Compact Muon Solenoid
LHC, CERN

Visit us: CMS Public Website, CMS Physics ; Contact us: CMS Publications Committee

CMS-EXO-23-005 ; CERN-EP-2024-106

Dark sector searches with the CMS experiment

CMS Collaboration

22 May 2024

Accepted for publication in Physics Reports

Abstract: Astrophysical observations provide compelling evidence for gravitationally interacting dark matter in the universe that cannot be explained by the standard model of particle physics. The extraordinary amount of data from the CERN LHC presents a unique opportunity to shed light on the nature of dark matter at unprecedented collision energies. This Report comprehensively reviews the most recent searches with the CMS experiment for particles and interactions belonging to a dark sector and for dark-sector mediators. Models with invisible massive particles are probed by searches for signatures of missing transverse momentum recoiling against visible standard model particles. Searches for mediators are also conducted via fully visible final states. The results of these searches are compared with those obtained from direct-detection experiments. Searches for alternative scenarios predicting more complex dark sectors with multiple new particles and new forces are also presented. Many of these models include long-lived particles, which could manifest themselves with striking unconventional signatures with relatively small amounts of background. Searches for such particles are discussed and their impact on dark-sector scenarios is evaluated. Many results and interpretations have been newly obtained for this Report.

Links: e-print arXiv:2405.13778 [hep-ex] (PDF) ; CDS record ; inSPIRE record ; CADI line (restricted) ;

