CMS logoCMS event Hgg
Compact Muon Solenoid
LHC, CERN

CMS-BPH-18-003 ; CERN-EP-2021-085
Measurement of prompt open-charm production cross sections in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV
JHEP 11 (2021) 225
Abstract: The production cross sections for prompt open-charm mesons in proton-proton collisions at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV are reported. The measurement is performed using a data sample collected by the CMS experiment corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 29 nb$^{-1}$. The differential production cross sections of the ${{\mathrm{D}^{\ast}(2010)^{\pm}}}$, ${\mathrm{D^{\pm}}}$, and ${\mathrm{D^0}}$ ($\mathrm{\overline{D}{}^{0}}$) mesons are presented in ranges of transverse momentum and pseudorapidity 4 $ < {p_{\mathrm{T}}} < $ 100 GeV and $|{\eta}| < $ 2.1, respectively. The results are compared to several theoretical calculations and to previous measurements.
Figures & Tables Summary References CMS Publications
Figures

png pdf
Figure 1:
The invariant mass distributions: $\Delta M = M(\mathrm{K^{-}} \pi^{+} {\pi ^+_{\mathrm {s}}}) - M(\mathrm{K^{-}} \pi^{+})$ (upper), $M(\mathrm{K^{-}} \pi^{+})$ (middle), and $M(\mathrm{K^{-}} \pi^{+} \pi^{+})$ (lower); charge conjugation is implied. Plots in the left column show the 5 $ < {p_{\mathrm {T}}} < $ 6 GeV bin, while the 16 $ < {p_{\mathrm {T}}} < $ 24 GeV bin is shown in the right column. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data. The overall result from the fit is shown by the solid line, the fit to the combinatorial background by the dotted line, and, in the middle plots, the fit to the K/$\pi$ swapped candidates by the red dot-dashed line.

png pdf
Figure 1-a:
The $\Delta M = M(\mathrm{K^{-}} \pi^{+} {\pi ^+_{\mathrm {s}}}) - M(\mathrm{K^{-}} \pi^{+})$ invariant mass distribution in the 5 $ < {p_{\mathrm {T}}} < $ 6 GeV bin ; charge conjugation is implied. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data. The overall result from the fit is shown by the solid line, the fit to the combinatorial background by the dotted line.

png pdf
Figure 1-b:
The $\Delta M = M(\mathrm{K^{-}} \pi^{+} {\pi ^+_{\mathrm {s}}}) - M(\mathrm{K^{-}} \pi^{+})$ invariant mass distribution in the 16 $ < {p_{\mathrm {T}}} < $ 24 GeV bin ; charge conjugation is implied. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data. The overall result from the fit is shown by the solid line, the fit to the combinatorial background by the dotted line.

png pdf
Figure 1-c:
The $M(\mathrm{K^{-}} \pi^{+})$ invariant mass distribution in the 5 $ < {p_{\mathrm {T}}} < $ 6 GeV bin ; charge conjugation is implied. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data. The overall result from the fit is shown by the solid line, the fit to the combinatorial background by the dotted line, and the fit to the K/$\pi$ swapped candidates by the red dot-dashed line.

png pdf
Figure 1-d:
The $M(\mathrm{K^{-}} \pi^{+})$ invariant mass distribution in the 16 $ < {p_{\mathrm {T}}} < $ 24 GeV bin ; charge conjugation is implied. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data. The overall result from the fit is shown by the solid line, the fit to the combinatorial background by the dotted line, and the fit to the K/$\pi$ swapped candidates by the red dot-dashed line.

png pdf
Figure 1-e:
The $M(\mathrm{K^{-}} \pi^{+} \pi^{+})$ invariant mass distribution in the 5 $ < {p_{\mathrm {T}}} < $ 6 GeV bin ;charge conjugation is implied. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data. The overall result from the fit is shown by the solid line, the fit to the combinatorial background by the dotted line.

png pdf
Figure 1-f:
The $M(\mathrm{K^{-}} \pi^{+} \pi^{+})$ invariant mass distribution in the 16 $ < {p_{\mathrm {T}}} < $ 24 GeV bin ; charge conjugation is implied. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data. The overall result from the fit is shown by the solid line, the fit to the combinatorial background by the dotted line.

