CMS logoCMS event Hgg
Compact Muon Solenoid
LHC, CERN

CMS-HIG-18-017 ; CERN-EP-2019-170
Search for lepton flavour violating decays of a neutral heavy Higgs boson to $\mu\tau$ and e$\tau$ in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=$ 13 TeV
JHEP 03 (2020) 103
Abstract: A search for lepton flavour violating decays of a neutral non-standard-model Higgs boson in the $\mu\tau$ and e$\tau$ decay modes is presented. The search is based on proton-proton collisions at a center of mass energy $\sqrt{s}=$ 13 TeV collected with the CMS detector in 2016, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 35.9 fb$^{-1}$ . The $\tau$ leptons are reconstructed in the leptonic and hadronic decay modes. No signal is observed in the mass range 200-900 GeV. At 95% confidence level, the observed (expected) upper limits on the production cross section multiplied by the branching fraction vary from 51.9 (57.4) fb to 1.6 (2.1) fb for the $\mu\tau$ and from 94.1 (91.6) fb to 2.3 (2.3) fb for the e$\tau$ decay modes.
Figures & Tables Summary References CMS Publications
Figures

png pdf
Figure 1:
The ${M_{\text {col}}}$ distribution in the ${\mathrm{t} {}\mathrm{\bar{t}}} $ enriched (upper left), like-sign lepton (upper right), and W+jets enriched (lower) control samples defined in the text. The uncertainty bands include both statistical and systematic uncertainties from Section 7. No fit is performed for these distributions.

png pdf
Figure 1-a:
The ${M_{\text {col}}}$ distribution in the ${\mathrm{t} {}\mathrm{\bar{t}}} $ enriched control sample defined in the text. The uncertainty bands include both statistical and systematic uncertainties from Section 7. No fit is performed for these distributions.

png pdf
Figure 1-b:
The ${M_{\text {col}}}$ distribution in the like-sign lepton control sample defined in the text. The uncertainty bands include both statistical and systematic uncertainties from Section 7. No fit is performed for these distributions.

png pdf
Figure 1-c:
The ${M_{\text {col}}}$ distribution in the W+jets enriched control sample defined in the text. The uncertainty bands include both statistical and systematic uncertainties from Section 7. No fit is performed for these distributions.

png pdf
Figure 2:
The ${M_{\text {col}}}$ distribution in the signal region, for the $\mu {\tau _\mathrm {h}} $ (upper) and $\mu \tau _{\mathrm{e}} $ (lower) channels for the Higgs boson mass in the range 200-450 GeV for 0-jet (left) and 1-jet (right) categories. The uncertainty bands include both statistical and systematic uncertainties. The plotted values are number of events per bin using a variable bin size. The background is normalised to the best fit values from a binned likelihood fit, discussed in the text, to the background only hypothesis. For depicting the signals a branching fraction of 1% and BSM cross sections from Ref. [78] are assumed.

png pdf
Figure 2-a:
The ${M_{\text {col}}}$ distribution in the signal region, for the $\mu {\tau _\mathrm {h}} $ channel for the Higgs boson mass in the range 200-450 GeV for the 0-jet category. The uncertainty bands include both statistical and systematic uncertainties. The plotted values are number of events per bin using a variable bin size. The background is normalised to the best fit values from a binned likelihood fit, discussed in the text, to the background only hypothesis. For depicting the signals a branching fraction of 1% and BSM cross sections from Ref. [78] are assumed.

png pdf
Figure 2-b:
The ${M_{\text {col}}}$ distribution in the signal region, for the $\mu {\tau _\mathrm {h}} $ channel for the Higgs boson mass in the range 200-450 GeV for the 1-jet category. The uncertainty bands include both statistical and systematic uncertainties. The plotted values are number of events per bin using a variable bin size. The background is normalised to the best fit values from a binned likelihood fit, discussed in the text, to the background only hypothesis. For depicting the signals a branching fraction of 1% and BSM cross sections from Ref. [78] are assumed.

png pdf
Figure 2-c:
The ${M_{\text {col}}}$ distribution in the signal region, for the $\mu \tau _{\mathrm{e}} $ channel for the Higgs boson mass in the range 200-450 GeV for the 0-jet category. The uncertainty bands include both statistical and systematic uncertainties. The plotted values are number of events per bin using a variable bin size. The background is normalised to the best fit values from a binned likelihood fit, discussed in the text, to the background only hypothesis. For depicting the signals a branching fraction of 1% and BSM cross sections from Ref. [78] are assumed.