Figures
png pdf	Figure 1: An outline of the paper organization in terms of theoretical models and observable final states and how the two perspectives are related.
png pdf	Figure 2: Map of the models probed in CMS searches for dark sectors.
png pdf	Figure 3: Example Feynman diagrams in the taxonomy of dark sector models.
png pdf	Figure 4: Representative Feynman diagrams for simplified model processes of DM pair production via different mediators. First row left: $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ mediator, with $ g_{\mathrm{q}} $ and $ g_{\text{DM}} $ couplings to the quarks and the DM candidate $ \chi $, respectively, discussed in Section 2.1.1.1. In this diagram, we also show the initial-state radiation that is regularly used as an additional component in the searches. First row right: $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ mediator, with $ g_{\mathrm{q}} $ couplings to the quarks, also discussed in Section 2.1.1.1. Second row: dark-photon mediator $ \text{A}^{\prime} $, via mixing with the SM photon, discussed in Section 2.1.1.2. Third row left: generic scalar mediator $ \text{S} $, with Yukawa couplings $ y_\mathrm{q} = m_\mathrm{q} g_\mathrm{q}/v $, and $ y_\textrm{DM} $ and gluon coupling induced primarily via the top quark loop, discussed in Section 2.1.2.1. Third row right: dark Higgs mediator $ \mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{D}} $, produced via mixing $ \theta_{\text{h}} $ with the SM Higgs boson, discussed in Section 2.1.2.2. As discussed in Section 2.1.2.3, the Higgs portal scenario can be seen as a subcase of the dark-Higgs portal. Fourth row left: pseudoscalar and ALP ($ \text{P} $/$ \mathrm{a} $) mediators, either with Yukawa-like coupling $ y_\mathrm{t} $ or effective coupling $ \Lambda^{-1} $, as described in Sections 2.1.2.4 and 2.1.2.5, respectively. Fourth row right: the fermion portal via the bifundamental mediator $ \Phi $, discussed in Section 2.1.4.
png pdf	Figure 4-a: Representative Feynman diagrams for simplified model processes of DM pair production via different mediators. First row left: $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ mediator, with $ g_{\mathrm{q}} $ and $ g_{\text{DM}} $ couplings to the quarks and the DM candidate $ \chi $, respectively, discussed in Section 2.1.1.1. In this diagram, we also show the initial-state radiation that is regularly used as an additional component in the searches. First row right: $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ mediator, with $ g_{\mathrm{q}} $ couplings to the quarks, also discussed in Section 2.1.1.1. Second row: dark-photon mediator $ \text{A}^{\prime} $, via mixing with the SM photon, discussed in Section 2.1.1.2. Third row left: generic scalar mediator $ \text{S} $, with Yukawa couplings $ y_\mathrm{q} = m_\mathrm{q} g_\mathrm{q}/v $, and $ y_\textrm{DM} $ and gluon coupling induced primarily via the top quark loop, discussed in Section 2.1.2.1. Third row right: dark Higgs mediator $ \mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{D}} $, produced via mixing $ \theta_{\text{h}} $ with the SM Higgs boson, discussed in Section 2.1.2.2. As discussed in Section 2.1.2.3, the Higgs portal scenario can be seen as a subcase of the dark-Higgs portal. Fourth row left: pseudoscalar and ALP ($ \text{P} $/$ \mathrm{a} $) mediators, either with Yukawa-like coupling $ y_\mathrm{t} $ or effective coupling $ \Lambda^{-1} $, as described in Sections 2.1.2.4 and 2.1.2.5, respectively. Fourth row right: the fermion portal via the bifundamental mediator $ \Phi $, discussed in Section 2.1.4.
png pdf	Figure 4-b: Representative Feynman diagrams for simplified model processes of DM pair production via different mediators. First row left: $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ mediator, with $ g_{\mathrm{q}} $ and $ g_{\text{DM}} $ couplings to the quarks and the DM candidate $ \chi $, respectively, discussed in Section 2.1.1.1. In this diagram, we also show the initial-state radiation that is regularly used as an additional component in the searches. First row right: $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ mediator, with $ g_{\mathrm{q}} $ couplings to the quarks, also discussed in Section 2.1.1.1. Second row: dark-photon mediator $ \text{A}^{\prime} $, via mixing with the SM photon, discussed in Section 2.1.1.2. Third row left: generic scalar mediator $ \text{S} $, with Yukawa couplings $ y_\mathrm{q} = m_\mathrm{q} g_\mathrm{q}/v $, and $ y_\textrm{DM} $ and gluon coupling induced primarily via the top quark loop, discussed in Section 2.1.2.1. Third row right: dark Higgs mediator $ \mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{D}} $, produced via mixing $ \theta_{\text{h}} $ with the SM Higgs boson, discussed in Section 2.1.2.2. As discussed in Section 2.1.2.3, the Higgs portal scenario can be seen as a subcase of the dark-Higgs portal. Fourth row left: pseudoscalar and ALP ($ \text{P} $/$ \mathrm{a} $) mediators, either with Yukawa-like coupling $ y_\mathrm{t} $ or effective coupling $ \Lambda^{-1} $, as described in Sections 2.1.2.4 and 2.1.2.5, respectively. Fourth row right: the fermion portal via the bifundamental mediator $ \Phi $, discussed in Section 2.1.4.
png pdf	Figure 4-c: Representative Feynman diagrams for simplified model processes of DM pair production via different mediators. First row left: $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ mediator, with $ g_{\mathrm{q}} $ and $ g_{\text{DM}} $ couplings to the quarks and the DM candidate $ \chi $, respectively, discussed in Section 2.1.1.1. In this diagram, we also show the initial-state radiation that is regularly used as an additional component in the searches. First row right: $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ mediator, with $ g_{\mathrm{q}} $ couplings to the quarks, also discussed in Section 2.1.1.1. Second row: dark-photon mediator $ \text{A}^{\prime} $, via mixing with the SM photon, discussed in Section 2.1.1.2. Third row left: generic scalar mediator $ \text{S} $, with Yukawa couplings $ y_\mathrm{q} = m_\mathrm{q} g_\mathrm{q}/v $, and $ y_\textrm{DM} $ and gluon coupling induced primarily via the top quark loop, discussed in Section 2.1.2.1. Third row right: dark Higgs mediator $ \mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{D}} $, produced via mixing $ \theta_{\text{h}} $ with the SM Higgs boson, discussed in Section 2.1.2.2. As discussed in Section 2.1.2.3, the Higgs portal scenario can be seen as a subcase of the dark-Higgs portal. Fourth row left: pseudoscalar and ALP ($ \text{P} $/$ \mathrm{a} $) mediators, either with Yukawa-like coupling $ y_\mathrm{t} $ or effective coupling $ \Lambda^{-1} $, as described in Sections 2.1.2.4 and 2.1.2.5, respectively. Fourth row right: the fermion portal via the bifundamental mediator $ \Phi $, discussed in Section 2.1.4.
png pdf	Figure 4-d: Representative Feynman diagrams for simplified model processes of DM pair production via different mediators. First row left: $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ mediator, with $ g_{\mathrm{q}} $ and $ g_{\text{DM}} $ couplings to the quarks and the DM candidate $ \chi $, respectively, discussed in Section 2.1.1.1. In this diagram, we also show the initial-state radiation that is regularly used as an additional component in the searches. First row right: $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ mediator, with $ g_{\mathrm{q}} $ couplings to the quarks, also discussed in Section 2.1.1.1. Second row: dark-photon mediator $ \text{A}^{\prime} $, via mixing with the SM photon, discussed in Section 2.1.1.2. Third row left: generic scalar mediator $ \text{S} $, with Yukawa couplings $ y_\mathrm{q} = m_\mathrm{q} g_\mathrm{q}/v $, and $ y_\textrm{DM} $ and gluon coupling induced primarily via the top quark loop, discussed in Section 2.1.2.1. Third row right: dark Higgs mediator $ \mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{D}} $, produced via mixing $ \theta_{\text{h}} $ with the SM Higgs boson, discussed in Section 2.1.2.2. As discussed in Section 2.1.2.3, the Higgs portal scenario can be seen as a subcase of the dark-Higgs portal. Fourth row left: pseudoscalar and ALP ($ \text{P} $/$ \mathrm{a} $) mediators, either with Yukawa-like coupling $ y_\mathrm{t} $ or effective coupling $ \Lambda^{-1} $, as described in Sections 2.1.2.4 and 2.1.2.5, respectively. Fourth row right: the fermion portal via the bifundamental mediator $ \Phi $, discussed in Section 2.1.4.
png pdf	Figure 4-e: Representative Feynman diagrams for simplified model processes of DM pair production via different mediators. First row left: $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ mediator, with $ g_{\mathrm{q}} $ and $ g_{\text{DM}} $ couplings to the quarks and the DM candidate $ \chi $, respectively, discussed in Section 2.1.1.1. In this diagram, we also show the initial-state radiation that is regularly used as an additional component in the searches. First row right: $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ mediator, with $ g_{\mathrm{q}} $ couplings to the quarks, also discussed in Section 2.1.1.1. Second row: dark-photon mediator $ \text{A}^{\prime} $, via mixing with the SM photon, discussed in Section 2.1.1.2. Third row left: generic scalar mediator $ \text{S} $, with Yukawa couplings $ y_\mathrm{q} = m_\mathrm{q} g_\mathrm{q}/v $, and $ y_\textrm{DM} $ and gluon coupling induced primarily via the top quark loop, discussed in Section 2.1.2.1. Third row right: dark Higgs mediator $ \mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{D}} $, produced via mixing $ \theta_{\text{h}} $ with the SM Higgs boson, discussed in Section 2.1.2.2. As discussed in Section 2.1.2.3, the Higgs portal scenario can be seen as a subcase of the dark-Higgs portal. Fourth row left: pseudoscalar and ALP ($ \text{P} $/$ \mathrm{a} $) mediators, either with Yukawa-like coupling $ y_\mathrm{t} $ or effective coupling $ \Lambda^{-1} $, as described in Sections 2.1.2.4 and 2.1.2.5, respectively. Fourth row right: the fermion portal via the bifundamental mediator $ \Phi $, discussed in Section 2.1.4.
png pdf	Figure 4-f: Representative Feynman diagrams for simplified model processes of DM pair production via different mediators. First row left: $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ mediator, with $ g_{\mathrm{q}} $ and $ g_{\text{DM}} $ couplings to the quarks and the DM candidate $ \chi $, respectively, discussed in Section 2.1.1.1. In this diagram, we also show the initial-state radiation that is regularly used as an additional component in the searches. First row right: $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ mediator, with $ g_{\mathrm{q}} $ couplings to the quarks, also discussed in Section 2.1.1.1. Second row: dark-photon mediator $ \text{A}^{\prime} $, via mixing with the SM photon, discussed in Section 2.1.1.2. Third row left: generic scalar mediator $ \text{S} $, with Yukawa couplings $ y_\mathrm{q} = m_\mathrm{q} g_\mathrm{q}/v $, and $ y_\textrm{DM} $ and gluon coupling induced primarily via the top quark loop, discussed in Section 2.1.2.1. Third row right: dark Higgs mediator $ \mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{D}} $, produced via mixing $ \theta_{\text{h}} $ with the SM Higgs boson, discussed in Section 2.1.2.2. As discussed in Section 2.1.2.3, the Higgs portal scenario can be seen as a subcase of the dark-Higgs portal. Fourth row left: pseudoscalar and ALP ($ \text{P} $/$ \mathrm{a} $) mediators, either with Yukawa-like coupling $ y_\mathrm{t} $ or effective coupling $ \Lambda^{-1} $, as described in Sections 2.1.2.4 and 2.1.2.5, respectively. Fourth row right: the fermion portal via the bifundamental mediator $ \Phi $, discussed in Section 2.1.4.
png pdf	Figure 4-g: Representative Feynman diagrams for simplified model processes of DM pair production via different mediators. First row left: $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ mediator, with $ g_{\mathrm{q}} $ and $ g_{\text{DM}} $ couplings to the quarks and the DM candidate $ \chi $, respectively, discussed in Section 2.1.1.1. In this diagram, we also show the initial-state radiation that is regularly used as an additional component in the searches. First row right: $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ mediator, with $ g_{\mathrm{q}} $ couplings to the quarks, also discussed in Section 2.1.1.1. Second row: dark-photon mediator $ \text{A}^{\prime} $, via mixing with the SM photon, discussed in Section 2.1.1.2. Third row left: generic scalar mediator $ \text{S} $, with Yukawa couplings $ y_\mathrm{q} = m_\mathrm{q} g_\mathrm{q}/v $, and $ y_\textrm{DM} $ and gluon coupling induced primarily via the top quark loop, discussed in Section 2.1.2.1. Third row right: dark Higgs mediator $ \mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{D}} $, produced via mixing $ \theta_{\text{h}} $ with the SM Higgs boson, discussed in Section 2.1.2.2. As discussed in Section 2.1.2.3, the Higgs portal scenario can be seen as a subcase of the dark-Higgs portal. Fourth row left: pseudoscalar and ALP ($ \text{P} $/$ \mathrm{a} $) mediators, either with Yukawa-like coupling $ y_\mathrm{t} $ or effective coupling $ \Lambda^{-1} $, as described in Sections 2.1.2.4 and 2.1.2.5, respectively. Fourth row right: the fermion portal via the bifundamental mediator $ \Phi $, discussed in Section 2.1.4.
png pdf	Figure 5: Feynman diagrams of the VBF, $ \mathrm{g}\mathrm{g}\mathrm{H} $, $ \mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}\mathrm{H} $, and VH Higgs boson production modes analyzed in the $ \mathrm{H} \to \text{inv} $ searches.
png pdf	Figure 5-a: Feynman diagrams of the VBF, $ \mathrm{g}\mathrm{g}\mathrm{H} $, $ \mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}\mathrm{H} $, and VH Higgs boson production modes analyzed in the $ \mathrm{H} \to \text{inv} $ searches.
png pdf	Figure 5-b: Feynman diagrams of the VBF, $ \mathrm{g}\mathrm{g}\mathrm{H} $, $ \mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}\mathrm{H} $, and VH Higgs boson production modes analyzed in the $ \mathrm{H} \to \text{inv} $ searches.
png pdf	Figure 5-c: Feynman diagrams of the VBF, $ \mathrm{g}\mathrm{g}\mathrm{H} $, $ \mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}\mathrm{H} $, and VH Higgs boson production modes analyzed in the $ \mathrm{H} \to \text{inv} $ searches.
png pdf	Figure 5-d: Feynman diagrams of the VBF, $ \mathrm{g}\mathrm{g}\mathrm{H} $, $ \mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}\mathrm{H} $, and VH Higgs boson production modes analyzed in the $ \mathrm{H} \to \text{inv} $ searches.
png pdf	Figure 6: Feynman diagrams for production channels involving the bifundamental mediator $ \Phi $: pair production via gluon-gluon fusion (upper left), pair production via quark-antiquark annihilation (upper right), single production in association with a DM particle $ \chi $ (lower left), and $ t $-channel nonresonant DM production (lower right).
png pdf	Figure 6-a: Feynman diagrams for production channels involving the bifundamental mediator $ \Phi $: pair production via gluon-gluon fusion (upper left), pair production via quark-antiquark annihilation (upper right), single production in association with a DM particle $ \chi $ (lower left), and $ t $-channel nonresonant DM production (lower right).
png pdf	Figure 6-b: Feynman diagrams for production channels involving the bifundamental mediator $ \Phi $: pair production via gluon-gluon fusion (upper left), pair production via quark-antiquark annihilation (upper right), single production in association with a DM particle $ \chi $ (lower left), and $ t $-channel nonresonant DM production (lower right).
png pdf	Figure 6-c: Feynman diagrams for production channels involving the bifundamental mediator $ \Phi $: pair production via gluon-gluon fusion (upper left), pair production via quark-antiquark annihilation (upper right), single production in association with a DM particle $ \chi $ (lower left), and $ t $-channel nonresonant DM production (lower right).
png pdf	Figure 6-d: Feynman diagrams for production channels involving the bifundamental mediator $ \Phi $: pair production via gluon-gluon fusion (upper left), pair production via quark-antiquark annihilation (upper right), single production in association with a DM particle $ \chi $ (lower left), and $ t $-channel nonresonant DM production (lower right).
png pdf	Figure 7: Feynman diagrams for 2HDM+a signatures. Left: a mono-Higgs signature, mediated by the heavy pseudoscalar $ \text{A} $. Center: $ {\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} $ resonant production, mediated by the heavy scalar H. Similar processes involve $ \mathrm{H}^\pm $ particles, $ \mbox{e.g.} \mathrm{H}^\pm \to \mathrm{t}\mathrm{b} $. Right: exotic decay of the SM-like Higgs boson $ \mathrm{h} $.
png pdf	Figure 7-a: Feynman diagrams for 2HDM+a signatures. Left: a mono-Higgs signature, mediated by the heavy pseudoscalar $ \text{A} $. Center: $ {\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} $ resonant production, mediated by the heavy scalar H. Similar processes involve $ \mathrm{H}^\pm $ particles, $ \mbox{e.g.} \mathrm{H}^\pm \to \mathrm{t}\mathrm{b} $. Right: exotic decay of the SM-like Higgs boson $ \mathrm{h} $.
png pdf	Figure 7-b: Feynman diagrams for 2HDM+a signatures. Left: a mono-Higgs signature, mediated by the heavy pseudoscalar $ \text{A} $. Center: $ {\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} $ resonant production, mediated by the heavy scalar H. Similar processes involve $ \mathrm{H}^\pm $ particles, $ \mbox{e.g.} \mathrm{H}^\pm \to \mathrm{t}\mathrm{b} $. Right: exotic decay of the SM-like Higgs boson $ \mathrm{h} $.
png pdf	Figure 7-c: Feynman diagrams for 2HDM+a signatures. Left: a mono-Higgs signature, mediated by the heavy pseudoscalar $ \text{A} $. Center: $ {\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} $ resonant production, mediated by the heavy scalar H. Similar processes involve $ \mathrm{H}^\pm $ particles, $ \mbox{e.g.} \mathrm{H}^\pm \to \mathrm{t}\mathrm{b} $. Right: exotic decay of the SM-like Higgs boson $ \mathrm{h} $.
png pdf	Figure 8: Feynman diagrams for pair production of top squarks under the stealth SYY (left) and stealth $\mathrm{SHH}$ (right) models. In these models, the signature is a pair of SM top quarks, with additional jets originating from gluons (SYY) or b quarks ($\mathrm{SHH}$).
png pdf	Figure 8-a: Feynman diagrams for pair production of top squarks under the stealth SYY (left) and stealth $\mathrm{SHH}$ (right) models. In these models, the signature is a pair of SM top quarks, with additional jets originating from gluons (SYY) or b quarks ($\mathrm{SHH}$).
png pdf	Figure 8-b: Feynman diagrams for pair production of top squarks under the stealth SYY (left) and stealth $\mathrm{SHH}$ (right) models. In these models, the signature is a pair of SM top quarks, with additional jets originating from gluons (SYY) or b quarks ($\mathrm{SHH}$).
png pdf	Figure 9: Feynman diagram of inelastic dark matter production and decay processes in pp collisions, for fermionic DM states. The heavier DM state $ \chi_2 $ can be long-lived, and decays into $ \chi_1 $ and to a muon pair via an off-shell dark photon $ \text{A}^{\prime} $.
png pdf	Figure 10: A qualitative depiction of the phenomenological behavior of dark QCD models depending on the fraction of invisible particles within a jet $ r_{\text{inv}} $ and the proper decay length of dark hadrons c$ \tau_{\text{dark}} $. The $ r_{\text{inv}} $ parameter is defined in Section 2.2.4.1.
png pdf	Figure 11: Illustrative Feynman diagrams showing example production modes for different hidden valley phenomena: semivisible jets (left), emerging jets (center), and soft unclustered energy patterns (right). Dotted lines indicate invisible particles.
png pdf	Figure 11-a: Illustrative Feynman diagrams showing example production modes for different hidden valley phenomena: semivisible jets (left), emerging jets (center), and soft unclustered energy patterns (right). Dotted lines indicate invisible particles.
png pdf	Figure 11-b: Illustrative Feynman diagrams showing example production modes for different hidden valley phenomena: semivisible jets (left), emerging jets (center), and soft unclustered energy patterns (right). Dotted lines indicate invisible particles.
png pdf	Figure 11-c: Illustrative Feynman diagrams showing example production modes for different hidden valley phenomena: semivisible jets (left), emerging jets (center), and soft unclustered energy patterns (right). Dotted lines indicate invisible particles.
png pdf	Figure 12: The event selection efficiency for requiring HLT thresholds of 120 GeV in both $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ and $ H_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ as a function of the offline corrected $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $, which takes into account jet energy scale corrections.
png pdf	Figure 14: Illustration of the appearance of a secondary vertex (SV) from the decay of a long-lived particle resulting in charged-particle tracks that are displaced with respect to the primary interaction vertex (PV), and hence can have large impact parameter (IP) values. In BSM searches, LLPs have very long lifetimes compared to SM particles, leading to large displacements of the secondary vertices. Figure adapted from Ref. [175].
png pdf	Figure 15: The ROC curves illustrating the displaced jet tagger performance for the split SUSY (solid line), GMSB SUSY (dashed line), and RPV SUSY (dot-dashed line) benchmark models, assuming $ c\tau_0 $ values of 1 mm (left) and 1 m (right). The thin line with hatched shading indicates the performance obtained with a DNN training using split SUSY samples but without domain adaptation (DA). Figure taken from Ref. [192].
png pdf	Figure 16: Illustration of contributions to the delay of particles that originate from LLP decays. For prompt decays, the path length to reach a particular location on the timing detector ($ l_{\text{prompt}} $) is smaller than the path length for a deposit originating from an LLP decay ($ l_{\mathrm{LLP}} $+$ l_{\mathrm{SM'}} $). In addition, the velocity of the light SM particles ($ \rm{v}_{\text{prompt}} $) will be close to that of light while the velocity of the LLP ($ \rm{v}_{\rm{LLP}} $) can be significantly lower. These factors lead to substantial delays for the decay products of LLPs, which can be exploited to improve sensitivity.
png pdf	Figure 17: Simulated muon reconstruction efficiency of standard global muon (blue squares) and DSA (red circles) track reconstruction algorithms as a function of transverse vertex displacement $ v_{xy} $, for the IDM model discussed in Section 2.2.3. The two dashed vertical gray lines denote the ends of the fiducial tracker and muon detector regions, respectively. Figure taken from Ref. [207].
png pdf	Figure 18: Distribution of the $ I_{\text{h}} $ estimator, computed using d$E$/d$x$ measurements in the silicon strip tracker, versus the track momentum, using the data recorded in 2017 during the LHC Run 2. Expected d$E$/d$x$ losses for pion, kaon, proton, and deuteron particles are shown as black lines. Tracks with $ p_{\mathrm{T}} < $ 0.5 GeV are not included in this plot.
png pdf	Figure 19: A diagram of the ABCD method, shown for illustration on simulated background events in a search for LLPs that decay to displaced leptons. The CRs are regions A, B, and C. There are four SRs, labeled I-IV, in this search. Figure taken from Ref. [243].
png pdf	Figure 20: Comparison of $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ between data and the background prediction in the monojet SR after the simultaneous fit for the full Run 2 data set. The upper panel shows the $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ distribution, the middle panel shows the ratio of the data to the prediction, and the lower panel shows the ratio of the data minus the prediction, all divided by the uncertainty. The axial vector signal and $ {\mathrm{H} $ (inv) $ } $ signal are shown, the second of which is described in Section 6.1.2. Figure taken from Ref. [81].
png pdf	Figure 21: The $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ (left) and $ m_{\mathrm{T}} $ (right) distributions for events in the SR in the 0-jet final state, in the search for new physics in leptonically decaying Z boson events. The uncertainty band includes both statistical and systematic components. Figures adapted from Ref. [86].
png pdf	Figure 21-a: The $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ (left) and $ m_{\mathrm{T}} $ (right) distributions for events in the SR in the 0-jet final state, in the search for new physics in leptonically decaying Z boson events. The uncertainty band includes both statistical and systematic components. Figures adapted from Ref. [86].
png pdf	Figure 21-b: The $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ (left) and $ m_{\mathrm{T}} $ (right) distributions for events in the SR in the 0-jet final state, in the search for new physics in leptonically decaying Z boson events. The uncertainty band includes both statistical and systematic components. Figures adapted from Ref. [86].
png pdf	Figure 22: Distribution of $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ from SM backgrounds and data in the SR after simultaneously fitting the SR and all CRs, in the search for mono-t events. Each bin shows the event yields divided by the width of the bin. The figure corresponds to the tight category of the SR. The stacked histograms show the individual fitted SM background contributions. The blue solid (red dashed) line represents the sum of the SM background contributions normalized to their fitted yields (to the prediction). The lower panel shows the ratio of data to fitted prediction. The gray band on the ratio indicates the one standard deviation uncertainty on the prediction after propagating all the systematic uncertainties and their correlations in the fit. Figure taken from Ref. [263].
png pdf	Figure 23: Observed $ E_{\mathrm{T}}^\gamma $ distribution in a SR compared with the post-fit background expectations for various SM processes, in the search for mono-photon events. The last bin of the distribution includes all events with $ E_{\mathrm{T}}^\gamma > $ 1000 GeV. The expected background distributions are evaluated after performing a combined fit to the data in all the control samples and the SR. The ratios of data with the pre-fit background prediction (red dashed line) and post-fit background prediction (blue solid line) are shown in the lower panel. The bands in the lower panel show the post-fit uncertainty after combining all the systematic uncertainties. The expected signal distribution from a 1 TeV vector mediator decaying into 1 GeV DM particles is overlaid. Figure adapted from Ref. [268].
png pdf	Figure 24: The $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ distribution for the expected background and observed events in data in the $ \mathrm{H}\to\mathrm{Z}\mathrm{Z} $ analysis. Two signal benchmarks, corresponding to the $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $-2HDM (dotted orange line) and baryonic $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ (solid black line) model are superimposed. The signal is normalized to the product of cross section and branching fraction, where $ \mathcal{B} $ represents the $ \mathrm{H}\to\mathrm{Z}\mathrm{Z} $ branching fraction. The systematic uncertainties are shown by the hatched band. The ratios of the data and the sum of all the SM backgrounds are shown in the bottom panels. Figure taken from Ref. [269].
png pdf	Figure 25: Normalized distribution of the transverse mass of the trailing lepton plus missing transverse momentum system in the dilepton channel of the dark Higgs+$ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ search, for a signal with $ m_{\mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{D}}} = $ 160 GeV (denoted as $ m_{\text{S}} $ in the figure), $ m_{\text{DM}} = $ 100 GeV (denoted as $ m_\chi $ in the figure), and $ m_{\mathrm{Z}^{'}} = $ 500 GeV (black), after the event selection criteria are applied. Predictions for the two main backgrounds of the analysis, nonresonant WW and top quark production, are shown as blue and orange solid lines, respectively. The last bin includes the overflow. Figure taken from Ref. [271].
png pdf	Figure 26: Distributions of the dijet pair invariant mass in the SRs of the search for $ \mathrm{H} \to \text{inv} $ produced via vector boson fusion, for the high missing transverse momentum category (left) and for the dijet-based category (right). The signal processes are scaled by the fitted value of $ {\mathcal{B}(\mathrm{H} \to \text{inv})} $, shown in the legend. The background contributions are estimated from the fit to the data (S+B fit). The total background estimated from a fit assuming $ {\mathcal{B}(\mathrm{H} \to \text{inv})} $ = 0 (B-only fit) is also shown. The yields from the 2017 and 2018 samples are summed and the correlations between their uncertainties are neglected. The last bin of each distribution integrates events above the bin threshold divided by the bin width. Figures adapted from Ref. [80].
png pdf	Figure 26-a: Distributions of the dijet pair invariant mass in the SRs of the search for $ \mathrm{H} \to \text{inv} $ produced via vector boson fusion, for the high missing transverse momentum category (left) and for the dijet-based category (right). The signal processes are scaled by the fitted value of $ {\mathcal{B}(\mathrm{H} \to \text{inv})} $, shown in the legend. The background contributions are estimated from the fit to the data (S+B fit). The total background estimated from a fit assuming $ {\mathcal{B}(\mathrm{H} \to \text{inv})} $ = 0 (B-only fit) is also shown. The yields from the 2017 and 2018 samples are summed and the correlations between their uncertainties are neglected. The last bin of each distribution integrates events above the bin threshold divided by the bin width. Figures adapted from Ref. [80].