png pdf
Figure 2:
The invariant mass distributions: $\Delta M = M(\mathrm{K^{-}} \pi^{+} {\pi ^+_{\mathrm {s}}}) - M(\mathrm{K^{-}} \pi^{+})$ (upper), $M(\mathrm{K^{-}} \pi^{+})$ (middle), and $M(\mathrm{K^{-}} \pi^{+} \pi^{+})$ (lower); charge conjugation is implied. Plots in the left column show the $ {| \eta |} < $ 0.2 bin, while the 1.6 $ < {| \eta |} < $ 1.8 bin is shown in the right column. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data. The overall result from the fit is shown by the solid line, and the fit to the combinatorial background by the dotted line, and, in the middle plots, the fit to the K/$\pi$ swapped candidates by the red dot-dashed line.

png pdf
Figure 2-a:
The $\Delta M = M(\mathrm{K^{-}} \pi^{+} {\pi ^+_{\mathrm {s}}}) - M(\mathrm{K^{-}} \pi^{+})$ invariant mass distribution in the $ {| \eta |} < $ 0.2 bin ; charge conjugation is implied. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data. The overall result from the fit is shown by the solid line, and the fit to the combinatorial background by the dotted line.

png pdf
Figure 2-b:
The $\Delta M = M(\mathrm{K^{-}} \pi^{+} {\pi ^+_{\mathrm {s}}}) - M(\mathrm{K^{-}} \pi^{+})$ invariant mass distribution in the 1.6 $ < {| \eta |} < $ 1.8 bin ; charge conjugation is implied. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data. The overall result from the fit is shown by the solid line, and the fit to the combinatorial background by the dotted line.

png pdf
Figure 2-c:
The $M(\mathrm{K^{-}} \pi^{+})$ invariant mass distribution in the $ {| \eta |} < $ 0.2 bin ; charge conjugation is implied. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data. The overall result from the fit is shown by the solid line, and the fit to the combinatorial background by the dotted line, and the fit to the K/$\pi$ swapped candidates by the red dot-dashed line.

png pdf
Figure 2-d:
The $M(\mathrm{K^{-}} \pi^{+})$ invariant mass distribution in the 1.6 $ < {| \eta |} < $ 1.8 bin ; charge conjugation is implied. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data. The overall result from the fit is shown by the solid line, and the fit to the combinatorial background by the dotted line, and the fit to the K/$\pi$ swapped candidates by the red dot-dashed line.

png pdf
Figure 2-e:
The $M(\mathrm{K^{-}} \pi^{+} \pi^{+})$ invariant mass distribution in the $ {| \eta |} < $ 0.2 bin ; charge conjugation is implied. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data. The overall result from the fit is shown by the solid line, and the fit to the combinatorial background by the dotted line.

png pdf
Figure 2-f:
The $M(\mathrm{K^{-}} \pi^{+} \pi^{+})$ invariant mass distribution in the 1.6 $ < {| \eta |} < $ 1.8 bin ; charge conjugation is implied. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data. The overall result from the fit is shown by the solid line, and the fit to the combinatorial background by the dotted line.

png pdf
Figure 3:
The nonprompt fractions found from simulation, as a function of ${p_{\mathrm {T}}}$ (left) and $ {| \eta |}$ (right) for $\mathrm{D^{*+}}$ (squares), ${\mathrm{D^0}}$ (circles), and ${\mathrm{D^+}}$ (triangles) mesons. The vertical lines represent the statistical uncertainties and the horizontal lines the bin widths.

png pdf
Figure 3-a:
The nonprompt fractions found from simulation, as a function of ${p_{\mathrm {T}}}$ (squares), ${\mathrm{D^0}}$ (circles), and ${\mathrm{D^+}}$ (triangles) mesons. The vertical lines represent the statistical uncertainties and the horizontal lines the bin widths.

png pdf
Figure 3-b:
The nonprompt fractions found from simulation, as a function of $ {| \eta |}$ for $\mathrm{D^{*+}}$ (squares), ${\mathrm{D^0}}$ (circles), and ${\mathrm{D^+}}$ (triangles) mesons. The vertical lines represent the statistical uncertainties and the horizontal lines the bin widths.

