CMS logoCMS event Hgg
Compact Muon Solenoid
LHC, CERN

CMS-HIG-20-006 ; CERN-EP-2021-189
Analysis of the CP structure of the Yukawa coupling between the Higgs boson and $\tau$ leptons in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV
JHEP 06 (2022) 012
Abstract: The first measurement of the CP structure of the Yukawa coupling between the Higgs boson and $\tau$ leptons is presented. The measurement is based on data collected in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV by the CMS detector at the LHC, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 137 fb$^{-1}$. The analysis uses the angular correlation between the decay planes of $\tau$ leptons produced in Higgs boson decays. The effective mixing angle between CP-even and CP-odd $\tau$ Yukawa couplings is found to be $ -1 \pm 19 ^{\circ}$, compared to an expected value of $ 0 \pm 21 ^{\circ}$ at the 68.3% confidence level. The data disfavour the pure CP-odd scenario at 3.0 standard deviations. The results are compatible with predictions for the standard model Higgs boson.
Figures & Tables Summary Additional Figures & Tables References CMS Publications
Figures

png pdf
Figure 1:
The decay planes of two $\tau$ leptons decaying to a single charged pion. The angle ${\phi _{{\textit {CP}}}}$ is the angle between the decay planes. The illustration is in the H rest frame.

png pdf
Figure 2:
The normalised distribution of ${\phi _{{\textit {CP}}}}$ between the $\tau$ lepton decay planes in the H rest frame at the generator level, for both $\tau$ leptons decaying to a charged pion and a neutrino. The distributions are for a decaying scalar (CP-even, solid red), pseudoscalar (CP-odd, dash blue), a maximal mixing angle of $45^{\circ}$ (CP-mix, dash-dot-dot green), and a Z vector boson (black dash-dot). The transverse momentum of the visible $\tau$ decay products $ {p_{\mathrm {T}}} ^{\tau}$ was required to be larger than 33 GeV during the event generation.

png pdf
Figure 3:
Illustration of the $\tau$ lepton decay planes and the angle ${\phi _{{\textit {CP}}}}$ for various decay configurations. The decay planes are illustrated with the shaded regions, and either the vector ${\hat{\lambda}}$ or the momentum vector of the neutral pion is in the decay plane. The illustrations are in the frame in which the sum of the momenta of the charged particles is zero. Left: the decay plane for the decays $\tau^{-} \to \pi^{-} +\nu $ and $\tau^{+} \to \pi^{+} +\bar{\nu} $. Middle: the decay plane as reconstructed from the neutral and charged pion momenta. Right: ${\phi _{{\textit {CP}}}}$ for the mixed scenario, in which one $\tau$ lepton decays to a pion while the other decays via an intermediate $\rho$ meson.

png pdf
Figure 3-a:
The decay plane for the decays $\tau^{-} \to \pi^{-} +\nu $ and $\tau^{+} \to \pi^{+} +\bar{\nu} $.

png pdf
Figure 3-b:
The decay plane as reconstructed from the neutral and charged pion momenta.

png pdf
Figure 3-c:
${\phi _{{\textit {CP}}}}$ for the mixed scenario, in which one $\tau$ lepton decays to a pion while the other decays via an intermediate $\rho$ meson.

png pdf
Figure 4:
The decay of ${\mathrm {a_{1}^{3\text{pr}}}}$ via an intermediate ${\rho ^0}$ to three charged pions.

png pdf
Figure 5:
The angle ${\phi _{{\textit {CP}}}}$ for ${\mu \to {\tau _\mathrm {h}}}$ events in which the ${\tau _\mathrm {h}}$ decays to a charged $\pi$ (upper) or a charged $\rho$ meson (lower). The distributions are decomposed in a subset in which the charged $\pi$ is "nearly coplanar" (left) or "nearly perpendicular" (right) to the production plane.

png pdf
Figure 5-a:
The angle ${\phi _{{\textit {CP}}}}$ for ${\mu \to {\tau _\mathrm {h}}}$ events in which the ${\tau _\mathrm {h}}$ decays to a charged $\pi$. In this subset the charged $\pi$ is "nearly coplanar" to the production plane.

png pdf
Figure 5-b:
The angle ${\phi _{{\textit {CP}}}}$ for ${\mu \to {\tau _\mathrm {h}}}$ events in which the ${\tau _\mathrm {h}}$ decays to a charged $\rho$ meson. In this subset the charged $\pi$ is "nearly perpendicular" to the production plane.

png pdf
Figure 5-c:
The angle ${\phi _{{\textit {CP}}}}$ for ${\mu \to {\tau _\mathrm {h}}}$ events in which the ${\tau _\mathrm {h}}$ decays to a charged $\pi$ (upper) or a charged $\rho$ meson (lower). The distributions are decomposed in a subset in which the charged $\pi$ is "nearly coplanar" (left) or "nearly perpendicular" (right) to the production plane.

png pdf
Figure 5-d:
The angle ${\phi _{{\textit {CP}}}}$ for ${\mu \to {\tau _\mathrm {h}}}$ events in which the ${\tau _\mathrm {h}}$ decays to a charged $\pi$ (upper) or a charged $\rho$ meson (lower). The distributions are decomposed in a subset in which the charged $\pi$ is "nearly coplanar" (left) or "nearly perpendicular" (right) to the production plane.

png pdf
Figure 6:
The post-fit MVA score distributions for the Genuine (left) and Mis-ID categories (right) in the ${\tau _{\mu} {\tau _\mathrm {h}}}$ (upper) and ${{\tau _{\mathrm{e}}} {\tau _\mathrm {h}}}$ (lower) channels. The distributions are inclusive in ${\tau _\mathrm {h}}$ decay mode. The best fit signal distributions are overlaid. In the lower panels, the data minus the background template divided by the uncertainty in the background template is displayed, as well as the signal distribution divided by the uncertainty in the background template. The uncertainty band accounts for all sources of systematic uncertainty in the background prediction, after the fit to data.

png pdf
Figure 6-a:
The post-fit MVA score distribution for the Genuine category in the ${\tau _{\mu} {\tau _\mathrm {h}}}$ channel. The distribution is inclusive in ${\tau _\mathrm {h}}$ decay mode. The best fit signal distribution is overlaid. In the lower panel, the data minus the background template divided by the uncertainty in the background template is displayed, as well as the signal distribution divided by the uncertainty in the background template. The uncertainty band accounts for all sources of systematic uncertainty in the background prediction, after the fit to data.

png pdf
Figure 6-b:
The post-fit MVA score distribution for the Mis-ID category in the ${\tau _{\mu} {\tau _\mathrm {h}}}$ channel. The distribution is inclusive in ${\tau _\mathrm {h}}$ decay mode. The best fit signal distribution is overlaid. In the lower panel, the data minus the background template divided by the uncertainty in the background template is displayed, as well as the signal distribution divided by the uncertainty in the background template. The uncertainty band accounts for all sources of systematic uncertainty in the background prediction, after the fit to data.

png pdf
Figure 6-c:
The post-fit MVA score distribution for the Genuine category in the ${{\tau _{\mathrm{e}}} {\tau _\mathrm {h}}}$ channel. The distribution is inclusive in ${\tau _\mathrm {h}}$ decay mode. The best fit signal distribution is overlaid. In the lower panel, the data minus the background template divided by the uncertainty in the background template is displayed, as well as the signal distribution divided by the uncertainty in the background template. The uncertainty band accounts for all sources of systematic uncertainty in the background prediction, after the fit to data.

png pdf
Figure 6-d:
The post-fit MVA score distribution for the Mis-ID category in the ${{\tau _{\mathrm{e}}} {\tau _\mathrm {h}}}$ channel. The distribution is inclusive in ${\tau _\mathrm {h}}$ decay mode. The best fit signal distribution is overlaid. In the lower panel, the data minus the background template divided by the uncertainty in the background template is displayed, as well as the signal distribution divided by the uncertainty in the background template. The uncertainty band accounts for all sources of systematic uncertainty in the background prediction, after the fit to data.

png pdf
Figure 7:
The post-fit MVA score distributions for the Genuine (left) and Mis-ID categories (right) in the ${{\tau _\mathrm {h}} {\tau _\mathrm {h}}}$ channel. The distributions are inclusive in ${\tau _\mathrm {h}}$ decay mode. The best fit signal distributions are overlaid. In the lower panels, the data minus the background template divided by the uncertainty in the background template is displayed, as well as the signal distribution divided by the uncertainty in the background template. The uncertainty band accounts for all sources of systematic uncertainty in the background prediction, after the fit to data.