png pdf	Figure 26-b: Distributions of the dijet pair invariant mass in the SRs of the search for $ \mathrm{H} \to \text{inv} $ produced via vector boson fusion, for the high missing transverse momentum category (left) and for the dijet-based category (right). The signal processes are scaled by the fitted value of $ {\mathcal{B}(\mathrm{H} \to \text{inv})} $, shown in the legend. The background contributions are estimated from the fit to the data (S+B fit). The total background estimated from a fit assuming $ {\mathcal{B}(\mathrm{H} \to \text{inv})} $ = 0 (B-only fit) is also shown. The yields from the 2017 and 2018 samples are summed and the correlations between their uncertainties are neglected. The last bin of each distribution integrates events above the bin threshold divided by the bin width. Figures adapted from Ref. [80].
png pdf	Figure 27: The $ m_{\mathrm{T}} $ distribution from the simultaneous fit for events with $ m_{jj} < $ 1500 GeV in the SRs of the search for dark photons in Higgs boson decays. The category other background includes contributions from Z+jets, nonprompt, top quark, VV, and VVV processes. Overflow events are included in the last bin. The shaded bands represent the combination of the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the predicted yields. The light green line, illustrating the possible contribution expected from inclusive SM Higgs boson production, assumes a branching fraction of 5% for $ \mathrm{H} \to \text{inv} $+$ \gamma $ decays. The lower panel shows a per-bin ratio of the data yield and the background expectation. The shaded band corresponds to the combined systematic and statistical uncertainty in the background expectation. Figure taken from Ref. [273].
png pdf	Figure 28: The normalized distribution of the minimum azimuthal angle between the $ {\vec p}_{\mathrm{T}}^{\kern1pt\text{miss}} $ and each of the two leading jets ($ \Delta\phi_{\text{min}} $) for simulated SM backgrounds and several SVJ signal models. The red vertical dotted line indicates the selection requirement on this variable. Figure taken from Ref. [148].
png pdf	Figure 29: The dijet mass distributions for the combination of $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} \to \mathrm{q}_{\text{dark}}\overline{\mathrm{q}}_{\text{dark}} $ and $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} \to \mathrm{q}\overline{\mathrm{q}} $ events, for $ r_{\text{inv}}= $ 0.3 (left) and $ r_{\text{inv}}= $ 0.0 (right), in SVJ signal models.
png pdf	Figure 29-a: The dijet mass distributions for the combination of $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} \to \mathrm{q}_{\text{dark}}\overline{\mathrm{q}}_{\text{dark}} $ and $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} \to \mathrm{q}\overline{\mathrm{q}} $ events, for $ r_{\text{inv}}= $ 0.3 (left) and $ r_{\text{inv}}= $ 0.0 (right), in SVJ signal models.
png pdf	Figure 29-b: The dijet mass distributions for the combination of $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} \to \mathrm{q}_{\text{dark}}\overline{\mathrm{q}}_{\text{dark}} $ and $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} \to \mathrm{q}\overline{\mathrm{q}} $ events, for $ r_{\text{inv}}= $ 0.3 (left) and $ r_{\text{inv}}= $ 0.0 (right), in SVJ signal models.
png pdf	Figure 30: The relative efficiencies of several selection criteria from the monojet search for SVJ signals. The efficiencies of the $ \Delta\phi({\vec p}_{\mathrm{T}}^{\,\text{jet}},{\vec p}_{\mathrm{T}}^{\kern1pt\text{miss}}) $ and $ N_{{\mathrm{b}}\text{-jet}} $ requirements are evaluated after the $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} > $ 250 GeV requirement. The uncertainty in the simulation is negligible.
png pdf	Figure 31: Jet $ m_{\mathrm{SD}} $ distribution in data for CA15 jets for a $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ range of the fit from 575 to 625 GeV, in the search for low-mass vector resonances decaying into quark-antiquark pairs. Data are shown as black points. The QCD multijet background prediction, including uncertainties, is shown by the shaded bands. Smaller contributions from the W and Z bosons, and top quark background processes are shown as well. A hypothetical $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ boson signal with a mass of 210 GeV is also indicated. In the bottom panel, the ratio of the data to its statistical uncertainty, after subtracting the nonresonant backgrounds, is shown. Figure taken from Ref. [281].
png pdf	Figure 32: The soft drop jet mass distribution of the SR in the search for low-mass quark-antiquark resonances produced in association with a photon, after the main background estimation fit is performed. The nonresonant background is indicated by a dashed line, while the total background composed of the sum of this nonresonant background and the resonant backgrounds is shown by the solid line. Representative signals are plotted for comparison. The bottom panel shows the difference between the data and the final background estimate, divided by the statistical uncertainty of the data in each bin. The shaded region represents the total uncertainty in the background estimate in each bin. Figure taken from Ref. [283].
png pdf	Figure 33: The observed and fitted background $ m_{\mathrm{SD}} $ distributions in the 800 $ < p_{\mathrm{T}} < $ 1000 GeV category for the AK8 selection in the passing regions, in the search for low-mass resonances decaying into bottom quark-antiquark pairs. The fit is performed under the background-only hypothesis. A hypothetical signal at a mass of 140 GeV is also indicated. The shaded blue band shows the systematic uncertainty in the total background prediction. The bottom panel shows the difference between the data and the nonresonant background prediction, divided by the statistical uncertainty in the data. Figure taken from Ref. [282].
png pdf	Figure 34: The dimuon invariant mass distributions of events selected with the standard muon triggers (brown, darker), and the scouting dimuon triggers (green, lighter), in the search for a prompt dark photon resonance decaying into two muons. Events are required to pass all the selection requirements. The inset shows the data (black points), the signal model (blue line), and the background-only fit (orange line), and it is restricted to events in the barrel category in the mass range 23.9-26.1 GeV. A function describing the background is fit to these data. The bottom panel of the inset shows the bin-by-bin difference between the number of events in data and the prediction from the background fit, divided by the statistical uncertainty. Figure taken from Ref. [178].
png pdf	Figure 35: The dimuon invariant mass distribution obtained with the muon scouting data collected during 2017-2018 with two sets of selections: the $ \Upsilon{\textrm{(1S)}} $-trained muon MVA identification (blue solid line), and the $ \mathrm{J}/\psi $-trained muon MVA identification (red dashed line). Figure taken from Ref. [177].
png pdf	Figure 36: Dijet mass spectrum (points) compared to a fitted parameterization of the background (solid curve) in the search for dijet resonances using events with three jets, where the fit is performed in the range 290 $ < m_{jj} < $ 1000 GeV. The horizontal bars show the widths of each bin in dijet mass. The dashed lines represent the dijet mass distribution from 400, 550, and 700 GeV resonance signals expected to be excluded at 95% CL by this analysis. The lower panel shows the difference between the data and the fitted parametrization, divided by the statistical uncertainty of the data. Figure taken from Ref. [179].
png pdf	Figure 37: Dijet mass spectrum in the SR (points) compared to a fitted parameterization of the background (solid line) and the one obtained from the CR (green squares), in the search for high-mass dijet resonances. The lower panel shows the difference between the data and the fitted parametrization (red, solid), and the data and the prediction obtained from the CR (green, hatched), divided by the statistical uncertainty in the data, which for the ratio method includes the statistical uncertainty in the data in the CR. Examples of predicted signals from narrow gluon-gluon, quark-gluon, and quark-quark resonances are shown (dashed colored lines) with cross sections equal to the observed upper limits at 95% CL. Figure taken from Ref. [277].
png pdf	Figure 38: The invariant mass distribution of pairs of (left) electrons and (right) muons observed in data (black dots with statistical uncertainties) and expected from the SM processes (stacked histograms), in the high-mass dilepton search. For the dimuon channel, a prescaled trigger with a $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ threshold of 27 GeV was used to collect events in the normalization region (NR) with dimuon mass less than 120 GeV. The corresponding offline threshold is 30 GeV. Events in the SR corresponding to masses greater than 120 GeV are collected using an unprescaled single-muon trigger. The bin width gradually increases with mass. The ratios of the data yields after background subtraction to the expected background yields are shown in the lower plots. The blue shaded band represents the combined statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background. Signal contributions expected from simulated resonances are shown. Figures adapted from Ref. [65].
png pdf	Figure 39: Distribution of $ N_{\text{hits}}^{\text{low \ddinline{E}{x} }} $ in the search and CRs for the early 2018 data set, in the search for fractionally charged particles. The middle (lower) panels show the ratio of the number of tracks observed in the CR (SR) and the fit function. Figure taken from Ref. [215].
png pdf	Figure 40: An example SUEP event from a representative model with a scalar mediator of mass 800 GeV shown in the lab frame (left) and the generator-level S mediator frame (right). The jets are clustered from charged particle tracks associated with the primary vertex using the anti-$ k_{\mathrm{T}} $ algorithm with a distance parameter of 1.5. The size of each dot is scaled based on the $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ of the corresponding track.
png pdf	Figure 41: The neural network score ($ S_{\mathrm{NN}} $) distribution for 2017-2018 shows the data in the SR (black points); simulated background normalized to the number of data events (filled histograms); RPV signal model with a top squark mass of 450 GeV (red short dashed line); and stealth SYY signal model with a top squark mass of 850 GeV (cyan long dashed line), in the search for stealth top squarks. The band on the total background histogram denotes the dominant systematic uncertainties, as well as the statistical uncertainty for the non-$ {\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} $ components. The lower panel shows the ratio of the number of data events to the number of normalized simulated events with the band representing the difference between the nominal ratio and the ratio obtained when varying the total background by its uncertainty. Figure taken from Ref. [290].
png pdf	Figure 42: Diphoton acoplanarity distribution in the search for axion-like particles in ultraperipheral PbPb collisions, for exclusive events measured in the data after selection criteria (squares), compared to the expected light-by-light scattering signal (orange histogram), quantum electrodynamics $ \mathrm{e}^{+} \mathrm{e}^{-} $ (yellow histogram), and the CEP+other (purple histogram) backgrounds. Signal and quantum electrodynamics $ \mathrm{e}^{+} \mathrm{e}^{-} $ MC samples are scaled according to their theoretical cross sections and integrated luminosity. The error bars around the data points indicate statistical uncertainties. The horizontal bars around the data symbols indicate the bin size. Figure taken from Ref. [219].
png pdf	Figure 43: Missing-mass distributions in the $ \mathrm{Z}\to\mu\mu $ final state of the CMS and CMS-TOTEM search using the missing-mass technique. The distributions are shown for protons reconstructed with (from left to right) the multi-multi, multi-single, single-multi, and single-single methods, respectively. The background distributions are shown after the fit. The lower panels display the ratio between the data and the background model, with the arrows indicating values lying outside the displayed range. The expectations for a signal with $ m_X= $ 1000 GeV are superimposed and normalized to 1 pb. Figure taken from Ref. [291].
png pdf	Figure 44: A diagram of a simulated signal event in the inclusive displaced-leptons search, from a transverse view of the interaction point, in the analysis presented in Ref. [243]. The black arrows indicate the lepton transverse impact parameter vectors.
png pdf	Figure 45: Comparison of the number of events observed in 2018 data with the expected number of background events, as a function of the smaller of the two $ d_0 $ significance values ($ \text{min}(d_0/{\sigma_{d_0}}) $) for pairs of muons that are globally reconstructed in the tracker and muon system (TMS), in the search for displaced muon pairs. The black points with error bars show the number of observed events; the green and yellow components of the stacked histograms represent the estimated numbers of DY and QCD events, respectively. The last bin includes events in the overflow. The uncertainties in the total expected background (shaded area) are statistical only. Signal contributions expected from simulated decays of exotic Higgs bosons to dark Z bosons, with Z boson masses of 20 and 50 GeV are shown in red and blue, respectively. Their yields are set to the corresponding combined median expected exclusion limits at 95% CL, scaled up as indicated in the legend to improve visibility. Figure taken from Ref. [132].
png pdf	Figure 46: Distribution of the invariant masses $ m_{(\mu\mu)1} $ vs. $ m_{(\mu\mu)2} $ of the isolated dimuon systems, in the search for displaced dimuons in final states with 4 $ \mu $+X. Triangles represent data events passing all the selection criteria and falling in the SR $ m_{(\mu\mu)1} \approx m_{(\mu\mu)2} $ (outlined by dashed lines), and white bullets represent data events that pass all selection criteria but fall outside the SR. Figure taken from Ref. [293].
png pdf	Figure 47: The dimuon invariant mass distribution from the search for displaced dimuon resonances with data scouting, shown in bins of $ l_{xy} $ as obtained from all selected dimuon events. Figure taken from Ref. [176].
png pdf	Figure 48: Distribution of the vertex track multiplicity, for data, simulated QCD multijet events, and simulated signal events, in the displaced-jets search. For a given event, if there is more than one SV candidate being reconstructed, the one with the largest vertex track multiplicity is chosen. If the track multiplicities are the same, the one with the smallest $ \chi^{2} $/ndof is chosen, where ndof is the number of degrees of freedom. The lower panel shows the ratios between the data and the simulated QCD multijet events. The blue shaded error bands and vertical bars represent the statistical uncertainties. Three benchmark signal distributions are shown (dashed lines). For visualization purposes, each signal process is given a cross section that yields 106 events produced in the analyzed data sample. Figure taken from Ref. [187].
png pdf	Figure 49: The distribution of distances between vertices in the $ x-y $ plane, $ d_{\mathrm{VV}} $, for the displaced-vertices search, for three simulated multijet signals each with a mass of 1600 GeV, with the background template distribution overlaid. The production cross section for each signal model is assumed to be the lower limit excluded by Ref. [295], corresponding to values of 0.8, 0.25, and 0.15 fb for the samples with $ c\tau_0 = $ 0.3, 1.0, and 10 mm, respectively. The last bin includes the overflow events. The two vertical pink dashed lines separate the regions used in the fit. Figure taken from Ref. [184].
png pdf	Figure 50: Distributions of the GNN output score for the data (points with error bars), SM multijet simulation (dark gray line), and signal simulation (colored lines), for the search for emerging jets. Separate GNNs are trained for the unflavored model (uGNN, left) and the flavor-aligned model (aGNN, right). Bins are chosen to correspond to the jet selection criteria applied in the analysis. The sums of the entries are normalized to unity. Figure taken from Ref. [297].
png pdf	Figure 51: The muon timing distribution in the DTs for 2016 data, simulated cosmic ray muon events, and simulated signal events, for the muon channel of the stopped-LLPs search. The gray bands indicate the statistical uncertainty in the simulation. The histograms are normalized to unit area. Figure taken from Ref. [206].
png pdf	Figure 52: The cluster reconstruction efficiency as a function of the simulated $ r $ and $ |z| $ decay positions of an LLP with a mass of 40 GeV and a range of $ c\tau_0 $ values between 1 and 10 m, for the search for neutral LLPs decaying in the muon system. Figure taken from Ref. [301].
png pdf	Figure 53: Measured min-$ d_{xy} $ distribution in the 2-match category of the IDM search, after requiring the min-$ d_{xy} $ muon to pass the isolation requirement $ I^{\text{rel}}_{\text{PF}} < $ 0.25. Overlaid with a red histogram is the background predicted from the region of the ABCD plane failing the same requirement, as well as three signal benchmark hypotheses (as defined in the legends), assuming $ \alpha_{\mathrm{D}} = \alpha_{\mathrm{EM}} $ (the fine-structure constant). The red hatched bands correspond to the background prediction uncertainty. The last bin includes the overflow. Figure taken from Ref. [207].
png pdf	Figure 54: The contributions to the delay of the LLP from the path length and the lower velocity of the parent particle, in the delayed-jets search [199]. For this model, which features LLPs with proper decay lengths of 10 m and masses of 3 TeV, the lower velocity dominates the contribution to the delay.
png pdf	Figure 55: The efficiency of the jet tagger working point used in the trackless and OOT jets and $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ analysis shown as a function of the lab frame LLP transverse decay length. The uncertainties shown account for lifetime dependence and statistical uncertainty. Figure taken from Ref. [200].
png pdf	Figure 56: Distributions of the output score of the interaction network ($ S_{\mathrm{ML}} $) for data, simulated background, and signal, for the displaced vertex plus $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ search. Events with at least five tracks are shown. The distributions are shown for split-SUSY signals with a gluino mass of 2000 GeV and a neutralino mass of 1800 GeV. Different gluino proper decay lengths are shown. All distributions are normalized to unity. Figure taken from Ref. [185].
png pdf	Figure 57: Observed and expected 95% CL exclusion regions in the $ m_{\text{med}}-m_{\text{DM}} $ plane for dijet searches [281,279,179,278,277] and different $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $-based DM searches [81,268,86] from CMS in the leptophobic vector mediator model (upper) and the axial-vector mediator model (lower). Following the recommendation of the LHC DM Working Group [24,25], the exclusions are computed for a universal quark coupling of $ g_{\mathrm{q}} = $ 0.25 and for a DM coupling of $ g_{\text{DM}} = $ 1.0. The perturbative unitarity constraint $ m_{\text{DM}} = 0.5m_{\text{med}} $ is plotted as the gray dashed line, while the constraint from the relic density ($ \Omega \mathrm{h}^2 > $ 0.12), obtained from WMAP [303] and Planck [304], is plotted as the gray solid line. It should also be noted that the absolute exclusion of the different searches as well as their relative importance, will strongly depend on the chosen coupling and model scenario. Therefore, the exclusion regions, relic density contours, and unitarity curve shown in this plot are not applicable to other choices of coupling values or models.
png pdf	Figure 57-a: Observed and expected 95% CL exclusion regions in the $ m_{\text{med}}-m_{\text{DM}} $ plane for dijet searches [281,279,179,278,277] and different $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $-based DM searches [81,268,86] from CMS in the leptophobic vector mediator model (upper) and the axial-vector mediator model (lower). Following the recommendation of the LHC DM Working Group [24,25], the exclusions are computed for a universal quark coupling of $ g_{\mathrm{q}} = $ 0.25 and for a DM coupling of $ g_{\text{DM}} = $ 1.0. The perturbative unitarity constraint $ m_{\text{DM}} = 0.5m_{\text{med}} $ is plotted as the gray dashed line, while the constraint from the relic density ($ \Omega \mathrm{h}^2 > $ 0.12), obtained from WMAP [303] and Planck [304], is plotted as the gray solid line. It should also be noted that the absolute exclusion of the different searches as well as their relative importance, will strongly depend on the chosen coupling and model scenario. Therefore, the exclusion regions, relic density contours, and unitarity curve shown in this plot are not applicable to other choices of coupling values or models.
png pdf	Figure 57-b: Observed and expected 95% CL exclusion regions in the $ m_{\text{med}}-m_{\text{DM}} $ plane for dijet searches [281,279,179,278,277] and different $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $-based DM searches [81,268,86] from CMS in the leptophobic vector mediator model (upper) and the axial-vector mediator model (lower). Following the recommendation of the LHC DM Working Group [24,25], the exclusions are computed for a universal quark coupling of $ g_{\mathrm{q}} = $ 0.25 and for a DM coupling of $ g_{\text{DM}} = $ 1.0. The perturbative unitarity constraint $ m_{\text{DM}} = 0.5m_{\text{med}} $ is plotted as the gray dashed line, while the constraint from the relic density ($ \Omega \mathrm{h}^2 > $ 0.12), obtained from WMAP [303] and Planck [304], is plotted as the gray solid line. It should also be noted that the absolute exclusion of the different searches as well as their relative importance, will strongly depend on the chosen coupling and model scenario. Therefore, the exclusion regions, relic density contours, and unitarity curve shown in this plot are not applicable to other choices of coupling values or models.
png pdf	Figure 58: Observed and expected 95% CL exclusion regions in the $ m_{\text{med}}-m_{\text{DM}} $ plane for dijet [278,277,280] and dilepton [65] searches from CMS in the vector mediator model (upper) and the axial-vector mediator model (lower). Following the recommendation of the LHC DM Working Group [24,25], the exclusions are computed for a universal quark coupling of $ g_{\mathrm{q}} = $ 0.1, lepton coupling $ g_{\ell} = $ 0.01 (upper) and $ g_{\ell} = $ 0.1 (lower), and for a DM coupling of $ g_{\text{DM}} = $ 1.0. The perturbative unitarity constraint $ m_{\text{DM}} = 0.5m_{\text{med}} $ is plotted as the gray dashed line, while the constraint from the relic density ($ \Omega \mathrm{h}^2 > $ 0.12), obtained from WMAP [303] and Planck [304], is plotted as the gray solid line. It should also be noted that the absolute exclusion of the different searches as well as their relative importance, will strongly depend on the chosen coupling and model scenario. Therefore, the exclusion regions, relic density contours, and unitarity curve shown in this plot are not applicable to other choices of coupling values or models.
png pdf	Figure 58-a: Observed and expected 95% CL exclusion regions in the $ m_{\text{med}}-m_{\text{DM}} $ plane for dijet [278,277,280] and dilepton [65] searches from CMS in the vector mediator model (upper) and the axial-vector mediator model (lower). Following the recommendation of the LHC DM Working Group [24,25], the exclusions are computed for a universal quark coupling of $ g_{\mathrm{q}} = $ 0.1, lepton coupling $ g_{\ell} = $ 0.01 (upper) and $ g_{\ell} = $ 0.1 (lower), and for a DM coupling of $ g_{\text{DM}} = $ 1.0. The perturbative unitarity constraint $ m_{\text{DM}} = 0.5m_{\text{med}} $ is plotted as the gray dashed line, while the constraint from the relic density ($ \Omega \mathrm{h}^2 > $ 0.12), obtained from WMAP [303] and Planck [304], is plotted as the gray solid line. It should also be noted that the absolute exclusion of the different searches as well as their relative importance, will strongly depend on the chosen coupling and model scenario. Therefore, the exclusion regions, relic density contours, and unitarity curve shown in this plot are not applicable to other choices of coupling values or models.
png pdf	Figure 58-b: Observed and expected 95% CL exclusion regions in the $ m_{\text{med}}-m_{\text{DM}} $ plane for dijet [278,277,280] and dilepton [65] searches from CMS in the vector mediator model (upper) and the axial-vector mediator model (lower). Following the recommendation of the LHC DM Working Group [24,25], the exclusions are computed for a universal quark coupling of $ g_{\mathrm{q}} = $ 0.1, lepton coupling $ g_{\ell} = $ 0.01 (upper) and $ g_{\ell} = $ 0.1 (lower), and for a DM coupling of $ g_{\text{DM}} = $ 1.0. The perturbative unitarity constraint $ m_{\text{DM}} = 0.5m_{\text{med}} $ is plotted as the gray dashed line, while the constraint from the relic density ($ \Omega \mathrm{h}^2 > $ 0.12), obtained from WMAP [303] and Planck [304], is plotted as the gray solid line. It should also be noted that the absolute exclusion of the different searches as well as their relative importance, will strongly depend on the chosen coupling and model scenario. Therefore, the exclusion regions, relic density contours, and unitarity curve shown in this plot are not applicable to other choices of coupling values or models.
png pdf	Figure 59: A comparison of CMS exclusions in the $ m_{\text{DM}}-\sigma_\mathrm{SI} $ plane (upper) and the $ m_{\text{DM}}-\sigma_\mathrm{SD} $ plane (lower). The exclusions are derived from the model with a vector mediator, Dirac DM, and couplings of $ g_{\mathrm{q}}= $ 0.25 and $ g_{\text{DM}}= $ 1.0. Unlike for the $ m_{\text{DM}}-m_{\text{med}} $ plane, the limits are shown at 90% CL. The CMS SI exclusion contour is compared with limits from the CRESST-III [305], DarkSide-50 [306], PandaX-4T [307], XENONnT [13], and LZ [14] experiments. The CMS SD exclusion contour is compared with limits from the PICASSO [308] and PICO [309] experiments, as well as the IceCube limit for the $ \mathrm{t} \overline{\mathrm{t}} $ annihilation channel [310,311]. The CMS limits do not include a constraint on the relic density, and the absolute exclusion of the different CMS searches as well as their relative importance will strongly depend on the chosen coupling and model scenario. Therefore, the shown CMS exclusion regions in this plot are not applicable to other choices of coupling values or models.
png pdf	Figure 59-a: A comparison of CMS exclusions in the $ m_{\text{DM}}-\sigma_\mathrm{SI} $ plane (upper) and the $ m_{\text{DM}}-\sigma_\mathrm{SD} $ plane (lower). The exclusions are derived from the model with a vector mediator, Dirac DM, and couplings of $ g_{\mathrm{q}}= $ 0.25 and $ g_{\text{DM}}= $ 1.0. Unlike for the $ m_{\text{DM}}-m_{\text{med}} $ plane, the limits are shown at 90% CL. The CMS SI exclusion contour is compared with limits from the CRESST-III [305], DarkSide-50 [306], PandaX-4T [307], XENONnT [13], and LZ [14] experiments. The CMS SD exclusion contour is compared with limits from the PICASSO [308] and PICO [309] experiments, as well as the IceCube limit for the $ \mathrm{t} \overline{\mathrm{t}} $ annihilation channel [310,311]. The CMS limits do not include a constraint on the relic density, and the absolute exclusion of the different CMS searches as well as their relative importance will strongly depend on the chosen coupling and model scenario. Therefore, the shown CMS exclusion regions in this plot are not applicable to other choices of coupling values or models.
png pdf	Figure 59-b: A comparison of CMS exclusions in the $ m_{\text{DM}}-\sigma_\mathrm{SI} $ plane (upper) and the $ m_{\text{DM}}-\sigma_\mathrm{SD} $ plane (lower). The exclusions are derived from the model with a vector mediator, Dirac DM, and couplings of $ g_{\mathrm{q}}= $ 0.25 and $ g_{\text{DM}}= $ 1.0. Unlike for the $ m_{\text{DM}}-m_{\text{med}} $ plane, the limits are shown at 90% CL. The CMS SI exclusion contour is compared with limits from the CRESST-III [305], DarkSide-50 [306], PandaX-4T [307], XENONnT [13], and LZ [14] experiments. The CMS SD exclusion contour is compared with limits from the PICASSO [308] and PICO [309] experiments, as well as the IceCube limit for the $ \mathrm{t} \overline{\mathrm{t}} $ annihilation channel [310,311]. The CMS limits do not include a constraint on the relic density, and the absolute exclusion of the different CMS searches as well as their relative importance will strongly depend on the chosen coupling and model scenario. Therefore, the shown CMS exclusion regions in this plot are not applicable to other choices of coupling values or models.