png pdf
Figure 4:
Differential cross sections $ {\mathrm {d}}\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {p_{\mathrm {T}}} $ (upper) and $ {\mathrm {d}}\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {| \eta |}$ (lower) for prompt ${{\mathrm{D}^{\ast}(2010)^{\pm}}}$ meson production. Black markers represent the data and are compared with several MC simulation models and theoretical predictions. The statistical and total uncertainties are shown by the inner and outer vertical lines, respectively. The FONLL band represents the standard uncertainties in the prediction as detailed in the text. The lower panel gives the ratios of the predictions to the data.

png pdf
Figure 4-a:
Differential cross section $ {\mathrm {d}}\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {p_{\mathrm {T}}} $ for prompt ${{\mathrm{D}^{\ast}(2010)^{\pm}}}$ meson production. Black markers represent the data and are compared with several MC simulation models and theoretical predictions. The statistical and total uncertainties are shown by the inner and outer vertical lines, respectively. The FONLL band represents the standard uncertainties in the prediction as detailed in the text. The lower panel gives the ratios of the predictions to the data.

png pdf
Figure 4-b:
Differential cross section $ {\mathrm {d}}\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {| \eta |}$ for prompt ${{\mathrm{D}^{\ast}(2010)^{\pm}}}$ meson production. Black markers represent the data and are compared with several MC simulation models and theoretical predictions. The statistical and total uncertainties are shown by the inner and outer vertical lines, respectively. The FONLL band represents the standard uncertainties in the prediction as detailed in the text. The lower panel gives the ratios of the predictions to the data.

png pdf
Figure 5:
Differential cross section $ {\mathrm {d}}\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {p_{\mathrm {T}}} $ (upper) and $ {\mathrm {d}}\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {| \eta |}$ (lower) for prompt ${\mathrm{D^0}}$ ($\mathrm{\overline{D}{}^{0}}$) meson production. Black markers represent the data and are compared with several MC simulation models and theoretical predictions. The statistical and total uncertainties are shown by the inner and outer vertical lines, respectively. The FONLL band represents the standard uncertainties in the prediction as detailed in the text. The lower panel gives the ratios of the predictions to the data.

png pdf
Figure 5-a:
Differential cross section $ {\mathrm {d}}\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {p_{\mathrm {T}}} $ for prompt ${\mathrm{D^0}}$ ($\mathrm{\overline{D}{}^{0}}$) meson production. Black markers represent the data and are compared with several MC simulation models and theoretical predictions. The statistical and total uncertainties are shown by the inner and outer vertical lines, respectively. The FONLL band represents the standard uncertainties in the prediction as detailed in the text. The lower panel gives the ratios of the predictions to the data.

png pdf
Figure 5-b:
Differential cross section $ {\mathrm {d}}\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {| \eta |}$ for prompt ${\mathrm{D^0}}$ ($\mathrm{\overline{D}{}^{0}}$) meson production. Black markers represent the data and are compared with several MC simulation models and theoretical predictions. The statistical and total uncertainties are shown by the inner and outer vertical lines, respectively. The FONLL band represents the standard uncertainties in the prediction as detailed in the text. The lower panel gives the ratios of the predictions to the data.

png pdf
Figure 6:
Differential cross section $ {\mathrm {d}}\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {p_{\mathrm {T}}} $ (upper) and $ {\mathrm {d}}\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {| \eta |}$ (lower) for prompt ${\mathrm{D^{\pm}}}$ meson production. Black markers represent the data and are compared with several MC simulation models and theoretical predictions. The statistical and total uncertainties are shown by the inner and outer vertical lines, respectively. The FONLL band represents the standard uncertainties in the prediction as detailed in the text. The lower panel gives the ratios of the predictions to the data.

png pdf
Figure 6-a:
Differential cross section $ {\mathrm {d}}\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {p_{\mathrm {T}}} $ for prompt ${\mathrm{D^{\pm}}}$ meson production. Black markers represent the data and are compared with several MC simulation models and theoretical predictions. The statistical and total uncertainties are shown by the inner and outer vertical lines, respectively. The FONLL band represents the standard uncertainties in the prediction as detailed in the text. The lower panel gives the ratios of the predictions to the data.

png pdf
Figure 6-b:
Differential cross section $ {\mathrm {d}}\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {| \eta |}$ for prompt ${\mathrm{D^{\pm}}}$ meson production. Black markers represent the data and are compared with several MC simulation models and theoretical predictions. The statistical and total uncertainties are shown by the inner and outer vertical lines, respectively. The FONLL band represents the standard uncertainties in the prediction as detailed in the text. The lower panel gives the ratios of the predictions to the data.