png pdf
Figure 7-a:
The post-fit MVA score distribution for the Genuine category in the ${{\tau _\mathrm {h}} {\tau _\mathrm {h}}}$ channel. The distribution is inclusive in ${\tau _\mathrm {h}}$ decay mode. The best fit signal distribution is overlaid. In the lower panel, the data minus the background template divided by the uncertainty in the background template is displayed, as well as the signal distribution divided by the uncertainty in the background template. The uncertainty band accounts for all sources of systematic uncertainty in the background prediction, after the fit to data.

png pdf
Figure 7-b:
The post-fit MVA score distribution for the Mis-ID category in the ${{\tau _\mathrm {h}} {\tau _\mathrm {h}}}$ channel. The distribution is inclusive in ${\tau _\mathrm {h}}$ decay mode. The best fit signal distribution is overlaid. In the lower panel, the data minus the background template divided by the uncertainty in the background template is displayed, as well as the signal distribution divided by the uncertainty in the background template. The uncertainty band accounts for all sources of systematic uncertainty in the background prediction, after the fit to data.

png pdf
Figure 8:
Distributions of ${\phi _{{\textit {CP}}}}$ in the ${\mu \rho}$ (upper) and ${\mu \pi}$ (lower) channels in windows of increasing MVA score, shown on top of each window. The best fit and pseudoscalar (PS) signal distributions are overlaid. The $x$-axis represents the cyclic bins in ${\phi _{{\textit {CP}}}}$ in the range of $(0, 360^{\circ})$. In the lower panels, the data minus the background template divided by the uncertainty in the background template is displayed, as well as the signal distributions divided by the uncertainty in the background template. The uncertainty band accounts for all sources of systematic uncertainty in the background prediction, after the fit to data.

png pdf
Figure 8-a:
Distribution of ${\phi _{{\textit {CP}}}}$ in the ${\mu \rho}$ channel in windows of increasing MVA score, shown on top of the window. The best fit and pseudoscalar (PS) signal distributions are overlaid. The $x$-axis represents the cyclic bins in ${\phi _{{\textit {CP}}}}$ in the range of $(0, 360^{\circ})$. In the lower panel, the data minus the background template divided by the uncertainty in the background template is displayed, as well as the signal distributions divided by the uncertainty in the background template. The uncertainty band accounts for all sources of systematic uncertainty in the background prediction, after the fit to data.

png pdf
Figure 8-b:
Distribution of ${\phi _{{\textit {CP}}}}$ in the ${\mu \pi}$ channel in windows of increasing MVA score, shown on top of the window. The best fit and pseudoscalar (PS) signal distributions are overlaid. The $x$-axis represents the cyclic bins in ${\phi _{{\textit {CP}}}}$ in the range of $(0, 360^{\circ})$. In the lower panel, the data minus the background template divided by the uncertainty in the background template is displayed, as well as the signal distributions divided by the uncertainty in the background template. The uncertainty band accounts for all sources of systematic uncertainty in the background prediction, after the fit to data.

png pdf
Figure 9:
Distributions of ${\phi _{{\textit {CP}}}}$ in the ${\rho \rho}$ (upper) and ${\pi \rho}$ (lower) channels in windows of increasing MVA score, shown on top of each window. The best fit and pseudoscalar (PS) signal distributions are overlaid. The $x$-axis represents the cyclic bins in ${\phi _{{\textit {CP}}}}$ in the range of $(0, 360^{\circ})$. In the lower panels, the data minus the background template divided by the uncertainty in the background template is displayed, as well as the signal distributions divided by the uncertainty in the background template. The uncertainty band accounts for all sources of systematic uncertainty in the background prediction, after the fit to data.

png pdf
Figure 9-a:
Distribution of ${\phi _{{\textit {CP}}}}$ in the ${\rho \rho}$ channel in windows of increasing MVA score, shown on top of the window. The best fit and pseudoscalar (PS) signal distributions are overlaid. The $x$-axis represents the cyclic bins in ${\phi _{{\textit {CP}}}}$ in the range of $(0, 360^{\circ})$. In the lower panel, the data minus the background template divided by the uncertainty in the background template is displayed, as well as the signal distributions divided by the uncertainty in the background template. The uncertainty band accounts for all sources of systematic uncertainty in the background prediction, after the fit to data.

png pdf
Figure 9-b:
Distribution of ${\phi _{{\textit {CP}}}}$ in the ${\pi \rho}$ channel in windows of increasing MVA score, shown on top of the window. The best fit and pseudoscalar (PS) signal distributions are overlaid. The $x$-axis represents the cyclic bins in ${\phi _{{\textit {CP}}}}$ in the range of $(0, 360^{\circ})$. In the lower panel, the data minus the background template divided by the uncertainty in the background template is displayed, as well as the signal distributions divided by the uncertainty in the background template. The uncertainty band accounts for all sources of systematic uncertainty in the background prediction, after the fit to data.

png pdf
Figure 10:
Distributions of ${\phi _{{\textit {CP}}}}$ in the ${\mathrm{e} \rho}$ (upper) and ${\mathrm{e} \pi}$ (lower) channels in windows of increasing MVA score, shown on top of each window. The best fit and pseudoscalar (PS) signal distributions are overlaid. The $x$-axis represents the cyclic bins in ${\phi _{{\textit {CP}}}}$ in the range of $(0, 360^{\circ})$. In the lower panels, the data minus the background template divided by the uncertainty in the background template is displayed, as well as the signal distributions divided by the uncertainty in the background template. The uncertainty band accounts for all sources of systematic uncertainty in the background prediction, after the fit to data.

png pdf
Figure 10-a:
Distribution of ${\phi _{{\textit {CP}}}}$ in the ${\mathrm{e} \rho}$ channel in windows of increasing MVA score, shown on top of the window. The best fit and pseudoscalar (PS) signal distributions are overlaid. The $x$-axis represents the cyclic bins in ${\phi _{{\textit {CP}}}}$ in the range of $(0, 360^{\circ})$. In the lower panel, the data minus the background template divided by the uncertainty in the background template is displayed, as well as the signal distributions divided by the uncertainty in the background template. The uncertainty band accounts for all sources of systematic uncertainty in the background prediction, after the fit to data.

png pdf
Figure 10-b:
Distribution of ${\phi _{{\textit {CP}}}}$ in the ${\mathrm{e} \pi}$ channel in windows of increasing MVA score, shown on top of the window. The best fit and pseudoscalar (PS) signal distributions are overlaid. The $x$-axis represents the cyclic bins in ${\phi _{{\textit {CP}}}}$ in the range of $(0, 360^{\circ})$. In the lower panel, the data minus the background template divided by the uncertainty in the background template is displayed, as well as the signal distributions divided by the uncertainty in the background template. The uncertainty band accounts for all sources of systematic uncertainty in the background prediction, after the fit to data.

png pdf
Figure 11:
Negative log-likelihood scan for the combination of the ${{\tau _{\mathrm{e}}} {\tau _\mathrm {h}}}$, ${\tau _{\mu} {\tau _\mathrm {h}}}$, and ${{\tau _\mathrm {h}} {\tau _\mathrm {h}}}$ channels. The observed (expected) sensitivity to distinguish between the scalar and pseudoscalar hypotheses, defined at $ {\alpha ^{\mathrm{H} \tau \tau}} = $ 0 and $ \pm 90 ^{\circ}$, respectively, is 3.0$\sigma $ (2.6$\sigma $). The observed (expected) value for ${\alpha ^{\mathrm{H} \tau \tau}}$ is $-1 \pm 19 ^{\circ}$ ($0 \pm 21 ^{\circ}$) at the 68.3% CL. At 95.5% CL the range is $ \pm 41 ^{\circ}$ ($ \pm 49 ^{\circ}$), and at the 99.7% CL the observed range is $ \pm 84 ^{\circ}$.

png pdf
Figure 12:
The 2-D scan of the signal strength modifier $\mu $ versus ${\alpha ^{\mathrm{H} \tau \tau}}$. The 68.3, 95.5, and 99.7% confidence regions are overlaid.

png pdf
Figure 13:
The 2-D scan of the (reduced) CP-even (${\kappa _\tau}$) and CP-odd (${\tilde{\kappa}_\tau}$) $\tau$ Yukawa couplings. The 68.3, 95.5, and 99.7% confidence regions are overlaid.

