CMS logoCMS event Hgg
Compact Muon Solenoid
LHC, CERN

CMS-EXO-22-011 ; CERN-EP-2024-032
Search for heavy neutral leptons in final states with electrons, muons, and hadronically decaying tau leptons in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV
JHEP 06 (2024) 123
Abstract: A search for heavy neutral leptons (HNLs) of Majorana or Dirac type using proton-proton collision data at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV is presented. The data were collected by the CMS experiment at the CERN LHC and correspond to an integrated luminosity of 138 fb$ ^{-1} $. Events with three charged leptons (electrons, muons, and hadronically decaying tau leptons) are selected, corresponding to HNL production in association with a charged lepton and decay of the HNL to two charged leptons and a standard model (SM) neutrino. The search is performed for HNL masses between 10 GeV and 1.5 TeV. No evidence for an HNL signal is observed in data. Upper limits at 95% confidence level are found for the squared coupling strength of the HNL to SM neutrinos, considering exclusive coupling of the HNL to a single SM neutrino generation, for both Majorana and Dirac HNLs. The limits exceed previously achieved experimental constraints for a wide range of HNL masses, and the limits on tau neutrino coupling scenarios with HNL masses above the W boson mass are presented for the first time.
Figures & Tables Summary References CMS Publications
Figures

png pdf
Figure 1:
Examples of Feynman diagrams for production and decay of an HNL (indicated with the symbol $ \mathrm{N} $) resulting in final states with three charged leptons. The production processes DY (upper row and lower left) and VBF (lower right) are shown, with decays mediated by a W boson (upper row and lower right) or a Z boson (lower left). In the left column, HNLs of Majorana type with an LNV decay are shown, whereas the right column has HNLs of Dirac type with an LNC decay. The leptons that couple directly to the HNL (indicated with the symbol $\ell$) are restricted to the SM generation that couples with the HNL, whereas the leptons from the W and Z boson decays (indicated with the symbol $ \ell^\prime $) can be from any SM generation.

png pdf
Figure 1-a:
Examples of Feynman diagrams for production and decay of an HNL (indicated with the symbol $ \mathrm{N} $) resulting in final states with three charged leptons. The production processes DY (upper row and lower left) and VBF (lower right) are shown, with decays mediated by a W boson (upper row and lower right) or a Z boson (lower left). In the left column, HNLs of Majorana type with an LNV decay are shown, whereas the right column has HNLs of Dirac type with an LNC decay. The leptons that couple directly to the HNL (indicated with the symbol $\ell$) are restricted to the SM generation that couples with the HNL, whereas the leptons from the W and Z boson decays (indicated with the symbol $ \ell^\prime $) can be from any SM generation.

png pdf
Figure 1-b:
Examples of Feynman diagrams for production and decay of an HNL (indicated with the symbol $ \mathrm{N} $) resulting in final states with three charged leptons. The production processes DY (upper row and lower left) and VBF (lower right) are shown, with decays mediated by a W boson (upper row and lower right) or a Z boson (lower left). In the left column, HNLs of Majorana type with an LNV decay are shown, whereas the right column has HNLs of Dirac type with an LNC decay. The leptons that couple directly to the HNL (indicated with the symbol $\ell$) are restricted to the SM generation that couples with the HNL, whereas the leptons from the W and Z boson decays (indicated with the symbol $ \ell^\prime $) can be from any SM generation.

png pdf
Figure 1-c:
Examples of Feynman diagrams for production and decay of an HNL (indicated with the symbol $ \mathrm{N} $) resulting in final states with three charged leptons. The production processes DY (upper row and lower left) and VBF (lower right) are shown, with decays mediated by a W boson (upper row and lower right) or a Z boson (lower left). In the left column, HNLs of Majorana type with an LNV decay are shown, whereas the right column has HNLs of Dirac type with an LNC decay. The leptons that couple directly to the HNL (indicated with the symbol $\ell$) are restricted to the SM generation that couples with the HNL, whereas the leptons from the W and Z boson decays (indicated with the symbol $ \ell^\prime $) can be from any SM generation.

png pdf
Figure 1-d:
Examples of Feynman diagrams for production and decay of an HNL (indicated with the symbol $ \mathrm{N} $) resulting in final states with three charged leptons. The production processes DY (upper row and lower left) and VBF (lower right) are shown, with decays mediated by a W boson (upper row and lower right) or a Z boson (lower left). In the left column, HNLs of Majorana type with an LNV decay are shown, whereas the right column has HNLs of Dirac type with an LNC decay. The leptons that couple directly to the HNL (indicated with the symbol $\ell$) are restricted to the SM generation that couples with the HNL, whereas the leptons from the W and Z boson decays (indicated with the symbol $ \ell^\prime $) can be from any SM generation.