png pdf
Figure 2-d:
The ${M_{\text {col}}}$ distribution in the signal region, for the $\mu \tau _{\mathrm{e}} $ channel for the Higgs boson mass in the range 200-450 GeV for the 1-jet category. The uncertainty bands include both statistical and systematic uncertainties. The plotted values are number of events per bin using a variable bin size. The background is normalised to the best fit values from a binned likelihood fit, discussed in the text, to the background only hypothesis. For depicting the signals a branching fraction of 1% and BSM cross sections from Ref. [78] are assumed.

png pdf
Figure 3:
The ${M_{\text {col}}}$ distribution in the signal region, for the $\mu {\tau _\mathrm {h}} $ (upper) and $\mu \tau _{\mathrm{e}} $ (lower) channels for the Higgs boson mass in the range 450-900 GeV for 0-jet (left) and 1-jet (right) categories. The uncertainty bands include both statistical and systematic uncertainties. The plotted values are number of events per bin using a variable bin size. The background is normalised to the best fit values from a binned likelihood fit, discussed in the text, to the background only hypothesis. For depicting the signals a branching fraction of 1% and BSM cross sections from Ref. [78] are assumed.

png pdf
Figure 3-a:
The ${M_{\text {col}}}$ distribution in the signal region, for the $\mu {\tau _\mathrm {h}} $ channel for the Higgs boson mass in the range 450-900 GeV for the 0-jet category. The uncertainty bands include both statistical and systematic uncertainties. The plotted values are number of events per bin using a variable bin size. The background is normalised to the best fit values from a binned likelihood fit, discussed in the text, to the background only hypothesis. For depicting the signals a branching fraction of 1% and BSM cross sections from Ref. [78] are assumed.

png pdf
Figure 3-b:
The ${M_{\text {col}}}$ distribution in the signal region, for the $\mu {\tau _\mathrm {h}} $ channel for the Higgs boson mass in the range 450-900 GeV for the 1-jet category. The uncertainty bands include both statistical and systematic uncertainties. The plotted values are number of events per bin using a variable bin size. The background is normalised to the best fit values from a binned likelihood fit, discussed in the text, to the background only hypothesis. For depicting the signals a branching fraction of 1% and BSM cross sections from Ref. [78] are assumed.

png pdf
Figure 3-c:
The ${M_{\text {col}}}$ distribution in the signal region, for the $\mu \tau _{\mathrm{e}} $ channel for the Higgs boson mass in the range 450-900 GeV for the 0-jet category. The uncertainty bands include both statistical and systematic uncertainties. The plotted values are number of events per bin using a variable bin size. The background is normalised to the best fit values from a binned likelihood fit, discussed in the text, to the background only hypothesis. For depicting the signals a branching fraction of 1% and BSM cross sections from Ref. [78] are assumed.

png pdf
Figure 3-d:
The ${M_{\text {col}}}$ distribution in the signal region, for the $\mu \tau _{\mathrm{e}} $ channel for the Higgs boson mass in the range 450-900 GeV for the 1-jet category. The uncertainty bands include both statistical and systematic uncertainties. The plotted values are number of events per bin using a variable bin size. The background is normalised to the best fit values from a binned likelihood fit, discussed in the text, to the background only hypothesis. For depicting the signals a branching fraction of 1% and BSM cross sections from Ref. [78] are assumed.

png pdf
Figure 4:
The observed and median expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma (\mathrm{g} \mathrm{g} \to \mathrm{H})\mathcal {B}(\mathrm{H} \to \mu \tau)$, for the $\mu {\tau _\mathrm {h}} $ (upper) and $\mu \tau _{\mathrm{e}} $ (lower) channels, for 0-jet (left) and 1-jet (right) categories. The dashed line shows the transition between the two investigated mass ranges.

png pdf
Figure 4-a:
The observed and median expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma (\mathrm{g} \mathrm{g} \to \mathrm{H})\mathcal {B}(\mathrm{H} \to \mu \tau)$, for the $\mu {\tau _\mathrm {h}} $ channel, for the 0-jet category. The dashed line shows the transition between the two investigated mass ranges.

png pdf
Figure 4-b:
The observed and median expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma (\mathrm{g} \mathrm{g} \to \mathrm{H})\mathcal {B}(\mathrm{H} \to \mu \tau)$, for the $\mu {\tau _\mathrm {h}} $ channel, for the 1-jet category. The dashed line shows the transition between the two investigated mass ranges.