png pdf
Figure 7:
Differential cross section $ {\mathrm {d}}\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {p_{\mathrm {T}}} $ for ${{\mathrm{D}^{\ast}(2010)^{\pm}}}$ (left) and ${\mathrm{D^{\pm}}}$ (right) meson production, comparing the production from CMS (black circles, prompt, this paper) at $\sqrt {s} = $ 13 TeV and ATLAS (red squares, prompt $+$ nonprompt) at $\sqrt {s} = $ 7 TeV [5]. The corresponding predictions from FONLL are shown by the unfilled and filled boxes, respectively. The vertical lines on the points give the total uncertainties in the data, and the horizontal lines show the bin widths. The two lower panels in each plot give the ratios of the FONLL predictions to the CMS and ATLAS data, shown by circles and squares, respectively.

png pdf
Figure 7-a:
Differential cross section $ {\mathrm {d}}\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {p_{\mathrm {T}}} $ for ${{\mathrm{D}^{\ast}(2010)^{\pm}}}$ meson production, comparing the production from CMS (black circles, prompt, this paper) at $\sqrt {s} = $ 13 TeV and ATLAS (red squares, prompt $+$ nonprompt) at $\sqrt {s} = $ 7 TeV [5]. The corresponding predictions from FONLL are shown by the unfilled and filled boxes, respectively. The vertical lines on the points give the total uncertainties in the data, and the horizontal lines show the bin widths. The two lower panels give the ratios of the FONLL predictions to the CMS and ATLAS data, shown by circles and squares, respectively.

png pdf
Figure 7-b:
Differential cross section $ {\mathrm {d}}\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {p_{\mathrm {T}}} $ for ${\mathrm{D^{\pm}}}$ meson production, comparing the production from CMS (black circles, prompt, this paper) at $\sqrt {s} = $ 13 TeV and ATLAS (red squares, prompt $+$ nonprompt) at $\sqrt {s} = $ 7 TeV [5]. The corresponding predictions from FONLL are shown by the unfilled and filled boxes, respectively. The vertical lines on the points give the total uncertainties in the data, and the horizontal lines show the bin widths. The two lower panels give the ratios of the FONLL predictions to the CMS and ATLAS data, shown by circles and squares, respectively.

png pdf
Figure 8:
Differential cross section $ {\mathrm {d}}\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {p_{\mathrm {T}}} $ for prompt ${{\mathrm{D}^{\ast}(2010)^{\pm}}}$ (upper left), ${\mathrm{D^0}} + \mathrm{\overline{D}{}^{0}}$ (upper right) and ${\mathrm{D^{\pm}}}$ (lower) meson production with $ {p_{\mathrm {T}}} < $ 24 GeV from CMS (black circles, this paper) at $\sqrt {s} = $ 13 TeV and ALICE [7] (magenta squares) at $\sqrt {s} = $ 7 TeV and $ {| y |} < $ 0.5. The corresponding predictions from FONLL are shown by the unfilled and filled boxes, respectively. The cross section definition by ALICE includes a factor of 1/2 that accounts for the fact that the measured yields include particles and antiparticles while the cross sections are given for particles only. The same is true for the corresponding FONLL predictions, as well. The vertical lines on the points give the total uncertainties in the data, and the horizontal lines show the bin widths. The two lower panels in each plot give the ratios of the FONLL predictions to the CMS and ALICE data, shown by circles and squares, respectively.

png pdf
Figure 8-a:
Differential cross section $ {\mathrm {d}}\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {p_{\mathrm {T}}} $ for prompt ${{\mathrm{D}^{\ast}(2010)^{\pm}}}$ meson production with $ {p_{\mathrm {T}}} < $ 24 GeV from CMS (black circles, this paper) at $\sqrt {s} = $ 13 TeV and ALICE [7] (magenta squares) at $\sqrt {s} = $ 7 TeV and $ {| y |} < $ 0.5. The corresponding predictions from FONLL are shown by the unfilled and filled boxes, respectively. The cross section definition by ALICE includes a factor of 1/2 that accounts for the fact that the measured yields include particles and antiparticles while the cross sections are given for particles only. The same is true for the corresponding FONLL predictions, as well. The vertical lines on the points give the total uncertainties in the data, and the horizontal lines show the bin widths. The two lower panels give the ratios of the FONLL predictions to the CMS and ALICE data, shown by circles and squares, respectively.

