Observed limit</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$ model ($\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})=50\%$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (W~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 50%">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20B~)%20B(N2-%3EZN1)%20%3D%2050%25">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20B~)%20B(N2-%3EZN1)%20%3D%2050%25">Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (W~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 50%">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20B~)%20B(N2-%3EZN1)%20%3D%2050%">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20B~)%20B(N2-%3EZN1)%20%3D%2050%25">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$ model ($\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})=75\%$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (W~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 75%">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (W~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 75%">Observed limit</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$ model ($\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})=100\%$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (W~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 100%">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (W~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 100%">Observed limit</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{B})$ model ($\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})=50\%$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (H~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 50%">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20B~)%20B(N2-%3EZN1)%20%3D%2050%25">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li>Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$): (No mass point could be excluded) <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (H~, B~) B(N2->ZN1) = 50%">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20B~)%20B(N2-%3EZN1)%20%3D%2050%">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20B~)%20B(N2-%3EZN1)%20%3D%2050%25">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{H})$ model ($\textrm{tan}\beta=10,~\mu>0$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (W~, H~), tanb = 10, mu>0">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20mu%3E0">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20mu%3E0">Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (W~, H~), tanb = 10, mu>0">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20mu%3E0">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20mu%3E0">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{W})$ model ($\textrm{tan}\beta=10,~\mu>0$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (H~, W~), tanb = 10, mu>0">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20mu%3E0">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li>Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$): (No mass point could be excluded) <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (H~, W~), tanb = 10, mu>0">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20mu%3E0">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20mu%3E0">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{H})$ model ($\textrm{tan}\beta=10$) on ($\mu$,$M_{2}$) plane: <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (W~, H~), tanb = 10, M2 vs mu">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20M2%20vs%20mu">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20M2%20vs%20mu">Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (W~, H~), tanb = 10, M2 vs mu">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20M2%20vs%20mu">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20M2%20vs%20mu">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{W})$ model ($\textrm{tan}\beta=10$) on ($\mu$,$M_{2}$) plane: <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (H~, W~), tanb = 10, M2 vs mu">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20M2%20vs%20mu">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li>Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$): (No mass point could be excluded) <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (H~, W~), tanb = 10, M2 vs mu">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20M2%20vs%20mu">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%20%3D%2010%2C%20M2%20vs%20mu">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{G})$ model: <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (H~, G~)">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20G~)">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20G~)">Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (H~, G~)">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20G~)">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20G~)">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{a})$ model ($\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{a})=100\%$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (H~, a~) B(N1->Za~) = 100%">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20a~)%20B(N1-%3EZa~)%20%3D%20100%25">Expected limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20a~)%20B(N1-%3EZa~)%20%3D%20100%25">Expected limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{exp}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (H~, a~) B(N1->Za~) = 100%">Observed limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(%2B1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20a~)%20B(N1-%3EZa~)%20%3D%20100%25">Observed limit ($+1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs%20limit%20(-1sig)%20on%20(H~%2C%20a~)%20B(N1-%3EZa~)%20%3D%20100%">Observed limit ($-1\sigma_{\textrm{theory}}^{\textrm{SUSY}}$)</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{a})$ model ($\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{a})=75\%$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (H~, a~) B(N1->Za~) = 75%">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (H~, a~) B(N1->Za~) = 75%">Observed limit</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{a})$ model ($\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{a})=50\%$): <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Exp limit on (H~, a~) B(N1->Za~) = 50%">Expected limit</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (H~, a~) B(N1->Za~) = 50%">Observed limit</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{a})$ model ($\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{a})=25\%$): <ul> <li>Expected limit : (No mass point could be excluded) <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Obs limit on (H~, a~) B(N1->Za~) = 25%">Observed limit</a> </ul> </ul> <b>EWKino branching ratios:</b> <ul> <li>$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{H})$ model: <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=B(C2-%3EW%2BN1%2CN2)%20in%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{\pm}\rightarrow W\tilde{\chi}_{1,2}^{0})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=B(C2-%3EZ%2BC1)%20in%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb=10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{\pm}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=B(C2-%3Eh%2BC1)%20in%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb=10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{\pm}\rightarrow