png pdf
Figure 4-c:
The observed and median expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma (\mathrm{g} \mathrm{g} \to \mathrm{H})\mathcal {B}(\mathrm{H} \to \mu \tau)$, for the $\mu \tau _{\mathrm{e}} $ channel, for the 0-jet category. The dashed line shows the transition between the two investigated mass ranges.

png pdf
Figure 4-d:
The observed and median expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma (\mathrm{g} \mathrm{g} \to \mathrm{H})\mathcal {B}(\mathrm{H} \to \mu \tau)$, for the $\mu \tau _{\mathrm{e}} $ channel, for the 1-jet category. The dashed line shows the transition between the two investigated mass ranges.

png pdf
Figure 5:
The combined observed and median expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma (\mathrm{g} \mathrm{g} \to \mathrm{H})\mathcal {B}(\mathrm{H} \to \mu \tau)$, for $\mu {\tau _\mathrm {h}} $ (upper left) and $\mu \tau _{\mathrm{e}} $ (lower right) channels, and their combination $\mu \tau $ (lower). The dashed line shows the transition between the two investigated mass ranges.

png pdf
Figure 5-a:
The combined observed and median expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma (\mathrm{g} \mathrm{g} \to \mathrm{H})\mathcal {B}(\mathrm{H} \to \mu \tau)$, for the $\mu {\tau _\mathrm {h}} $ channel. The dashed line shows the transition between the two investigated mass ranges.

png pdf
Figure 5-b:
The combined observed and median expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma (\mathrm{g} \mathrm{g} \to \mathrm{H})\mathcal {B}(\mathrm{H} \to \mu \tau)$, for the $\mu \tau _{\mathrm{e}} $ channel. The dashed line shows the transition between the two investigated mass ranges.

png pdf
Figure 5-c:
The combined observed and median expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma (\mathrm{g} \mathrm{g} \to \mathrm{H})\mathcal {B}(\mathrm{H} \to \mu \tau)$, for the combination $\mu \tau $ of the $\mu {\tau _\mathrm {h}} $ and $\mu \tau _{\mathrm{e}} $ channels. The dashed line shows the transition between the two investigated mass ranges.

png pdf
Figure 6:
The ${M_{\text {col}}}$ distribution in the signal region, for the e$ {\tau _\mathrm {h}} $ (upper) and e$ \tau _\mu $ (lower) channels for the Higgs boson mass in the range 200-450 GeV for 0-jet (left) and 1-jet (right) categories. The uncertainty bands include both statistical and systematic uncertainties. The plotted values are number of events per bin using a variable bin size. The background is normalised to the best fit values from a binned likelihood fit, discussed in the text, to the background only hypothesis. For depicting the signals a branching fraction of 1% and BSM cross sections from Ref. [78] are assumed.

png pdf
Figure 6-a:
The ${M_{\text {col}}}$ distribution in the signal region, for the e$ {\tau _\mathrm {h}} $ channel for the Higgs boson mass in the range 200-450 GeV for the 0-jet category. The uncertainty bands include both statistical and systematic uncertainties. The plotted values are number of events per bin using a variable bin size. The background is normalised to the best fit values from a binned likelihood fit, discussed in the text, to the background only hypothesis. For depicting the signals a branching fraction of 1% and BSM cross sections from Ref. [78] are assumed.

png pdf
Figure 6-b:
The ${M_{\text {col}}}$ distribution in the signal region, for the e$ {\tau _\mathrm {h}} $ channel for the Higgs boson mass in the range 200-450 GeV for the 1-jet category. The uncertainty bands include both statistical and systematic uncertainties. The plotted values are number of events per bin using a variable bin size. The background is normalised to the best fit values from a binned likelihood fit, discussed in the text, to the background only hypothesis. For depicting the signals a branching fraction of 1% and BSM cross sections from Ref. [78] are assumed.

png pdf
Figure 6-c:
The ${M_{\text {col}}}$ distribution in the signal region, for the e$ \tau _\mu $ channel for the Higgs boson mass in the range 200-450 GeV for the 0-jet category. The uncertainty bands include both statistical and systematic uncertainties. The plotted values are number of events per bin using a variable bin size. The background is normalised to the best fit values from a binned likelihood fit, discussed in the text, to the background only hypothesis. For depicting the signals a branching fraction of 1% and BSM cross sections from Ref. [78] are assumed.