png pdf
Figure 8-b:
Differential cross section $ {\mathrm {d}}\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {p_{\mathrm {T}}} $ for prompt ${\mathrm{D^0}} + \mathrm{\overline{D}{}^{0}}$ meson production with $ {p_{\mathrm {T}}} < $ 24 GeV from CMS (black circles, this paper) at $\sqrt {s} = $ 13 TeV and ALICE [7] (magenta squares) at $\sqrt {s} = $ 7 TeV and $ {| y |} < $ 0.5. The corresponding predictions from FONLL are shown by the unfilled and filled boxes, respectively. The cross section definition by ALICE includes a factor of 1/2 that accounts for the fact that the measured yields include particles and antiparticles while the cross sections are given for particles only. The same is true for the corresponding FONLL predictions, as well. The vertical lines on the points give the total uncertainties in the data, and the horizontal lines show the bin widths. The two lower panels give the ratios of the FONLL predictions to the CMS and ALICE data, shown by circles and squares, respectively.

png pdf
Figure 8-c:
Differential cross section $ {\mathrm {d}}\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {p_{\mathrm {T}}} $ for prompt ${\mathrm{D^{\pm}}}$ meson production with $ {p_{\mathrm {T}}} < $ 24 GeV from CMS (black circles, this paper) at $\sqrt {s} = $ 13 TeV and ALICE [7] (magenta squares) at $\sqrt {s} = $ 7 TeV and $ {| y |} < $ 0.5. The corresponding predictions from FONLL are shown by the unfilled and filled boxes, respectively. The cross section definition by ALICE includes a factor of 1/2 that accounts for the fact that the measured yields include particles and antiparticles while the cross sections are given for particles only. The same is true for the corresponding FONLL predictions, as well. The vertical lines on the points give the total uncertainties in the data, and the horizontal lines show the bin widths. The two lower panels give the ratios of the FONLL predictions to the CMS and ALICE data, shown by circles and squares, respectively.

png pdf
Figure 9:
Differential cross section $ {\mathrm {d}}\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {p_{\mathrm {T}}} $ for the prompt ${\mathrm{D^0}} +\mathrm{\overline{D}{}^{0}} $ meson production from CMS at $\sqrt {s} = $ 13 TeV (black circles, this paper) and 5.02 TeV [4] (light blue squares) for $ {| y |} < $ 1. The corresponding FONLL predictions are shown by the unfilled and filled boxes, respectively. The vertical lines on the points give the total uncertainty in the data, and the horizontal lines show the bin widths. The two lower panels give the ratios of the FONLL predictions to the CMS data at $\sqrt {s} = $ 13 TeV and 5.02 TeV, shown by circles and squares, respectively.

png pdf
Figure 10:
Differential cross section $ {\mathrm {d}}\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {p_{\mathrm {T}}} $ for prompt ${{\mathrm{D}^{\ast}(2010)^{\pm}}}$ (upper left), ${\mathrm{D^0}} + \mathrm{\overline{D}{}^{0}}$ (upper right) and ${\mathrm{D^{\pm}}}$ (lower) meson production at $\sqrt {s} = $ 13 TeV with $ {p_{\mathrm {T}}} < $ 16 GeV for CMS (black circles, this paper) for $ {| \eta |} < $ 2.1 and LHCb [11] (blue squares) for 2 $ < {| y |} < $ 2.5. The corresponding FONLL predictions are shown by the unfilled and filled boxes, respectively. To simplify the results representation, the equivalence between $ {\mathrm {d}}\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {p_{\mathrm {T}}} $ for 2 $ < {| y |} < $ 2.5 and $ {\mathrm {d}}^2\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {p_{\mathrm {T}}} dy$ for 2 $ < y < $ 2.5, as in the original publication, has been used. The vertical lines on the points give the total uncertainty in the data, and the horizontal lines show the bin widths. The two lower panels in each plot give the ratios of the FONLL predictions to the CMS and LHCb data, shown by circles and squares, respectively.