png pdf
Figure 2:
Comparison of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) distributions in the low-mass selection for the 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ categories combined. Important input variables to the BDT training are shown: $ \min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-}) $ (upper left), $ m_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper right), $ \Delta R $ between the two leptons used for $ \min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-}) $ ($ \Delta R[\min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-})] $, lower left), $ m(3\ell) $ (lower right). The predicted background yields are shown before the fit to the data (``prefit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to tau neutrinos are shown with coloured lines, and are normalized to the total background yield. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the predictions. The last bins include the overflow contributions. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 2-a:
Comparison of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) distributions in the low-mass selection for the 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ categories combined. Important input variables to the BDT training are shown: $ \min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-}) $ (upper left), $ m_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper right), $ \Delta R $ between the two leptons used for $ \min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-}) $ ($ \Delta R[\min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-})] $, lower left), $ m(3\ell) $ (lower right). The predicted background yields are shown before the fit to the data (``prefit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to tau neutrinos are shown with coloured lines, and are normalized to the total background yield. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the predictions. The last bins include the overflow contributions. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 2-b:
Comparison of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) distributions in the low-mass selection for the 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ categories combined. Important input variables to the BDT training are shown: $ \min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-}) $ (upper left), $ m_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper right), $ \Delta R $ between the two leptons used for $ \min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-}) $ ($ \Delta R[\min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-})] $, lower left), $ m(3\ell) $ (lower right). The predicted background yields are shown before the fit to the data (``prefit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to tau neutrinos are shown with coloured lines, and are normalized to the total background yield. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the predictions. The last bins include the overflow contributions. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 2-c:
Comparison of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) distributions in the low-mass selection for the 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ categories combined. Important input variables to the BDT training are shown: $ \min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-}) $ (upper left), $ m_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper right), $ \Delta R $ between the two leptons used for $ \min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-}) $ ($ \Delta R[\min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-})] $, lower left), $ m(3\ell) $ (lower right). The predicted background yields are shown before the fit to the data (``prefit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to tau neutrinos are shown with coloured lines, and are normalized to the total background yield. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the predictions. The last bins include the overflow contributions. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 2-d:
Comparison of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) distributions in the low-mass selection for the 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ categories combined. Important input variables to the BDT training are shown: $ \min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-}) $ (upper left), $ m_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper right), $ \Delta R $ between the two leptons used for $ \min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-}) $ ($ \Delta R[\min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-})] $, lower left), $ m(3\ell) $ (lower right). The predicted background yields are shown before the fit to the data (``prefit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to tau neutrinos are shown with coloured lines, and are normalized to the total background yield. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the predictions. The last bins include the overflow contributions. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 3:
Comparison of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) distributions in the low-mass selection for the 1$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ categories combined. Important input variables to the BDT training are shown: $ \min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-}) $ (upper left), $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\ell_{3})$ (upper right), $ m(3\ell) $ (lower left), $ L_{\mathrm{T}} $ (lower right). The predicted background yields are shown before the fit to the data (``prefit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to tau neutrinos are shown with coloured lines, and are normalized to the total background yield. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the predictions. The last bins include the overflow contributions. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 3-a:
Comparison of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) distributions in the low-mass selection for the 1$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ categories combined. Important input variables to the BDT training are shown: $ \min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-}) $ (upper left), $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\ell_{3})$ (upper right), $ m(3\ell) $ (lower left), $ L_{\mathrm{T}} $ (lower right). The predicted background yields are shown before the fit to the data (``prefit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to tau neutrinos are shown with coloured lines, and are normalized to the total background yield. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the predictions. The last bins include the overflow contributions. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 3-b:
Comparison of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) distributions in the low-mass selection for the 1$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ categories combined. Important input variables to the BDT training are shown: $ \min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-}) $ (upper left), $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\ell_{3})$ (upper right), $ m(3\ell) $ (lower left), $ L_{\mathrm{T}} $ (lower right). The predicted background yields are shown before the fit to the data (``prefit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to tau neutrinos are shown with coloured lines, and are normalized to the total background yield. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the predictions. The last bins include the overflow contributions. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 3-c:
Comparison of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) distributions in the low-mass selection for the 1$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ categories combined. Important input variables to the BDT training are shown: $ \min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-}) $ (upper left), $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\ell_{3})$ (upper right), $ m(3\ell) $ (lower left), $ L_{\mathrm{T}} $ (lower right). The predicted background yields are shown before the fit to the data (``prefit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to tau neutrinos are shown with coloured lines, and are normalized to the total background yield. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the predictions. The last bins include the overflow contributions. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 3-d:
Comparison of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) distributions in the low-mass selection for the 1$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ categories combined. Important input variables to the BDT training are shown: $ \min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-}) $ (upper left), $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\ell_{3})$ (upper right), $ m(3\ell) $ (lower left), $ L_{\mathrm{T}} $ (lower right). The predicted background yields are shown before the fit to the data (``prefit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to tau neutrinos are shown with coloured lines, and are normalized to the total background yield. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the predictions. The last bins include the overflow contributions. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 4:
Comparison of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) distributions in the high-mass selection for the 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ categories combined. Important input variables to the BDT training are shown: $ \Delta R[\min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-})] $ (upper left), $ m_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper right), $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\ell_{3})$ (lower left), $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ (lower right). The predicted background yields are shown before the fit to the data (``prefit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to tau neutrinos are shown with coloured lines, and are normalized to the total background yield. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the predictions. The last bins include the overflow contributions. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 4-a:
Comparison of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) distributions in the high-mass selection for the 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ categories combined. Important input variables to the BDT training are shown: $ \Delta R[\min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-})] $ (upper left), $ m_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper right), $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\ell_{3})$ (lower left), $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ (lower right). The predicted background yields are shown before the fit to the data (``prefit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to tau neutrinos are shown with coloured lines, and are normalized to the total background yield. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the predictions. The last bins include the overflow contributions. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 4-b:
Comparison of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) distributions in the high-mass selection for the 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ categories combined. Important input variables to the BDT training are shown: $ \Delta R[\min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-})] $ (upper left), $ m_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper right), $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\ell_{3})$ (lower left), $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ (lower right). The predicted background yields are shown before the fit to the data (``prefit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to tau neutrinos are shown with coloured lines, and are normalized to the total background yield. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the predictions. The last bins include the overflow contributions. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 4-c:
Comparison of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) distributions in the high-mass selection for the 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ categories combined. Important input variables to the BDT training are shown: $ \Delta R[\min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-})] $ (upper left), $ m_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper right), $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\ell_{3})$ (lower left), $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ (lower right). The predicted background yields are shown before the fit to the data (``prefit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to tau neutrinos are shown with coloured lines, and are normalized to the total background yield. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the predictions. The last bins include the overflow contributions. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 4-d:
Comparison of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) distributions in the high-mass selection for the 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ categories combined. Important input variables to the BDT training are shown: $ \Delta R[\min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-})] $ (upper left), $ m_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper right), $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\ell_{3})$ (lower left), $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ (lower right). The predicted background yields are shown before the fit to the data (``prefit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to tau neutrinos are shown with coloured lines, and are normalized to the total background yield. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the predictions. The last bins include the overflow contributions. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 5:
Comparison of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) distributions in the WZ CR. The leading lepton $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper left) and $ \eta $ (upper right), as well as $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ (lower left) and $ \min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-}) $ (lower right) are shown. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the predictions. The last bins include the overflow contributions. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 5-a:
Comparison of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) distributions in the WZ CR. The leading lepton $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper left) and $ \eta $ (upper right), as well as $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ (lower left) and $ \min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-}) $ (lower right) are shown. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the predictions. The last bins include the overflow contributions. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 5-b:
Comparison of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) distributions in the WZ CR. The leading lepton $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper left) and $ \eta $ (upper right), as well as $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ (lower left) and $ \min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-}) $ (lower right) are shown. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the predictions. The last bins include the overflow contributions. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 5-c:
Comparison of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) distributions in the WZ CR. The leading lepton $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper left) and $ \eta $ (upper right), as well as $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ (lower left) and $ \min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-}) $ (lower right) are shown. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the predictions. The last bins include the overflow contributions. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 5-d:
Comparison of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) distributions in the WZ CR. The leading lepton $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper left) and $ \eta $ (upper right), as well as $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ (lower left) and $ \min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-}) $ (lower right) are shown. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the predictions. The last bins include the overflow contributions. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 6:
Comparison of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) distributions in the ZZ CR. The leading lepton $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper left), $ m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-}) $ of $ \mathrm{Z}_2 $ ($ m(\mathrm{Z}_2) $, upper right), $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ (lower left), and $ \min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-}) $ (lower right) are shown. The ZZ prediction is scaled with a normalization factor of 1.12, as discussed in the text. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the predictions. The last bins include the overflow contributions. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 6-a:
Comparison of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) distributions in the ZZ CR. The leading lepton $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper left), $ m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-}) $ of $ \mathrm{Z}_2 $ ($ m(\mathrm{Z}_2) $, upper right), $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ (lower left), and $ \min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-}) $ (lower right) are shown. The ZZ prediction is scaled with a normalization factor of 1.12, as discussed in the text. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the predictions. The last bins include the overflow contributions. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 6-b:
Comparison of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) distributions in the ZZ CR. The leading lepton $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper left), $ m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-}) $ of $ \mathrm{Z}_2 $ ($ m(\mathrm{Z}_2) $, upper right), $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ (lower left), and $ \min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-}) $ (lower right) are shown. The ZZ prediction is scaled with a normalization factor of 1.12, as discussed in the text. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the predictions. The last bins include the overflow contributions. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 6-c:
Comparison of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) distributions in the ZZ CR. The leading lepton $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper left), $ m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-}) $ of $ \mathrm{Z}_2 $ ($ m(\mathrm{Z}_2) $, upper right), $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ (lower left), and $ \min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-}) $ (lower right) are shown. The ZZ prediction is scaled with a normalization factor of 1.12, as discussed in the text. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the predictions. The last bins include the overflow contributions. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 6-d:
Comparison of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) distributions in the ZZ CR. The leading lepton $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper left), $ m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-}) $ of $ \mathrm{Z}_2 $ ($ m(\mathrm{Z}_2) $, upper right), $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ (lower left), and $ \min m({\ell}^{+}{\ell}^{-}) $ (lower right) are shown. The ZZ prediction is scaled with a normalization factor of 1.12, as discussed in the text. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the predictions. The last bins include the overflow contributions. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 7:
Comparison of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) distributions in the $ \mathrm{Z}\gamma $ CR. The leading lepton $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper left) and $ \eta $ (upper right), $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ (lower left), and $ m_{\mathrm{T}} $ (lower right) are shown. The $ \mathrm{Z}\gamma $ prediction is scaled with a normalization factor of 1.11, as discussed in the text. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the predictions. The last bins include the overflow contributions. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 7-a:
Comparison of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) distributions in the $ \mathrm{Z}\gamma $ CR. The leading lepton $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper left) and $ \eta $ (upper right), $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ (lower left), and $ m_{\mathrm{T}} $ (lower right) are shown. The $ \mathrm{Z}\gamma $ prediction is scaled with a normalization factor of 1.11, as discussed in the text. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the predictions. The last bins include the overflow contributions. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 7-b:
Comparison of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) distributions in the $ \mathrm{Z}\gamma $ CR. The leading lepton $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper left) and $ \eta $ (upper right), $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ (lower left), and $ m_{\mathrm{T}} $ (lower right) are shown. The $ \mathrm{Z}\gamma $ prediction is scaled with a normalization factor of 1.11, as discussed in the text. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the predictions. The last bins include the overflow contributions. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 7-c:
Comparison of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) distributions in the $ \mathrm{Z}\gamma $ CR. The leading lepton $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper left) and $ \eta $ (upper right), $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ (lower left), and $ m_{\mathrm{T}} $ (lower right) are shown. The $ \mathrm{Z}\gamma $ prediction is scaled with a normalization factor of 1.11, as discussed in the text. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the predictions. The last bins include the overflow contributions. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 7-d:
Comparison of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) distributions in the $ \mathrm{Z}\gamma $ CR. The leading lepton $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper left) and $ \eta $ (upper right), $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ (lower left), and $ m_{\mathrm{T}} $ (lower right) are shown. The $ \mathrm{Z}\gamma $ prediction is scaled with a normalization factor of 1.11, as discussed in the text. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the predictions. The last bins include the overflow contributions. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 8:
Comparison of the number of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) events in the SR bins, shown for the 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ (left column) and 1$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ (right column) categories combined. The La1-8 and Lb1-8 (upper row), Ha1-Ha9 (middle row), and Hb1-16 (lower row) are displayed. The predicted background yields are shown with the values of the normalizations and nuisance parameters obtained in background-only fits applied (``postfit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to tau neutrinos are shown with coloured lines. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the background predictions as obtained from the fits. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the background predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 8-a:
Comparison of the number of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) events in the SR bins, shown for the 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ (left column) and 1$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ (right column) categories combined. The La1-8 and Lb1-8 (upper row), Ha1-Ha9 (middle row), and Hb1-16 (lower row) are displayed. The predicted background yields are shown with the values of the normalizations and nuisance parameters obtained in background-only fits applied (``postfit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to tau neutrinos are shown with coloured lines. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the background predictions as obtained from the fits. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the background predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 8-b:
Comparison of the number of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) events in the SR bins, shown for the 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ (left column) and 1$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ (right column) categories combined. The La1-8 and Lb1-8 (upper row), Ha1-Ha9 (middle row), and Hb1-16 (lower row) are displayed. The predicted background yields are shown with the values of the normalizations and nuisance parameters obtained in background-only fits applied (``postfit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to tau neutrinos are shown with coloured lines. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the background predictions as obtained from the fits. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the background predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 8-c:
Comparison of the number of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) events in the SR bins, shown for the 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ (left column) and 1$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ (right column) categories combined. The La1-8 and Lb1-8 (upper row), Ha1-Ha9 (middle row), and Hb1-16 (lower row) are displayed. The predicted background yields are shown with the values of the normalizations and nuisance parameters obtained in background-only fits applied (``postfit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to tau neutrinos are shown with coloured lines. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the background predictions as obtained from the fits. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the background predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 8-d:
Comparison of the number of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) events in the SR bins, shown for the 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ (left column) and 1$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ (right column) categories combined. The La1-8 and Lb1-8 (upper row), Ha1-Ha9 (middle row), and Hb1-16 (lower row) are displayed. The predicted background yields are shown with the values of the normalizations and nuisance parameters obtained in background-only fits applied (``postfit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to tau neutrinos are shown with coloured lines. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the background predictions as obtained from the fits. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the background predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 8-e:
Comparison of the number of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) events in the SR bins, shown for the 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ (left column) and 1$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ (right column) categories combined. The La1-8 and Lb1-8 (upper row), Ha1-Ha9 (middle row), and Hb1-16 (lower row) are displayed. The predicted background yields are shown with the values of the normalizations and nuisance parameters obtained in background-only fits applied (``postfit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to tau neutrinos are shown with coloured lines. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the background predictions as obtained from the fits. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the background predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 8-f:
Comparison of the number of observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) events in the SR bins, shown for the 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ (left column) and 1$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ (right column) categories combined. The La1-8 and Lb1-8 (upper row), Ha1-Ha9 (middle row), and Hb1-16 (lower row) are displayed. The predicted background yields are shown with the values of the normalizations and nuisance parameters obtained in background-only fits applied (``postfit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to tau neutrinos are shown with coloured lines. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the background predictions as obtained from the fits. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the background predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 9:
Comparison of the observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) BDT output distributions of the low-mass selection, shown for the $ \mathrm{e}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{e} $ and $ \mathrm{e}\mathrm{e}\mu $ channels combined (left column) and the $ \mathrm{e}\mu\mu $ and $ \mu\mu\mu $ channels combined (right column). The output scores BDT(10-40, e, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper left), BDT(10-40, $ \mu $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper right), BDT(50-75, e, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower left), and BDT(50-75, $ \mu $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower right) are displayed. The predicted background yields are shown with the values of the normalizations and nuisance parameters obtained in background-only fits applied (``postfit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to electron (left column) or muon (right column) neutrinos are shown with coloured lines. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the background predictions as obtained from the fits. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the background predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 9-a:
Comparison of the observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) BDT output distributions of the low-mass selection, shown for the $ \mathrm{e}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{e} $ and $ \mathrm{e}\mathrm{e}\mu $ channels combined (left column) and the $ \mathrm{e}\mu\mu $ and $ \mu\mu\mu $ channels combined (right column). The output scores BDT(10-40, e, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper left), BDT(10-40, $ \mu $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper right), BDT(50-75, e, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower left), and BDT(50-75, $ \mu $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower right) are displayed. The predicted background yields are shown with the values of the normalizations and nuisance parameters obtained in background-only fits applied (``postfit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to electron (left column) or muon (right column) neutrinos are shown with coloured lines. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the background predictions as obtained from the fits. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the background predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 9-b:
Comparison of the observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) BDT output distributions of the low-mass selection, shown for the $ \mathrm{e}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{e} $ and $ \mathrm{e}\mathrm{e}\mu $ channels combined (left column) and the $ \mathrm{e}\mu\mu $ and $ \mu\mu\mu $ channels combined (right column). The output scores BDT(10-40, e, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper left), BDT(10-40, $ \mu $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper right), BDT(50-75, e, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower left), and BDT(50-75, $ \mu $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower right) are displayed. The predicted background yields are shown with the values of the normalizations and nuisance parameters obtained in background-only fits applied (``postfit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to electron (left column) or muon (right column) neutrinos are shown with coloured lines. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the background predictions as obtained from the fits. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the background predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 9-c:
Comparison of the observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) BDT output distributions of the low-mass selection, shown for the $ \mathrm{e}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{e} $ and $ \mathrm{e}\mathrm{e}\mu $ channels combined (left column) and the $ \mathrm{e}\mu\mu $ and $ \mu\mu\mu $ channels combined (right column). The output scores BDT(10-40, e, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper left), BDT(10-40, $ \mu $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper right), BDT(50-75, e, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower left), and BDT(50-75, $ \mu $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower right) are displayed. The predicted background yields are shown with the values of the normalizations and nuisance parameters obtained in background-only fits applied (``postfit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to electron (left column) or muon (right column) neutrinos are shown with coloured lines. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the background predictions as obtained from the fits. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the background predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 9-d:
Comparison of the observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) BDT output distributions of the low-mass selection, shown for the $ \mathrm{e}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{e} $ and $ \mathrm{e}\mathrm{e}\mu $ channels combined (left column) and the $ \mathrm{e}\mu\mu $ and $ \mu\mu\mu $ channels combined (right column). The output scores BDT(10-40, e, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper left), BDT(10-40, $ \mu $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper right), BDT(50-75, e, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower left), and BDT(50-75, $ \mu $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower right) are displayed. The predicted background yields are shown with the values of the normalizations and nuisance parameters obtained in background-only fits applied (``postfit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to electron (left column) or muon (right column) neutrinos are shown with coloured lines. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the background predictions as obtained from the fits. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the background predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 10:
Comparison of the observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) BDT output distributions of the low-mass selection, shown for the 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ channels combined (left column) and the 1$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ channels combined (right column). The output scores BDT(10-40, $ \tau $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper left), BDT(10-40, $ \tau $, 1$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper right), BDT(50-75, $ \tau $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower left), and BDT(50-75, $ \tau $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower right) are displayed. The predicted background yields are shown with the values of the normalizations and nuisance parameters obtained in background-only fits applied (``postfit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to tau neutrinos are shown with coloured lines. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the background predictions as obtained from the fits. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the background predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 10-a:
Comparison of the observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) BDT output distributions of the low-mass selection, shown for the 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ channels combined (left column) and the 1$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ channels combined (right column). The output scores BDT(10-40, $ \tau $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper left), BDT(10-40, $ \tau $, 1$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper right), BDT(50-75, $ \tau $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower left), and BDT(50-75, $ \tau $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower right) are displayed. The predicted background yields are shown with the values of the normalizations and nuisance parameters obtained in background-only fits applied (``postfit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to tau neutrinos are shown with coloured lines. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the background predictions as obtained from the fits. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the background predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 10-b:
Comparison of the observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) BDT output distributions of the low-mass selection, shown for the 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ channels combined (left column) and the 1$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ channels combined (right column). The output scores BDT(10-40, $ \tau $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper left), BDT(10-40, $ \tau $, 1$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper right), BDT(50-75, $ \tau $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower left), and BDT(50-75, $ \tau $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower right) are displayed. The predicted background yields are shown with the values of the normalizations and nuisance parameters obtained in background-only fits applied (``postfit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to tau neutrinos are shown with coloured lines. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the background predictions as obtained from the fits. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the background predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 10-c:
Comparison of the observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) BDT output distributions of the low-mass selection, shown for the 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ channels combined (left column) and the 1$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ channels combined (right column). The output scores BDT(10-40, $ \tau $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper left), BDT(10-40, $ \tau $, 1$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper right), BDT(50-75, $ \tau $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower left), and BDT(50-75, $ \tau $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower right) are displayed. The predicted background yields are shown with the values of the normalizations and nuisance parameters obtained in background-only fits applied (``postfit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to tau neutrinos are shown with coloured lines. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the background predictions as obtained from the fits. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the background predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 10-d:
Comparison of the observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) BDT output distributions of the low-mass selection, shown for the 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ channels combined (left column) and the 1$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ channels combined (right column). The output scores BDT(10-40, $ \tau $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper left), BDT(10-40, $ \tau $, 1$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper right), BDT(50-75, $ \tau $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower left), and BDT(50-75, $ \tau $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower right) are displayed. The predicted background yields are shown with the values of the normalizations and nuisance parameters obtained in background-only fits applied (``postfit''). The HNL predictions for three different $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ values with exclusive coupling to tau neutrinos are shown with coloured lines. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainties in the data, and the hatched bands the total uncertainties in the background predictions as obtained from the fits. In the lower panels, the ratios of the event yield in data to the overall sum of the background predictions are shown.