png pdf
Figure 6-d:
The ${M_{\text {col}}}$ distribution in the signal region, for the e$ \tau _\mu $ channel for the Higgs boson mass in the range 200-450 GeV for the 1-jet category. The uncertainty bands include both statistical and systematic uncertainties. The plotted values are number of events per bin using a variable bin size. The background is normalised to the best fit values from a binned likelihood fit, discussed in the text, to the background only hypothesis. For depicting the signals a branching fraction of 1% and BSM cross sections from Ref. [78] are assumed.

png pdf
Figure 7:
The ${M_{\text {col}}}$ distribution in the signal region, for the e$ {\tau _\mathrm {h}} $ (upper) and e$ \tau _\mu $ (lower) channels for the Higgs boson mass in the range 450-900 GeV for 0-jet (left) and 1-jet (right) categories. The uncertainty bands include both statistical and systematic uncertainties. The plotted values are number of events per bin using a variable bin size. The background is normalised to the best fit values from a binned likelihood fit, discussed in the text, to the background only hypothesis. For depicting the signals a branching fraction of 1% and BSM cross sections from Ref. [78] are assumed.

png pdf
Figure 7-a:
The ${M_{\text {col}}}$ distribution in the signal region, for the e$ {\tau _\mathrm {h}} $ channel for the Higgs boson mass in the range 450-900 GeV for the 0-jet category. The uncertainty bands include both statistical and systematic uncertainties. The plotted values are number of events per bin using a variable bin size. The background is normalised to the best fit values from a binned likelihood fit, discussed in the text, to the background only hypothesis. For depicting the signals a branching fraction of 1% and BSM cross sections from Ref. [78] are assumed.

png pdf
Figure 7-b:
The ${M_{\text {col}}}$ distribution in the signal region, for the e$ {\tau _\mathrm {h}} $ channel for the Higgs boson mass in the range 450-900 GeV for the 1-jet category. The uncertainty bands include both statistical and systematic uncertainties. The plotted values are number of events per bin using a variable bin size. The background is normalised to the best fit values from a binned likelihood fit, discussed in the text, to the background only hypothesis. For depicting the signals a branching fraction of 1% and BSM cross sections from Ref. [78] are assumed.

png pdf
Figure 7-c:
The ${M_{\text {col}}}$ distribution in the signal region, for the e$ \tau _\mu $ channel for the Higgs boson mass in the range 450-900 GeV for the 0-jet category. The uncertainty bands include both statistical and systematic uncertainties. The plotted values are number of events per bin using a variable bin size. The background is normalised to the best fit values from a binned likelihood fit, discussed in the text, to the background only hypothesis. For depicting the signals a branching fraction of 1% and BSM cross sections from Ref. [78] are assumed.

png pdf
Figure 7-d:
The ${M_{\text {col}}}$ distribution in the signal region, for the e$ \tau _\mu $ channel for the Higgs boson mass in the range 450-900 GeV for the 1-jet category. The uncertainty bands include both statistical and systematic uncertainties. The plotted values are number of events per bin using a variable bin size. The background is normalised to the best fit values from a binned likelihood fit, discussed in the text, to the background only hypothesis. For depicting the signals a branching fraction of 1% and BSM cross sections from Ref. [78] are assumed.

png pdf
Figure 8:
The observed and median expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma (\mathrm{g} \mathrm{g} \to \mathrm{H})\mathcal {B}(\mathrm{H} \to {\mathrm{e}} \tau)$, for the e$ {\tau _\mathrm {h}} $ (upper) and e$ \tau _\mu $ (lower) channels, for 0-jet (left) and 1-jet (right) categories. The dashed line shows the transition between the two investigated mass ranges.

png pdf
Figure 8-a:
The observed and median expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma (\mathrm{g} \mathrm{g} \to \mathrm{H})\mathcal {B}(\mathrm{H} \to {\mathrm{e}} \tau)$, for the e$ {\tau _\mathrm {h}} $ channel, for the 0-jet category. The dashed line shows the transition between the two investigated mass ranges.

png pdf
Figure 8-b:
The observed and median expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma (\mathrm{g} \mathrm{g} \to \mathrm{H})\mathcal {B}(\mathrm{H} \to {\mathrm{e}} \tau)$, for the e$ {\tau _\mathrm {h}} $ channel, for the 1-jet category. The dashed line shows the transition between the two investigated mass ranges.