png pdf
Figure 14:
The ${\phi _{{\textit {CP}}}}$ distributions for the ${\rho \rho}$, ${\pi \rho}$, ${\mu \rho}$, and ${\mathrm{e} \rho}$ channels weighed by A S/(S+B) are combined. Events are included from all MVA score bins in the four signal categories. The background is subtracted from the data. The scalar distribution is depicted in red, while the pseudoscalar is displayed in blue. In the predictions, the rate parameters are taken from their best fit values. The grey uncertainty band indicates the uncertainty in the subtracted background component. In combining the channels, a phase-shift of 180$^{\circ}$ was applied to the channels involving a lepton since this channel has a phase difference of 180$^{\circ}$ with respect to the two hadronic channels due to a sign-flip in the spectral function of the light lepton.
Tables

png pdf
Table 1:
Decay modes of $\tau$ leptons used in this analysis and their branching fractions $\mathcal {B}$ [38]. Where appropriate, we indicate the known intermediate resonances. The last row gives the shorthand notation for the decays used throughout this paper.

png pdf
Table 2:
Kinematic trigger and offline requirements applied to the ${{\tau _{\mathrm{e}}} {\tau _\mathrm {h}}}$, ${\tau _{\mu} {\tau _\mathrm {h}}}$, and ${{\tau _\mathrm {h}} {\tau _\mathrm {h}}}$ channels. The trigger ${p_{\mathrm {T}}}$ requirement is indicated in parentheses (in GeV). The ${p_{\mathrm {T}}}$ thresholds indicated for the ${\tau _\mathrm {h}}$ apply only for the object matched to the hadronic trigger or to the hadronic leg from the cross trigger.

png pdf
Table 3:
The different sources of backgrounds in the ${{\tau _\mathrm {h}} {\tau _\mathrm {h}}}$ channel are shown in the rows and columns. The entries in the table represent the possible $\tau$ lepton pair background contribution from different processes and misidentifications and encapsulate the different experimental techniques that are deployed to estimate the background contributions.

png pdf
Table 4:
The different sources of backgrounds in the ${{\tau _{\ell}} {\tau _\mathrm {h}}}$ channel are shown in the rows and columns. The entries in the table represent the possible $\tau$ lepton pair background contribution from different processes and misidentifications and encapsulate the different experimental techniques that are deployed to estimate the background contributions.

png pdf
Table 5:
Input variables to the MVA discriminants for the ${{\tau _{\ell}} {\tau _\mathrm {h}}}$ and ${{\tau _\mathrm {h}} {\tau _\mathrm {h}}}$ channels. The {Svfit} algorithm is used to estimate the di-$\tau$ mass.

png pdf
Table 6:
Overview of the systematic uncertainties. The third column indicates if the source of uncertainty was treated as being correlated between the years in the fit described in Section 12. The forth column indicates if the uncertainty affects the shapes of the distributions.
Summary
The first measurement of the effective mixing angle $\alpha^{\mathrm{H \to \tau\tau}}$ between scalar and pseudoscalar $\mathrm{H\tau\tau}$ couplings has been presented for a data set of proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 137 fb$^{-1}$. The data were collected with the CMS experiment at the LHC in the period 2016-2018. The following $\tau$ lepton decay modes were included: $\mathrm{e^{\pm}}$, $\mu^{\pm}$, $\pi^{\pm}$, $\rho^{\pm} \to \pi^{\pm}\pi^{0}$, $\mathrm{q}_{1}^\pm\to\pi^{\pm}\pi^{0}\pi^{0}$, and $\mathrm{q}_{1}^\pm\to\pi^{\pm}\pi^{\mp}\pi^{\pm}$. Dedicated strategies were adopted to reconstruct the angle $\phi_{\text{CP}}$ between the $\tau$ decay planes for the various $\tau$ decay modes. The data disfavour the pure CP-odd scenario at 3.0 standard deviations. The observed effective mixing angle is found to be $-1 \pm 19 ^{\circ}$, while the expected value is $0 \pm 21 ^{\circ}$ at the 68.3% confidence level (CL). The observed and expected uncertainties are found to be $ \pm 41 ^{\circ}$ and $ \pm 49 ^{\circ}$ at the 95.5% CL, respectively, and the observed sensitivity at the 99.7% CL is $ \pm 84 ^{\circ}$. The leading uncertainty in the measurement is statistical, implying that the precision of the measurement will increase with the accumulation of more collision data. The measurement is consistent with the standard model expectation, and reduces the allowed parameter space for its extensions. Tabulated results are provided in HEPDATA [110].
Additional Figures

png pdf
Additional Figure 1:
The normalised distribution of $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ between the ${\tau}$ decay planes in the visible rest frame in the $ {{\mu}} {\pi}$ channel. The distributions are for a decaying scalar (CP-even, solid red), pseudoscalar (CP-odd, dash blue), a maximal mixing angle of 45$^{\circ}$ (CP-mix, dash-dot-dot green), and a Z vector boson (black dash-dot). A ${p_{\mathrm {T}}}$ cutoff of 19 (16) GeV is applied on the visible leptonic (hadronic) tau decay products.

png pdf
Additional Figure 2:
The normalised distribution of $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ between the ${\tau}$ decay planes in the visible rest frame in the $ {\pi} {\rho} $ channel. The distributions are for a decaying scalar (CP-even, solid red), pseudoscalar (CP-odd, dash blue), a maximal mixing angle of 45$^{\circ}$ (CP-mix, dash-dot-dot green), and a Z vector boson (black dash-dot). A ${p_{\mathrm {T}}}$ cutoff of 33 GeV is applied on the visible tau decay products.

png pdf
Additional Figure 3:
The normalised distribution of $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ between the ${\tau}$ decay planes in visible rest frame in the $ {\rho} {\rho} $ channel. The distributions are for a decaying scalar (CP-even, solid red), pseudoscalar (CP-odd, dash blue), a maximal mixing angle of 45$^{\circ}$ (CP-mix, dash-dot-dot green), and a Z vector boson (black dash-dot). A ${p_{\mathrm {T}}}$ cutoff of 33 GeV is applied on the visible tau decay products.

png pdf
Additional Figure 4:
The $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ distribution in the $ {{\mu}} {\rho} $ channel. Events were collected from all years and MVA score bins. The background is subtracted from the data. The events are reweighed via AS/(S+B), in which S and B are the signal and background rates, respectively, and A is a measure for the average asymmetry between the scalar and pseudoscalar distributions. The definition of the value of A per bin is $ {| \textit {CP}^{\text {even}}-\textit {CP}^{\text {odd}} |}/(\textit {CP}^{\text {even}}+\textit {CP}^{\text {odd}})$, and A is normalised to the total number of bins. In this equation $\textit {CP}^{\text {even}}$ and $\textit {CP}^{\text {odd}}$ are the scalar and pseudoscalar contributions per bin. The scalar distribution is depicted in red, while the pseudoscalar is displayed in blue. In the predictions the rate parameters are taken from their best fit values. The grey uncertainty band indicates the uncertainty in the subtracted background component. It should be noted that an overall phase-shift of 180$^{\circ}$ was applied to the channel.

png pdf
Additional Figure 5:
The $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ distribution in the $ {\pi} {\rho} $ channel. Events were collected from all years and MVA score bins. The background is subtracted from the data. The events are reweighed via AS/(S+B), in which S and B are the signal and background rates, respectively, and A is a measure for the average asymmetry between the scalar and pseudoscalar distributions. The definition of the value of A per bin is $ {| \textit {CP}^{\text {even}}-\textit {CP}^{\text {odd}} |}/(\textit {CP}^{\text {even}}+\textit {CP}^{\text {odd}})$, and A is normalised to the total number of bins. In this equation $\textit {CP}^{\text {even}}$ and $\textit {CP}^{\text {odd}}$ are the scalar and pseudoscalar contributions per bin. The scalar distribution is depicted in red, while the pseudoscalar is displayed in blue. In the predictions the rate parameters are taken from their best fit values. The grey uncertainty band indicates the uncertainty in the subtracted background component.

png pdf
Additional Figure 6:
The $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ distribution in the $ {\rho} {\rho} $ channel. Events were collected from all years and MVA score bins. The background is subtracted from the data. The events are reweighed via AS/(S+B), in which S and B are the signal and background rates, respectively, and A is a measure for the average asymmetry between the scalar and pseudoscalar distributions. The definition of the value of A per bin is $ {| \textit {CP}^{\text {even}}-\textit {CP}^{\text {odd}} |}/(\textit {CP}^{\text {even}}+\textit {CP}^{\text {odd}})$, and A is normalised to the total number of bins. In this equation $\textit {CP}^{\text {even}}$ and $\textit {CP}^{\text {odd}}$ are the scalar and pseudoscalar contributions per bin. The scalar distribution is depicted in red, while the pseudoscalar is displayed in blue. In the predictions the rate parameters are taken from their best fit values. The grey uncertainty band indicates the uncertainty in the subtracted background component.