png pdf
Figure 11:
Comparison of the observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) BDT output distributions of the high-mass selection, shown for the $ \mathrm{e}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{e} $ and $ \mathrm{e}\mathrm{e}\mu $ channels combined (left column) and the $ \mathrm{e}\mu\mu $ and $ \mu\mu\mu $ channels combined (right column). The output scores BDT(85-150, e, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper left), BDT(85-150, $ \mu $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper right), BDT(200-250, e, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (middle left), BDT(200-250, $ \mu $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (middle right), BDT(300-400, e, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower left), and BDT(300-400, $ \mu $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower right) are displayed. Notations as in Fig. 9.

png pdf
Figure 11-a:
Comparison of the observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) BDT output distributions of the high-mass selection, shown for the $ \mathrm{e}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{e} $ and $ \mathrm{e}\mathrm{e}\mu $ channels combined (left column) and the $ \mathrm{e}\mu\mu $ and $ \mu\mu\mu $ channels combined (right column). The output scores BDT(85-150, e, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper left), BDT(85-150, $ \mu $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper right), BDT(200-250, e, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (middle left), BDT(200-250, $ \mu $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (middle right), BDT(300-400, e, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower left), and BDT(300-400, $ \mu $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower right) are displayed. Notations as in Fig. 9.

png pdf
Figure 11-b:
Comparison of the observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) BDT output distributions of the high-mass selection, shown for the $ \mathrm{e}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{e} $ and $ \mathrm{e}\mathrm{e}\mu $ channels combined (left column) and the $ \mathrm{e}\mu\mu $ and $ \mu\mu\mu $ channels combined (right column). The output scores BDT(85-150, e, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper left), BDT(85-150, $ \mu $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper right), BDT(200-250, e, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (middle left), BDT(200-250, $ \mu $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (middle right), BDT(300-400, e, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower left), and BDT(300-400, $ \mu $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower right) are displayed. Notations as in Fig. 9.

png pdf
Figure 11-c:
Comparison of the observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) BDT output distributions of the high-mass selection, shown for the $ \mathrm{e}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{e} $ and $ \mathrm{e}\mathrm{e}\mu $ channels combined (left column) and the $ \mathrm{e}\mu\mu $ and $ \mu\mu\mu $ channels combined (right column). The output scores BDT(85-150, e, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper left), BDT(85-150, $ \mu $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper right), BDT(200-250, e, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (middle left), BDT(200-250, $ \mu $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (middle right), BDT(300-400, e, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower left), and BDT(300-400, $ \mu $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower right) are displayed. Notations as in Fig. 9.

png pdf
Figure 11-d:
Comparison of the observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) BDT output distributions of the high-mass selection, shown for the $ \mathrm{e}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{e} $ and $ \mathrm{e}\mathrm{e}\mu $ channels combined (left column) and the $ \mathrm{e}\mu\mu $ and $ \mu\mu\mu $ channels combined (right column). The output scores BDT(85-150, e, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper left), BDT(85-150, $ \mu $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper right), BDT(200-250, e, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (middle left), BDT(200-250, $ \mu $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (middle right), BDT(300-400, e, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower left), and BDT(300-400, $ \mu $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower right) are displayed. Notations as in Fig. 9.

png pdf
Figure 11-e:
Comparison of the observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) BDT output distributions of the high-mass selection, shown for the $ \mathrm{e}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{e} $ and $ \mathrm{e}\mathrm{e}\mu $ channels combined (left column) and the $ \mathrm{e}\mu\mu $ and $ \mu\mu\mu $ channels combined (right column). The output scores BDT(85-150, e, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper left), BDT(85-150, $ \mu $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper right), BDT(200-250, e, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (middle left), BDT(200-250, $ \mu $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (middle right), BDT(300-400, e, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower left), and BDT(300-400, $ \mu $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower right) are displayed. Notations as in Fig. 9.

png pdf
Figure 11-f:
Comparison of the observed (points) and predicted (coloured histograms) BDT output distributions of the high-mass selection, shown for the $ \mathrm{e}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{e} $ and $ \mathrm{e}\mathrm{e}\mu $ channels combined (left column) and the $ \mathrm{e}\mu\mu $ and $ \mu\mu\mu $ channels combined (right column). The output scores BDT(85-150, e, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper left), BDT(85-150, $ \mu $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (upper right), BDT(200-250, e, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (middle left), BDT(200-250, $ \mu $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (middle right), BDT(300-400, e, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower left), and BDT(300-400, $ \mu $, 0$ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $) (lower right) are displayed. Notations as in Fig. 9.

png pdf
Figure 12:
The 95% CL limits on $ |V_{\mathrm{e}\mathrm{N}}|^2 $ (upper row), $ |V_{\mu\mathrm{N}}|^2 $ (middle row), and $ |V_{\tau\mathrm{N}}|^2 $ (lower row) as functions of $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ for a Majorana (left) and Dirac (right) HNL. The area above the solid (dashed) black curve indicates the observed (expected) exclusion region. Previous results from the DELPHI Collaboration [142] are shown for reference. The previous CMS result ``3\ell prompt (2016)'' [46] is shown to highlight the improvements achieved in our analysis, and the results ``3\ell displaced'' [50], ``2\ell displaced'' [52], and ``$ t $-channel VBF'' [143] are shown to highlight the complementarity to other search strategies.