png pdf
Figure 8-c:
The observed and median expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma (\mathrm{g} \mathrm{g} \to \mathrm{H})\mathcal {B}(\mathrm{H} \to {\mathrm{e}} \tau)$, for the e$ \tau _\mu $ channel, for the 0-jet category. The dashed line shows the transition between the two investigated mass ranges.

png pdf
Figure 8-d:
The observed and median expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma (\mathrm{g} \mathrm{g} \to \mathrm{H})\mathcal {B}(\mathrm{H} \to {\mathrm{e}} \tau)$, for the e$ \tau _\mu $ channel, for the 1-jet category. The dashed line shows the transition between the two investigated mass ranges.

png pdf
Figure 9:
The combined observed and median expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma (\mathrm{g} \mathrm{g} \to \mathrm{H})\mathcal {B}(\mathrm{H} \to {\mathrm{e}} \tau)$, for e$ {\tau _\mathrm {h}} $ (upper left) and e$ \tau _\mu $ (upper right) channels, and their combination e$ \tau $ (lower). The dashed line shows the transition between the two investigated mass ranges.

png pdf
Figure 9-a:
The combined observed and median expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma (\mathrm{g} \mathrm{g} \to \mathrm{H})\mathcal {B}(\mathrm{H} \to {\mathrm{e}} \tau)$, for the e$ {\tau _\mathrm {h}} $ channel. The dashed line shows the transition between the two investigated mass ranges.

png pdf
Figure 9-b:
The combined observed and median expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma (\mathrm{g} \mathrm{g} \to \mathrm{H})\mathcal {B}(\mathrm{H} \to {\mathrm{e}} \tau)$, for the e$ \tau _\mu $ channel. The dashed line shows the transition between the two investigated mass ranges.

png pdf
Figure 9-c:
The combined observed and median expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma (\mathrm{g} \mathrm{g} \to \mathrm{H})\mathcal {B}(\mathrm{H} \to {\mathrm{e}} \tau)$, for the combination e$ \tau $ of the e$ {\tau _\mathrm {h}} $ and e$ \tau _\mu $ channels. The dashed line shows the transition between the two investigated mass ranges.
Tables

png pdf
Table 1:
Initial selection criteria applied to the kinematic variables for the ${\mathrm{H} \to \mu \tau} $ and ${\mathrm{H} \to {\mathrm{e}} \tau} $ analyses. The selected sample is used in the background estimation from control samples in data.

png pdf
Table 2:
Final event selection criteria for the low-mass range, 200 $ < m_{\mathrm{H}} < $ 450 GeV, and the high-mass range, 450 $ < m_{\mathrm{H}} < $ 900 GeV, considered in the ${\mathrm{H} \to \mu \tau} $ and ${\mathrm{H} \to {\mathrm{e}} \tau} $ analyses.

png pdf
Table 3:
The systematic uncertainties for the four channels. All uncertainties are treated as correlated between the categories, except those with more values separated by the $\oplus $ symbol. In the case of two values, the first value is the correlated uncertainty and the second value is the uncorrelated uncertainty for each individual category. In the case of three values, the first and second values correspond to the uncertainties arising from factorisation and renormalisation scales and PDF variations and are correlated between categories, while the third value is the uncorrelated uncertainty for each individual category. Two values separated by the "-" sign represent the range of the uncertainties from the different sources and/or in the different jet categories.

png pdf
Table 4:
Theoretical uncertainties from [78] are applied to the Higgs boson production cross sections for the different masses. In the reference, the PDF and $ {\alpha _S} $ uncertainties are computed following the recommendation of the PDF4LHC working group. The remaining Gaussian uncertainty accounts for additional intrinsic sources of theory uncertainty described in detail in the reference.

png pdf
Table 5:
The observed and median expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma (\mathrm{g} \mathrm{g} \to \mathrm{H}) \mathcal {B}(\mathrm{H} \to \mu \tau)$.