png pdf
Figure 10-a:
Differential cross section $ {\mathrm {d}}\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {p_{\mathrm {T}}} $ for prompt ${{\mathrm{D}^{\ast}(2010)^{\pm}}}$ meson production at $\sqrt {s} = $ 13 TeV with $ {p_{\mathrm {T}}} < $ 16 GeV for CMS (black circles, this paper) for $ {| \eta |} < $ 2.1 and LHCb [11] (blue squares) for 2 $ < {| y |} < $ 2.5. The corresponding FONLL predictions are shown by the unfilled and filled boxes, respectively. To simplify the results representation, the equivalence between $ {\mathrm {d}}\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {p_{\mathrm {T}}} $ for 2 $ < {| y |} < $ 2.5 and $ {\mathrm {d}}^2\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {p_{\mathrm {T}}} dy$ for 2 $ < y < $ 2.5, as in the original publication, has been used. The vertical lines on the points give the total uncertainty in the data, and the horizontal lines show the bin widths. The two lower panels give the ratios of the FONLL predictions to the CMS and LHCb data, shown by circles and squares, respectively.

png pdf
Figure 10-b:
Differential cross section $ {\mathrm {d}}\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {p_{\mathrm {T}}} $ for prompt ${\mathrm{D^0}} + \mathrm{\overline{D}{}^{0}}$ meson production at $\sqrt {s} = $ 13 TeV with $ {p_{\mathrm {T}}} < $ 16 GeV for CMS (black circles, this paper) for $ {| \eta |} < $ 2.1 and LHCb [11] (blue squares) for 2 $ < {| y |} < $ 2.5. The corresponding FONLL predictions are shown by the unfilled and filled boxes, respectively. To simplify the results representation, the equivalence between $ {\mathrm {d}}\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {p_{\mathrm {T}}} $ for 2 $ < {| y |} < $ 2.5 and $ {\mathrm {d}}^2\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {p_{\mathrm {T}}} dy$ for 2 $ < y < $ 2.5, as in the original publication, has been used. The vertical lines on the points give the total uncertainty in the data, and the horizontal lines show the bin widths. The two lower panels give the ratios of the FONLL predictions to the CMS and LHCb data, shown by circles and squares, respectively.

png pdf
Figure 10-c:
Differential cross section $ {\mathrm {d}}\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {p_{\mathrm {T}}} $ for prompt ${\mathrm{D^{\pm}}}$ meson production at $\sqrt {s} = $ 13 TeV with $ {p_{\mathrm {T}}} < $ 16 GeV for CMS (black circles, this paper) for $ {| \eta |} < $ 2.1 and LHCb [11] (blue squares) for 2 $ < {| y |} < $ 2.5. The corresponding FONLL predictions are shown by the unfilled and filled boxes, respectively. To simplify the results representation, the equivalence between $ {\mathrm {d}}\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {p_{\mathrm {T}}} $ for 2 $ < {| y |} < $ 2.5 and $ {\mathrm {d}}^2\sigma / {\mathrm {d}} {p_{\mathrm {T}}} dy$ for 2 $ < y < $ 2.5, as in the original publication, has been used. The vertical lines on the points give the total uncertainty in the data, and the horizontal lines show the bin widths. The two lower panels give the ratios of the FONLL predictions to the CMS and LHCb data, shown by circles and squares, respectively.
Tables

png pdf
Table 1:
The selection requirements for each charm meson.

png pdf
Table 2:
The signal yields in data for $\mathrm{D^{*+}}$, ${\mathrm{D^0}}$, and ${\mathrm{D^+}}$ mesons in ${p_{\mathrm {T}}}$ bins for $ {| \eta |} < $ 2.1. The uncertainties are statistical only.

png pdf
Table 3:
The signal yields in data for $\mathrm{D^{*+}}$, ${\mathrm{D^0}}$, and ${\mathrm{D^+}}$ mesons with 4 $ < {p_{\mathrm {T}}} < $ 100 GeV in $ {| \eta |}$ bins. The uncertainties are statistical only.

png pdf
Table 4:
Summary of the systematic uncertainties (%) in the $\mathrm{D^{*+}}$, ${\mathrm{D^0}}$, and ${\mathrm{D^+}}$ meson cross sections. For the bin-dependent systematic uncertainties in the table, the weighted average is shown. The total uncertainty is the sum in quadrature of the individual contributions.

png pdf
Table 5:
The differential cross sections of prompt $\mathrm{D^{*+}} + \mathrm{D^{*-}}$, ${\mathrm{D^0}} + \mathrm{\overline{D}{}^{0}}$, and ${\mathrm{D^+}} + \mathrm{D^{-}}$ production in ${p_{\mathrm {T}}}$ bins with $ {| \eta |} < $ 2.1; the first uncertainty is statistical, the second is systematic.