png pdf	Figure 60: Observed and expected 95% CL exclusion regions for the universal quark coupling $ g_{\mathrm{q}} $, assuming a DM coupling $ g_{\text{DM}} = $ 1.0, for varying $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ mediator mass [283,281,179,279,278,81,277,285]. The hashed areas indicate the direction of the excluded area from the observed limits. The gray dashed lines show the $ g_{\mathrm{q}} $ values at fixed values of the relative width $ \Gamma_{\mathrm{Z}^{'}}/m_{\mathrm{Z}^{'}} $. Most searches assume that the intrinsic $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ width is negligible compared to the experimental resolution and hence are valid for $ \Gamma_{\mathrm{Z}^{'}}/m_{\mathrm{Z}^{'}} \lesssim 10% $. The dijet search is valid for $ \Gamma_{\mathrm{Z}^{'}}/m_{\mathrm{Z}^{'}} \lesssim 50% $, and the dijet angular analysis is valid for $ \Gamma_{\mathrm{Z}^{'}}/m_{\mathrm{Z}^{'}} \lesssim 100% $. The observed DM relic density is also shown; it drops to 2.17 $ \times10^{-4} $ for $ m_{\mathrm{Z}^{'}} = $ 5 GeV.
png pdf	Figure 61: Limits at 95% CL from the monojet search [81] interpreted via MADANALYSIS [DVN/IRF7ZL_2021] for a dark-photon model with a DM coupling. The limits are presented in terms of the mixing parameter $ \epsilon^{2} $ with $ g_{\text{DM}} = $ 1.0 and $ \alpha_{\text{dark}} = g_{\text{DM}}^{2}/(4\pi) $. The constraint from the relic density ($ \Omega_{c} \mathrm{h}^2 \geq $ 0.12), obtained from WMAP [303] and Planck [304], is plotted in magenta.
png pdf	Figure 62: Observed upper limits at 90% CL on the square of the kinetic mixing coefficient $ \epsilon $ in the minimal model of a dark photon from a CMS dimuon search [177] in the mass ranges of 1.1-2.6 GeV and 4.2-7.9 GeV (pink) and from another CMS dimuon search [178] at larger masses (green). The limits are compared with the existing limits at 90% CL provided by LHCb (blue) [314,315] and BaBar (gray) [316].
png pdf	Figure 63: Observed (solid lines) and expected (dashed lines) 95% CL exclusion limits for the scalar model as a function of $ m_{\text{med}} $ for different $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $-based DM searches from CMS [81,86,84]. The hashed areas indicate the direction of the excluded area from the observed limits. Following the recommendation of the LHC DM Working Group [24,25], the exclusions are computed for a universal quark coupling of $ g_{\mathrm{q}} = $ 1.0 and for a DM coupling of $ g_{\text{DM}} = $ 1.0. The exclusion away from $ \sigma / \sigma_{\text{theory}} = $ 1 only applies to coupling combinations that yield the same kinematic distributions as the benchmark model considered here.
png pdf	Figure 64: Observed (red lines) and expected (black lines) 95% CL exclusion limits for the dark-Higgs boson model in terms of $ m_{\mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{D}}} $ (written as s in the figure) and $ m_{\mathrm{Z}^{'}} $ for $ m_{\text{DM}}= $ 150 GeV (upper) and 200 GeV (lower) (where $ m_{\text{DM}} $ is written as $ m_\chi $ in the figure). The gray line indicates where the model parameters produce exactly the observed relic density. Figure taken from Ref. [271].
png pdf	Figure 64-a: Observed (red lines) and expected (black lines) 95% CL exclusion limits for the dark-Higgs boson model in terms of $ m_{\mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{D}}} $ (written as s in the figure) and $ m_{\mathrm{Z}^{'}} $ for $ m_{\text{DM}}= $ 150 GeV (upper) and 200 GeV (lower) (where $ m_{\text{DM}} $ is written as $ m_\chi $ in the figure). The gray line indicates where the model parameters produce exactly the observed relic density. Figure taken from Ref. [271].
png pdf	Figure 64-b: Observed (red lines) and expected (black lines) 95% CL exclusion limits for the dark-Higgs boson model in terms of $ m_{\mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{D}}} $ (written as s in the figure) and $ m_{\mathrm{Z}^{'}} $ for $ m_{\text{DM}}= $ 150 GeV (upper) and 200 GeV (lower) (where $ m_{\text{DM}} $ is written as $ m_\chi $ in the figure). The gray line indicates where the model parameters produce exactly the observed relic density. Figure taken from Ref. [271].
png pdf	Figure 65: 95% CL upper limits on the mixing parameter $ \theta_{\text{h}}^{2} $ from the $ \mathrm{H} \to \text{inv} $ analysis [85] (Section 6.1.2) interpreted with a dark-Higgs boson model.
png pdf	Figure 66: Results on $ {\mathcal{B}(\mathrm{H} \to \text{inv})} $, shown separately for each Higgs boson production mode as tagged by the input analyses, as well as combined across modes. Left: observed and expected upper limits on $ {\mathcal{B}(\mathrm{H} \to \text{inv})} $ at 95% CL. Right: best-fit estimates of $ {\mathcal{B}(\mathrm{H} \to \text{inv})} $. Figure adapted from Ref. [85].
png pdf	Figure 66-a: Results on $ {\mathcal{B}(\mathrm{H} \to \text{inv})} $, shown separately for each Higgs boson production mode as tagged by the input analyses, as well as combined across modes. Left: observed and expected upper limits on $ {\mathcal{B}(\mathrm{H} \to \text{inv})} $ at 95% CL. Right: best-fit estimates of $ {\mathcal{B}(\mathrm{H} \to \text{inv})} $. Figure adapted from Ref. [85].
png pdf	Figure 66-b: Results on $ {\mathcal{B}(\mathrm{H} \to \text{inv})} $, shown separately for each Higgs boson production mode as tagged by the input analyses, as well as combined across modes. Left: observed and expected upper limits on $ {\mathcal{B}(\mathrm{H} \to \text{inv})} $ at 95% CL. Right: best-fit estimates of $ {\mathcal{B}(\mathrm{H} \to \text{inv})} $. Figure adapted from Ref. [85].
png pdf	Figure 67: Translation of the exclusion limits on $ {\mathcal{B}(\mathrm{H} \to \text{inv})} $ into 90% CL upper limits on the spin-independent DM-nucleon scattering cross section [85], and comparison with results from the CRESST-III [305], DarkSide-50 [306], PandaX-4T [307], and LUX-ZEPLIN [14] experiments. Figure adapted from Ref. [85].
png pdf	Figure 68: Observed (solid lines) and expected (dashed lines) 95% CL exclusion limits for the pseudoscalar model in terms of $ m_{\text{med}} $ for different $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $-based DM searches from CMS [81,86,84]. The hashed areas indicate the direction of the excluded area from the observed limits. Following the recommendation of the LHC DM Working Group [24,25], the exclusions are computed for a universal quark coupling of $ g_{\mathrm{q}} = $ 1.0 and for a DM coupling of $ g_{\text{DM}} = $ 1.0. The exclusion away from $ \sigma / \sigma_{\text{theory}} = $ 1 only applies to coupling combinations that yield the same kinematic distributions as the benchmark model considered here.
png pdf	Figure 69: Observed (solid line) and expected (dashed lines) exclusions at 95% CL in the $ m_{\Phi}-m_{\text{DM}} $ plane for the fermion portal model scenario obtained from the monojet search performed using data collected in 2016-2018. Figure adapted from Ref. [81].
png pdf	Figure 70: Observed (solid lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion regions at 95% CL in the $ m_{\mathrm{a}}-m_{\text{A}} $ plane for the 2HDM+a scenario arising from various ``mono-X'' searches performed using data collected in 2016-2018 [86,81,270]. Following the recommendation of the LHC DM Working Group [24,25], the projection is performed for values of the other parameters as follows: $ m_{\mathrm{H}}=m_{\text{A}}=m_{\mathrm{H}^{\pm}} $, $ \sin\theta= $ 0.35, $ \tan\beta= $ 1, $ m_{\text{DM}}= $ 10 GeV, and $ y_{\text{DM}}= $ 1.
png pdf	Figure 71: Exclusion regions at 95% CL in the $ m_{\mathrm{a}}-m_{\text{DM}} $ plane for the 2HDM+a scenario arising from searches for exotic and invisible decays of the 125 GeV Higgs boson performed using data collected in 2016-2018 [318,319,320,321,85]. Following the recommendation of the LHC DM Working Group [24,25], the projection is performed for values of the other parameters as follows: $ m_{\mathrm{H}}=m_{\text{A}}=m_{\mathrm{H}^{\pm}}= $ 1 TeV, $ \sin\theta= $ 0.35, $ \tan\beta= $ 1, and $ y_{\text{DM}}= $ 1. The branching fractions of the pseudoscalar boson to SM and DM particles are computed using the MADWIDTH [322] functionality within MadGraph-5\_aMC@NLO.
png pdf	Figure 72: Observed 95% CL exclusion contours in the plane defined by the kinetic mixing parameter ($ \epsilon $) and the mass of the new dark boson. A summary of Run 2 CMS searches focusing on displaced signatures is presented. Two of those searches, namely Refs. [132] (red) and [294] (blue), consider the HAHM signal and use a final state with at least two muons $ (2\mu+X) $, and the latter one uses data scouting. The third search (orange) [293] uses a final state with at least four muons $ (4\mu+X) $ and a dark SUSY signal scenario.
png pdf	Figure 73: Expected and observed 95% CL upper limit on the product of the top squark pair production cross section and branching fraction in terms of the top squark mass for the stealth SYY SUSY model (upper) and stealth $\mathrm{SHH}$ SUSY model (lower). Particle masses and branching fractions assumed for the model are included. The expected cross section is computed at NNLO accuracy, improved by using the summation of soft gluons at next-to-next-to-leading logarithmic (NNLL) order, and is shown in the red curve. Upper figure adapted from Ref. [290].
png pdf	Figure 73-a: Expected and observed 95% CL upper limit on the product of the top squark pair production cross section and branching fraction in terms of the top squark mass for the stealth SYY SUSY model (upper) and stealth $\mathrm{SHH}$ SUSY model (lower). Particle masses and branching fractions assumed for the model are included. The expected cross section is computed at NNLO accuracy, improved by using the summation of soft gluons at next-to-next-to-leading logarithmic (NNLL) order, and is shown in the red curve. Upper figure adapted from Ref. [290].
png pdf	Figure 73-b: Expected and observed 95% CL upper limit on the product of the top squark pair production cross section and branching fraction in terms of the top squark mass for the stealth SYY SUSY model (upper) and stealth $\mathrm{SHH}$ SUSY model (lower). Particle masses and branching fractions assumed for the model are included. The expected cross section is computed at NNLO accuracy, improved by using the summation of soft gluons at next-to-next-to-leading logarithmic (NNLL) order, and is shown in the red curve. Upper figure adapted from Ref. [290].
png pdf	Figure 74: Observed 95% CL exclusions of the product of the top squark pair production cross section and branching fraction as functions of the top squark mass and proper decay length of the singlino for the stealth $\mathrm{SY\overline{Y}}$ (left) and stealth $\mathrm{SHH}$ (right) SUSY model where the mass of the singlino is 100 GeV (upper) and $ m_{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}}- $ 225 GeV (lower). Exclusions are for the stealth SUSY search [290] (dark green), the displaced vertices search [184] (gray), the displaced-jets search [187] (red), the trackless- and OOT-jets search [200] (blue), and muon system showers search (MS clusters) [301] (orange). The hatching direction on each contour denotes the region of excluded 2D phase space that is bounded by the respective contour. Note that the displaced-jets search has no sensitivity less than $ c\tau_{\widetilde{\text{S}}}=$ 0.1 mm, the DVs search has no sensitivity less than $ c\tau_{\widetilde{\text{S}}}= $ 0.1 (0.3) mm for the $\mathrm{SY\overline{Y}}$ ($\mathrm{SHH}$) model, and the stealth SUSY search has no sensitivity to either stealth SUSY model when $ m_{\widetilde{\text{S}}} - m_{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}} = $ 225 GeV. Additionally, for the specific result here, the muon system showers search only uses the CSCs component of the muon system.
png pdf	Figure 74-a: Observed 95% CL exclusions of the product of the top squark pair production cross section and branching fraction as functions of the top squark mass and proper decay length of the singlino for the stealth $\mathrm{SY\overline{Y}}$ (left) and stealth $\mathrm{SHH}$ (right) SUSY model where the mass of the singlino is 100 GeV (upper) and $ m_{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}}- $ 225 GeV (lower). Exclusions are for the stealth SUSY search [290] (dark green), the displaced vertices search [184] (gray), the displaced-jets search [187] (red), the trackless- and OOT-jets search [200] (blue), and muon system showers search (MS clusters) [301] (orange). The hatching direction on each contour denotes the region of excluded 2D phase space that is bounded by the respective contour. Note that the displaced-jets search has no sensitivity less than $ c\tau_{\widetilde{\text{S}}}=$ 0.1 mm, the DVs search has no sensitivity less than $ c\tau_{\widetilde{\text{S}}}= $ 0.1 (0.3) mm for the $\mathrm{SY\overline{Y}}$ ($\mathrm{SHH}$) model, and the stealth SUSY search has no sensitivity to either stealth SUSY model when $ m_{\widetilde{\text{S}}} - m_{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}} = $ 225 GeV. Additionally, for the specific result here, the muon system showers search only uses the CSCs component of the muon system.
png pdf	Figure 74-b: Observed 95% CL exclusions of the product of the top squark pair production cross section and branching fraction as functions of the top squark mass and proper decay length of the singlino for the stealth $\mathrm{SY\overline{Y}}$ (left) and stealth $\mathrm{SHH}$ (right) SUSY model where the mass of the singlino is 100 GeV (upper) and $ m_{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}}- $ 225 GeV (lower). Exclusions are for the stealth SUSY search [290] (dark green), the displaced vertices search [184] (gray), the displaced-jets search [187] (red), the trackless- and OOT-jets search [200] (blue), and muon system showers search (MS clusters) [301] (orange). The hatching direction on each contour denotes the region of excluded 2D phase space that is bounded by the respective contour. Note that the displaced-jets search has no sensitivity less than $ c\tau_{\widetilde{\text{S}}}=$ 0.1 mm, the DVs search has no sensitivity less than $ c\tau_{\widetilde{\text{S}}}= $ 0.1 (0.3) mm for the $\mathrm{SY\overline{Y}}$ ($\mathrm{SHH}$) model, and the stealth SUSY search has no sensitivity to either stealth SUSY model when $ m_{\widetilde{\text{S}}} - m_{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}} = $ 225 GeV. Additionally, for the specific result here, the muon system showers search only uses the CSCs component of the muon system.
png pdf	Figure 74-c: Observed 95% CL exclusions of the product of the top squark pair production cross section and branching fraction as functions of the top squark mass and proper decay length of the singlino for the stealth $\mathrm{SY\overline{Y}}$ (left) and stealth $\mathrm{SHH}$ (right) SUSY model where the mass of the singlino is 100 GeV (upper) and $ m_{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}}- $ 225 GeV (lower). Exclusions are for the stealth SUSY search [290] (dark green), the displaced vertices search [184] (gray), the displaced-jets search [187] (red), the trackless- and OOT-jets search [200] (blue), and muon system showers search (MS clusters) [301] (orange). The hatching direction on each contour denotes the region of excluded 2D phase space that is bounded by the respective contour. Note that the displaced-jets search has no sensitivity less than $ c\tau_{\widetilde{\text{S}}}=$ 0.1 mm, the DVs search has no sensitivity less than $ c\tau_{\widetilde{\text{S}}}= $ 0.1 (0.3) mm for the $\mathrm{SY\overline{Y}}$ ($\mathrm{SHH}$) model, and the stealth SUSY search has no sensitivity to either stealth SUSY model when $ m_{\widetilde{\text{S}}} - m_{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}} = $ 225 GeV. Additionally, for the specific result here, the muon system showers search only uses the CSCs component of the muon system.
png pdf	Figure 74-d: Observed 95% CL exclusions of the product of the top squark pair production cross section and branching fraction as functions of the top squark mass and proper decay length of the singlino for the stealth $\mathrm{SY\overline{Y}}$ (left) and stealth $\mathrm{SHH}$ (right) SUSY model where the mass of the singlino is 100 GeV (upper) and $ m_{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}}- $ 225 GeV (lower). Exclusions are for the stealth SUSY search [290] (dark green), the displaced vertices search [184] (gray), the displaced-jets search [187] (red), the trackless- and OOT-jets search [200] (blue), and muon system showers search (MS clusters) [301] (orange). The hatching direction on each contour denotes the region of excluded 2D phase space that is bounded by the respective contour. Note that the displaced-jets search has no sensitivity less than $ c\tau_{\widetilde{\text{S}}}=$ 0.1 mm, the DVs search has no sensitivity less than $ c\tau_{\widetilde{\text{S}}}= $ 0.1 (0.3) mm for the $\mathrm{SY\overline{Y}}$ ($\mathrm{SHH}$) model, and the stealth SUSY search has no sensitivity to either stealth SUSY model when $ m_{\widetilde{\text{S}}} - m_{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}} = $ 225 GeV. Additionally, for the specific result here, the muon system showers search only uses the CSCs component of the muon system.
png pdf	Figure 75: Two-dimensional exclusion surface in the search for IDM, assuming $ \Delta = 0.1 \, m_{\text{DM}} $, in terms of the DM mass $ m_{\text{DM}} $ and the signal strength $ y $, with $ m_{\text{med}} = 3 \, m_{\text{DM}} $. Filled histograms denote observed limits on $ \sigma(\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p} \to \text{A}^{\prime} \to \chi_2 \chi_1) \, \mathcal{B}(\chi_2 \to \chi_1 \mu^{+} \mu^{-}) $. Solid (dashed) curves denote the observed (expected) exclusion limits at 95% CL, with 68% CL uncertainty bands around the expectation. Regions above the curves are excluded, depending on the $ \alpha_{\text{dark}} $ hypothesis: $ \alpha_{\text{dark}} = \alpha_{\text{EM}} $ (dark blue) or 0.1 (light magenta). The sensitivity is higher in the region near $ m_{\text{DM}} \approx $ 30 GeV or $ m_{\text{med}} \approx $ 90 GeV because of the $ \text{A}^{\prime} $ mixing with the Z boson in that mass range. Figure adapted from Ref. [207].
png pdf	Figure 76: Observed and expected 95% CL excluded regions of the $ m_{\mathrm{Z}^{'}}-r_{\text{inv}} $ plane from the dedicated SVJ search [148], the dijet search [277] (Section 6.2.2.2), and the monojet search [81] (Section 6.1.1.1). The hashed areas indicate the direction of the excluded area from the observed limits.
png pdf	Figure 77: Observed and expected 95% CL exclusion limits on $ g_{\mathrm{q}} $ for SVJ signals from the dedicated SVJ search [148], the dijet search [277], and the monojet search [81], for $ r_{\text{inv}}= $ 0.3 (upper) and $ r_{\text{inv}}= $ 0.6 (lower). The hashed areas indicate the direction of the excluded area from the observed limits. The observed limits from the monojet search in the upper plot and the inclusive SVJ search in the lower plot are outside the range of validity of the narrow-width approximation, so they are not shown.
png pdf	Figure 77-a: Observed and expected 95% CL exclusion limits on $ g_{\mathrm{q}} $ for SVJ signals from the dedicated SVJ search [148], the dijet search [277], and the monojet search [81], for $ r_{\text{inv}}= $ 0.3 (upper) and $ r_{\text{inv}}= $ 0.6 (lower). The hashed areas indicate the direction of the excluded area from the observed limits. The observed limits from the monojet search in the upper plot and the inclusive SVJ search in the lower plot are outside the range of validity of the narrow-width approximation, so they are not shown.
png pdf	Figure 77-b: Observed and expected 95% CL exclusion limits on $ g_{\mathrm{q}} $ for SVJ signals from the dedicated SVJ search [148], the dijet search [277], and the monojet search [81], for $ r_{\text{inv}}= $ 0.3 (upper) and $ r_{\text{inv}}= $ 0.6 (lower). The hashed areas indicate the direction of the excluded area from the observed limits. The observed limits from the monojet search in the upper plot and the inclusive SVJ search in the lower plot are outside the range of validity of the narrow-width approximation, so they are not shown.
png pdf	Figure 78: Observed and expected 95% CL exclusion limits from the track-based [297] and muon detector shower-based [301] searches for pair production of a bifundamental mediator that decays into a jet and an emerging jet, for $ m_{\text{dark}}= $ 10 GeV and various choices of $ \Phi $ masses and $ \pi_{\text{dark}} $ proper decay lengths, in the unflavored model (upper) and the flavor-aligned model (lower).
png pdf	Figure 78-a: Observed and expected 95% CL exclusion limits from the track-based [297] and muon detector shower-based [301] searches for pair production of a bifundamental mediator that decays into a jet and an emerging jet, for $ m_{\text{dark}}= $ 10 GeV and various choices of $ \Phi $ masses and $ \pi_{\text{dark}} $ proper decay lengths, in the unflavored model (upper) and the flavor-aligned model (lower).
png pdf	Figure 78-b: Observed and expected 95% CL exclusion limits from the track-based [297] and muon detector shower-based [301] searches for pair production of a bifundamental mediator that decays into a jet and an emerging jet, for $ m_{\text{dark}}= $ 10 GeV and various choices of $ \Phi $ masses and $ \pi_{\text{dark}} $ proper decay lengths, in the unflavored model (upper) and the flavor-aligned model (lower).
png pdf	Figure 79: Observed 95% CL exclusion limits on the branching fraction of the Higgs boson decay into DS hadrons, $ \Psi $, for the search for neutral decays in the muon system (Section 6.3.3.1). Sensitivity for the gluon (left) and Higgs boson (right) DS decay portals are shown. The model parameters considered here are $ m_{\omega_{\text{dark}}}=2.5m_{\eta_{\text{dark}}} $, $ \Lambda_{\text{dark}} =m_{\eta_{\text{dark}}} $. Figure adapted from Ref. [301].
png pdf	Figure 79-a: Observed 95% CL exclusion limits on the branching fraction of the Higgs boson decay into DS hadrons, $ \Psi $, for the search for neutral decays in the muon system (Section 6.3.3.1). Sensitivity for the gluon (left) and Higgs boson (right) DS decay portals are shown. The model parameters considered here are $ m_{\omega_{\text{dark}}}=2.5m_{\eta_{\text{dark}}} $, $ \Lambda_{\text{dark}} =m_{\eta_{\text{dark}}} $. Figure adapted from Ref. [301].
png pdf	Figure 79-b: Observed 95% CL exclusion limits on the branching fraction of the Higgs boson decay into DS hadrons, $ \Psi $, for the search for neutral decays in the muon system (Section 6.3.3.1). Sensitivity for the gluon (left) and Higgs boson (right) DS decay portals are shown. The model parameters considered here are $ m_{\omega_{\text{dark}}}=2.5m_{\eta_{\text{dark}}} $, $ \Lambda_{\text{dark}} =m_{\eta_{\text{dark}}} $. Figure adapted from Ref. [301].
png pdf	Figure 80: Observed and expected 95% CL excluded regions in the SUEP search (Section 6.2.3.2) in $ m_{\text{dark}} $-$ T_{\text{dark}} $ for each $ m_{\text{S}} $ value, considering the case with $ m_{\text{A}^{\prime}}= $ 1.0 GeV ($ \text{A}^{\prime} \to \pi^{+}\pi^{-} $ with $ \mathcal{B}=100% $). The regions below the lines are excluded. Figure taken from Ref. [289].
png pdf	Figure 81: Observed 95% CL upper limits on the branching fraction of Higgs bosons decaying into LLPs with masses between 40 and 55 GeV [243,294,292,323,187,301,85].
png pdf	Figure 82: Observed 95% CL upper limits on the branching fraction of Higgs bosons decaying into LLPs with masses between 15 and 30 GeV [243,294,292,323,187,301,85].
png pdf	Figure 83: Observed 95% CL upper limits on the branching fraction of Higgs bosons decaying into LLPs with masses between 0.4 and 7 GeV [294,301].
png pdf	Figure 84: Observed 95% CL exclusion limits for $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ bosons decaying into LLPs with fully hadronic final states, for a $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ boson mass of 3000 GeV (upper) and 4500 GeV (lower). Analyses employing different strategies are shown to have complementary lifetime sensitivity [184,199,200,187]. The theoretical cross section assumes the Z' has SM-like couplings to SM quarks [66].
png pdf	Figure 84-a: Observed 95% CL exclusion limits for $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ bosons decaying into LLPs with fully hadronic final states, for a $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ boson mass of 3000 GeV (upper) and 4500 GeV (lower). Analyses employing different strategies are shown to have complementary lifetime sensitivity [184,199,200,187]. The theoretical cross section assumes the Z' has SM-like couplings to SM quarks [66].
png pdf	Figure 84-b: Observed 95% CL exclusion limits for $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ bosons decaying into LLPs with fully hadronic final states, for a $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ boson mass of 3000 GeV (upper) and 4500 GeV (lower). Analyses employing different strategies are shown to have complementary lifetime sensitivity [184,199,200,187]. The theoretical cross section assumes the Z' has SM-like couplings to SM quarks [66].
png pdf	Figure 85: Observed 95% CL exclusion limits for $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ bosons decaying into LLPs with hadronic plus $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ final states, for a $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ boson mass of 3000 GeV (upper) and 4500 GeV (lower). Analyses employing different strategies are shown to have complementary lifetime sensitivity [199,200,187]. The theoretical cross section assumes the Z' has SM-like couplings to SM quarks [66].
png pdf	Figure 85-a: Observed 95% CL exclusion limits for $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ bosons decaying into LLPs with hadronic plus $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ final states, for a $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ boson mass of 3000 GeV (upper) and 4500 GeV (lower). Analyses employing different strategies are shown to have complementary lifetime sensitivity [199,200,187]. The theoretical cross section assumes the Z' has SM-like couplings to SM quarks [66].
png pdf	Figure 85-b: Observed 95% CL exclusion limits for $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ bosons decaying into LLPs with hadronic plus $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ final states, for a $ \mathrm{Z}^{'} $ boson mass of 3000 GeV (upper) and 4500 GeV (lower). Analyses employing different strategies are shown to have complementary lifetime sensitivity [199,200,187]. The theoretical cross section assumes the Z' has SM-like couplings to SM quarks [66].
png pdf	Figure 86: Observed 95% CL exclusion limits for $ \mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{D}} $ decaying into LLPs with a fully hadronic final state, for a $ \mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{D}} $ mass of 400 GeV (upper) and 800 GeV (lower). The $ \mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{D}} $ production cross section assumes point-like effective theory [274]. Analyses employing different strategies are shown to have complementary lifetime sensitivity [184,301,187,200].
png pdf	Figure 86-a: Observed 95% CL exclusion limits for $ \mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{D}} $ decaying into LLPs with a fully hadronic final state, for a $ \mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{D}} $ mass of 400 GeV (upper) and 800 GeV (lower). The $ \mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{D}} $ production cross section assumes point-like effective theory [274]. Analyses employing different strategies are shown to have complementary lifetime sensitivity [184,301,187,200].
png pdf	Figure 86-b: Observed 95% CL exclusion limits for $ \mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{D}} $ decaying into LLPs with a fully hadronic final state, for a $ \mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{D}} $ mass of 400 GeV (upper) and 800 GeV (lower). The $ \mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{D}} $ production cross section assumes point-like effective theory [274]. Analyses employing different strategies are shown to have complementary lifetime sensitivity [184,301,187,200].
png pdf	Figure 87: Observed 95% CL exclusion limits for $ \mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{D}} $ decaying into LLPs with a hadronic plus $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ final state, for a $ \mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{D}} $ mass of 400 GeV (upper) and 800 GeV (lower). The $ \mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{D}} $ production cross section assumes point-like effective theory [274]. Analyses employing different strategies are shown to have complementary lifetime sensitivity [187,200].
png pdf	Figure 87-a: Observed 95% CL exclusion limits for $ \mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{D}} $ decaying into LLPs with a hadronic plus $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ final state, for a $ \mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{D}} $ mass of 400 GeV (upper) and 800 GeV (lower). The $ \mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{D}} $ production cross section assumes point-like effective theory [274]. Analyses employing different strategies are shown to have complementary lifetime sensitivity [187,200].
png pdf	Figure 87-b: Observed 95% CL exclusion limits for $ \mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{D}} $ decaying into LLPs with a hadronic plus $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ final state, for a $ \mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{D}} $ mass of 400 GeV (upper) and 800 GeV (lower). The $ \mathrm{H}_{\mathrm{D}} $ production cross section assumes point-like effective theory [274]. Analyses employing different strategies are shown to have complementary lifetime sensitivity [187,200].
png pdf	Figure 88: A qualitative depiction of how the results in this Report map onto the models probed in CMS searches for dark sectors.