png pdf
Figure 12-a:
The 95% CL limits on $ |V_{\mathrm{e}\mathrm{N}}|^2 $ (upper row), $ |V_{\mu\mathrm{N}}|^2 $ (middle row), and $ |V_{\tau\mathrm{N}}|^2 $ (lower row) as functions of $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ for a Majorana (left) and Dirac (right) HNL. The area above the solid (dashed) black curve indicates the observed (expected) exclusion region. Previous results from the DELPHI Collaboration [142] are shown for reference. The previous CMS result ``3\ell prompt (2016)'' [46] is shown to highlight the improvements achieved in our analysis, and the results ``3\ell displaced'' [50], ``2\ell displaced'' [52], and ``$ t $-channel VBF'' [143] are shown to highlight the complementarity to other search strategies.

png pdf
Figure 12-b:
The 95% CL limits on $ |V_{\mathrm{e}\mathrm{N}}|^2 $ (upper row), $ |V_{\mu\mathrm{N}}|^2 $ (middle row), and $ |V_{\tau\mathrm{N}}|^2 $ (lower row) as functions of $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ for a Majorana (left) and Dirac (right) HNL. The area above the solid (dashed) black curve indicates the observed (expected) exclusion region. Previous results from the DELPHI Collaboration [142] are shown for reference. The previous CMS result ``3\ell prompt (2016)'' [46] is shown to highlight the improvements achieved in our analysis, and the results ``3\ell displaced'' [50], ``2\ell displaced'' [52], and ``$ t $-channel VBF'' [143] are shown to highlight the complementarity to other search strategies.

png pdf
Figure 12-c:
The 95% CL limits on $ |V_{\mathrm{e}\mathrm{N}}|^2 $ (upper row), $ |V_{\mu\mathrm{N}}|^2 $ (middle row), and $ |V_{\tau\mathrm{N}}|^2 $ (lower row) as functions of $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ for a Majorana (left) and Dirac (right) HNL. The area above the solid (dashed) black curve indicates the observed (expected) exclusion region. Previous results from the DELPHI Collaboration [142] are shown for reference. The previous CMS result ``3\ell prompt (2016)'' [46] is shown to highlight the improvements achieved in our analysis, and the results ``3\ell displaced'' [50], ``2\ell displaced'' [52], and ``$ t $-channel VBF'' [143] are shown to highlight the complementarity to other search strategies.

png pdf
Figure 12-d:
The 95% CL limits on $ |V_{\mathrm{e}\mathrm{N}}|^2 $ (upper row), $ |V_{\mu\mathrm{N}}|^2 $ (middle row), and $ |V_{\tau\mathrm{N}}|^2 $ (lower row) as functions of $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ for a Majorana (left) and Dirac (right) HNL. The area above the solid (dashed) black curve indicates the observed (expected) exclusion region. Previous results from the DELPHI Collaboration [142] are shown for reference. The previous CMS result ``3\ell prompt (2016)'' [46] is shown to highlight the improvements achieved in our analysis, and the results ``3\ell displaced'' [50], ``2\ell displaced'' [52], and ``$ t $-channel VBF'' [143] are shown to highlight the complementarity to other search strategies.

png pdf
Figure 12-e:
The 95% CL limits on $ |V_{\mathrm{e}\mathrm{N}}|^2 $ (upper row), $ |V_{\mu\mathrm{N}}|^2 $ (middle row), and $ |V_{\tau\mathrm{N}}|^2 $ (lower row) as functions of $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ for a Majorana (left) and Dirac (right) HNL. The area above the solid (dashed) black curve indicates the observed (expected) exclusion region. Previous results from the DELPHI Collaboration [142] are shown for reference. The previous CMS result ``3\ell prompt (2016)'' [46] is shown to highlight the improvements achieved in our analysis, and the results ``3\ell displaced'' [50], ``2\ell displaced'' [52], and ``$ t $-channel VBF'' [143] are shown to highlight the complementarity to other search strategies.

png pdf
Figure 12-f:
The 95% CL limits on $ |V_{\mathrm{e}\mathrm{N}}|^2 $ (upper row), $ |V_{\mu\mathrm{N}}|^2 $ (middle row), and $ |V_{\tau\mathrm{N}}|^2 $ (lower row) as functions of $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ for a Majorana (left) and Dirac (right) HNL. The area above the solid (dashed) black curve indicates the observed (expected) exclusion region. Previous results from the DELPHI Collaboration [142] are shown for reference. The previous CMS result ``3\ell prompt (2016)'' [46] is shown to highlight the improvements achieved in our analysis, and the results ``3\ell displaced'' [50], ``2\ell displaced'' [52], and ``$ t $-channel VBF'' [143] are shown to highlight the complementarity to other search strategies.
Tables

png pdf
Table 1:
Requirements on the light-lepton $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ values in the online and offline selections. The first two columns give the numbers of electrons and muons in the event ($ N_{\mathrm{e}} $ and $ N_{\mu} $). The third column lists the $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ thresholds on the reconstructed electrons and muons in the online trigger selection, where the indices 1, 2, and 3 refer to the highest $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, second-highest $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, and third-highest $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ lepton, respectively. The fourth column lists the offline event selection requirements applied in addition to the baseline requirements of $ p_{\mathrm{T}^{\ell_1} > $ 15 GeV and $ p_{\mathrm{T}^{\ell_{2,3}} > $ 10 GeV, where $\ell$ refers to reconstructed leptons of any flavour. For the $ \mathrm{e}\mu $ trigger, the requirements are given for the highest and second-highest $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ light lepton, referred to as $ \ell_1 $ and $ \ell_2 $ to indicate that a $ \tau_{\mathrm{h}} $ present in the event is not considered for the ordering. The values in parentheses give the thresholds applied in 2017 and 2018, where they are different from 2016. All events are required to pass the conditions of at least one of the rows.

png pdf
Table 2:
Definitions of the search regions (SRs) for events in the low-mass (upper part) and high-mass (lower part) selections.

png pdf
Table 3:
Relative impacts of the uncertainty sources in fits for six different fit models specified with $ m_{\mathrm{N}} $ value and coupling scenario, where the relative impact is defined as the ratio between the uncertainty from the respective source and the total uncertainty in the HNL signal strength. The symbol ``$ \text{---} $'' indicates that the corresponding uncertainty source is not applicable.