png pdf
Additional Figure 7:
The $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ distribution in the $ {\mathrm {e}} {\rho} $ channel. Events were collected from all years and MVA score bins. The background is subtracted from the data. The events are reweighed via AS/(S+B), in which S and B are the signal and background rates, respectively, and A is a measure for the average asymmetry between the scalar and pseudoscalar distributions. The definition of the value of A per bin is $ {| \textit {CP}^{\text {even}}-\textit {CP}^{\text {odd}} |}/(\textit {CP}^{\text {even}}+\textit {CP}^{\text {odd}})$, and A is normalised to the total number of bins. In this equation $\textit {CP}^{\text {even}}$ and $\textit {CP}^{\text {odd}}$ are the scalar and pseudoscalar contributions per bin. The scalar distribution is depicted in red, while the pseudoscalar is displayed in blue. In the predictions the rate parameters are taken from their best fit values. The grey uncertainty band indicates the uncertainty in the subtracted background component. It should be noted that an overall phase-shift of 180$^{\circ}$ was applied to the channel.

png pdf
Additional Figure 8:
The $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ distribution for combination of the 13 least sensitive $\tau _{l}\tau _{\mathrm {h}}$ and $\tau _{\mathrm {h}}\tau _{\mathrm {h}}$ channels added together. Events were collected from all years and MVA score bins. The background is subtracted from the data. The events are reweighed via AS/(S+B), in which S and B are the signal and background rates, respectively, and A is a measure for the average asymmetry between the scalar and pseudoscalar distributions. The definition of the value of A per bin is $ {| \textit {CP}^{\text {even}}-\textit {CP}^{\text {odd}} |}/(\textit {CP}^{\text {even}}+\textit {CP}^{\text {odd}})$, and A is normalised to the total number of bins. In this equation $\textit {CP}^{\text {even}}$ and $\textit {CP}^{\text {odd}}$ are the scalar and pseudoscalar contributions per bin. The scalar distribution is depicted in red, while the pseudoscalar is displayed in blue. In the predictions the rate parameters are taken from their best fit values. The grey uncertainty band indicates the uncertainty in the subtracted background component. In combining the channels, a phase-shift of 180$^{\circ}$ was applied to a subset of the channels such that the distributions are all in phase.

png pdf
Additional Figure 9:
Distributions of $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ in the $ {{\mu}}\mathrm {a_{1}^{3pr}}$ channel for an event sample dominated by Drell-Yan events. Events were selected for which $\alpha ^{\rho}_{-}\geq \pi /4$ for the intermediate ${\rho}$. The Drell-Yan background template is extracted from simulation, while the $\text {jet}\to \tau _{\mathrm {h}}$ background is obtained from the $F_{\text {F}}$ method. The remaining backgrounds are summarised in the template named Other. In the lower plot the ratio between data and the prediction is displayed together with the systematic uncertainty band.

png pdf
Additional Figure 10:
Distributions of $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ in the $ {{\mu}}\mathrm {a_{1}^{1pr}}$ channel for an event sample dominated by Drell-Yan events. Events were selected for which $\alpha ^{\rho}_{-}$, calculated for the intermediate $\mathrm {a_{1}^{1pr}}$, was $\geq \pi /4$. The Drell-Yan background template is extracted from simulation, while the $\text {jet}\to \tau _{\mathrm {h}}$ background is obtained from the $F_{\text {F}}$ method. The remaining backgrounds are summarised in the template named Other. In the lower plot the ratio between data and the prediction is displayed together with the systematic uncertainty band.

png pdf
Additional Figure 11:
Distributions of $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ in the $ {{\mu}}\mathrm {a_{1}^{3pr}}$ channel for an event sample dominated by Drell-Yan events. Events were selected for which $\alpha ^{\rho}_{-} < \pi /4$ for the intermediate ${\rho}$. The Drell-Yan background template is extracted from simulation, while the $\text {jet}\to \tau _{\mathrm {h}}$ background is obtained from the $F_{\text {F}}$ method. The remaining backgrounds are summarised in the template named Other. In the lower plot the ratio between data and the prediction is displayed together with the systematic uncertainty band.

png pdf
Additional Figure 12:
Distributions of $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ in the $ {{\mu}}\mathrm {a_{1}^{1pr}}$ channel for an event sample dominated by Drell-Yan events. Events were selected for which $\alpha ^{\rho}_{-}$, calculated for the intermediate $\mathrm {a_{1}^{1pr}}$, was $ < \pi /4$. The Drell-Yan background template is extracted from simulation, while the $\text {jet}\to \tau _{\mathrm {h}}$ background is obtained from the $F_{\text {F}}$ method. The remaining backgrounds are summarised in the template named Other. In the lower plot the ratio between data and the prediction is displayed together with the systematic uncertainty band.

png pdf
Additional Figure 13:
Distributions of $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ in the $ {{\mu}}\mathrm {a_{1}^{3pr}}$ channel in windows of increasing MVA score, shown on top of each window. The best fit and pseudoscalar signal distributions are overlaid. The $x$ axis represents the cyclic bins in $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ in the range of (0, 360$^{\circ}$). In the bottom plot the data minus the background template divided by the uncertainty in the background template is displayed, as well as the signal distributions divided by the uncertainty in the background template. The uncertainty band consists of the sum of the post-fit uncertainties in the background templates.

png pdf
Additional Figure 14:
Distributions of $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ in the $ {{\mu}}\mathrm {a_{1}^{1pr}}$ channel in windows of increasing MVA score, shown on top of each window. The best fit and pseudoscalar signal distributions are overlaid. The $x$ axis represents the cyclic bins in $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ in the range of (0, 360$^{\circ}$). In the bottom plot the data minus the background template divided by the uncertainty in the background template is displayed, as well as the signal distributions divided by the uncertainty in the background template. The uncertainty band consists of the sum of the post-fit uncertainties in the background templates.

png pdf
Additional Figure 15:
Distributions of $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ in the $\mathrm {a_{1}^{1pr}} {\rho} +\mathrm {a_{1}^{1pr}}\mathrm {a_{1}^{1pr}}$ channels in windows of increasing MVA score, shown on top of each window. The best fit and pseudoscalar signal distributions are overlaid. The $x$ axis represents the cyclic bins in $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ in the range of (0, 360$^{\circ}$). In the bottom plot the data minus the background template divided by the uncertainty in the background template is displayed, as well as the signal distributions divided by the uncertainty in the background template. The uncertainty band consists of the sum of the post-fit uncertainties in the background templates.

png pdf
Additional Figure 16:
Distributions of $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ in the $\mathrm {a_{1}^{3pr}}\mathrm {a_{1}^{1pr}}$ channel in windows of increasing MVA score, shown on top of each window. The best fit and pseudoscalar signal distributions are overlaid. The $x$ axis represents the cyclic bins in $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ in the range of (0, 360$^{\circ}$). In the bottom plot the data minus the background template divided by the uncertainty in the background template is displayed, as well as the signal distributions divided by the uncertainty in the background template. The uncertainty band consists of the sum of the post-fit uncertainties in the background templates.

png pdf
Additional Figure 17:
Distributions of $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ in the $ {\pi}\mathrm {a_{1}^{1pr}}$ channel in windows of increasing MVA score, shown on top of each window. The best fit and pseudoscalar signal distributions are overlaid. The $x$ axis represents the cyclic bins in $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ in the range of (0, 360$^{\circ}$). In the bottom plot the data minus the background template divided by the uncertainty in the background template is displayed, as well as the signal distributions divided by the uncertainty in the background template. The uncertainty band consists of the sum of the post-fit uncertainties in the background templates.

png pdf
Additional Figure 18:
Distributions of $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ in the $\mathrm {a_{1}^{3pr}}\mathrm {a_{1}^{3pr}}$ channel in windows of increasing MVA score, shown on top of each window. The polarimetric vector method was deployed to reconstruct $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$. The best fit and pseudoscalar signal distributions are overlaid. The $x$ axis represents the cyclic bins in $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ in the range of (0, 360$^{\circ}$). In the bottom plot the data minus the background template divided by the uncertainty in the background template is displayed, as well as the signal distributions divided by the uncertainty in the background template. The uncertainty band consists of the sum of the post-fit uncertainties in the background templates.