Tables
png pdf	Table 1: Summary of $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (or $ E_{\mathrm{T}} $) requirements (in GeV) of a subset of the HLT algorithms deployed in CMS during 2018, for trigger paths based on one or two physics objects. One $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ threshold value is given for the single-object triggers, and two $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ threshold values are given for the di-object triggers. Triggers with isolated leptons are labeled ``iso.'', and have generally lower kinematical thresholds than the corresponding algorithms that do not impose isolation requirements on leptons. The ``1-prong'' note for the tau lepton trigger refers to a selection targeting the $ \tau $ decay into a single charged particle + neutrals. The ``barrel'' note for the photon trigger refers to a photon reconstructed solely within the barrel section of the ECAL. The ``AK4'' and ``AK8'' notes refer to jets reconstructed with the anti-$ k_\text{T} $ algorithm and a distance parameter of 0.4 and 0.8, respectively [165]; the mass threshold is applied to $ m_\text{trim} $, the trimmed jet mass [172]. The ``b tags'' note refers to the number of jets that are b-tagged with the DEEPCSV algorithm [175].
png pdf	Table 2: Data sets, respective integrated luminosities, and relevant publications for each $ \mathrm{H} \to \text{inv} $ production mode across Run 1 and Run 2. For some data-taking periods, no $ \mathrm{H} \to \text{inv} $ searches have been performed for the given production mode. Table adapted from Ref. [85].
png pdf	Table 3: Trigger thresholds for various jet-based triggers in Run 2. All values are in GeVns.
png pdf	Table 4: Summary of 95% CL observed exclusion limits on $ m_{\text{med}} = m_{\mathrm{Z}^{'}} $ for $p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss}-based$ DM searches in the leptophobic vector and axial-vector model. Following the recommendation of the LHC DM Working Group [24,25], the exclusions are computed for a universal quark coupling of $ g_{\mathrm{q}} = $ 0.25 and for a DM coupling of $ g_{\text{DM}} = $ 1.0.
png pdf	Table 5: Summary of 95% CL observed exclusion limits on $ m_{\text{med}} = m_{\text{S}} $ for $p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss}-based$ DM searches from CMS in the scalar model. Following the recommendation of the LHC DM Working Group [24,25], the exclusions are computed for a universal quark coupling of $ g_{\mathrm{q}} = $ 1.0 and for a DM coupling of $ g_{\text{DM}} = $ 1.0. Each search listed here used data corresponding to $ \mathcal{L}_{\mathrm{int}} = $ 137 fb$^{-1} $.
png pdf	Table 6: The observed best-fit estimates of $ {\mathcal{B}(\mathrm{H} \to \text{inv})} $, for each analysis channel in the combination, and the 95% CL observed and expected (exp) upper limits on $ {\mathcal{B}(\mathrm{H} \to \text{inv})} $. Table adapted from Ref. [85].