h\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=B(N3-%3EW%2BC1)%20in%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb=10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{3}^{0}\rightarrow W\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=B(N3-%3EZ%2BN1%2CN2)%20in%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{3}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1,2}^{0})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=B(N3-%3Eh%2BN1%2CN2)%20in%20(W~%2C%20H~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{3}^{0}\rightarrow h\tilde{\chi}_{1,2}^{0})$</a> </ul> <li>$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{W})$ model: <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=B(C2-%3EW%2BN1)%20in%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{\pm}\rightarrow W\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=B(C2-%3EZ%2BC1)%20in%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{\pm}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=B(C2-%3Eh%2BC1)%20in%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{\pm}\rightarrow h\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=B(N2-%3EW%2BC1)%20in%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow W\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=B(N2-%3EZ%2BN1)%20in%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=B(N2-%3Eh%2BN1)%20in%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}\rightarrow h\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=B(N3-%3EW%2BC1)%20in%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{3}^{0}\rightarrow W\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=B(N3-%3EZ%2BN1)%20in%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{3}^{0}\rightarrow Z\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})$</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=B(N3-%3Eh%2BN1)%20in%20(H~%2C%20W~)%2C%20tanb%3D10%2C%20mu%3E0">$\textrm{B}(\tilde{\chi}_{3}^{0}\rightarrow h\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})$</a> </ul> </ul> <b>Cross-section upper limit:</b> <ul> <li>Expected: <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Expected cross-section upper limit on C1C1-WW">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1C1-WW)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Expected cross-section upper limit on C1N2-WZ">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-WZ)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Expected cross-section upper limit on C1N2-Wh">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-Wh)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Expected cross-section upper limit on (H~, G~)">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{G})$ model</a> </ul> <li>Observed: <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Observed cross-section upper limit on C1C1-WW">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1C1-WW)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Observed cross-section upper limit on C1N2-WZ">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-WZ)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Observed cross-section upper limit on C1N2-Wh">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-Wh)</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Observed cross-section upper limit on (H~, G~)">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{G})$ model</a> </ul> </ul> <b>Acceptance:</b> <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Acceptance of C1C1-WW signals by SR-4Q-VV">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1C1-WW) in SR-4Q-VV</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Acceptance of C1N2-WZ signals by SR-4Q-VV">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-WZ) in SR-4Q-VV</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Acceptance of C1N2-WZ signals by SR-2B2Q-VZ">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-WZ) in SR-2B2Q-VZ</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Acceptance of C1N2-Wh signals by SR-2B2Q-Vh">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-WZ) in SR-2B2Q-Vh</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Acceptance of N2N3-ZZ signals by SR-4Q-VV">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (N2N3-ZZ) in SR-4Q-VV</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Acceptance of N2N3-ZZ signals by SR-2B2Q-VZ">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (N2N3-ZZ) in SR-2B2Q-VZ</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Acceptance of N2N3-Zh signals by SR-2B2Q-Vh">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (N2N3-Zh) in SR-2B2Q-Vh</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Acceptance of N2N3-hh signals by SR-2B2Q-Vh">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (N2N3-hh) in SR-2B2Q-Vh</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Acceptance of (H~, G~) signals by SR-4Q-VV">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{G})$ model in SR-4Q-VV</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Acceptance of (H~, G~) signals by SR-2B2Q-VZ">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{G})$ model in SR-2B2Q-VZ</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Acceptance of (H~, G~) signals by SR-2B2Q-Vh">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{G})$ model in SR-2B2Q-Vh</a> </ul> <b>Efficiency:</b> <ul> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Efficiency of C1C1-WW signals by SR-4Q-VV">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1C1-WW) in SR-4Q-VV</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Efficiency of C1N2-WZ signals by SR-4Q-VV">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-WZ) in SR-4Q-VV</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Efficiency of C1N2-WZ signals by SR-2B2Q-VZ">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-WZ) in SR-2B2Q-VZ</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Efficiency of C1N2-Wh signals by SR-2B2Q-Vh">$(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (C1N2-Wh) in SR-2B2Q-Vh</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Efficiency of N2N3-ZZ signals by SR-4Q-VV">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (N2N3-ZZ) in SR-4Q-VV</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Efficiency of N2N3-ZZ signals by SR-2B2Q-VZ">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (N2N3-ZZ) in SR-2B2Q-VZ</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Efficiency of N2N3-Zh signals by SR-2B2Q-Vh">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (N2N3-Zh) in SR-2B2Q-Vh</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Efficiency of N2N3-hh signals by SR-2B2Q-Vh">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{B})$-SIM model (N2N3-hh) in SR-2B2Q-Vh</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Efficiency of (H~, G~) signals by SR-4Q-VV">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{G})$ model in SR-4Q-VV</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Efficiency of (H~, G~) signals by SR-2B2Q-VZ">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{G})$ model in SR-2B2Q-VZ</a> <li><a href="104458?version=3&table=Efficiency of (H~, G~) signals by SR-2B2Q-Vh">$(\tilde{H},~\tilde{G})$ model in SR-2B2Q-Vh</a> </ul>
Cut flows of some representative signals up to SR-4Q-VV, SR-2B2Q-VZ, and SR-2B2Q-Vh. One signal point from the $(\tilde{W},~\tilde{B})$ simplified models (C1C1-WW, C1N2-WZ, and C1N2-Wh) and $(\tilde{H},~\tilde{G})$ is chosen. The "preliminary event reduction" is a technical selection applied for reducing the sample size, which is fully efficient after the $n_{\textrm{Large}-R~\textrm{jets}}\geq 2$ selection.