png pdf
Table 6:
The observed and median expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma (\mathrm{g} \mathrm{g} \to \mathrm{H})\mathcal {B}(\mathrm{H} \to {\mathrm{e}} \tau)$.
Summary
The first direct search for lepton flavour violating decays of a neutral non-standard-model Higgs boson (H) in the $\mu\tau$ and e$\tau$ channels is presented in this paper. The analyzed data set corresponds to an integrated luminosity of 35.9 fb$^{-1}$ of proton-proton collision data recorded at $\sqrt{s}=$ 13 TeV. The results are extracted from a fit to the collinear mass distributions. No evidence is found for lepton flavour violating decays of $\mathrm{H}$ in the investigated mass range. The observed (expected) upper limits at 95% confidence level on the product of production cross section with branching fraction, for $\mathrm{H}$ mass in the range 200-900 GeV, decaying to $\mu\tau$ and e$\tau$ vary from 51.9 (57.4) fb to 1.6 (2.1) fb and from 94.1 (91.6) fb to 2.3 (2.3) fb, respectively.
References
1 ATLAS Collaboration Observation of a new particle in the search for the standard model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC PLB 716 (2012) 1 1207.7214
2 CMS Collaboration Observation of a new boson at a mass of 125 GeV with the CMS experiment at the LHC PLB 716 (2012) 30 CMS-HIG-12-028
1207.7235
3 CMS Collaboration Observation of a new boson with mass near 125 GeV in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 7 and 8 TeV JHEP 06 (2013) 081 CMS-HIG-12-036
1303.4571
4 F. Englert and R. Brout Broken symmetry and the mass of gauge vector mesons PRL 13 (1964) 321
5 P. W. Higgs Broken symmetries, massless particles and gauge fields PL12 (1964) 132
6 P. W. Higgs Broken symmetries and the masses of gauge bosons PRL 13 (1964) 508
7 G. S. Guralnik, C. R. Hagen, and T. W. B. Kibble Global conservation laws and massless particles PRL 13 (1964) 585
8 P. W. Higgs Spontaneous symmetry breakdown without massless bosons PR145 (1966) 1156
9 T. W. B. Kibble Symmetry breaking in non-abelian gauge theories PR155 (1967) 1554
10 ATLAS and CMS Collaborations Measurements of the Higgs boson production and decay rates and constraints on its couplings from a combined ATLAS and CMS analysis of the LHC pp collision data at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 7 and 8 TeV JHEP 08 (2016) 045 1606.02266
11 CMS Collaboration Combined measurements of Higgs boson couplings in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV EPJC 79 (2019) 421 CMS-HIG-17-031
1809.10733
12 M. Buschmann, J. Kopp, J. Liu, and X.-P. Wang New signatures of flavor violating Higgs couplings JHEP 06 (2016) 149 1601.02616
13 J. D. Bjorken and S. Weinberg Mechanism for nonconservation of muon number PRL 38 (1977) 622
14 J. L. Diaz-Cruz and J. J. Toscano Lepton flavor violating decays of Higgs bosons beyond the standard model PRD 62 (2000) 116005 hep-ph/9910233
15 T. Han and D. Marfatia $ h \to \mu \tau $ at hadron colliders PRL 86 (2001) 1442 hep-ph/0008141
16 E. Arganda, A. M. Curiel, M. J. Herrero, and D. Temes Lepton flavor violating Higgs boson decays from massive seesaw neutrinos PRD 71 (2005) 035011 hep-ph/0407302
17 A. Arhrib, Y. Cheng, and O. C. W. Kong Comprehensive analysis on lepton flavor violating Higgs boson to $ \mu^\mp\tau^\pm $ decay in supersymmetry without R parity PRD 87 (2013) 015025 1210.8241
18 M. Arana-Catania, E. Arganda, and M. J. Herrero Non-decoupling SUSY in LFV Higgs decays: a window to new physics at the LHC JHEP 09 (2013) 160 1304.3371
19 E. Arganda, M. J. Herrero, R. Morales, and A. Szynkman Analysis of the $ h, H, A \to\tau\mu $ decays induced from SUSY loops within the mass insertion approximation JHEP 03 (2016) 055 1510.04685
20 E. Arganda, M. J. Herrero, X. Marcano, and C. Weiland Enhancement of the lepton flavor violating Higgs boson decay rates from SUSY loops in the inverse seesaw model PRD 93 (2016) 055010 1508.04623
21 K. Agashe and R. Contino Composite Higgs-mediated flavor-changing neutral current PRD 80 (2009) 075016 0906.1542
22 A. Azatov, M. Toharia, and L. Zhu Higgs mediated flavor changing neutral currents in warped extra dimensions PRD 80 (2009) 035016 0906.1990