png pdf
Table 4:
Summary of the selections, categories, and distributions used in the maximum likelihood fits for the HNL signal points.
Summary
A search for heavy neutral leptons (HNLs) produced in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV has been presented. The data were collected with the CMS experiment at the LHC and correspond to an integrated luminosity of 138 fb$ ^{-1} $. Events with three charged leptons (electrons, muons, and hadronically decaying tau leptons) are selected, and dedicated identification criteria based on machine learning techniques are applied to reduce the contribution from nonprompt leptons not originating from the hard scattering process. Remaining standard model (SM) background contributions with nonprompt leptons are estimated from control samples in data, whereas other SM contributions that mostly stem from diboson production are estimated from Monte Carlo event simulations. A combination of categorization by kinematic properties and machine learning discriminants achieves optimal separation of the predicted signal and SM background contributions. No significant deviations from the SM predictions are observed. Exclusion limits at 95% confidence level are evaluated, assuming exclusive HNL couplings to a single generation of SM neutrinos in the mass range 10 GeV-1.5 TeV, for both Majorana and Dirac HNLs. These results exceed previous experimental constraints over large parts of the mass range. Constraints on tau neutrino couplings for HNL masses above the W boson mass are presented for the first time.
References
1 Super-Kamiokande Collaboration Evidence for oscillation of atmospheric neutrinos PRL 81 (1998) 1562 hep-ex/9807003
2 SNO Collaboration Direct evidence for neutrino flavor transformation from neutral-current interactions in the Sudbury Neutrino Observatory PRL 89 (2002) 011301 nucl-ex/0204008
3 KamLAND Collaboration First results from KamLAND: Evidence for reactor antineutrino disappearance PRL 90 (2003) 021802 hep-ex/0212021
4 S. Bilenky Neutrino oscillations: From a historical perspective to the present status NPB 908 (2016) 2 1602.00170
5 J. Formaggio, A. de Gouvêa, and R. Robertson Direct measurements of neutrino mass Phys. Rept. 914 (2021) 1 2102.00594
6 KATRIN Collaboration Direct neutrino-mass measurement with sub-electronvolt sensitivity Nature Phys. 18 (2022) 160 2105.08533
7 Planck Collaboration Planck 2018 results. VI. cosmological parameters Astron. Astrophys. 641 (2020) A6 1807.06209
8 eBOSS Collaboration Completed SDSS-IV extended baryon oscillation spectroscopic survey: Cosmological implications from two decades of spectroscopic surveys at the Apache Point Observatory PRD 103 (2021) 083533 2007.08991
9 Z. Sakr A short review on the latest neutrinos mass and number constraints from cosmological observables Universe 8 (2022) 284
10 P. Minkowski $ {\mu\to\mathrm{e}\gamma} $ at a rate of one out of $ 10^9 $ muon decays? PLB 67 (1977) 421
11 T. Yanagida Horizontal gauge symmetry and masses of neutrinos in Proc. Workshop on the Unified Theories and the Baryon Number in the Universe, Tsukuba, Japan, 1979
Conf. Proc. C 7902131 (1979) 95
12 M. Gell-Mann, P. Ramond, and R. Slansky Complex spinors and unified theories in Supergravity, North Holland Publishing, 1979 1306.4669
13 S. Glashow The future of elementary particle physics NATO Sci. Ser. B 61 (1980) 687
14 R. Mohapatra and G. Senjanović Neutrino mass and spontaneous parity nonconservation PRL 44 (1980) 912
15 J. Schechter and J. Valle Neutrino masses in $ \mathrm{SU}(2)\otimes\mathrm{U}(1) $ theories PRD 22 (1980) 2227
16 R. Shrock General theory of weak leptonic and semileptonic decays. I. leptonic pseudoscalar meson decays, with associated tests for, and bounds on, neutrino masses and lepton mixing PRD 24 (1981) 1232
17 Y. Cai, T. Han, T. Li, and R. Ruiz Lepton number violation: Seesaw models and their collider tests Front. Phys. 6 (2018) 40 1711.02180
18 S. Dodelson and L. Widrow Sterile neutrinos as dark matter PRL 72 (1994) 17 hep-ph/9303287
19 A. Boyarsky et al. Sterile neutrino dark matter Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 104 (2019) 1 1807.07938
20 M. Fukugita and T. Yanagida Baryogenesis without grand unification PLB 174 (1986) 45
21 E. Chun et al. Probing leptogenesis Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 33 (2018) 1842005 1711.02865
22 M. Drewes, Y. Georis, and J. Klarić Mapping the viable parameter space for testable leptogenesis PRL 128 (2022) 051801 2106.16226
23 J. Beacham et al. Physics beyond colliders at CERN: Beyond the standard model working group report JPG 47 (2020) 010501 1901.09966
24 M. Drewes, J. Klarić , and J. López-Pavón New benchmark models for heavy neutral lepton searches EPJC 82 (2022) 1176 2207.02742
25 F. del Aguila and J. Aguilar-Saavedra Distinguishing seesaw models at LHC with multi-lepton signals NPB 813 (2009) 22 0808.2468
26 A. Atre, T. Han, S. Pascoli, and B. Zhang The search for heavy Majorana neutrinos JHEP 05 (2009) 030 0901.3589
27 V. Tello et al. Left-right symmetry: from LHC to neutrinoless double beta decay PRL 106 (2011) 151801 1011.3522
28 A. Das and N. Okada Inverse seesaw neutrino signatures at the LHC and ILC PRD 88 (2013) 113001 1207.3734
29 F. Deppisch, P. Bhupal Dev, and A. Pilaftsis Neutrinos and collider physics New J. Phys. 17 (2015) 075019 1502.06541
30 A. Das and N. Okada Bounds on heavy Majorana neutrinos in type-I seesaw and implications for collider searches PLB 774 (2017) 32 1702.04668
31 A. Das, P. Konar, and A. Thalapillil Jet substructure shedding light on heavy Majorana neutrinos at the LHC JHEP 02 (2018) 083 1709.09712
32 A. Bhardwaj, A. Das, P. Konar, and A. Thalapillil Looking for minimal inverse seesaw scenarios at the LHC with jet substructure techniques JPG 47 (2020) 075002 1801.00797
33 S. Pascoli, R. Ruiz, and C. Weiland Heavy neutrinos with dynamic jet vetoes: multilepton searches at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 14, 27, and 100 TeV JHEP 06 (2019) 049 1812.08750
34 A. Abdullahi et al. The present and future status of heavy neutral leptons JPG 50 (2023) 020501 2203.08039
35 C. Antel et al. Feebly interacting particles: FIPs 2022 workshop report EPJC 83 (2023) 1122 2305.01715
36 W.-Y. Keung and G. Senjanovic Majorana neutrinos and the production of the right-handed charged gauge boson PRL 50 (1983) 1427
37 S. Petcov Possible signature for production of Majorana particles in $ \mathrm{e}^+ \mathrm{e}^- $ and $ {\mathrm{p}\overline{\mathrm{p}}} $ collisions PLB 139 (1984) 421
38 A. Datta, M. Guchait, and A. Pilaftsis Probing lepton number violation via Majorana neutrinos at hadron supercolliders PRD 50 (1994) 3195 hep-ph/9311257
39 P. Bhupal Dev, A. Pilaftsis, and U.-k. Yang New production mechanism for heavy neutrinos at the LHC PRL 112 (2014) 081801 1308.2209
40 D. Alva, T. Han, and R. Ruiz Heavy Majorana neutrinos from $ {\mathrm{W}\gamma} $ fusion at hadron colliders JHEP 02 (2015) 072 1411.7305
41 C. Degrande, O. Mattelaer, R. Ruiz, and J. Turner Fully-automated precision predictions for heavy neutrino production mechanisms at hadron colliders PRD 94 (2016) 053002 1602.06957
42 CMS Collaboration Search for heavy Majorana neutrinos in $ {\mu^\pm\mu^\pm}+ $jets and $ {\mathrm{e}^\pm\mathrm{e}^\pm}+ $jets events in $ {\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}} $ collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 7 TeV PLB 717 (2012) 109 CMS-EXO-11-076
1207.6079
43 CMS Collaboration Search for heavy Majorana neutrinos in $ {\mu^\pm\mu^\pm}+ $jets events in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 8 TeV PLB 748 (2015) 144 CMS-EXO-12-057
1501.05566
44 ATLAS Collaboration Search for heavy Majorana neutrinos with the ATLAS detector in $ {\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}} $ collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 8 TeV JHEP 07 (2015) 162 1506.06020
45 CMS Collaboration Search for heavy Majorana neutrinos in $ {\mathrm{e}^\pm\mathrm{e}^\pm}+ $jets and $ {\mathrm{e}^\pm\mu^\pm}+ $jets events in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 8 TeV JHEP 04 (2016) 169 CMS-EXO-14-014
1603.02248