The boson-tagging efficiency for jets arising from $W/Z$ bosons decaying into $q\bar{q}$ (signal jets) are shown. The signal jet efficiency of $W_{qq}$/$Z_{qq}$-tagging is evaluated using a sample of pre-selected large-$R$ jets ($p_{\textrm{T}}>200~\textrm{GeV}, |\eta|<2.0, m_{J} > 40~\textrm{GeV}$) in the simulated $(\tilde{W},\tilde{B})$ simplified model signal events with $\Delta m (\tilde{\chi}_{\textrm{heavy}},~\tilde{\chi}_{\textrm{light}}) \ge 400~\textrm{GeV}$. The jets are matched with generator-level $W/Z$-bosons by $\Delta R<1.0$ which decay into $q\bar{q}$. The efficiency correction factors are applied on the signal efficiency rejection for the $W_{qq}$/$Z_{qq}$-tagging. The systematic uncertainty is represented by the hashed bands.
The transverse-momentum ($p_{\rm T}$) spectra and coalescence parameters $B_2$ of (anti)deuterons are measured in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV for the first time in and out of jets. In this measurement, the direction of the leading particle with the highest $p_{\rm T}$ in the event ($p_{\rm T}^{\rm{ lead}} > 5$ GeV/$c$) is used as an approximation for the jet axis. The event is consequently divided into three azimuthal regions and the jet signal is obtained as the difference between the Toward region, that contains jet fragmentation products in addition to the underlying event (UE), and the Transverse region, which is dominated by the UE. The coalescence parameter in the jet is found to be approximately a factor of 10 larger than that in the underlying event. This experimental observation is consistent with the coalescence picture and can be attributed to the smaller average phase-space distance between nucleons inside the jet cone as compared to the underlying event. The results presented in this Letter are compared to predictions from a simple nucleon coalescence model, where the phase space distributions of nucleons are generated using PYTHIA 8 with the Monash 2013 tuning, and to predictions from a deuteron production model based on ordinary nuclear reactions with parametrized energy-dependent cross sections tuned on data. The latter model is implemented in PYTHIA 8.3. Both models reproduce the observed large difference between in-jet and out-of-jet coalescence parameters, although the almost flat trend of the $B^{\rm Jet}_2$ is not reproduced by the models, which instead give a decreasing trend.
Transverse momentum spectra for the transverse azimuthal regions. Events with a leading track with PT>5 GEV at midrapidity are selected. The spectrum is shown in Figure 1 (left panel).
Transverse momentum spectra for the toward azimuthal regions. Events with a leading track with PT>5 GEV at midrapidity are selected. The spectrum is shown in Figure 1 (left panel).
Transverse momentum spectra for the away azimuthal regions. Events with a leading track with PT>5 GEV at midrapidity are selected. The spectrum is shown in Figure 1 (left panel).