Summary

A comprehensive review of dark sector (DS) searches with the CMS experiment at the LHC has been presented, using proton-proton and heavy ion collision data collected in Run 2, from 2016 to 2018, or, in some cases, from Run 1 (2011-2012) or Run 3 (2022). These searches have been interpreted in simplified and extended DS models. Figure 88 qualitatively illustrates how the results map into this theoretical framework. The broad DS search program spans many different signatures, including those with invisible particles, those with particles promptly decaying into fully visible final states, and those with long-lived particles (LLPs). A number of searches have been newly reinterpreted with DS benchmark scenarios for this Report. In order to perform these searches, several unique techniques of data collection and reconstruction were employed, and they are also described in this Report. The broad variety of searches provides sensitivity across a wide range of models and parameter space, and the results represent the most complete set of constraints on DS models obtained by the CMS Collaboration to date. In particular, this Report has presented the latest constraints from the CMS experiment on a comprehensive set of simplified dark matter models, and it has compared these constraints with those from direct-detection experiments. New reinterpretations have been shown for extended DS scenarios, including semivisible jets, emerging jets, dark supersymmetry, hidden Abelian Higgs models, and two-Higgs-doublet plus a pseudoscalar models. Several scenarios involving LLPs have been presented, including models with heavy LLPs, stealth supersymmetry, and Higgs boson decays to LLPs. In addition, future improvements will provide increased DS sensitivity. For Run 3 of the LHC [324], new triggers are available [183], as well as improvements to unique data-collection strategies, such as data scouting and data parking [176]. These strategies have already been exploited by some of the searches presented in this Report, and more analyses in the future will also benefit from them. Finally, the High-Luminosity LHC will provide even further DS sensitivity, owing to both the increased performance of the accelerator and the substantial upgrades of the CMS detector [160,325,326,327,328,329,330,331]. The impressive extension in sensitivity that will be achieved for DS models has been shown in several studies of the physics performance at the High-Luminosity LHC [332,333,334].