png pdf
Table 6:
The differential cross sections of prompt $\mathrm{D^{*+}} + \mathrm{D^{*-}}$, ${\mathrm{D^0}} + \mathrm{\overline{D}{}^{0}}$, and ${\mathrm{D^+}} + \mathrm{D^{-}}$ production in $ {| \eta |}$ bins with 4 $ < {p_{\mathrm {T}}} < $ 100 GeV; the first uncertainty is statistical, the second is systematic.
Summary
The differential cross sections ${\mathrm{d}}\sigma/{\mathrm{d}}{p_{\mathrm{T}}}$ and ${\mathrm{d}}\sigma/{\mathrm{d}}|{\eta}|$ for prompt charm meson (${{\mathrm{D}^{\ast}(2010)^{\pm}}}$, ${\mathrm{D^0}}$ ($\mathrm{\overline{D}{}^{0}}$), and ${\mathrm{D^{\pm}}}$) production are measured in the transverse momentum range 4 $ < {p_{\mathrm{T}}} < $ 100 GeV and pseudorapidity $|{\eta}| < $ 2.1, using data collected by the CMS experiment in proton-proton collisions in 2016 at $\sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 29 nb$^{-1}$. The charm mesons were identified with signal invariant mass peaks of high statistical significance. The contamination arising from nonprompt D mesons originating from b hadron decays was removed using Monte Carlo event simulations, validated by measurements.