This Letter presents the measurement of near-side associated per-trigger yields, denoted ridge yields, from the analysis of angular correlations of charged hadrons in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV. Long-range ridge yields are extracted for pairs of charged particles with a pseudorapidity difference of $1.4 < |\Delta\eta| < 1.8$ and a transverse momentum of $1 < p_{\rm T} < 2$ GeV/$c$, as a function of the charged-particle multiplicity measured at midrapidity. This study extends the measurements of the ridge yield to the low multiplicity region, where in hadronic collisions it is typically conjectured that a strongly-interacting medium is unlikely to be formed. The precision of the new results allows for the first direct quantitative comparison with the results obtained in $\mathrm {e^{+}e^{-}}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 91 GeV, where initial-state effects such as pre-equilibrium dynamics and collision geometry are not expected to play a role. In the multiplicity range where the $\mathrm {e^{+}e^{-}}$ results have good precision, the measured ridge yields in pp collisions are substantially larger than the limits set in $\mathrm {e^{+}e^{-}}$ annihilations. Consequently, the findings presented in this Letter suggest that the processes involved in $\mathrm {e^{+}e^{-}}$ annihilations do not contribute significantly to the emergence of long-range correlations in pp collisions.
Ridge yield $Y_\mathrm{ridge}$ extracted at $1.4<|\Delta\eta|<1.8$ with $1.0<p_\mathrm{T,trig}<2.0\,\mathrm{GeV}/c$, $1.0<p_\mathrm{T,assoc}<2.0\,\mathrm{GeV}/c$ as a function of charged particle multiplicity counted at midrapidity $|\eta|<1.0$. The first three points at $N_\mathrm{ch}<8$ represent a 95% upper confidence limit where the statistical and systematic uncertainty have been combined.
A search for physics beyond the standard model (SM) in the final state with a hadronically decaying tau lepton and a neutrino is presented. This analysis is based on data recorded by the CMS experiment from proton-proton collisions at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV at the LHC, corresponding to a total integrated luminosity of 138 fb$^{=1}$. The transverse mass spectrum is analyzed for the presence of new physics. No significant deviation from the SM prediction is observed. Limits are set on the production cross section of a W' boson decaying into a tau lepton and a neutrino. Lower limits are set on the mass of the sequential SM-like heavy charged vector boson and the mass of a quantum black hole. Upper limits are placed on the couplings of a new boson to the SM fermions. Constraints are put on a nonuniversal gauge interaction model and an effective field theory model. For the first time, upper limits on the cross section of $t$-channel leptoquark (LQ) exchange are presented. These limits are translated into exclusion limits on the LQ mass and on its coupling in the $t$-channel. The sensitivity of this analysis extends into the parameter space of LQ models that attempt to explain the anomalies observed in B meson decays. The limits presented for the various interpretations are the most stringent to date. Additionally, a model-independent limit is provided.
The transverse mass distribution of $ au$ leptons and missing transverse momentum observed in the Run-2 data (black dots with statistical uncertainty) as well as the expectation from SM processes (stacked histograms). Different signal hypotheses normalized to 10 fb$^{-1}$ are illustrated as dashed lines for exemplary SSM W$\prime$ boson, QBH and EFT signal hypotheses. The ratios of the background-subtracted data yields to the expected background yields are presented in the lower panel. The combined statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background are represented by the grey shaded band in the ratio panel.
Bayesian upper exclusion limits at 95% CL on the product of the cross section and branching fraction of a W$\prime$ boson decaying to a $\tau$ lepton and a neutrino in the SSM model. For this model, W$\prime$ boson masses of up to 4.8 TeV can be excluded. The limit is given by the intersection of the observed (solid) limit and the theoretical cross section (blue dotted curve). The 68 and 95% quantiles of the limits are represented by the green and yellow bands, respectively. The $\sigma \mathcal{B}$ for an SSM W' boson, along with its associated uncertainty, calculated at NNLO precision in QCD is shown.
Bayesian 95% CL model-independent upper limit on the product of signal cross sections and branching fraction for the $\tau+\nu$ decay for a back-to-back $\tau$ lepton plus $p_{T}^{miss}$ topology. To calculate this limit, all events for signal, background, and data are summed starting from a minimum $m_{T}$ threshold and then divided by the total number of events. No assumption on signal shape is included in this limit. The expected (dashed line) and observed (solid line) limits are shown as well as the 68% and 95% CL uncertainty bands (green and yellow, respectively).