46 CMS Collaboration Search for heavy neutral leptons in events with three charged leptons in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV PRL 120 (2018) 221801 CMS-EXO-17-012
1802.02965
47 CMS Collaboration Search for heavy Majorana neutrinos in same-sign dilepton channels in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV JHEP 01 (2019) 122 CMS-EXO-17-028
1806.10905
48 ATLAS Collaboration Search for heavy neutral leptons in decays of W bosons produced in 13 TeV $ {\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}} $ collisions using prompt and displaced signatures with the ATLAS detector JHEP 10 (2019) 265 1905.09787
49 LHCb Collaboration Search for heavy neutral leptons in $ {\mathrm{W^+}\to\mu^{+}\mu^\pm\,\text{jet}} $ decays EPJC 81 (2021) 248 2011.05263
50 CMS Collaboration Search for long-lived heavy neutral leptons with displaced vertices in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV JHEP 07 (2022) 081 CMS-EXO-20-009
2201.05578
51 ATLAS Collaboration Search for heavy neutral leptons in decays of W bosons using a dilepton displaced vertex in $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV $ {\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}} $ collisions with the ATLAS detector PRL 131 (2023) 061803 2204.11988
52 CMS Collaboration Search for long-lived heavy neutral leptons with lepton flavour conserving or violating decays to a jet and a charged lepton Submitted to JHEP, 2023 CMS-EXO-21-013
2312.07484
53 CMS Collaboration Review of searches for vector-like quarks, vector-like leptons, and heavy neutral leptons in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV at the CMS experiment Submitted to Phys. Rept., 2024 CMS-EXO-23-006
2405.17605
54 A. Abada, N. Bernal, M. Losada, and X. Marcano Inclusive displaced vertex searches for heavy neutral leptons at the LHC JHEP 01 (2019) 093 1807.10024
55 J.-L. Tastet, O. Ruchayskiy, and I. Timiryasov Reinterpreting the ATLAS bounds on heavy neutral leptons in a realistic neutrino oscillation model JHEP 12 (2021) 182 2107.12980
56 CMS Collaboration HEPData record for this analysis link
57 T. Asaka, S. Blanchet, and M. Shaposhnikov The \PGnMSM, dark matter and neutrino masses PLB 631 (2005) 151 hep-ph/0503065
58 CMS Collaboration The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC JINST 3 (2008) S08004
59 CMS Collaboration Development of the CMS detector for the CERN LHC Run 3 Accepted by JINST, 2023 CMS-PRF-21-001
2309.05466
60 CMS Collaboration Performance of the CMS Level-1 trigger in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV JINST 15 (2020) P10017 CMS-TRG-17-001
2006.10165
61 CMS Collaboration The CMS trigger system JINST 12 (2017) P01020 CMS-TRG-12-001
1609.02366
62 CMS Collaboration Particle-flow reconstruction and global event description with the CMS detector JINST 12 (2017) P10003 CMS-PRF-14-001
1706.04965
63 CMS Collaboration Technical proposal for the Phase-II upgrade of the Compact Muon Solenoid CMS Technical Proposal CERN-LHCC-2015-010, CMS-TDR-15-02, 2015
CDS
64 M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez The anti-$ k_{\mathrm{T}} $ jet clustering algorithm JHEP 04 (2008) 063 0802.1189
65 M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez FASTJET user manual EPJC 72 (2012) 1896 1111.6097
66 CMS Collaboration Jet energy scale and resolution in the CMS experiment in $ {\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}} $ collisions at 8 TeV JINST 12 (2017) P02014 CMS-JME-13-004
1607.03663
67 CMS Collaboration Jet algorithms performance in 13 TeV data CMS Physics Analysis Summary, 2017
CMS-PAS-JME-16-003
CMS-PAS-JME-16-003
68 CMS Collaboration Performance of missing transverse momentum reconstruction in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV using the CMS detector JINST 14 (2019) P07004 CMS-JME-17-001
1903.06078
69 CMS Collaboration Identification of heavy-flavour jets with the CMS detector in $ {\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}} $ collisions at 13 TeV JINST 13 (2018) P05011 CMS-BTV-16-002
1712.07158
70 E. Bols et al. Jet flavour classification using DeepJet JINST 15 (2020) P12012 2008.10519
71 CMS Collaboration Performance summary of AK4 jet b tagging with data from proton-proton collisions at 13 TeV with the CMS detector CMS Detector Performance Note CMS-DP-2023-005, 2023
CDS
72 GEANT4 Collaboration GEANT 4---a simulation toolkit NIM A 506 (2003) 250
73 CMS Collaboration Pileup mitigation at CMS in 13 TeV data JINST 15 (2020) P09018 CMS-JME-18-001
2003.00503
74 J. Alwall et al. The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations JHEP 07 (2014) 079 1405.0301
75 P. Artoisenet, R. Frederix, O. Mattelaer, and R. Rietkerk Automatic spin-entangled decays of heavy resonances in Monte Carlo simulations JHEP 03 (2013) 015 1212.3460
76 NNPDF Collaboration Parton distributions from high-precision collider data EPJC 77 (2017) 663 1706.00428
77 A. Manohar, P. Nason, G. P. Salam, and G. Zanderighi How bright is the proton? A precise determination of the photon parton distribution function PRL 117 (2016) 242002 1607.04266
78 A. V. Manohar, P. Nason, G. P. Salam, and G. Zanderighi The photon content of the proton JHEP 12 (2017) 046 1708.01256
79 NNPDF Collaboration Illuminating the photon content of the proton within a global PDF analysis SciPost Phys. 5 (2018) 008 1712.07053
80 K. Bondarenko, A. Boyarsky, D. Gorbunov, and O. Ruchayskiy Phenomenology of GeVns-scale heavy neutral leptons JHEP 11 (2018) 032 1805.08567
81 P. Nason A new method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms JHEP 11 (2004) 040 hep-ph/0409146
82 S. Frixione, G. Ridolfi, and P. Nason A positive-weight next-to-leading-order Monte Carlo for heavy flavour hadroproduction JHEP 09 (2007) 126 0707.3088
83 S. Frixione, P. Nason, and C. Oleari Matching NLO QCD computations with parton shower simulations: the POWHEG method JHEP 11 (2007) 070 0709.2092
84 S. Alioli, P. Nason, C. Oleari, and E. Re NLO single-top production matched with shower in POWHEG: $ s $- and $ t $-channel contributions JHEP 09 (2009) 111 0907.4076
85 P. Nason and C. Oleari NLO Higgs boson production via vector-boson fusion matched with shower in POWHEG JHEP 02 (2010) 037 0911.5299
86 S. Alioli, P. Nason, C. Oleari, and E. Re A general framework for implementing NLO calculations in shower Monte Carlo programs: the POWHEG \textscbox JHEP 06 (2010) 043 1002.2581
87 E. Re Single-top $ {\mathrm{W}\mathrm{t}} $-channel production matched with parton showers using the POWHEG method EPJC 71 (2011) 1547 1009.2450
88 E. Bagnaschi, G. Degrassi, P. Slavich, and A. Vicini Higgs production via gluon fusion in the POWHEG approach in the SM and in the MSSM JHEP 02 (2012) 088 1111.2854
89 P. Nason and G. Zanderighi $ {\mathrm{W^+}\mathrm{W^-}} $, $ {\mathrm{W}\mathrm{Z}} $ and $ {\mathrm{Z}\mathrm{Z}} $ production in the POWHEG -\textscbox-v2 EPJC 74 (2014) 2702 1311.1365
90 J. M. Campbell and R. K. Ellis An update on vector boson pair production at hadron colliders PRD 60 (1999) 113006 hep-ph/9905386
91 J. M. Campbell, R. K. Ellis, and C. Williams Vector boson pair production at the LHC JHEP 07 (2011) 018 1105.0020
92 J. M. Campbell, R. K. Ellis, and W. T. Giele A multi-threaded version of MCFM EPJC 75 (2015) 246 1503.06182
93 T. Sjöstrand et al. An introduction to PYTHIA8.2 Comput. Phys. Commun. 191 (2015) 159 1410.3012
94 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
95 J. Alwall et al. Comparative study of various algorithms for the merging of parton showers and matrix elements in hadronic collisions EPJC 53 (2008) 473 0706.2569
96 R. Frederix and S. Frixione Merging meets matching in MC@NLO JHEP 12 (2012) 061 1209.6215
97 S. Bolognesi et al. On the spin and parity of a single-produced resonance at the LHC PRD 86 (2012) 095031 1208.4018
98 CMS Collaboration Electron and photon reconstruction and identification with the CMS experiment at the CERN LHC JINST 16 (2021) P05014 CMS-EGM-17-001
2012.06888
99 CMS Collaboration ECAL 2016 refined calibration and Run2 summary plots CMS Detector Performance Note CMS-DP-2020-021, 2020
CDS
100 CMS Collaboration Performance of the CMS muon detector and muon reconstruction with proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV JINST 13 (2018) P06015 CMS-MUO-16-001