23 H. Ishimori et al. Non-Abelian discrete symmetries in particle physics Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl. 183 (2010) 1 1003.3552
24 G. Perez and L. Randall Natural neutrino masses and mixings from warped geometry JHEP 01 (2009) 077 0805.4652
25 S. Casagrande et al. Flavor physics in the Randall-Sundrum model I. theoretical setup and electroweak precision tests JHEP 10 (2008) 094 0807.4937
26 A. J. Buras, B. Duling, and S. Gori The impact of Kaluza-Klein fermions on Standard Model fermion couplings in a RS model with custodial protection JHEP 09 (2009) 076 0905.2318
27 M. Blanke et al. $ \Delta F= $ 2 observables and fine-tuning in a warped extra dimension with custodial protection JHEP 03 (2009) 001 0809.1073
28 G. F. Giudice and O. Lebedev Higgs-dependent Yukawa couplings PLB 665 (2008) 79 0804.1753
29 J. A. Aguilar-Saavedra A minimal set of top-Higgs anomalous couplings NPB 821 (2009) 215 0904.2387
30 M. E. Albrecht et al. Electroweak and flavour structure of a warped extra dimension with custodial protection JHEP 09 (2009) 064 0903.2415
31 A. Goudelis, O. Lebedev, and J. H. Park Higgs-induced lepton flavor violation PLB 707 (2012) 369 1111.1715
32 D. McKeen, M. Pospelov, and A. Ritz Modified Higgs branching ratios versus CP and lepton flavor violation PRD 86 (2012) 113004 1208.4597
33 A. Pilaftsis Lepton flavour nonconservation in $ \mathrm{H}^0 $ decays PLB 285 (1992) 68
34 J. G. Korner, A. Pilaftsis, and K. Schilcher Leptonic $ \mathrm{CP} $ asymmetries in flavor-changing $ \mathrm{H}^{0} $ decays PRD 47 (1993) 1080
35 E. Arganda, M. J. Herrero, X. Marcano, and C. Weiland Imprints of massive inverse seesaw model neutrinos in lepton flavor violating Higgs boson decays PRD 91 (2015) 015001 1405.4300
36 M. Sher and K. Thrasher Flavor-changing leptonic decays of heavy Higgs bosons PRD 93 (2016) 055021 1601.03973
37 CMS Collaboration Search for lepton flavour violating decays of the Higgs boson to $ \mu\tau $ and $ \mathrm{e}\tau $ in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV JHEP 06 (2018) 001 CMS-HIG-17-001
1712.07173
38 CMS Collaboration Search for lepton-flavour-violating decays of the Higgs boson PLB 749 (2015) 337 CMS-HIG-14-005
1502.07400
39 CMS Collaboration Search for lepton flavour violating decays of the Higgs boson to e$ \tau $ and e$ \mu $ in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 8 TeV PLB 763 (2016) 472 CMS-HIG-14-040
1607.03561
40 ATLAS Collaboration Search for lepton-flavour-violating decays of the Higgs and $ Z $ bosons with the ATLAS detector EPJC 77 (2017) 70 1604.07730
41 ATLAS Collaboration Search for lepton-flavour-violating $ \mathrm{H}\to\mu\tau $ decays of the Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector JHEP 11 (2015) 211 1508.03372
42 CMS Collaboration Evidence for the direct decay of the 125 GeV Higgs boson to fermions NP 10 (2014) 557 CMS-HIG-13-033
1401.6527
43 CMS Collaboration Evidence for the 125 GeV Higgs boson decaying to a pair of $ \tau $ leptons JHEP 05 (2014) 104 CMS-HIG-13-004
1401.5041
44 CMS Collaboration Observation of the Higgs boson decay to a pair of $ \tau $ leptons with the CMS detector PLB 779 (2018) 283 CMS-HIG-16-043
1708.00373
45 CMS Collaboration Search for additional neutral MSSM Higgs bosons in the $ \tau\tau $ final state in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV JHEP 07 (2018) 007 CMS-HIG-13-021
1408.3316
46 ATLAS Collaboration Evidence for the Higgs-boson Yukawa coupling to tau leptons with the ATLAS detector JHEP 04 (2015) 117 1501.04943
47 CMS Collaboration The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC JINST 3 (2008) S08004 CMS-00-001
48 CMS Collaboration The CMS trigger system JINST 12 (2017) P01020 CMS-TRG-12-001
1609.02366
49 CMS Collaboration CMS luminosity measurements for the 2016 data taking period CMS-PAS-LUM-17-001 CMS-PAS-LUM-17-001
50 P. Nason A new method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms JHEP 11 (2004) 040 hep-ph/0409146
51 S. Frixione, P. Nason, and C. Oleari Matching NLO QCD computations with parton shower simulations: the POWHEG method JHEP 11 (2007) 070 0709.2092
52 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