Proton-proton interactions resulting in final states with two photons are studied in a search for the signature of flavor-changing neutral current interactions of top quarks (t) and Higgs bosons (H). The analysis is based on data collected at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV with the CMS detector at the LHC, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 137 fb$^{-1}$. No significant excess above the background prediction is observed. Upper limits on the branching fractions ($\mathcal{B}$) of the top quark decaying to a Higgs boson and an up (u) or charm quark (c) are derived through a binned fit to the diphoton invariant mass spectrum. The observed (expected) 95% confidence level upper limits are found to be 0.019 (0.031)% for $\mathcal B$(t $\to$ Hu) and 0.073 (0.051)% for $\mathcal{B}$(t $\to$ Hc). These are the strictest upper limits yet determined.
Expected and observed 95\% CL upper limits on the branching fraction of the top quark decaying to the Higgs boson and a light-flavor quark (either an up or a charm quark)
A search for a heavy resonance decaying into a top quark and a W boson in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} =$ 13 TeV is presented. The data analyzed were recorded with the CMS detector at the LHC and correspond to an integrated luminosity of 138 fb$^{-1}$. The top quark is reconstructed as a single jet and the W boson, from its decay into an electron or muon and the corresponding neutrino. A top quark tagging technique based on jet clustering with a variable distance parameter and simultaneous jet grooming is used to identify jets from the collimated top quark decay. The results are interpreted in the context of two benchmark models, where the heavy resonance is either an excited bottom quark b$^*$ or a vector-like quark B. A statistical combination with an earlier search by the CMS Collaboration in the all-hadronic final state is performed to place upper cross section limits on these two models. The new analysis extends the lower range of resonance mass probed from 1.4 down to 0.7 TeV. For left-handed, right-handed, and vector-like couplings, b$^*$ masses up to 3.0, 3.0, and 3.2 TeV are excluded at 95% confidence level, respectively. The observed upper limits represent the most stringent constraints on the b$^*$ model to date.
Distributions of MtW in the 1b category. The data are shown by filled markers, where the horizontal bars indicate the bin widths. The individual background contributions are given by filled histograms. The expected signal for a LH b* with mb∗ = 2.4 TeV is shown by a dashed line. The shaded region is the uncertainty in the total background estimate. The lower panel shows the ratio of data to the background estimate, with the total uncertainty on the predicted background displayed as the gray band.
Distributions of MtW in the 2b category. The data are shown by filled markers, where the horizontal bars indicate the bin widths. The individual background contributions are given by filled histograms. The expected signal for a LH b* with mb∗ = 2.4 TeV is shown by a dashed line. The shaded region is the uncertainty in the total background estimate. The lower panel shows the ratio of data to the background estimate, with the total uncertainty on the predicted background displayed as the gray band.
Upper limits on the production cross section times branching fraction of the b* LH hypothesis at a 95% CL. Dashed colored lines show the expected limits from the l+jets and all-hadronic channels, where the latter start at resonance masses of 1.4 TeV. The observed and expected limits from the combination are shown as solid and dashed black lines, respectively. The green and yellow bands show the 68 and 95% confidence intervals on the combined expected limits.
A search is presented for long-lived particles produced in pairs in proton-proton collisions at the LHC operating at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV. The data were collected with the CMS detector during the period from 2015 through 2018, and correspond to a total integrated luminosity of 140 fb$^{-1}$. This search targets pairs of long-lived particles with mean proper decay lengths between 0.1 and 100 mm, each of which decays into at least two quarks that hadronize to jets, resulting in a final state with two displaced vertices. No significant excess of events with two displaced vertices is observed. In the context of $R$-parity violating supersymmetry models, the pair production of long-lived neutralinos, gluinos, and top squarks is excluded at 95% confidence level for cross sections larger than 0.08 fb, masses between 800 and 3000 GeV, and mean proper decay lengths between 1 and 25 mm.
Event yields in the control samples in data. The ''one-vertex'' events correspond to events containing exactly one vertex with the specified number of tracks. The ''two-vertex'' events have two or more vertices containing the specified numbers of tracks. We seek the signal in the $\geq$5-track two-vertex sample.
The distribution of distances between vertices in the $x$-$y$ plane, $d_{\mathrm{VV}}$, for three simulated multijet signals each with a mass of 1600 GeV, with the background template distribution overlaid. The production cross section for each signal model is assumed to be the lower limit excluded by CMS-EXO-17-018, corresponding to values of 0.8, 0.25, and 0.15 fb for the samples with $c\tau =$ 0.3, 1.0, and 10 mm, respectively. The last bin includes the overflow events. The two vertical pink dashed lines separate the regions used in the fit.