1804.04528
101 K. Rehermann and B. Tweedie Efficient identification of boosted semileptonic top quarks at the LHC JHEP 03 (2011) 059 1007.2221
102 CMS Collaboration Observation of four top quark production in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV PLB 847 (2023) 138290 CMS-TOP-22-013
2305.13439
103 CMS Collaboration Evidence for associated production of a Higgs boson with a top quark pair in final states with electrons, muons, and hadronically decaying $ \tau $ leptons at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV JHEP 08 (2018) 066 CMS-HIG-17-018
1803.05485
104 CMS Collaboration Observation of single top quark production in association with a Z boson in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV PRL 122 (2019) 132003 CMS-TOP-18-008
1812.05900
105 CMS Collaboration Measurement of the Higgs boson production rate in association with top quarks in final states with electrons, muons, and hadronically decaying tau leptons at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV EPJC 81 (2021) 378 CMS-HIG-19-008
2011.03652
106 CMS Collaboration Search for electroweak production of charginos and neutralinos in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV JHEP 04 (2022) 147 CMS-SUS-19-012
2106.14246
107 CMS Collaboration Measurements of the electroweak diboson production cross sections in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 5.02 TeV using leptonic decays PRL 127 (2021) 191801 CMS-SMP-20-012
2107.01137
108 CMS Collaboration Inclusive and differential cross section measurements of single top quark production in association with a Z boson in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV JHEP 02 (2022) 107 CMS-TOP-20-010
2111.02860
109 CMS Collaboration Muon identification using multivariate techniques in the CMS experiment in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV Accepted by JINST, 2023 CMS-MUO-22-001
2310.03844
110 CMS Collaboration Performance of reconstruction and identification of $ \tau $ leptons decaying to hadrons and $ \nu_{\!\tau} $ in $ {\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}} $ collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV JINST 13 (2018) P10005 CMS-TAU-16-003
1809.02816
111 CMS Collaboration Identification of hadronic tau lepton decays using a deep neural network JINST 17 (2022) P07023 CMS-TAU-20-001
2201.08458
112 Particle Data Group , R. L. Workman et al. Review of particle physics Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2022 (2022) 083C01
113 CMS Collaboration Performance of electron reconstruction and selection with the CMS detector in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 8 TeV JINST 10 (2015) P06005 CMS-EGM-13-001
1502.02701
114 CMS Collaboration Performance of CMS muon reconstruction in cosmic-ray events JINST 5 (2010) T03022 CMS-CFT-09-014
0911.4994
115 CMS Collaboration Performance of the reconstruction and identification of high-momentum muons in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV JINST 15 (2020) P02027 CMS-MUO-17-001
1912.03516
116 H. Voss, A. Höcker, J. Stelzer, and F. Tegenfeldt TMVA, the toolkit for multivariate data analysis with ROOT in Proc. 11th Int. Workshop on Advanced Computing and Analysis Techniques in Phys. Research (ACAT ): Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2017
[PoS (ACAT2017) 040]
physics/0703039
117 CMS Collaboration Search for new physics in same-sign dilepton events in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV EPJC 76 (2016) 439 CMS-SUS-15-008
1605.03171
118 CMS Collaboration Measurement of the cross section of top quark-antiquark pair production in association with a W boson in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV JHEP 07 (2023) 219 CMS-TOP-21-011
2208.06485
119 CMS Collaboration Precision luminosity measurement in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV in 2015 and 2016 at CMS EPJC 81 (2021) 800 CMS-LUM-17-003
2104.01927
120 CMS Collaboration CMS luminosity measurement for the 2017 data-taking period at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV CMS Physics Analysis Summary, 2018
CMS-PAS-LUM-17-004
CMS-PAS-LUM-17-004
121 CMS Collaboration CMS luminosity measurement for the 2018 data-taking period at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV CMS Physics Analysis Summary, 2019
CMS-PAS-LUM-18-002
CMS-PAS-LUM-18-002
122 CMS Collaboration Measurements of inclusive W and Z cross sections in $ {\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}} $ collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 7 TeV JHEP 01 (2011) 080 CMS-EWK-10-002
1012.2466
123 A. Lazopoulos, K. Melnikov, and F. Petriello QCD corrections to tri-boson production PRD 76 (2007) 014001 hep-ph/0703273
124 T. Binoth, G. Ossola, C. G. Papadopoulos, and R. Pittau NLO QCD corrections to tri-boson production JHEP 06 (2008) 082 0804.0350
125 V. Hankele and D. Zeppenfeld QCD corrections to hadronic $ {\mathrm{W}\mathrm{W}\mathrm{Z}} $ production with leptonic decays PLB 661 (2008) 103 0712.3544
126 F. Campanario et al. QCD corrections to charged triple vector boson production with leptonic decay PRD 78 (2008) 094012 0809.0790
127 S. Dittmaier, A. Huss, and G. Knippen Next-to-leading-order QCD and electroweak corrections to $ {\mathrm{W}\mathrm{W}\mathrm{W}} $ production at proton-proton colliders JHEP 09 (2017) 034 1705.03722
128 CMS Collaboration A portrait of the Higgs boson by the CMS experiment ten years after the discovery Nature 607 (2022) 60 CMS-HIG-22-001
2207.00043
129 K. Melnikov and F. Petriello Electroweak gauge boson production at hadron colliders through $ \mathcal{O}({\alpha_\mathrm{S}^2}) $ PRD 74 (2006) 114017 hep-ph/0609070
130 R. Gavin, Y. Li, F. Petriello, and S. Quackenbush FEWZ 2.0: A code for hadronic Z production at next-to-next-to-leading order Comput. Phys. Commun. 182 (2011) 2388 1011.3540
131 R. Gavin, Y. Li, F. Petriello, and S. Quackenbush W physics at the LHC with FEWZ 2.1 Comput. Phys. Commun. 184 (2013) 208 1201.5896
132 Y. Li and F. Petriello Combining QCD and electroweak corrections to dilepton production in FEWZ PRD 86 (2012) 094034 1208.5967
133 CMS Collaboration The CMS statistical analysis and combination tool: COMBINE Submitted to Comput. Softw. Big Sci., 2024 CMS-CAT-23-001
2404.06614
134 W. Verkerke and D. Kirkby The RooFit toolkit for data modeling in th International Conference on Computing in High Energy and Nuclear Physics (CHEP ): La Jolla CA, United States, March 24--28, . . . [eConf C0303241 MOLT007], 2003
Proc. 1 (2003) 3
physics/0306116
135 L. Moneta et al. The RooStats project in Proc. 13th International Workshop on Advanced Computing and Analysis Techniques in Physics Research (ACAT ): Jaipur, India, 2010
[PoS (ACAT) 057]
1009.1003
136 ATLAS and CMS Collaborations, and LHC Higgs Combination Group Procedure for the LHC Higgs boson search combination in Summer 2011 Technical Report CMS-NOTE-2011-005, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2011-11, 2011
137 R. Barlow and C. Beeston Fitting using finite Monte Carlo samples Comput. Phys. Commun. 77 (1993) 219
138 J. S. Conway Incorporating nuisance parameters in likelihoods for multisource spectra in Proc. 2011 Workshop on Statistical Issues Related to Discovery Claims in Search Experiments and Unfolding (PHYSTAT ): Geneva, Switzerland, 2011
link
1103.0354
139 T. Junk Confidence level computation for combining searches with small statistics NIM A 434 (1999) 435 hep-ex/9902006
140 A. L. Read Presentation of search results: The $ \text{CL}_\text{s} $ technique JPG 28 (2002) 2693
141 G. Cowan, K. Cranmer, E. Gross, and O. Vitells Asymptotic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics EPJC 71 (2011) 1554 1007.1727
142 DELPHI Collaboration Search for neutral heavy leptons produced in Z decays Z. Phys. C 74 (1997) 57
143 CMS Collaboration Probing heavy Majorana neutrinos and the Weinberg operator through vector boson fusion processes in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV PRL 131 (2023) 011803 CMS-EXO-21-003
2206.08956
144 BaBar Collaboration Search for heavy neutral leptons using tau lepton decays at BaBaR PRD 107 (2023) 052009 2207.09575
Compact Muon Solenoid
LHC, CERN