png pdf
Additional Figure 19:
Distributions of $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ in the $ {\pi}\mathrm {a_{1}^{3pr}}$ channel in windows of increasing MVA score, shown on top of each window. The best fit and pseudoscalar signal distributions are overlaid. The $x$ axis represents the cyclic bins in $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ in the range of (0, 360$^{\circ}$). In the bottom plot the data minus the background template divided by the uncertainty in the background template is displayed, as well as the signal distributions divided by the uncertainty in the background template. The uncertainty band consists of the sum of the post-fit uncertainties in the background templates.

png pdf
Additional Figure 20:
Distributions of $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ in the $\mathrm {a_{1}^{3pr}} {\rho} $ channel in windows of increasing MVA score, shown on top of each window. The best fit and pseudoscalar signal distributions are overlaid. The $x$ axis represents the cyclic bins in $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ in the range of (0, 360$^{\circ}$). In the bottom plot the data minus the background template divided by the uncertainty in the background template is displayed, as well as the signal distributions divided by the uncertainty in the background template. The uncertainty band consists of the sum of the post-fit uncertainties in the background templates.

png pdf
Additional Figure 21:
Distributions of $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ in the $ {\pi} {\pi}$ channel in windows of increasing MVA score, shown on top of each window. The best fit and pseudoscalar signal distributions are overlaid. The $x$ axis represents the cyclic bins in $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ in the range of (0, 360$^{\circ}$). In the bottom plot the data minus the background template divided by the uncertainty in the background template is displayed, as well as the signal distributions divided by the uncertainty in the background template. The uncertainty band consists of the sum of the post-fit uncertainties in the background templates.

png pdf
Additional Figure 22:
Distributions of $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ in the $ {\mathrm {e}}\mathrm {a_{1}^{3pr}}$ channel in windows of increasing MVA score, shown on top of each window. The best fit and pseudoscalar signal distributions are overlaid. The $x$ axis represents the cyclic bins in $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ in the range of (0, 360$^{\circ}$). In the bottom plot the data minus the background template divided by the uncertainty in the background template is displayed, as well as the signal distributions divided by the uncertainty in the background template. The uncertainty band consists of the sum of the post-fit uncertainties in the background templates.

png pdf
Additional Figure 23:
Distributions of $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ in the $ {\mathrm {e}}\mathrm {a_{1}^{1pr}}$ channel in windows of increasing MVA score, shown on top of each window. The best fit and pseudoscalar signal distributions are overlaid. The $x$ axis represents the cyclic bins in $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ in the range of (0, 360$^{\circ}$). In the bottom plot the data minus the background template divided by the uncertainty in the background template is displayed, as well as the signal distributions divided by the uncertainty in the background template. The uncertainty band consists of the sum of the post-fit uncertainties in the background templates.

png pdf
Additional Figure 24:
A candidate event featuring a Higgs decaying into two ${\tau}$ leptons is depicted. The ${\tau}$ leptons decay into a muon (in red) and a $\mathrm {a_{1}}$ that decays in three charged pions (indicated by the orange cone and the calorimeter cells).

png pdf
Additional Figure 25:
A zoomed view of a candidate event featuring a Higgs decaying into two ${\tau}$ leptons. The ${\tau}$ leptons decay into a muon (in red) and a $\mathrm {a_{1}}$ that decays into three charged pions. The displaced secondary vertex from which the tracks of the three charged pions candidates are emerging is indicated by the red circle. The pileup vertices are also indicated.

png pdf
Additional Figure 26:
The resolution of the x (left), y (middle) and z (right) coordinate of the nominal primary vertex (blue), and the refitted beamspot-corrected primary vertex (red). The width of the distributions is indicated in the legend. Event samples were utilised in which a Higgs boson was produced in the gluon fusion and vector boson fusion process, and the samples were reweighed to their standard model cross section.

png pdf
Additional Figure 27:
Expected negative log-likelihood scan for the combination of the $\tau _{{\mathrm {e}}}\tau _{\mathrm {h}}$, $\tau _{{{\mu}}}\tau _{\mathrm {h}}$ and $\tau _{\mathrm {h}}\tau _{\mathrm {h}}$ channels, including predictions for LHC Run 3 and Phase 2 integrated luminosities. The extrapolations have been made assuming systematic uncertainties as derived for the main analysis, while the statistical uncertainties were adjusted to different luminosity scenarios. The expected sensitivity to distinguish between the scalar and pseudo-scalar hypotheses, defined at $\alpha ^{{\mathrm {H}} \tau \tau} = $ 0 and $ \pm $ 90$ ^{\circ}$, respectively, exceeds 5 standard deviations for the Phase 2 scenario.

png pdf
Additional Figure 28:
The ratio of $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ for simulated events and events from the embedded samples in the $ {{\mu}} {\pi}$ final state are displayed. The shapes are consistent within statistical fluctuations.

png pdf
Additional Figure 29:
The ratio of $\phi _{\textit {CP}}$ for simulated events and events from the embedded samples in the $ {{\mu}} {\rho} $ final state are displayed. A minor residual effect is present in the embedded sample that is a consequence of misalignment effects in the embedding procedure. These effects cancel in the bin flattening procedure that is applied.

png pdf
Additional Figure 30:
Observed correlations between $\alpha ^{{\mathrm {H}} \tau \tau}$ and the signal strength modifiers.

png pdf
Additional Figure 31:
Two-dimensional scan of the $ {\mathrm {g}} {\mathrm {g}} {\mathrm {H}} $ signal strength modifier versus $\alpha ^{{\mathrm {H}} \tau \tau}$. The VBF+$ {\mathrm {H}} $ signal strength modifier is profiled.

png pdf
Additional Figure 32:
Two-dimensional scan of the VBF+$ {\mathrm {H}} $ signal strength modifier versus $\alpha ^{{\mathrm {H}} \tau \tau}$. The $ {\mathrm {g}} {\mathrm {g}} {\mathrm {H}} $ signal strength modifier is profiled.

png pdf
Additional Figure 33:
Two-dimensional scan of the $ {\mathrm {g}} {\mathrm {g}} {\mathrm {H}} $ and VBF+$ {\mathrm {H}} $ signal strength modifiers. The value of $\alpha ^{{\mathrm {H}} \tau \tau}$ is profiled.

png pdf
Additional Figure 34:
Observed and expected distribution of the ${\pi ^{\pm}}$ energy from the $ {\tau}\rightarrow {\rho} \nu \rightarrow {\pi ^{\pm}} {\pi ^0}\nu $ decay chain in the $\tau _{{{\mu}}}\tau _{\mathrm {h}}$ channel, produced using the 2018 dataset prior to the fit used for the signal extraction. The invariant mass of the visible $ {\tau} {\tau}$ decay products is required to be smaller than 90 GeV in order to select a large fraction of $ {\mathrm {Z}} \rightarrow \tau \tau $ events. The uncertainty band includes statistical uncertainties and systematic uncertainties that affect the normalisation of the background distribution.

png pdf
Additional Figure 35:
Observed and expected distribution of the ${\pi ^{\pm}}$ azimuthal angle $\phi $ from the $ {\tau}\rightarrow {\rho} \nu \rightarrow {\pi ^{\pm}} {\pi ^0}\nu $ decay chain in the $\tau _{{{\mu}}}\tau _{\mathrm {h}}$ channel, produced using the 2018 dataset prior to the fit used for the signal extraction. The invariant mass of the visible $ {\tau} {\tau}$ decay products is required to be smaller than 90 GeV in order to select a large fraction of $ {\mathrm {Z}} \rightarrow \tau \tau $ events. The uncertainty band includes statistical uncertainties and systematic uncertainties that affect the normalisation of the background distribution.

png pdf
Additional Figure 36:
Observed and expected distribution of the ${\pi ^{\pm}}$ pseudorapidity $\eta $ from the $ {\tau}\rightarrow {\rho} \nu \rightarrow {\pi ^{\pm}} {\pi ^0}\nu $ decay chain in the $\tau _{{{\mu}}}\tau _{\mathrm {h}}$ channel, produced using the 2018 dataset prior to the fit used for the signal extraction. The invariant mass of the visible $ {\tau} {\tau}$ decay products is required to be smaller than 90 GeV in order to select a large fraction of $ {\mathrm {Z}} \rightarrow \tau \tau $ events. The uncertainty band includes statistical uncertainties and systematic uncertainties that affect the normalisation of the background distribution.

png pdf
Additional Figure 37:
Observed and expected distribution of the ${\pi ^0}$ energy from the $ {\tau}\rightarrow {\rho} \nu \rightarrow {\pi ^{\pm}} {\pi ^0}\nu $ decay chain in the $\tau _{{{\mu}}}\tau _{\mathrm {h}}$ channel, produced using the 2018 dataset prior to the fit used for the signal extraction. The invariant mass of the visible $ {\tau} {\tau}$ decay products is required to be smaller than 90 GeV in order to select a large fraction of $ {\mathrm {Z}} \rightarrow \tau \tau $ events. The uncertainty band includes statistical uncertainties and systematic uncertainties that affect the normalisation of the background distribution.