Multijet signal efficiencies as a function of the signal mass and lifetime for events satisfying all event and vertex requirements, with corrections based on systematic differences in the vertex reconstruction efficiency between data and simulation.
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.
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.
Inclusive and differential measurements of the top-antitop ($t\bar{t}$) charge asymmetry $A_\text{C}^{t\bar{t}}$ and the leptonic asymmetry $A_\text{C}^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ are presented in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV recorded by the ATLAS experiment at the CERN Large Hadron Collider. The measurement uses the complete Run 2 dataset, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$, combines data in the single-lepton and dilepton channels, and employs reconstruction techniques adapted to both the resolved and boosted topologies. A Bayesian unfolding procedure is performed to correct for detector resolution and acceptance effects. The combined inclusive $t\bar{t}$ charge asymmetry is measured to be $A_\text{C}^{t\bar{t}} = 0.0068 \pm 0.0015$, which differs from zero by 4.7 standard deviations. Differential measurements are performed as a function of the invariant mass, transverse momentum and longitudinal boost of the $t\bar{t}$ system. Both the inclusive and differential measurements are found to be compatible with the Standard Model predictions, at next-to-next-to-leading order in quantum chromodynamics perturbation theory with next-to-leading-order electroweak corrections. The measurements are interpreted in the framework of the Standard Model effective field theory, placing competitive bounds on several Wilson coefficients.
- - - - - - - - Overview of HEPData Record - - - - - - - - <br/><br/> <b>Results:</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Resultsforchargeasymmetryinclusive">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Resultsforchargeasymmetryvsmtt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Resultsforchargeasymmetryvspttt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Resultsforchargeasymmetryvsbetatt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Resultsforleptonicchargeasymmetryinclusive">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Resultsforchargeasymmetryvsllmll">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Resultsforchargeasymmetryvsllptll">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Resultsforchargeasymmetryvsllbetall">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> </ul> <b>Bounds on the Wilson coefficients:</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=BoundsonWilsoncoefficientschargeasymmetryinclusive">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=BoundsonWilsoncoefficientschargeasymmetryvsmtt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$</a> </ul> <b>Ranking of systematic uncertainties:</b></br> Inclusive:<a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryinclusive">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$</a></br> <b>$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$:</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsbetattbin0">$\beta_{z,t\bar{t}} \in[0,0.3]$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsbetattbin1">$\beta_{z,t\bar{t}} \in[0.3,0.6]$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsbetattbin2">$\beta_{z,t\bar{t}} \in[0.6,0.8]$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsbetattbin3">$\beta_{z,t\bar{t}} \in[0.8,1]$</a> </ul> <b>$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$:</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsmttbin0">$m_{t\bar{t}}$ < $500$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsmttbin1">$m_{t\bar{t}} \in [500,750]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsmttbin2">$m_{t\bar{t}} \in [750,1000]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsmttbin3">$m_{t\bar{t}} \in [1000,1500]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsmttbin4">$m_{t\bar{t}}$ > $1500$GeV</a> </ul> <b>$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$:</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsptttbin0">$p_{T,t\bar{t}} \in [0,30]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsptttbin1">$p_{T,t\bar{t}} \in[30,120]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsptttbin2">$p_{T,t\bar{t}}$ > $120$GeV</a> </ul> Inclusive leptonic:<a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingleptonicchargeasymmetryinclusive">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a></br> <b>$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=1&tableNPrankingchargeasymmetry=vsllbetallbin0">$\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}} \in [0,0.3]$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&tableNPrankingchargeasymmetry=vsllbetallbin1">$\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}} \in [0.3,0.6]$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&tableNPrankingchargeasymmetry=vsllbetallbin2">$\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}} \in [0.6,0.8]$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&tableNPrankingchargeasymmetry=vsllbetallbin3">$\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}} \in [0.8,1]$</a> </ul> <b>$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsllmllbin0">$m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ < $200$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsllmllbin1">$m_{\ell\bar{\ell}} \in [200,300]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsllmllbin2">$m_{\ell\bar{\ell}} \in [300,400]$Ge$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsllmllbin3">$m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ > $400$GeV</a> </ul> <b>$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsllptllbin0">$p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}\in [0,20]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsllptllbin1">$p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}\in[20,70]$GeV</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPrankingchargeasymmetryvsllptllbin2">$p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ > $70$GeV</a> </ul> <b>NP correlations:</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPcorrelationschargeasymmetryinclusive">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPcorrelationschargeasymmetryvsmtt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPcorrelationschargeasymmetryvspttt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPcorrelationschargeasymmetryvsbetatt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPcorrelationsleptonicchargeasymmetryinclusive">$A_c^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPcorrelationschargeasymmetryvsllmll">$A_c^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPcorrelationschargeasymmetryvsllptll">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=NPcorrelationschargeasymmetryvsllbetall">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> </ul> <b>Covariance matrices:</b> <ul> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Covariancematrixchargeasymmetryvsmtt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Covariancematrixchargeasymmetryvspttt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Covariancematrixchargeasymmetryvsbetatt">$A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Covariancematrixleptonicchargeasymmetryvsllmll">$A_c^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Covariancematrixleptonicchargeasymmetryvsllptll">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> <li><a href="132116?version=1&table=Covariancematrixleptonicchargeasymmetryvsllbetall">$A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$</a> </ul>
The unfolded inclusive charge asymmetry. The measured values are given with statistical and systematic uncertainties. The SM theory predictions calculated at NNLO in QCD and NLO in EW theory are listed, and the impact of the linear term of the Wilson coefficient on the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ prediction is shown for two different values. The scale uncertainty is obtained by varying renormalisation and factorisation scales independently by a factor of 2 or 0.5 around $\mu_0$ to calculate the maximum and minimum value of the asymmetry, respectively. The nominal value $\mu_0$ is chosen as $H_T/4$. The variations in which one scale is multiplied by 2 while the other scale is divided by 2 are excluded. Finally, the scale and MC integration uncertainties are added in quadrature.
The unfolded differential charge asymmetry as a function of the invariant mass of the top pair system. The measured values are given with statistical and systematic uncertainties. The SM theory predictions calculated at NNLO in QCD and NLO in EW theory are listed, and the impact of the linear term of the Wilson coefficient on the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ prediction is shown for two different values. The scale uncertainty is obtained by varying renormalisation and factorisation scales independently by a factor of 2 or 0.5 around $\mu_0$ to calculate the maximum and minimum value of the asymmetry, respectively. The nominal value $\mu_0$ is chosen as $H_T/4$. The variations in which one scale is multiplied by 2 while the other scale is divided by 2 are excluded. Finally, the scale and MC integration uncertainties are added in quadrature.
Several extensions of the Standard Model predict the production of dark matter particles at the LHC. A search for dark matter particles produced in association with a dark Higgs boson decaying into $W^{+}W^{-}$ in the $\ell^\pm\nu q \bar q'$ final states with $\ell=e,\mu$ is presented. This analysis uses 139 fb$^{-1}$ of $pp$ collisions recorded by the ATLAS detector at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV. The $W^\pm \to q\bar q'$ decays are reconstructed from pairs of calorimeter-measured jets or from track-assisted reclustered jets, a technique aimed at resolving the dense topology from a pair of boosted quarks using jets in the calorimeter and tracking information. The observed data are found to agree with Standard Model predictions. Scenarios with dark Higgs boson masses ranging between 140 and 390 GeV are excluded.
Probability of finding at least one TAR jet, where the p<sub>T</sub>-leading TAR jet passes the m<sub>Wcand</sub> and D<sub>2</sub><sup>β=1</sup> requirements, as a function of m<sub>s</sub>. The probability is determined in a sample of signal events with m<sub>Z'</sub>=500 GeV, with the preselections applied.
Probability of finding at least one TAR jet, where the p<sub>T</sub>-leading TAR jet passes the m<sub>Wcand</sub> and D<sub>2</sub><sup>β=1</sup> requirements, as a function of m<sub>s</sub>. The probability is determined in a sample of signal events with m<sub>Z'</sub>=1000 GeV, with the preselections applied.
Probability of finding at least one TAR jet, where the p<sub>T</sub>-leading TAR jet passes the m<sub>Wcand</sub> and D<sub>2</sub><sup>β=1</sup> requirements, as a function of m<sub>s</sub>. The probability is determined in a sample of signal events with m<sub>Z'</sub>=1700 GeV, with the preselections applied.
Forum