53 S. Alioli et al. Jet pair production in POWHEG JHEP 04 (2011) 081 1012.3380
54 S. Alioli, P. Nason, C. Oleari, and E. Re NLO Higgs boson production via gluon fusion matched with shower in POWHEG JHEP 04 (2009) 002 0812.0578
55 E. Bagnaschi, G. Degrassi, P. Slavich, and A. Vicini Higgs production via gluon fusion in the POWHEG approach in the SM and in the MSSM JHEP 02 (2012) 088 1111.2854
56 H. M. Georgi, S. L. Glashow, M. E. Machacek, and D. V. Nanopoulos Higgs bosons from two-gluon annihilation in proton proton collisions PRL 40 (1978) 692
57 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
58 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
59 R. Frederix and S. Frixione Merging meets matching in MC@NLO JHEP 12 (2012) 061 1209.6215
60 T. Sjostrand et al. An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2 CPC 191 (2015) 159 1410.3012
61 CMS Collaboration Event generator tunes obtained from underlying event and multiparton scattering measurements EPJC 76 (2016) 155 CMS-GEN-14-001
1512.00815
62 R. D. Ball et al. Unbiased global determination of parton distributions and their uncertainties at NNLO and at LO Nuclear Physics B 855 (2012) 153 1107.2652
63 GEANT4 Collaboration GEANT4--a simulation toolkit NIMA 506 (2003) 250
64 CMS Collaboration Particle-flow reconstruction and global event description with the CMS detector JINST 12 (2017) P10003 CMS-PRF-14-001
1706.04965
65 M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez The anti-$ {k_{\mathrm{T}}} $ jet clustering algorithm JHEP 04 (2008) 063 0802.1189
66 M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez FastJet user manual EPJC 72 (2012) 1896 1111.6097
67 CMS Collaboration Performance of the CMS muon detector and muon reconstruction with proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV JINST 13 (2018) P06015 1804.04528v2
68 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
69 M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam Dispelling the $ N^{3} $ myth for the $ {k_{\mathrm{T}}} $ jet-finder PLB 641 (2006) 57 hep-ph/0512210
70 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
71 CMS Collaboration Reconstruction and identification of $ \tau $ lepton decays to hadrons and $ \nu_\tau $ at CMS JINST 11 (2016) P01019 CMS-TAU-14-001
1510.07488
72 CMS Collaboration Performance of reconstruction and identification of $ \tau $ leptons decaying to hadrons and $ \nu_{\tau} $ in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV JINST 13 (2018) P10005 CMS-TAU-16-003
1809.02816
73 M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez The catchment area of jets JHEP 04 (2008) 005 0802.1188
74 M. Cacciari and G. P. Salam Pileup subtraction using jet areas PLB 659 (2008) 119 0707.1378
75 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
76 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
77 R. K. Ellis, I. Hinchliffe, M. Soldate, and J. J. Van Der Bij Higgs Decay to $ \tau^+\tau^- $ A possible signature of intermediate mass Higgs bosons at high energy hadron colliders NPB 297 (1988) 221
78 LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group Handbook of LHC Higgs cross sections: 4. deciphering the nature of the Higgs sector CERN-CYRM-2017-002 (2016) 1610.07922
79 R. Barlow and C. Beeston Fitting using finite Monte Carlo samples Comp. Phys. Comm. 77 (1993) 219
80 CMS Collaboration Measurement of the inelastic proton-proton cross section at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV JHEP 07 (2018) 161 CMS-FSQ-15-005
1802.02613
81 J. S. Conway Incorporating nuisance parameters in likelihoods for multisource spectra 1103.0354
82 ATLAS and CMS Collaborations, LHC Higgs Combination Group Procedure for the LHC Higgs boson search combination in Summer 2011 ATL-PHYS-PUB 2011-11, CMS NOTE 2011/005
83 T. Junk Confidence level computation for combining searches with small statistics NIMA 434 (1999) 435 hep-ex/9902006
84 A. L. Read Presentation of search results: the CLs technique JPG 28 (2002) 2693
85 G. Cowan, K. Cranmer, E. Gross, and O. Vitells Asymptotic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics EPJC 71 (2011) 1554 1007.1727
Compact Muon Solenoid
LHC, CERN