png pdf
Additional Figure 38:
Observed and expected distribution of the ${\pi ^0}$ azimuthal angle $\phi $ from the $ {\tau}\rightarrow {\rho} \nu \rightarrow {\pi ^{\pm}} {\pi ^0}\nu $ decay chain in the $\tau _{{{\mu}}}\tau _{\mathrm {h}}$ channel, produced using the 2018 dataset prior to the fit used for the signal extraction. The invariant mass of the visible $ {\tau} {\tau}$ decay products is required to be smaller than 90 GeV in order to select a large fraction of $ {\mathrm {Z}} \rightarrow \tau \tau $ events. The uncertainty band includes statistical uncertainties and systematic uncertainties that affect the normalisation of the background distribution.

png pdf
Additional Figure 39:
Observed and expected distribution of the ${\pi ^0}$ pseudorapidity $\eta $ from the $ {\tau}\rightarrow {\rho} \nu \rightarrow {\pi ^{\pm}} {\pi ^0}\nu $ decay chain in the $\tau _{{{\mu}}}\tau _{\mathrm {h}}$ channel, produced using the 2018 dataset prior to the fit used for the signal extraction. The invariant mass of the visible $ {\tau} {\tau}$ decay products is required to be smaller than 90 GeV in order to select a large fraction of $ {\mathrm {Z}} \rightarrow \tau \tau $ events. The uncertainty band includes statistical uncertainties and systematic uncertainties that affect the normalisation of the background distribution.

png pdf
Additional Figure 40:
Observed and expected distribution of the ${\pi ^{\pm}}$ impact parameter ($\lambda $) magnitude from $ {\tau}\rightarrow {\pi ^{\pm}} \nu $ decays in the $\tau _{{{\mu}}}\tau _{\mathrm {h}}$ channel, produced using the 2018 dataset prior to the fit used for the signal extraction. The invariant mass of the visible $ {\tau} {\tau}$ decay products is required to be smaller than 90 GeV in order to select a large fraction of $ {\mathrm {Z}} \rightarrow \tau \tau $ events. The uncertainty band includes statistical uncertainties and systematic uncertainties that affect the normalisation of the background distribution.

png pdf
Additional Figure 41:
Observed and expected distribution of the ${\pi ^{\pm}}$ impact parameter ($\lambda $) azimuthal angle $\phi $ from $ {\tau}\rightarrow {\pi ^{\pm}} \nu $ decays in the $\tau _{{{\mu}}}\tau _{\mathrm {h}}$ channel, produced using the 2018 dataset prior to the fit used for the signal extraction. The invariant mass of the visible $ {\tau} {\tau}$ decay products is required to be smaller than 90 GeV in order to select a large fraction of $ {\mathrm {Z}} \rightarrow \tau \tau $ events. The uncertainty band includes statistical uncertainties and systematic uncertainties that affect the normalisation of the background distribution.

png pdf
Additional Figure 42:
Observed and expected distribution of the ${\pi ^{\pm}}$ impact parameter ($\lambda $) pseudorapidity $\eta $ from $ {\tau}\rightarrow {\pi ^{\pm}} \nu $ decays in the $\tau _{{{\mu}}}\tau _{\mathrm {h}}$ channel, produced using the 2018 dataset prior to the fit used for the signal extraction. The invariant mass of the visible $ {\tau} {\tau}$ decay products is required to be smaller than 90 GeV in order to select a large fraction of $ {\mathrm {Z}} \rightarrow \tau \tau $ events. The uncertainty band includes statistical uncertainties and systematic uncertainties that affect the normalisation of the background distribution.

png pdf
Additional Figure 43:
Observed and expected distribution of the ${\tau}$ secondary vertex (SV) length relative to the primary vertex (PV) position from the $ {\tau}\rightarrow \mathrm {a_{1}}\nu \rightarrow {\pi ^{\pm}} {\pi^{\mp}} {\pi ^{\pm}} \nu $ decay chain in the $\tau _{{{\mu}}}\tau _{\mathrm {h}}$ channel, produced using the 2018 dataset prior to the fit used for the signal extraction. The invariant mass of the visible $ {\tau} {\tau}$ decay products is required to be smaller than 90 GeV in order to select a large fraction of $ {\mathrm {Z}} \rightarrow \tau \tau $ events. The uncertainty band includes statistical uncertainties and systematic uncertainties that affect the normalisation of the background distribution.

png pdf
Additional Figure 44:
Observed and expected distribution of the ${\tau}$ secondary vertex (SV) azimuthal angle $\phi $ relative to the primary vertex (PV) position from the $ {\tau}\rightarrow \mathrm {a_{1}}\nu \rightarrow {\pi ^{\pm}} {\pi^{\mp}} {\pi ^{\pm}} \nu $ decay chain in the $\tau _{{{\mu}}}\tau _{\mathrm {h}}$ channel, produced using the 2018 dataset prior to the fit used for the signal extraction. The invariant mass of the visible $ {\tau} {\tau}$ decay products is required to be smaller than 90 GeV in order to select a large fraction of $ {\mathrm {Z}} \rightarrow \tau \tau $ events. The uncertainty band includes statistical uncertainties and systematic uncertainties that affect the normalisation of the background distribution.

png pdf
Additional Figure 45:
Observed and expected distribution of the ${\tau}$ secondary vertex (SV) pseudorapidity $\eta $ relative to the primary vertex (PV) position from the $ {\tau}\rightarrow \mathrm {a_{1}}\nu \rightarrow {\pi ^{\pm}} {\pi^{\mp}} {\pi ^{\pm}} \nu $ decay chain in the $\tau _{{{\mu}}}\tau _{\mathrm {h}}$ channel, produced using the 2018 dataset prior to the fit used for the signal extraction. The invariant mass of the visible $ {\tau} {\tau}$ decay products is required to be smaller than 90 GeV in order to select a large fraction of $ {\mathrm {Z}} \rightarrow \tau \tau $ events. The uncertainty band includes statistical uncertainties and systematic uncertainties that affect the normalisation of the background distribution.

png pdf
Additional Figure 46:
Projections of the expected negative log-likelihood scans based on the Run 2 CMS analysis to an integrated luminosity, $\mathcal {L}$, of 3 ab$^{-1}$. The extrapolations have been made using different assumptions about the systematic uncertainties: no systematic uncertainties (red), assuming the same systematic uncertainties as for the Run 2 analysis (blue), systematic uncertainties scaled following the scheme used for the YR18 (arXiv:1902.00134) HL-LHC projections (black), and with "bin-by-bin" systematic uncertainties related to the finite statistics in the signal and background histograms scaled by 1/$\sqrt {\mathcal {L}}$ while all other systematic uncertainties are scaled following the YR18 scheme (magenta).

png pdf
Additional Figure 47:
Projections of the expected negative log-likelihood scans based on the Run 2 CMS analysis to an integrated luminosity, $\mathcal {L}$, of 3 ab$^{-1}$. The extrapolations have been made using different assumptions about the systematic uncertainties: no systematic uncertainties (red), assuming the same systematic uncertainties as for the Run 2 analysis (blue), systematic uncertainties scaled following the scheme used for the YR18 (arXiv:1902.00134) HL-LHC projections (black), and with "bin-by-bin" systematic uncertainties related to the finite statistics in the signal and background histograms scaled by 1/$\sqrt {\mathcal {L}}$ while all other systematic uncertainties are scaled following the YR18 scheme (magenta). The range $|\alpha ^{{\mathrm {H}} \tau \tau}| < $ 40$^{\circ}$ is shown.
Additional Tables

png pdf
Additional Table 1:
The obtained expected sensitivities in standard deviations to distinguish between a CP-even and CP-odd $ {\mathrm {H}} {\tau} {\tau}$ coupling. Results are displayed for the individual decay modes (combined with their background categories), the combined $\tau _{{\mathrm {e}}}\tau _{\mathrm {h}}$, $\tau _{{{\mu}}}\tau _{\mathrm {h}}$ and $\tau _{\mathrm {h}}\tau _{\mathrm {h}}$ channels with their background categories, and the overall combination.