The measured cross section values are compared to predictions from a theoretical calculation and several different Monte Carlo generators. The agreement with the various models can be considered fair, but no single Monte Carlo simulation or theoretical prediction describes the data well over the entire kinematic range. The measurements tend to favor a higher cross section than predicted by the FONLL calculations [15,16] and lower than estimated by the PYTHIA event generators [13,14]. The cross section predictions from the different PYTHIA tunes differ in both normalization and shape, which confirms that the description of the data provided by the models is sensitive to further model improvements. Overall, the best description is obtained by the upper edge of the FONLL uncertainty band, which could be taken as a reference prediction for background estimations for other processes, over the full kinematic range covered by all the LHC measurements. By confirming this finding in kinematic regions not previously covered, this measurement makes a contribution to the understanding of charm meson production in hadronic collisions, which is still dominated by large uncertainties in the present theoretical models.
References
1 FASER Collaboration Technical Proposal: FASERnu technical report, January 2001.03073
2 S. Alekhin et al. A facility to Search for Hidden Particles at the CERN SPS: the SHiP physics case Rept. Prog. Phys. 79 (2016), no. CERN-SPSC-2015-017, SPSC-P-350-ADD-1, 124201 1504.04855
3 SHiP Collaboration SND@LHC - Scattering and Neutrino Detector at the LHC CERN-LHCC-2021-003, LHCC-P-016, CERN, Geneva, Jan
4 CMS Collaboration Nuclear modification factor of D$ ^0 $ mesons in PbPb collisions at $ \sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}} = $ 5.02 TeV PLB 782 (2018) 474 CMS-HIN-16-001
1708.04962
5 ATLAS Collaboration Measurement of $ D^{*\pm} $, $ D^\pm $ and $ D_s^\pm $ meson production cross sections in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 7 TeV with the ATLAS detector NPB 907 (2016) 717 1512.02913
6 ALICE Collaboration Measurement of $ {{\mathrm{D}}^0} $ , $ {{\mathrm{D}}^+} $ , $ {{\mathrm{D}}^{*+}} $ and $ {{\mathrm{D}}^+_{\mathrm{s}}} $ production in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 5.02 TeV with ALICE EPJC 79 (2019) 388 1901.07979
7 ALICE Collaboration Measurement of charm production at central rapidity in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 7 TeV JHEP 01 (2012) 128 1111.1553
8 ALICE Collaboration Measurement of D-meson production at mid-rapidity in pp collisions at $ {\sqrt{s}=7} $ TeV EPJC 77 (2017) 550 1702.00766
9 LHCb Collaboration Measurements of prompt charm production cross-sections in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 5 TeV JHEP 06 (2017) 147 1610.02230
10 LHCb Collaboration Prompt charm production in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 7 TeV NPB 871 (2013) 1 1302.2864
11 LHCb Collaboration Measurements of prompt charm production cross-sections in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV JHEP 03 (2016) 159 1510.01707
12 CMS Collaboration HEPData record for this analysis doi
13 T. Sjostrand, S. Mrenna, and P. Z. Skands PYTHIA 6.4 physics and manual JHEP 05 (2006) 026 hep-ph/0603175
14 T. Sjostrand et al. An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2 CPC 191 (2015) 159 1410.3012
15 M. Cacciari, M. Greco, and P. Nason The $ p_T $ spectrum in heavy flavor hadroproduction JHEP 05 (1998) 007 hep-ph/9803400
16 M. Cacciari, M. L. Mangano, and P. Nason Gluon PDF constraints from the ratio of forward heavy-quark production at the LHC at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 7 and 13 TeV EPJC 75 (2015) 610 1507.06197
17 CMS Collaboration Description and performance of track and primary-vertex reconstruction with the CMS tracker JINST 9 (2014) P10009 CMS-TRK-11-001
1405.6569
18 CMS Collaboration The CMS trigger system JINST 12 (2017) P01020 CMS-TRG-12-001
1609.02366
19 CMS Collaboration The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC JINST 3 (2008) S08004 CMS-00-001
20 CMS Collaboration Precision luminosity measurement in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV in 2015 and 2016 at CMS Submitted to EPJC CMS-LUM-17-003
2104.01927
21 M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez The anti-$ {k_{\mathrm{T}}} $ jet clustering algorithm JHEP 04 (2008) 063 0802.1189
22 M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez FastJet user manual EPJC 72 (2012) 1896 1111.6097
23 D. J. Lange The EvtGen particle decay simulation package NIMA 462 (2001) 152
24 GEANT4 Collaboration GEANT4--A simulation toolkit NIMA 506 (2003) 250
25 Particle Data Group, M. Tanabashi et al. Review of particle physics PRD 98 (2018) 030001
26 CMS Collaboration Measurement of tracking efficiency CDS
27 CMS Collaboration Event generator tunes obtained from underlying event and multiparton scattering measurements EPJC 76 (2016) 155 CMS-GEN-14-001
1512.00815
28 CMS Collaboration Studies of beauty suppression via nonprompt $ D^0 $ mesons in Pb-Pb collisions at $ Q^2 = $ 4 GeV$^2 $ PRL 123 (2019) 022001 CMS-HIN-16-016
1810.11102
29 CMS Collaboration Tracking POG results for pion efficiency with the D* meson using data from 2016 and 2017 CDS
30 M. J. Oreglia A study of the reactions $\psi' \to \gamma\gamma \psi$ PhD thesis, Stanford University, 1980 SLAC Report SLAC-R-236, see A
31 J. Gaiser Charmonium Spectroscopy From Radiative Decays of the $\mathrm{J}/\psi$ PhD thesis, SLAC
32 CMS Collaboration CMS luminosity measurements for the 2016 data taking period CMS-PAS-LUM-17-001 CMS-PAS-LUM-17-001
33 M. Lisovyi, A. Verbytskyi, and O. Zenaiev Combined analysis of charm-quark fragmentation-fraction measurements EPJC 76 (2016) 397 1509.01061
34 CMS Collaboration Study of the underlying event at forward rapidity in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 0.9, 2.76, and 7 TeV JHEP 04 (2013) 072 CMS-FWD-11-003
1302.2394
35 R. Field Early LHC underlying event data - findings and surprises in 22nd Hadron Collider Physics Symposium (HCP 2010), W. Trischuk, ed Toronto 1010.3558
36 ATLAS Collaboration Summary of ATLAS Pythia 8 tunes ATL-PHYS-PUB-2012-003, 8
37 R. Corke and T. Sjostrand Interleaved parton showers and tuning prospects JHEP 03 (2011) 032 1011.1759
38 P. Skands, S. Carrazza, and J. Rojo Tuning PYTHIA 8.1: the Monash 2013 tune EPJC 74 (2014) 3024 1404.5630
39 CMS Collaboration Extraction and validation of a new set of CMS PYTHIA8 tunes from underlying-event measurements EPJC 80 (2020) 4 CMS-GEN-17-001
1903.12179
Compact Muon Solenoid
LHC, CERN