References
1	Planck Collaboration	Planck 2018 results: VI. Cosmological parameters	Astron. Astrophys. 641 (2020) A6	1807.06209
2	A. Arbey and F. Mahmoudi	Dark matter and the early universe: A review	Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 119 (2021) 103865	2104.11488
3	V. C. Rubin, N. Thonnard, and W. K. Ford, Jr.	Rotational properties of 21 SC galaxies with a large range of luminosities and radii, from NGC 4605 (R = 4 kpc) to UGC 2885 (R = 122 kpc)	Astrophys. J. 238 (1980) 471
4	M. Persic, P. Salucci, and F. Stel	The universal rotation curve of spiral galaxies: I. The dark matter connection	Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 281 (1996) 27	astro-ph/9506004
5	P. van Dokkum et al.	A galaxy lacking dark matter	Nature 555 (2018) 629	1803.10237
6	P. E. Piña Mancera et al.	No need for dark matter: resolved kinematics of the ultra-diffuse galaxy AGC 114905	Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 512 (2022) 3230	2112.00017
7	D. Clowe et al.	A direct empirical proof of the existence of dark matter	Astrophys. J. 648 (2006) L109	astro-ph/0608407
8	DES Collaboration	Dark Energy Survey year 1 results: Curved-sky weak lensing mass map	Mon. Not. Roy. Astron. Soc. 475 (2018) 3165	1708.01535
9	S. Dodelson	The real problem with MOND	Int. J. Mod. Phys. D 20 (2011) 2749	1112.1320
10	Planck Collaboration	Planck 2018 results: I. Overview and the cosmological legacy of Planck	Astron. Astrophys. 641 (2020) A1	1807.06205
11	M. Pospelov and J. Pradler	Big Bang Nucleosynthesis as a probe of new physics	Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 60 (2010) 539	1011.1054
12	Snowmass 2013 Cosmic Frontier Working Groups 1-4	Dark matter in the coming decade: complementary paths to discovery and beyond	Phys. Dark Univ. 7-8 16, 2015 link	1305.1605
13	XENON Collaboration	First dark matter search with nuclear recoils from the XENONnT experiment	PRL 131 (2023) 041003	2303.14729
14	LZ Collaboration	First dark matter search results from the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) experiment	PRL 131 (2023) 041002	2207.03764
15	PandaX-4T Collaboration	Dark matter search results from the PandaX-4T commissioning run	PRL 127 (2021) 261802	2107.13438
16	PADME Collaboration	Dark sector studies with the PADME experiment	SciPost Phys. Proc. 12 (2023) 050	2209.14755
17	C. Antel et al.	Feebly interacting particles: FIPs 2022 workshop report	in Workshop on Feebly-Interacting Particles, 2023	2305.01715
18	AMS Collaboration	The Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer (AMS) on the international space station: Part II --- results from the first seven years	Phys. Rept. 894 (2021) 1
19	EGRET Collaboration	The third EGRET catalog of high-energy gamma-ray sources	Astrophys. J. Suppl. 123 (1999) 79
20	Fermi-LAT Collaboration	The first Fermi LAT supernova remnant catalog	Astrophys. J. Suppl. 224 (2016) 8	1511.06778
21	IceCube Collaboration	First year performance of the IceCube neutrino telescope	Astropart. Phys. 26 (2006) 155	astro-ph/0604450
22	J. Beacham et al.	Physics beyond colliders at CERN: Beyond the standard model working group report	JPG 47 (2020) 010501	1901.09966
23	D. Abercrombie et al.	Dark matter benchmark models for early LHC Run-2 searches: Report of the ATLAS/CMS dark matter forum	Phys. Dark Univ. 27 (2020) 100371	1507.00966
24	A. Boveia et al.	Recommendations on presenting LHC searches for missing transverse energy signals using simplified $ s $-channel models of dark matter	Phys. Dark Univ. 27 (2020) 100365	1603.04156
25	A. Albert et al.	Recommendations of the LHC Dark Matter Working Group: Comparing LHC searches for dark matter mediators in visible and invisible decay channels and calculations of the thermal relic density	Phys. Dark Univ. 26 (2019) 100377	1703.05703
26	H. Baer et al.	Status of weak scale supersymmetry after LHC Run 2 and ton-scale noble liquid WIMP searches	Eur. Phys. J. ST 229 (2020) 3085	2002.03013
27	S. Rappoccio	The experimental status of direct searches for exotic physics beyond the standard model at the Large Hadron Collider	Rev. Phys. 4 (2019) 100027	1810.10579
28	A. Ilnicka, T. Robens, and T. Stefaniak	Constraining extended scalar sectors at the LHC and beyond	Mod. Phys. Lett. A 33 (2018) 1830007	1803.03594
29	J. Alexander et al.	Dark sectors 2016 workshop: Community report	in Workshop on Dark Sectors, 2016 link	1608.08632
30	A. Rajaraman, W. Shepherd, T. M. P. Tait, and A. M. Wijangco	LHC bounds on interactions of dark matter	PRD 84 (2011) 095013	1108.1196
31	M. Beltran et al.	Maverick dark matter at colliders	JHEP 09 (2010) 037	1002.4137
32	Y. Bai, P. J. Fox, and R. Harnik	The Tevatron at the frontier of dark matter direct detection	JHEP 12 (2010) 048	1005.3797
33	J. Goodman et al.	Constraints on dark matter from colliders	PRD 82 (2010) 116010	1008.1783
34	O. Buchmueller, M. J. Dolan, and C. McCabe	Beyond effective field theory for dark matter searches at the LHC	JHEP 01 (2014) 025	1308.6799
35	O. Lebedev and Y. Mambrini	Axial dark matter: The case for an invisible $ {Z'} $	PLB 734 (2014) 350	1403.4837
36	M. Fairbairn and J. Heal	Complementarity of dark matter searches at resonance	PRD 90 (2014) 115019	1406.3288
37	O. Buchmueller, M. J. Dolan, S. A. Malik, and C. McCabe	Characterising dark matter searches at colliders and direct detection experiments: Vector mediators	JHEP 01 (2015) 037	1407.8257
38	S. A. Malik et al.	Interplay and characterization of dark matter searches at colliders and in direct detection experiments	Phys. Dark Univ. 9-10 51, 2015 link	1409.4075
39	M. R. Buckley, D. Feld, and D. Goncalves	Scalar simplified models for dark matter	PRD 91 (2015) 015017	1410.6497
40	P. Harris, V. V. Khoze, M. Spannowsky, and C. Williams	Constraining dark sectors at colliders: Beyond the effective theory approach	PRD 91 (2015) 055009	1411.0535
41	Q.-F. Xiang, X.-J. Bi, P.-F. Yin, and Z.-H. Yu	Searches for dark matter signals in simplified models at future hadron colliders	PRD 91 (2015) 095020	1503.02931
42	M. Chala et al.	Constraining dark sectors with monojets and dijets	JHEP 07 (2015) 089	1503.05916
43	J. Abdallah et al.	Simplified models for dark matter searches at the LHC	Phys. Dark Univ. 9-10 8, 2015 link	1506.03116
44	P. Harris, V. V. Khoze, M. Spannowsky, and C. Williams	Closing up on dark sectors at colliders: from 14 to 100 TeV	PRD 93 (2016) 054030	1509.02904
45	A. Choudhury et al.	Less-simplified models of dark matter for direct detection and the LHC	JHEP 04 (2016) 182	1509.05771
46	A. De Simone and T. Jacques	Simplified models vs. effective field theory approaches in dark matter searches	EPJC 76 (2016) 367	1603.08002
47	A. Albert et al.	Towards the next generation of simplified dark matter models	Phys. Dark Univ. 16 (2017) 49	1607.06680
48	F. Kahlhoefer	Review of LHC dark matter searches	Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 32 (2017) 1730006	1702.02430
49	G. Arcadi et al.	The waning of the WIMP? a review of models, searches, and constraints	EPJC 78 (2018) 203	1703.07364
50	A. Boveia et al.	Summarizing experimental sensitivities of collider experiments to dark matter models and comparison to other experiments	in Community Study on the Future of Particle Physics (Snowmass), 2021	2206.03456
51	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
52	Muon $g{-}2$ Collaboration	Measurement of the positive muon anomalous magnetic moment to 0.20 ppm	PRL 131 (2023) 161802	2308.06230
53	HFLAV Collaboration	Averages of b-hadron, c-hadron, and $ \tau $-lepton properties as of 2018	EPJC 81 (2021) 226	1909.12524
54	F. U. Bernlochner, M. F. Sevilla, D. J. Robinson, and G. Wormser	Semitauonic b-hadron decays: A lepton flavor universality laboratory	Rev. Mod. Phys. 94 (2022) 015003	2101.08326
55	BaBar Collaboration	Measurement of an excess of $ \bar{B} \to D^{(*)}\tau^- \bar{\nu}_\tau $ decays and implications for charged Higgs bosons	PRD 88 (2013) 072012	1303.0571
56	LHCb Collaboration	Test of lepton flavor universality by the measurement of the $ B^0 \to D^{*-} \tau^+ \nu_{\tau} $ branching fraction using three-prong $ \tau $ decays	PRD 97 (2018) 072013	1711.02505
57	Belle Collaboration	Measurement of $ \mathcal{R}(D) $ and $ \mathcal{R}(D^*) $ with a semileptonic tagging method	PRL 124 (2020) 161803	1910.05864
58	W. Altmannshofer et al.	Neutrino tridents at DUNE	PRD 100 (2019) 115029	1902.06765
59	A. Greljo et al.	Muonic force behind flavor anomalies	JHEP 04 (2022) 151	2107.07518
60	G. Alonso-Álvarez and J. M. Cline	Gauging lepton flavor SU(3) for the muon $ g- $ 2	JHEP 03 (2022) 042	2111.04744
61	J.-Y. Cen, Y. Cheng, X.-G. He, and J. Sun	Flavor specific U(1)$ _{{B}_q-L_\mu} $ gauge model for muon $ g- $2 and $ b \to s\bar{\mu}\mu $ anomalies	NPB 978 (2022) 115762	2104.05006
62	A. Biswas and S. Khan	$ (g{-}2)_{e, \mu} $ and strongly interacting dark matter with collider implications	JHEP 07 (2022) 037	2112.08393
63	A. Greljo, P. Stangl, A. E. Thomsen, and J. Zupan	On $ (g{-}2)_{\mu} $ from gauged U(1)$ _{X} $	JHEP 07 (2022) 098	2203.13731
64	ATLAS Collaboration	Search for high-mass dilepton resonances using 139 fb$ ^{-1} $ of pp collision data collected at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector	PLB 796 (2019) 68	1903.06248
65	CMS Collaboration	Search for resonant and nonresonant new phenomena in high-mass dilepton final states at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	JHEP 07 (2021) 208	CMS-EXO-19-019 2103.02708
66	G. Altarelli, B. Mele, and M. Ruiz-Altaba	Searching for new heavy vector bosons in $ p\bar{p} $ colliders	Z. Phys. C 45 (1989) 109
67	A. Berlin, J. A. Dror, X. Gan, and J. T. Ruderman	Millicharged relics reveal massless dark photons	JHEP 05 (2023) 046	2211.05139
68	P. Ilten, Y. Soreq, M. Williams, and W. Xue	Serendipity in dark photon searches	JHEP 06 (2018) 004	1801.04847
69	P. Ilten, J. Thaler, M. Williams, and W. Xue	Dark photons from charm mesons at LHCb	PRD 92 (2015) 115017	1509.06765
70	K. Hsieh	Pseudo-Dirac bino dark matter	PRD 77 (2008) 015004	0708.3970
71	D. Tucker-Smith and N. Weiner	Inelastic dark matter	PRD 64 (2001) 043502	hep-ph/0101138
72	A. De Simone, V. Sanz, and H. P. Sato	Pseudo-Dirac dark matter leaves a trace	PRL 105 (2010) 121802	1004.1567
73	G. Lanfranchi, M. Pospelov, and P. Schuster	The search for feebly interacting particles	Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 71 (2021) 279	2011.02157
74	D. Curtin, R. Essig, S. Gori, and J. Shelton	Illuminating dark photons with high-energy colliders	JHEP 02 (2015) 157	1412.0018
75	G. Choi, T. T. Yanagida, and N. Yokozaki	Dark photon dark matter in the minimal $ B - L $ model	JHEP 01 (2021) 057	2008.12180
76	G. Krnjaic	Probing light thermal dark matter with a Higgs portal mediator	PRD 94 (2016) 073009	1512.04119
77	LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group	Handbook of LHC Higgs cross sections: 1. Inclusive observables	CERN Report CERN-2011-002, 2011 link	1101.0593
78	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
79	CMS Collaboration	Searches for invisible decays of the Higgs boson in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 7, 8, and 13 TeV	JHEP 02 (2017) 135	CMS-HIG-16-016 1610.09218
80	CMS Collaboration	Search for invisible decays of the Higgs boson produced via vector boson fusion in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	PRD 105 (2022) 092007	CMS-HIG-20-003 2201.11585
81	CMS Collaboration	Search for new particles in events with energetic jets and large missing transverse momentum in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	JHEP 11 (2021) 153	CMS-EXO-20-004 2107.13021
82	CMS Collaboration	Search for direct top squark pair production in events with one lepton, jets, and missing transverse momentum at 13 TeV with the CMS experiment	JHEP 05 (2020) 032	CMS-SUS-19-009 1912.08887
83	CMS Collaboration	Search for top squark pair production using dilepton final states in pp collision data collected at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	EPJC 81 (2021) 3	CMS-SUS-19-011 2008.05936
84	CMS Collaboration	Combined searches for the production of supersymmetric top quark partners in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	EPJC 81 (2021) 970	CMS-SUS-20-002 2107.10892
85	CMS Collaboration	A search for decays of the Higgs boson to invisible particles in events with a top-antitop quark pair or a vector boson in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	EPJC 83 (2023) 933	CMS-HIG-21-007 2303.01214
86	CMS Collaboration	Search for dark matter produced in association with a leptonically decaying Z boson in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	EPJC 81 (2021) 13	CMS-EXO-19-003 2008.04735
87	G. B é langer et al.	The MSSM invisible Higgs in the light of dark matter and $ g- $ 2	PLB 519 (2001) 93	hep-ph/0106275
88	A. Datta, K. Huitu, J. Laamanen, and B. Mukhopadhyaya	Linear collider signals of an invisible Higgs boson in theories of large extra dimensions	PRD 70 (2004) 075003	hep-ph/0404056
89	D. Dominici and J. F. Gunion	Invisible Higgs decays from Higgs-graviscalar mixing	PRD 80 (2009) 115006	0902.1512
90	R. E. Shrock and M. Suzuki	Invisible decays of Higgs bosons	PLB 110 (1982) 250
91	S. Argyropoulos, O. Brandt, and U. Haisch	Collider searches for dark matter through the Higgs lens	Symmetry 2021 (2021) 13	2109.13597
92	A. Djouadi, O. Lebedev, Y. Mambrini, and J. Quevillon	Implications of LHC searches for Higgs-portal dark matter	PLB 709 (2012) 65	1112.3299
93	S. Baek, P. Ko, W.-I. Park, and E. Senaha	Higgs-portal vector dark matter: revisited	JHEP 05 (2013) 036	1212.2131
94	A. Djouadi, A. Falkowski, Y. Mambrini, and J. Quevillon	Direct detection of Higgs--portal dark matter at the LHC	EPJC 73 (2013) 2455	1205.3169
95	A. Beniwal et al.	Combined analysis of effective Higgs-portal dark matter models	PRD 93 (2016) 115016	1512.06458
96	D. Curtin et al.	Exotic decays of the 125 GeV Higgs boson	PRD 90 (2014) 075004	1312.4992
97	A. Djouadi and M. Drees	Higgs boson decays into light gravitinos	PLB 407 (1997) 243	hep-ph/9703452
98	C. Petersson, A. Romagnoni, and R. Torre	Higgs decay with monophoton+$ \not\!\!\rm{E_T} $ signature from low scale supersymmetry breaking	JHEP 10 (2012) 016	1203.4563
99	E. Gabrielli and M. Raidal	Exponentially spread dynamical Yukawa couplings from nonperturbative chiral symmetry breaking in the dark sector	PRD 89 (2014) 015008	1310.1090
100	E. Gabrielli, M. Heikinheimo, B. Mele, and M. Raidal	Dark photons and resonant monophoton signatures in Higgs boson decays at the LHC	PRD 90 (2014) 055032	1405.5196
101	S. Biswas, E. Gabrielli, M. Heikinheimo, and B. Mele	Dark-photon searches via Higgs-boson production at the LHC	PRD 93 (2016) 093011	1603.01377
102	S. Biswas, E. Gabrielli, M. Heikinheimo, and B. Mele	Searching for massless dark photons at the LHC via Higgs boson production	PoS EPS-HEP 315, 2017 link
103	K. R. Dienes, J. Kumar, B. Thomas, and D. Yaylali	Overcoming velocity suppression in dark-matter direct-detection experiments	PRD 90 (2014) 015012	1312.7772
104	P. Agrawal and K. Howe	Factoring the strong CP problem	JHEP 12 (2018) 029	1710.04213
105	A. Hook, S. Kumar, Z. Liu, and R. Sundrum	The high quality QCD axion and the LHC	PRL 124 (2020) 221801	1911.12364
106	T. Gherghetta, V. V. Khoze, A. Pomarol, and Y. Shirman	The axion mass from 5D small instantons	JHEP 03 (2020) 063	2001.05610
107	J. Jaeckel and A. Ringwald	The low-energy frontier of particle physics	Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 60 (2010) 405	1002.0329
108	E. Izaguirre, T. Lin, and B. Shuve	Searching for axionlike particles in flavor-changing neutral current processes	PRL 118 (2017) 111802	1611.09355
109	D. Aloni, Y. Soreq, and M. Williams	Coupling QCD-scale axionlike particles to gluons	PRL 123 (2019) 031803	1811.03474
110	R. D. Peccei	The strong CP problem	Adv. Ser. Direct. High Energy Phys. 3 (1989) 503
111	A. M. Abdullahi et al.	The present and future status of heavy neutral leptons	JPG 50 (2023) 020501	2203.08039
112	B. Dasgupta and J. Kopp	Sterile neutrinos	Phys. Rept. 928 (2021) 1	2106.05913
113	Y. Bai and J. Berger	Fermion portal dark matter	JHEP 11 (2013) 171	1308.0612
114	A. DiFranzo, K. I. Nagao, A. Rajaraman, and T. M. P. Tait	Simplified models for dark matter interacting with quarks	JHEP 11 (2013) 014	1308.2679
115	T. Cohen, M. Lisanti, H. K. Lou, and S. Mishra-Sharma	LHC searches for dark sector showers	JHEP 11 (2017) 196	1707.05326
116	G. C. Branco et al.	Theory and phenomenology of two-Higgs-doublet models	Phys. Rept. 516 (2012) 1	1106.0034
117	J. F. Gunion and H. E. Haber	The CP-conserving two-Higgs-doublet model: The approach to the decoupling limit	PRD 67 (2003) 075019	hep-ph/0207010
118	M. Bauer, U. Haisch, and F. Kahlhoefer	Simplified dark matter models with two Higgs doublets: I. Pseudoscalar mediators	JHEP 05 (2017) 138	1701.07427
119	LHC Dark Matter Working Group	LHC Dark Matter Working Group: Next-generation spin-0 dark matter models	Phys. Dark Univ. 27 (2020) 100351	1810.09420
120	G. Jungman, M. Kamionkowski, and K. Griest	Supersymmetric dark matter	Phys. Rept. 267 (1996) 195	hep-ph/9506380
121	J. Alimena et al.	Searching for long-lived particles beyond the standard model at the Large Hadron Collider	JPG 47 (2020) 090501	1903.04497
122	Z. Liu and B. Tweedie	The fate of long-lived superparticles with hadronic decays after LHC Run 1	JHEP 06 (2015) 042	1503.05923
123	H. P. Nilles	Supersymmetry, supergravity and particle physics	Phys. Rept. 110 (1984) 1
124	R. Barbieri	Looking beyond the standard model: The supersymmetric option	Riv. Nuovo Cim. 11 (1988) 1
125	H. E. Haber and G. L. Kane	The search for supersymmetry: Probing physics beyond the standard model	Phys. Rept. 117 (1985) 75
126	J. F. Gunion and H. E. Haber	Higgs bosons in supersymmetric models: 3. Decays into neutralinos and charginos	NPB 307 (1988) 445
127	S. Dimopoulos, M. Dine, S. Raby, and S. D. Thomas	Experimental signatures of low-energy gauge mediated supersymmetry breaking	PRL 76 (1996) 3494	hep-ph/9601367
128	S. Dimopoulos, G. F. Giudice, and A. Pomarol	Dark matter in theories of gauge mediated supersymmetry breaking	PLB 389 (1996) 37	hep-ph/9607225
129	R. Barbier et al.	$ R $-parity violating supersymmetry	Phys. Rept. 420 (2005) 1	hep-ph/0406039
130	G. F. Giudice and A. Romanino	Split supersymmetry	NPB 699 (2004) 65	hep-ph/0406088
131	J. D. Wells	How to Find a Hidden World at the Large Hadron Collider	World Scientific Publishing, 2008 link	0803.1243
132	CMS Collaboration	Search for long-lived particles decaying to a pair of muons in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	JHEP 05 (2023) 228	CMS-EXO-21-006 2205.08582
133	N. Arkani-Hamed and N. Weiner	LHC signals for a superunified theory of dark matter	JHEP 12 (2008) 104	0810.0714
134	J. Fan, M. Reece, and J. T. Ruderman	Stealth supersymmetry	JHEP 11 (2011) 012	1105.5135
135	J. Fan, M. Reece, and J. T. Ruderman	A stealth supersymmetry sampler	JHEP 07 (2012) 196	1201.4875
136	J. Fan et al.	Stealth supersymmetry simplified	JHEP 07 (2016) 016	1512.05781
137	J. A. Dror, E. Kuflik, and W. H. Ng	Codecaying dark matter	PRL 117 (2016) 211801	1607.03110
138	A. Dery et al.	Dark matter in very supersymmetric dark sectors	PRD 99 (2019) 095023	1901.02018
139	E. Izaguirre, G. Krnjaic, and B. Shuve	Discovering inelastic thermal-relic dark matter at colliders	PRD 93 (2016) 063523	1508.03050
140	A. Berlin and F. Kling	Inelastic dark matter at the LHC lifetime frontier: ATLAS, CMS, LHCb, CODEX-b, FASER, and MATHUSLA	PRD 99 (2019) 015021	1810.01879
141	M. J. Strassler and K. M. Zurek	Echoes of a hidden valley at hadron colliders	PLB 651 (2007) 374	hep-ph/0604261
142	G. Albouy et al.	Theory, phenomenology, and experimental avenues for dark showers: a Snowmass 2021 report	EPJC 82 (2022) 1132	2203.09503
143	S. Knapen, J. Shelton, and D. Xu	Perturbative benchmark models for a dark shower search program	PRD 103 (2021) 115013	2103.01238
144	E. Witten	Baryons in the 1/$ n $ expansion	NPB 160 (1979) 57
145	J. E. Juknevich, D. Melnikov, and M. J. Strassler	A pure-glue hidden valley: I. States and decays	JHEP 07 (2009) 055	0903.0883
146	J. Kang and M. A. Luty	Macroscopic strings and 'quirks' at colliders	JHEP 11 (2009) 065	0805.4642
147	T. Cohen, M. Lisanti, and H. K. Lou	Semivisible jets: dark matter undercover at the LHC	PRL 115 (2015) 171804	1503.00009
148	CMS Collaboration	Search for resonant production of strongly coupled dark matter in proton-proton collisions at 13 TeV	JHEP 06 (2022) 156	CMS-EXO-19-020 2112.11125
149	Y. Bai and P. Schwaller	Scale of dark QCD	PRD 89 (2014) 063522	1306.4676
150	P. Schwaller, D. Stolarski, and A. Weiler	Emerging jets	JHEP 05 (2015) 059	1502.05409
151	S. Renner and P. Schwaller	A flavoured dark sector	JHEP 08 (2018) 052	1803.08080
152	S. Knapen, S. Pagan Griso, M. Papucci, and D. J. Robinson	Triggering soft bombs at the LHC	JHEP 08 (2017) 076	1612.00850
153	S. Alipour-Fard et al.	The second Higgs at the lifetime frontier	JHEP 07 (2020) 029	1812.09315
154	N. Craig, A. Katz, M. Strassler, and R. Sundrum	Naturalness in the dark at the LHC	JHEP 07 (2015) 105	1501.05310
155	G. Burdman, Z. Chacko, H.-S. Goh, and R. Harnik	Folded supersymmetry and the LEP paradox	JHEP 02 (2007) 009	hep-ph/0609152
156	H. Cai, H.-C. Cheng, and J. Terning	A quirky little Higgs model	JHEP 05 (2009) 045	0812.0843
157	CMS Collaboration	The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC	JINST 3 (2008) S08004
158	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
159	CMS Collaboration	The CMS trigger system	JINST 12 (2017) P01020	CMS-TRG-12-001 1609.02366
160	CMS Collaboration	Technical proposal for the Phase-II upgrade of the CMS detector	CMS Technical Proposal CERN-LHCC-2015-010, LHCC-P-008, CMS-TDR-15-02, 2015 link
161	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
162	Tracker Group of the CMS Collaboration	The CMS Phase-1 pixel detector upgrade	JINST 16 (2021) P02027	2012.14304
163	CMS Collaboration	Track impact parameter resolution for the full pseudo rapidity coverage in the 2017 dataset with the CMS Phase-1 pixel detector	CMS Detector Performance Summary CMS-DP-2020-049, 2020 CDS
164	CMS Collaboration	Particle-flow reconstruction and global event description with the CMS detector	JINST 12 (2017) P10003	CMS-PRF-14-001 1706.04965
165	M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez	The anti-$ k_{\mathrm{T}} $ jet clustering algorithm	JHEP 04 (2008) 063	0802.1189
166	M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez	FastJet user manual	EPJC 72 (2012) 1896	1111.6097
167	Y. L. Dokshitzer, G. D. Leder, S. Moretti, and B. R. Webber	Better jet clustering algorithms	JHEP 08 (1997) 001	hep-ph/9707323
168	CMS Collaboration	Pileup mitigation at CMS in 13 TeV data	JINST 15 (2020) P09018	CMS-JME-18-001 2003.00503
169	CMS Collaboration	Jet energy scale and resolution in the CMS experiment in pp collisions at 8 TeV	JINST 12 (2017) P02014	CMS-JME-13-004 1607.03663
170	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
171	S. Marzani, G. Soyez, and M. Spannowsky	Looking inside jets: an introduction to jet substructure and boosted-object phenomenology	Springer, 2019 link
172	D. Krohn, J. Thaler, and L.-T. Wang	Jet trimming	JHEP 02 (2010) 084	0912.1342
173	A. J. Larkoski, S. Marzani, G. Soyez, and J. Thaler	Soft drop	JHEP 05 (2014) 146	1402.2657
174	L. Lee, C. Ohm, A. Soffer, and T.-T. Yu	Collider searches for long-lived particles beyond the standard model	Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 106 (2019) 210	1810.12602
175	CMS Collaboration	Identification of heavy-flavour jets with the CMS detector in pp collisions at 13 TeV	JINST 13 (2018) P05011	CMS-BTV-16-002 1712.07158
176	CMS Collaboration	Enriching the physics program of the CMS experiment via data scouting and data parking	Submitted to Phys. Rept., 2024	CMS-EXO-23-007 2403.16134
177	CMS Collaboration	Search for direct production of GeV-scale resonances decaying to a pair of muons in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	JHEP 12 (2023) 070	CMS-EXO-21-005 2309.16003
178	CMS Collaboration	Search for a narrow resonance lighter than 200 GeV decaying to a pair of muons in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	PRL 124 (2020) 131802	CMS-EXO-19-018 1912.04776
179	CMS Collaboration	Search for dijet resonances using events with three jets in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV	PLB 805 (2020) 135448	CMS-EXO-19-004 1911.03761
180	CMS Collaboration	Search for pair-produced three-jet resonances in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	PRD 99 (2019) 012010	CMS-EXO-17-030 1810.10092
181	D. Bertolini, P. Harris, M. Low, and N. Tran	Pileup per particle identification	JHEP 10 (2014) 059	1407.6013
182	R. Frühwirth	Application of Kalman filtering to track and vertex fitting	NIM A 262 (1987) 444