png pdf
Additional Table 2:
The expected and observed values of $\alpha ^{{\mathrm {H}} \tau \tau}$ and the signal strength modifiers.
References
1 F. Englert and R. Brout Broken symmetry and the mass of gauge vector mesons PRL 13 (1964) 321
2 P. W. Higgs Broken symmetries, massless particles and gauge fields PL12 (1964) 132
3 P. W. Higgs Broken symmetries and the masses of gauge bosons PRL 13 (1964) 508
4 G. S. Guralnik, C. R. Hagen, and T. W. B. Kibble Global conservation laws and massless particles PRL 13 (1964) 585
5 P. W. Higgs Spontaneous symmetry breakdown without massless bosons PR145 (1966) 1156
6 T. W. B. Kibble Symmetry breaking in non-abelian gauge theories PR155 (1967) 1554
7 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
8 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
9 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
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 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
12 ATLAS Collaboration Cross-section measurements of the Higgs boson decaying into a pair of $ \tau $-leptons in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector PRD 99 (2019) 072001 1811.08856
13 CMS Collaboration A measurement of the Higgs boson mass in the diphoton decay channel PLB 805 (2020) 135425 CMS-HIG-19-004
2002.06398
14 CMS Collaboration On the mass and spin-parity of the Higgs boson candidate via its decays to Z boson pairs PRL 110 (2013) 081803 CMS-HIG-12-041
1212.6639
15 CMS Collaboration Measurement of the properties of a Higgs boson in the four-lepton final state PRD 89 (2014) 092007 CMS-HIG-13-002
1312.5353
16 CMS Collaboration Constraints on the spin-parity and anomalous HVV couplings of the Higgs boson in proton collisions at 7 and 8 TeV PRD 92 (2015) 012004 CMS-HIG-14-018
1411.3441
17 CMS Collaboration Limits on the Higgs boson lifetime and width from its decay to four charged leptons PRD 92 (2015) 072010 CMS-HIG-14-036
1507.06656
18 CMS Collaboration Combined search for anomalous pseudoscalar HVV couplings in $ \mathrm{V}\mathrm{H}(\mathrm{H}\to \mathrm{b\bar{b}} $) production and $ \mathrm{H}\to\mathrm{V}\mathrm{V} $ decay PLB 759 (2016) 672 CMS-HIG-14-035
1602.04305
19 CMS Collaboration Constraints on anomalous Higgs boson couplings using production and decay information in the four-lepton final state PLB 775 (2017) 1 CMS-HIG-17-011
1707.00541
20 CMS Collaboration Constraints on anomalous HVV couplings from the production of Higgs bosons decaying to $ \tau $ lepton pairs PRD 100 (2019) 112002 CMS-HIG-17-034
1903.06973
21 CMS Collaboration Constraints on anomalous Higgs boson couplings to vector bosons and fermions in its production and decay using the four-lepton final state PRD 104 (2021) 052004 CMS-HIG-19-009
2104.12152
22 ATLAS Collaboration Evidence for the spin-0 nature of the Higgs boson using ATLAS data PLB 726 (2013) 120 1307.1432
23 ATLAS Collaboration Study of the spin and parity of the Higgs boson in diboson decays with the ATLAS detector EPJC 75 (2015) 476 1506.05669
24 ATLAS Collaboration Test of CP invariance in vector-boson fusion production of the Higgs boson using the optimal observable method in the ditau decay channel with the ATLAS detector EPJC 76 (2016) 658 1602.04516
25 ATLAS Collaboration Measurement of inclusive and differential cross sections in the $ \mathrm{H} \to \mathrm{Z}\mathrm{Z}^* \to 4\ell $ decay channel in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector JHEP 10 (2017) 132 1708.02810
26 ATLAS Collaboration Measurement of the Higgs boson coupling properties in the $ \mathrm{H} \to \mathrm{Z}\mathrm{Z}^* \to 4\ell $ decay channel at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector JHEP 03 (2018) 095 1712.02304
27 ATLAS Collaboration Measurements of Higgs boson properties in the diphoton decay channel with 36 fb$^{-1}$ of pp collision data at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector PRD 98 (2018) 052005 1802.04146
28 C. Zhang and S. Willenbrock Effective-field-theory approach to top-quark production and decay PRD 83 (2011) 034006 1008.3869
29 R. Harnik et al. Measuring CP violation in $ \mathrm{H} \to \tau^+ \tau^- $ at colliders PRD 88 (2013) 076009 1308.1094
30 T. Ghosh, R. Godbole, and X. Tata Determining the spacetime structure of bottom-quark couplings to spin-zero particles PRD 100 (2019) 015026 1904.09895
31 A. V. Gritsan, R. Rontsch, M. Schulze, and M. Xiao Constraining anomalous Higgs boson couplings to the heavy-flavor fermions using matrix element techniques PRD 94 (2016) 055023 1606.03107
32 CMS Collaboration Measurements of $ \mathrm{t\bar{t}}\mathrm{H} $ production and the CP structure of the Yukawa interaction between the Higgs boson and top quark in the diphoton decay channel PRL 125 (2020) 061801 CMS-HIG-19-013
2003.10866
33 ATLAS Collaboration CP properties of Higgs boson interactions with top quarks in the $ \mathrm{t\bar{t}}\mathrm{H} $ and $ \mathrm{t}\mathrm{H} $ processes using $ \mathrm{H} \to \gamma\gamma $ with the ATLAS detector PRL 125 (2020) 061802 2004.04545
34 ATLAS Collaboration Constraints on Higgs boson properties using $ \mathrm{W}\mathrm{W}^{*}(\rightarrow \mathrm{e}\nu\mu\nu) jj $ production in 36.1 fb$^{-1}$ of $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV pp collisions with the ATLAS detector 2021. Accepted by EPJC 2109.13808
35 D. Fontes, J. C. Romão, R. Santos, and J. P. Silva Large pseudoscalar Yukawa couplings in the complex 2HDM JHEP 06 (2015) 060 1502.01720
36 S. F. King, M. Muhlleitner, R. Nevzorov, and K. Walz Exploring the CP-violating NMSSM: EDM constraints and phenomenology NPB 901 (2015) 526 1508.03255
37 S. Berge, W. Bernreuther, and S. Kirchner Determination of the Higgs CP-mixing angle in the tau decay channels at the LHC including the Drell--Yan background EPJC 74 (2014) 3164 1408.0798
38 Particle Data Group, P. A. Zyla et al. Review of particle physics Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2020 (2020) 083C01
39 S. Berge, W. Bernreuther, and S. Kirchner Determination of the Higgs CP-mixing angle in the tau decay channels Nucl. Part. Phys. Proc. 273-275 (2016) 841 1410.6362
40 S. Berge, W. Bernreuther, B. Niepelt, and H. Spiesberger How to pin down the CP quantum numbers of a Higgs boson in its tau decays at the LHC PRD 84 (2011) 116003 1108.0670
41 J. R. Dell'Aquila and C. A. Nelson Distinguishing a spin-0 technipion and an elementary Higgs boson: $ {V}_{1} {V}_{2} $ modes with decays into $ \ell^-_{A} \boldsymbol{l}_{B} $ and/or $ q^-_{A} \boldsymbol{q}_{B} $ PRD 33 (1986) 93
42 M. Kramer, J. Kuhn, M. L. Stong, and P. M. Zerwas Prospects of measuring the parity of Higgs particles Z. Phys. C 64 (1994) 21 hep-ph/9404280
43 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
44 CMS Collaboration The CMS trigger system JINST 12 (2017) P01020 CMS-TRG-12-001
1609.02366
45 CMS Collaboration The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC JINST 3 (2008) S08004 CMS-00-001
46 P. Nason A new method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms JHEP 11 (2004) 040 hep-ph/0409146
47 S. Frixione, P. Nason, and C. Oleari Matching NLO QCD computations with parton shower simulations: the POWHEG method JHEP 11 (2007) 070 0709.2092
48 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
49 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
50 P. Nason and C. Oleari NLO Higgs boson production via vector-boson fusion matched with shower in POWHEG JHEP 02 (2010) 037 0911.5299
51 T. Ježo and P. Nason On the treatment of resonances in next-to-leading order calculations matched to a parton shower JHEP 12 (2015) 065 1509.09071
52 F. Granata, J. M. Lindert, C. Oleari, and S. Pozzorini NLO QCD+EW predictions for HV and HV+jet production including parton-shower effects JHEP 09 (2017) 012 1706.03522
53 G. Klamke and D. Zeppenfeld Higgs plus two jet production via gluon fusion as a signal at the CERN LHC JHEP 04 (2007) 052 hep-ph/0703202