183	CMS Collaboration	Performance of long lived particle triggers in Run 3	CMS Detector Performance Summary CMS-DP-2023-043, 2023 CDS
184	CMS Collaboration	Search for long-lived particles decaying to jets with displaced vertices in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV	PRD 104 (2021) 052011	CMS-EXO-19-013 2104.13474
185	CMS Collaboration	Search for long-lived particles using displaced vertices and missing transverse momentum in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	Submitted to Phys. Rev. D, 2024	CMS-EXO-22-020 2402.15804
186	R. Frühwirth, W. Waltenberger, and P. Vanlaer	Adaptive vertex fitting	JPG 34 (2007) N343
187	CMS Collaboration	Search for long-lived particles using displaced jets in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	PRD 104 (2021) 012015	CMS-EXO-19-021 2012.01581
188	CMS Collaboration	Search for new long-lived particles at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	PLB 780 (2018) 432	CMS-EXO-16-003 1711.09120
189	N. Arkani-Hamed and S. Dimopoulos	Supersymmetric unification without low energy supersymmetry and signatures for fine-tuning at the LHC	JHEP 06 (2005) 073	hep-th/0405159
190	J. L. Hewett, B. Lillie, M. Masip, and T. G. Rizzo	Signatures of long-lived gluinos in split supersymmetry	JHEP 09 (2004) 070	hep-ph/0408248
191	M. J. Strassler and K. M. Zurek	Discovering the Higgs through highly-displaced vertices	PLB 661 (2008) 263	hep-ph/0605193
192	CMS Collaboration	A deep neural network to search for new long-lived particles decaying to jets	Mach. Learn. Sci. Tech. 1 (2020) 035012	CMS-EXO-19-011 1912.12238
193	CMS Collaboration	Deep learning in jet reconstruction at CMS	J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 1085 (2018) 042029
194	CMS Collaboration	Performance of the DeepJet b tagging algorithm using 41.9/fb of data from proton-proton collisions at 13 TeV with Phase 1 CMS detector	CMS Detector Performance Summary CMS-DP-2018-058, 2018 CDS
195	P. Baldi et al.	Parameterized neural networks for high-energy physics	EPJC 76 (2016) 235	1601.07913
196	Y. Ganin and V. Lempitsky	Unsupervised domain adaptation by backpropagation		1409.7495
197	CMS Collaboration	Time reconstruction and performance of the CMS electromagnetic calorimeter	JINST 5 (2010) T03011	CMS-CFT-09-006 0911.4044
198	J. Mans et al.	CMS Technical Design Report for the Phase 1 upgrade of the hadron calorimeter	CMS Technical Design Report CERN-LHCC-2012-015, CMS-TDR-010, 2012 link
199	CMS Collaboration	Search for long-lived particles using nonprompt jets and missing transverse momentum with proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	PLB 797 (2019) 134876	CMS-EXO-19-001 1906.06441
200	CMS Collaboration	Search for long-lived particles using out-of-time trackless jets in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	JHEP 07 (2023) 210	CMS-EXO-21-014 2212.06695
201	D. del Re	Timing performance of the CMS ECAL and prospects for the future	J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 587 (2015) 012003
202	CMS Collaboration	The performance of the CMS muon detector in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 7 TeV at the LHC	JINST 8 (2013) P11002	CMS-MUO-11-001 1306.6905
203	CMS Collaboration	Performance of CMS muon reconstruction in pp collision events at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 7 TeV	JINST 7 (2012) P10002	CMS-MUO-10-004 1206.4071
204	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
205	CMS Collaboration	Muon reconstruction and identification improvements for Run-2 and first results with 2015 run data	CMS Detector Performance Summary CMS-DP-2015-015, 2015 CDS
206	CMS Collaboration	Search for decays of stopped exotic long-lived particles produced in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV	JHEP 05 (2018) 127	CMS-EXO-16-004 1801.00359
207	CMS Collaboration	Search for inelastic dark matter in events with two displaced muons and missing transverse momentum in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	PRL 132 (2024) 041802	CMS-EXO-20-010 2305.11649
208	M. Ester, H.-P. Kriegel, J. Sander, and X. Xu	A density-based algorithm for discovering clusters in large spatial databases with noise	in Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, Association for the Advancement of Artificial Intelligence, 1996 link
209	CMS Collaboration	Search for heavy stable charged particles in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 7 TeV	JHEP 03 (2011) 024	CMS-EXO-10-011 1101.1645
210	CMS Collaboration	Search for long-lived charged particles in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt s= $ 13 TeV	PRD 94 (2016) 112004	CMS-EXO-15-010 1609.08382
211	CMS Collaboration	Search for supersymmetry in final states with disappearing tracks in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	PRD 109 (2024) 072007	CMS-SUS-21-006 2309.16823
212	CMS Collaboration	Search for disappearing tracks in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	PLB 806 (2020) 135502	CMS-EXO-19-010 2004.05153
213	V. Chiochia et al.	Simulation of the CMS prototype silicon pixel sensors and comparison with test beam measurements	IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 52 (2005) 1067	physics/0411143
214	CMS Collaboration	Searches for long-lived charged particles in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 7 and 8 TeV	JHEP 07 (2013) 122	CMS-EXO-12-026 1305.0491
215	CMS Collaboration	Search for fractionally charged particles in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	Submitted to Phys. Rev. Lett., 2024	CMS-EXO-19-006 2402.09932
216	CMS and TOTEM Collaborations	CMS-TOTEM Precision Proton Spectrometer	CMS Technical Design Report CERN-LHCC-2014-021, TOTEM-TDR-003, CMS-TDR-13, 2014 link
217	CMS and TOTEM Collaborations	Proton reconstruction with the CMS-TOTEM Precision Proton Spectrometer	JINST 18 (2023) P09009	CMS-PRO-21-001 2210.05854
218	ALICE Collaboration	Centrality dependence of the charged-particle multiplicity density at midrapidity in PbPb collisions at $ \sqrt{s_{\rm NN}} = $ 5.02 TeV	PRL 116 (2016) 222302	1512.06104
219	CMS Collaboration	Evidence for light-by-light scattering and searches for axion-like particles in ultraperipheral PbPb collisions at $ \sqrt {\smash [b]{s_{_{\mathrm {NN}}}}} = $ 5.02 TeV	PLB 797 (2019) 134826	CMS-FSQ-16-012 1810.04602
220	A. L. Read	Presentation of search results: the $ \text{CL}_\text{s} $ technique	JPG 28 (2002) 2693
221	T. Junk	Confidence level computation for combining searches with small statistics	NIM A 434 (1999) 435	hep-ex/9902006
222	G. Cowan, K. Cranmer, E. Gross, and O. Vitells	Asymptotic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics	EPJC 71 (2011) 1554	1007.1727
223	CMS Collaboration	The CMS statistical analysis and combination tool: \textscCombine	Submitted to Comput. Softw. Big Sci., 2024	CMS-CAT-23-001 2404.06614
224	A. Denner, S. Dittmaier, T. Kasprzik, and A. Mück	Electroweak corrections to W+jet hadroproduction including leptonic W-boson decays	JHEP 08 (2009) 075	0906.1656
225	A. Denner, S. Dittmaier, T. Kasprzik, and A. Mück	Electroweak corrections to dilepton+jet production at hadron colliders	JHEP 06 (2011) 069	1103.0914
226	A. Denner, S. Dittmaier, T. Kasprzik, and A. Mück	Electroweak corrections to monojet production at the LHC	EPJC 73 (2013) 2297	1211.5078
227	J. H. Kuhn, A. Kulesza, S. Pozzorini, and M. Schulze	Electroweak corrections to hadronic photon production at large transverse momenta	JHEP 03 (2006) 059	hep-ph/0508253
228	S. Kallweit et al.	NLO electroweak automation and precise predictions for W+multijet production at the LHC	JHEP 04 (2015) 012	1412.5157
229	S. Kallweit et al.	NLO QCD+EW predictions for V+jets including off-shell vector-boson decays and multijet merging	JHEP 04 (2016) 021	1511.08692
230	A. J. Barr and C. Gwenlan	The race for supersymmetry: Using $ m_{\mathrm{T2}} $ for discovery	PRD 80 (2009) 074007	0907.2713
231	C. Rogan	Kinematical variables towards new dynamics at the LHC		1006.2727
232	CMS Collaboration	Inclusive search for supersymmetry using the razor variables in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 7 TeV	PRL 111 (2013) 081802	CMS-SUS-11-024 1212.6961
233	UA2 Collaboration	A measurement of two jet decays of the W and Z bosons at the CERN $ \bar{p} p $ collider	Z. Phys. C 49 (1991) 17
234	CDF Collaboration	Search for new particles decaying into dijets in proton-antiproton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 1.96 TeV	PRD 79 (2009) 112002	0812.4036
235	ATLAS Collaboration	Search for new particles in two-jet final states in 7 TeV proton-proton collisions with the ATLAS detector at the LHC	PRL 105 (2010) 161801	1008.2461
236	CMS Collaboration	Search for dijet resonances in 7 TeV pp collisions at CMS	PRL 105 (2010) 211801	CMS-EXO-10-010 1010.0203
237	R. A. Fisher	On the interpretation of $ \chi^{2} $ from contingency tables, and the calculation of P	J. R. Stat. Soc 85 (1922) 87
238	R. G. Lomax and D. L. Hahs-Vaughn	Statistical concepts: A second course	Taylor and Francis, Hoboken, NJ, 2012
239	P. D. Dauncey, M. Kenzie, N. Wardle, and G. J. Davies	Handling uncertainties in background shapes: The discrete profiling method	JINST 10 (2015) P04015	1408.6865
240	CMS Collaboration	Search for resonant and nonresonant production of pairs of dijet resonances in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	JHEP 07 (2023) 161	CMS-EXO-21-010 2206.09997
241	R. M. Harris and K. Kousouris	Searches for dijet resonances at hadron colliders	Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 26 (2011) 5005	1110.5302
242	CDF Collaboration	A measurement of $ \sigma {B} ({W} \to e \nu) $ and $ \sigma {B} ({Z}^0 \to e^+ e^-) $ in $ \bar{p}p $ collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 1800 GeV	PRD 44 (1991) 29
243	CMS Collaboration	Search for long-lived particles decaying to leptons with large impact parameter in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	EPJC 82 (2022) 153	CMS-EXO-18-003 2110.04809
244	S. Choi and H. Oh	Improved extrapolation methods of data-driven background estimations in high energy physics	EPJC 81 (2021) 643	1906.10831
245	G. Kasieczka and D. Shih	Robust jet classifiers through distance correlation	PRL 125 (2020) 122001	2001.05310
246	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
247	CMS Collaboration	CMS luminosity measurement for the 2017 data-taking period at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	CMS Physics Analysis Summary, 2018 link	CMS-PAS-LUM-17-004
248	CMS Collaboration	CMS luminosity measurement for the 2018 data-taking period at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	CMS Physics Analysis Summary, 2019 link	CMS-PAS-LUM-18-002
249	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
250	P. Nason	A new method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms	JHEP 11 (2004) 040	hep-ph/0409146
251	S. Frixione, P. Nason, and C. Oleari	Matching NLO QCD computations with parton shower simulations: The POWHEG method	JHEP 11 (2007) 070	0709.2092
252	S. Alioli, P. Nason, C. Oleari, and E. Re	A general framework for implementing NLO calculations in shower Monte Carlo programs: The POWHEG BOX	JHEP 06 (2010) 043	1002.2581
253	T. Sjöstrand et al.	An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2	Comput. Phys. Commun. 191 (2015) 159	1410.3012
254	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
255	R. Frederix and S. Frixione	Merging meets matching in MC@NLO	JHEP 12 (2012) 061	1209.6215
256	NNPDF Collaboration	Parton distributions from high-precision collider data	EPJC 77 (2017) 663	1706.00428
257	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
258	GEANT4 Collaboration	GEANT 4---a simulation toolkit	NIM A 506 (2003) 250
259	F. Ambrogi et al.	MadDM v.3.0: A comprehensive tool for dark matter studies	Phys. Dark Univ. 24 (2019) 100249	1804.00044
260	CMS Collaboration	Search for new physics in final states with an energetic jet or a hadronically decaying W or Z boson and transverse momentum imbalance at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	PRD 97 (2018) 092005	CMS-EXO-16-048 1712.02345
261	S. L. Glashow, J. Iliopoulos, and L. Maiani	Weak interactions with lepton-hadron symmetry	PRD 2 (1970) 1285
262	J. Andrea, B. Fuks, and F. Maltoni	Monotops at the LHC	PRD 84 (2011) 074025	1106.6199
263	CMS Collaboration	Search for dark matter in events with energetic, hadronically decaying top quarks and missing transverse momentum at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV	JHEP 06 (2018) 027	CMS-EXO-16-051 1801.08427
264	A. J. Larkoski, G. P. Salam, and J. Thaler	Energy correlation functions for jet substructure	JHEP 06 (2013) 108	1305.0007
265	I. Moult, L. Necib, and J. Thaler	New angles on energy correlation functions	JHEP 12 (2016) 153	1609.07483
266	J. H. Friedman	Greedy function approximation: A gradient boosting machine	Annals Statist. 29 (2001) 1189
267	CMS Collaboration	Identification of heavy, energetic, hadronically decaying particles using machine-learning techniques	JINST 15 (2020) P06005	CMS-JME-18-002 2004.08262
268	CMS Collaboration	Search for new physics in final states with a single photon and missing transverse momentum in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	JHEP 02 (2019) 074	CMS-EXO-16-053 1810.00196
269	CMS Collaboration	Search for dark matter particles produced in association with a Higgs boson in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	JHEP 03 (2020) 025	CMS-EXO-18-011 1908.01713
270	CMS Collaboration	Search for dark matter produced in association with a Higgs boson decaying to a pair of bottom quarks in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV	EPJC 79 (2019) 280	CMS-EXO-16-050 1811.06562
271	CMS Collaboration	Search for dark matter particles in W$ ^+ $W$ ^- $ events with transverse momentum imbalance in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	JHEP 03 (2024) 134	CMS-EXO-21-012 2310.12229
272	CMS Collaboration	Search for dark photons in decays of Higgs bosons produced in association with Z bosons in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	JHEP 10 (2019) 139	CMS-EXO-19-007 1908.02699
273	CMS Collaboration	Search for dark photons in Higgs boson production via vector boson fusion in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	JHEP 03 (2021) 011	CMS-EXO-20-005 2009.14009
274	LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group	Handbook of LHC Higgs cross sections: 4. Deciphering the nature of the Higgs sector	CERN Report CERN-2017-002-M, 2017 link	1610.07922
275	CMS Collaboration	Search for invisible decays of Higgs bosons in the vector boson fusion and associated ZH production modes	EPJC 74 (2014) 2980	CMS-HIG-13-030 1404.1344
276	CMS Collaboration	Search for dark matter in proton-proton collisions at 8 TeV with missing transverse momentum and vector boson tagged jets	JHEP 12 (2016) 083	CMS-EXO-12-055 1607.05764
277	CMS Collaboration	Search for high mass dijet resonances with a new background prediction method in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	JHEP 05 (2020) 033	CMS-EXO-19-012 1911.03947
278	CMS Collaboration	Search for narrow and broad dijet resonances in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV and constraints on dark matter mediators and other new particles	JHEP 08 (2018) 130	CMS-EXO-16-056 1806.00843
279	CMS Collaboration	Search for narrow resonances in the b-tagged dijet mass spectrum in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 8 TeV	PRL 120 (2018) 201801	CMS-EXO-16-057 1802.06149
280	CMS Collaboration	Search for low mass vector resonances decaying into quark-antiquark pairs in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV	JHEP 01 (2018) 097	CMS-EXO-17-001 1710.00159
281	CMS Collaboration	Search for low mass vector resonances decaying into quark-antiquark pairs in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV	PRD 100 (2019) 112007	CMS-EXO-18-012 1909.04114
282	CMS Collaboration	Search for low-mass resonances decaying into bottom quark-antiquark pairs in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	PRD 99 (2019) 012005	CMS-EXO-17-024 1810.11822
283	CMS Collaboration	Search for low-mass quark-antiquark resonances produced in association with a photon at $ \sqrt {s} = $ 13 TeV	PRL 123 (2019) 231803	CMS-EXO-17-027 1905.10331
284	CMS Collaboration	Search for resonances and quantum black holes using dijet mass spectra in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 8 TeV	PRD 91 (2015) 052009	CMS-EXO-12-059 1501.04198
285	CMS Collaboration	Search for new physics in dijet angular distributions using proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV and constraints on dark matter and other models	EPJC 78 (2018) 789	CMS-EXO-16-046 1803.08030
286	LHC New Physics Working Group	Simplified models for LHC new physics searches	JPG 39 (2012) 105005	1105.2838
287	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
288	CMS Collaboration	Search for physics beyond the standard model in dilepton mass spectra in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 8 TeV	JHEP 04 (2015) 025	CMS-EXO-12-061 1412.6302
289	CMS Collaboration	Search for soft unclustered energy patterns in proton-proton collisions at 13 TeV	Submitted to Phys. Rev. Lett., 2024	CMS-EXO-23-002 2403.05311
290	CMS Collaboration	Search for top squarks in final states with two top quarks and several light-flavor jets in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt {s} = $ 13 TeV	PRD 104 (2021) 032006	CMS-SUS-19-004 2102.06976
291	CMS and TOTEM Collaborations	A search for new physics in central exclusive production using the missing mass technique with the CMS detector and the CMS-TOTEM Precision Proton Spectrometer	EPJC 83 (2023) 827	CMS-EXO-19-009 2303.04596
292	CMS Collaboration	Search for long-lived particles decaying to final states with a pair of muons in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13.6 TeV	Accepted by JHEP, 2024	CMS-EXO-23-014 2402.14491
293	CMS Collaboration	A search for pair production of new light bosons decaying into muons in proton-proton collisions at 13 TeV	PLB 796 (2019) 131	CMS-HIG-18-003 1812.00380
294	CMS Collaboration	Search for long-lived particles decaying into muon pairs in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV collected with a dedicated high-rate data stream	JHEP 04 (2022) 062	CMS-EXO-20-014 2112.13769
295	CMS Collaboration	Search for long-lived particles with displaced vertices in multijet events in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV	PRD 98 (2018) 092011	CMS-EXO-17-018 1808.03078
296	CMS Collaboration	Search for new particles decaying to a jet and an emerging jet	JHEP 02 (2019) 179	CMS-EXO-18-001 1810.10069
297	CMS Collaboration	Search for new physics with emerging jets in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	Submitted to JHEP, 2024	CMS-EXO-22-015 2403.01556
298	A. Arvanitaki et al.	Stopping gluinos	PRD 76 (2007) 055007	hep-ph/0506242
299	P. W. Graham, K. Howe, S. Rajendran, and D. Stolarski	New measurements with stopped particles at the LHC	PRD 86 (2012) 034020	1111.4176
300	CMS Collaboration	Search for long-lived particles decaying in the CMS endcap muon detectors in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	PRL 127 (2021) 261804	CMS-EXO-20-015 2107.04838
301	CMS Collaboration	Search for long-lived particles decaying in the CMS muon detectors in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	Accepted by Phys. Rev. D, 2024	CMS-EXO-21-008 2402.01898
302	W. H. Chiu, Z. Liu, M. Low, and L.-T. Wang	Jet timing	JHEP 01 (2022) 014	2109.01682
303	WMAP Collaboration	Nine-year Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) observations: Final maps and results	Astrophys. J. Suppl. 208 (2013) 20	1212.5225
304	Planck Collaboration	Planck 2015 results: XIII. Cosmological parameters	Astron. Astrophys. 594 (2016) A13	1502.01589
305	CRESST Collaboration	First results from the CRESST-III low-mass dark matter program	PRD 100 (2019) 102002	1904.00498
306	DarkSide-50 Collaboration	Search for low-mass dark matter WIMPs with 12 ton-day exposure of DarkSide-50	PRD 107 (2023) 063001	2207.11966
307	PandaX Collaboration	Search for solar B8 neutrinos in the PandaX-4T experiment using neutrino-nucleus coherent scattering	PRL 130 (2023) 021802	2207.04883
308	E. Behnke et al.	Final results of the PICASSO dark matter search experiment	Astropart. Phys. 90 (2017) 85	1611.01499
309	PICO Collaboration	Dark matter search results from the complete exposure of the PICO-60 C$ _3 $F$ _8 $ bubble chamber	PRD 100 (2019) 022001	1902.04031
310	IceCube Collaboration	Search for annihilating dark matter in the sun with 3 years of IceCube data	EPJC 77 (2017) 146	1612.05949
311	IceCube Collaboration	Improved limits on dark matter annihilation in the sun with the 79-string IceCube detector and implications for supersymmetry	JCAP 04 (2016) 022	1601.00653
312	E. Izaguirre, G. Krnjaic, P. Schuster, and N. Toro	Analyzing the discovery potential for light dark matter	PRL 115 (2015) 251301	1505.00011
313	A. Albert et al.	Displaying dark matter constraints from colliders with varying simplified model parameters		2203.12035
314	LHCb Collaboration	Search for dark photons produced in 13 TeV pp collisions	PRL 120 (2018) 061801	1710.02867
315	LHCb Collaboration	Search for $ a'\to\mu^+\mu^- $ decays	PRL 124 (2020) 041801	1910.06926
316	BaBar Collaboration	Search for a dark photon in $ e^+e^- $ collisions at BaBar	PRL 113 (2014) 201801	1406.2980
317	A. Albert	Implementation of a search for new phenomena in events featuring energetic jets and missing transverse energy (CMS-EXO-20-004)	Open Data UCLouvain, 2021 link
318	CMS Collaboration	Search for a light pseudoscalar Higgs boson in the boosted $ \mu\mu\tau\tau $ final state in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV	JHEP 08 (2020) 139	CMS-HIG-18-024 2005.08694
319	CMS Collaboration	Search for light pseudoscalar boson pairs produced from decays of the 125 GeV Higgs boson in final states with two muons and two nearby tracks in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV	PLB 800 (2020) 135087	CMS-HIG-18-006 1907.07235
320	CMS Collaboration	Search for an exotic decay of the Higgs boson to a pair of light pseudoscalars in the final state with two muons and two b quarks in pp collisions at 13 TeV	PLB 795 (2019) 398	CMS-HIG-18-011 1812.06359
321	CMS Collaboration	Search for an exotic decay of the Higgs boson to a pair of light pseudoscalars in the final state with two b quarks and two $ \tau $ leptons in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV	PLB 785 (2018) 462	CMS-HIG-17-024 1805.10191
322	J. Alwall et al.	Computing decay rates for new physics theories with FeynRules and MadGraph 5\_aMC@NLO	Comput. Phys. Commun. 197 (2015) 312	1402.1178
323	CMS Collaboration	Search for long-lived particles produced in association with a Z boson in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV	JHEP 03 (2022) 160	CMS-EXO-20-003 2110.13218
324	CMS Collaboration	Development of the CMS detector for the CERN LHC Run 3	Accepted by JINST, 2023	CMS-PRF-21-001 2309.05466
325	CMS Collaboration	The Phase-2 upgrade of the CMS tracker	CMS Technical Design Report CERN-LHCC-2017-009, CMS-TDR-014, 2017 link
326	CMS Collaboration	The Phase-2 upgrade of the CMS barrel calorimeters	CMS Technical Design Report CERN-LHCC-2017-011, CMS-TDR-015, 2017 CDS
327	CMS Collaboration	The Phase-2 upgrade of the CMS endcap calorimeter	CMS Technical Design Report CERN-LHCC-2017-023, CMS-TDR-019, 2017 link
328	CMS Collaboration	The Phase-2 upgrade of the CMS muon detectors	CMS Technical Design Report CERN-LHCC-2017-012, CMS-TDR-016, 2017 CDS
329	CMS Collaboration	The Phase-2 upgrade of the CMS Level-1 trigger	CMS Technical Design Report CERN-LHCC-2020-004, CMS-TDR-021, 2020 CDS
330	CMS Collaboration	A MIP timing detector for the CMS Phase-2 upgrade	CMS Technical Design Report CERN-LHCC-2019-003, CMS-TDR-020, 2019 CDS
331	CMS Collaboration	Update of the MTD physics case	CMS Detector Performance Summary CMS-DP-2022-025, 2022 CDS
332	CMS Collaboration	Snowmass white paper contribution: Physics with the Phase-2 ATLAS and CMS detectors	CMS Physics Analysis Summary, 2022 CMS-PAS-FTR-22-001
333	A. Dainese et al., eds	Report on the physics at the HL-LHC, and perspectives for the HE-LHC	Volume 7/ of CERN Yellow Reports: Monographs. CERN, ISBN~978-92-9083-549-3, 2019 link
334	CMS Collaboration	Search for dark matter in final states with a Higgs boson decaying to a pair of b jets and missing transverse momentum at the HL-LHC	CMS Physics Analysis Summary, 2022 CMS-PAS-FTR-22-005	CMS-PAS-FTR-22-005

Compact Muon Solenoid LHC, CERN

© Copyright CERN 2024 for the benefit of the CMS Collaboration