54 F. Demartin et al. Higgs characterisation at NLO in QCD: CP properties of the top-quark Yukawa interaction EPJC 74 (2014) 3065 1407.5089
55 K. Hamilton, P. Nason, E. Re, and G. Zanderighi NNLOPS simulation of Higgs boson production JHEP 10 (2013) 222 1309.0017
56 K. Hamilton, P. Nason, and G. Zanderighi Finite quark-mass effects in the NNLOPS POWHEG+MiNLO Higgs generator JHEP 05 (2015) 140 1501.04637
57 T. Sjostrand et al. An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2 CPC 191 (2015) 159 1410.3012
58 T. Przedzinski, E. Richter-Was, and Z. Was Documentation of TauSpinner algorithms: program for simulating spin effects in $ \tau $-lepton production at LHC EPJC 79 (2019) 91 1802.05459
59 NNPDF Collaboration Parton distributions for the LHC Run II JHEP 04 (2015) 040 1410.8849
60 NNPDF Collaboration Parton distributions from high-precision collider data EPJC 77 (2017) 663 1706.00428
61 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
62 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
63 S. Alioli, S.-O. Moch, and P. Uwer Hadronic top-quark pair-production with one jet and parton showering JHEP 01 (2012) 137 1110.5251
64 E. Re Single-top Wt-channel production matched with parton showers using the POWHEG method EPJC 71 (2011) 1547 1009.2450
65 R. Frederix, E. Re, and P. Torrielli Single-top $ t $-channel hadroproduction in the four-flavour scheme with POWHEG and aMC@NLO JHEP 09 (2012) 130 1207.5391
66 CMS Collaboration Event generator tunes obtained from underlying event and multiparton scattering measurements EPJC 76 (2016) 155 CMS-GEN-14-001
1512.00815
67 CMS Collaboration Extraction and validation of a new set of CMS PYTHIA8 tunes from underlying-event measurements EPJC 80 (2020) 4 CMS-GEN-17-001
1903.12179
68 GEANT4 Collaboration GEANT4--a simulation toolkit NIMA 506 (2003) 250
69 CMS Collaboration Particle-flow reconstruction and global event description with the CMS detector JINST 12 (2017) P10003 CMS-PRF-14-001
1706.04965
70 CMS Collaboration Description and performance of track and primary-vertex reconstruction with the CMS tracker JINST 9 (2014) P10009 CMS-TRK-11-001
1405.6569
71 K. Rose Deterministic annealing for clustering, compression, classification, regression, and related optimization problems Proc. IEEE 86 (1998) 2210
72 W. Waltenberger, R. Fruhwirth, and P. Vanlaer Adaptive vertex fitting JPG: Nuc. Part. Phys. 34 (2007) N343
73 M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez The anti-$ {k_{\mathrm{T}}} $ jet clustering algorithm JHEP 04 (2008) 063 0802.1189
74 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
75 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
76 M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez FastJet user manual EPJC 72 (2012) 1896 1111.6097
77 CMS Collaboration Jet algorithms performance in 13 TeV data CMS-PAS-JME-16-003 CMS-PAS-JME-16-003
78 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
79 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
80 D. Bertolini, P. Harris, M. Low, and N. Tran Pileup per particle identification JHEP 10 (2014) 059 1407.6013
81 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
82 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
83 CMS Collaboration Identification of hadronic tau lepton decays using a deep neural network 2022. Submitted to JINST CMS-TAU-20-001
2201.08458
84 L. Bianchini, J. Conway, E. K. Friis, and C. Veelken Reconstruction of the Higgs mass in $ \mathrm{H}\to\tau\tau $ events by dynamical likelihood techniques J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 513 (2014) 022035
85 S. Berge and W. Bernreuther Determining the CP parity of Higgs bosons at the LHC in the $ \tau $ to 1-prong decay channels PLB 671 (2009) 470 0812.1910
86 S. Berge, W. Bernreuther, and S. Kirchner Prospects of constraining the Higgs boson's CP nature in the tau decay channel at the LHC PRD 92 (2015) 096012 1510.03850
87 G. R. Bower, T. Pierzchala, Z. Wças, and M. Worek Measuring the Higgs boson's parity using $ \tau\to\rho\nu $ PLB 543 (2002) 227 hep-ph/0204292
88 V. Cherepanov, E. Richter-Was, and Z. Was Monte Carlo, fitting and machine learning for tau leptons SciPost Phys. Proc. 1 (2019) 018 1811.03969
89 V. Cherepanov and A. Zotz Kinematic reconstruction of $ \mathrm{Z}/\mathrm{H} \to \tau\tau $ decay in proton-proton collisions 2018 1805.06988
90 S. Jadach, J. H. Kuhn, and Z. Wças TAUOLA: A library of Monte Carlo programs to simulate decays of polarized $ \tau $ leptons CPC 64 (1990) 275
91 M. Jezabek, Z. Wças, S. Jadach, and J. H. Kuhn The $ \tau $ decay library TAUOLA, update with exact O(alpha) QED corrections in $ \tau\to\mu(\mathrm{e})\nu\bar{\nu} $ decay modes CPC 70 (1992) 69
92 S. Jadach, Z. Wças, R. Decker, and J. H. Kuhn The $ \tau $ decay library TAUOLA: Version 2.4 CPC 76 (1993) 361
93 CLEO Collaboration Hadronic structure in the decay $ \tau\to\nu_{\tau}\pi^{\pm}\pi^{0}\pi^{0} $ and the sign of the $ \nu_{\tau} $ helicity PRD 61 (2000) 012002 hep-ex/9902022
94 CMS Collaboration Identification of hadronic tau decay channels using multivariate analysis (MVA decay mode) CDS
95 T. Chen and C. Guestrin XGBoost: A scalable tree boosting system in Proceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, KDD '16, p. 785 2016 1603.02754
96 CMS Collaboration An embedding technique to determine $ \tau\tau $ backgrounds in proton-proton collision data JINST 14 (2019) P06032 CMS-TAU-18-001
1903.01216
97 CMS Collaboration Measurement of the $ \mathrm{Z}/\gamma^{*} \to \tau\tau $ cross section in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV and validation of $ \tau $ lepton analysis techniques EPJC 78 (2018) 708 CMS-HIG-15-007
1801.03535
98 CMS Collaboration Measurements of inclusive W and Z cross sections in pp collisions at $ \sqrt {s} = $ 7 TeV JHEP 01 (2011) 080 CMS-EWK-10-002
1012.2466
99 CMS Collaboration Measurement of the differential cross section for top quark pair production in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 8 TeV EPJC 75 (2015) 2339 CMS-TOP-12-028
1505.04480
100 LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group Handbook of LHC Higgs cross sections: 4. deciphering the nature of the Higgs sector CERN (2016) 1610.07922
101 CMS Collaboration CMS luminosity measurements for the 2016 data-taking period CMS-PAS-LUM-17-001 CMS-PAS-LUM-17-001
102 CMS Collaboration CMS luminosity measurement for the 2017 data-taking period at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV CMS-PAS-LUM-17-004 CMS-PAS-LUM-17-004
103 CMS Collaboration CMS luminosity measurement for the 2018 data-taking period at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV CMS-PAS-LUM-18-002 CMS-PAS-LUM-18-002
104 Y. Li and F. Petriello Combining QCD and electroweak corrections to dilepton production in the framework of the FEWZ simulation code PRD 86 (2012) 094034 1208.5967
105 M. Czakon and A. Mitov Top++: A program for the calculation of the top-pair cross-section at hadron colliders CPC 185 (2014) 2930 1112.5675
106 CMS Collaboration Measurement of the WZ production cross section in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV PLB 766 (2017) 268 CMS-SMP-16-002
1607.06943
107 CMS Collaboration Cross section measurement of $ t $-channel single top quark production in pp collisions at $ \sqrt s = $ 13 TeV PLB 772 (2017) 752 CMS-TOP-16-003
1610.00678
108 R. Barlow and C. Beeston Fitting using finite Monte Carlo samples CPC 77 (1993) 219
109 J. S. Conway Incorporating nuisance parameters in likelihoods for multisource spectra in PHYSTAT 2011, p. 115 2011 1103.0354
110 ATLAS and CMS Collaborations, and LHC Higgs Combination Group Procedure for the LHC Higgs boson search combination in Summer 2011 CMS-NOTE-2011-005
111 CMS Collaboration Precise determination of the mass of the Higgs boson and tests of compatibility of its couplings with the standard model predictions using proton collisions at 7 and 8 TeV EPJC 75 (2015) 212 CMS-HIG-14-009
1412.8662
112 CMS Collaboration HEPData record for this analysis link
Compact Muon Solenoid
LHC, CERN