CMSSMP22005 ; CERNEP2024066  
Measurement of multijet azimuthal correlations and determination of the strong coupling in protonproton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV  
CMS Collaboration  
24 April 2024  
Accepted for publication in EPJC  
Abstract: A measurement is presented of a ratio observable that provides a measure of the azimuthal correlations among jets with large transverse momentum $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $. This observable is measured in multijet events over the range of $ p_{\mathrm{T}} = $ 3603170 GeV based on data collected by the CMS experiment in protonproton collisions at a centreofmass energy of 13 TeV, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 134 fb$ ^{1} $. The results are compared with predictions from Monte Carlo partonshower event generator simulations, as well as with fixedorder perturbative quantum chromodynamics (pQCD) predictions at nexttoleadingorder (NLO) accuracy obtained with different parton distribution functions (PDFs) and corrected for nonperturbative and electroweak effects. Data and theory agree within uncertainties. From the comparison of the measured observable with the pQCD prediction obtained with the NNPDF3.1 NLO PDFs, the strong coupling at the Z boson mass scale is $ \alpha_\mathrm{S}(m_{\mathrm{Z}})= $ 0.1177 $ \pm $ 0.0013 (exp) $ _{0.0073}^{+0.0116} $ (theo) $ = $ 0.1177 $_{0.0074}^{+0.0117} $, where the total uncertainty is dominated by the scale dependence of the fixedorder predictions. A test of the running of $ \alpha_\mathrm{S} $ in the TeV region shows no deviation from the expected NLO pQCD behaviour.  
Links: eprint arXiv:2404.16082 [hepex] (PDF) ; CDS record ; inSPIRE record ; HepData record ; CADI line (restricted) ; 
Figures  
png pdf 
Figure 1:
Example of the number of entries contributing to the numerator and denominator of the $ R_{\Delta\phi}(p_{\mathrm{T}}) $ ratio, Eq. (1), for 2jet (left) and 3jet (right) events, with all jets having $ p_{\mathrm{T}} > p_{\text{Tmin}}^{\text{nbr}}= $ 100 GeV. The 2jet topology does not contribute (null numerator) to the $ R_{\Delta\phi}(p_{\mathrm{T}}) $ ratio when the azimuthal distance for neighbouring jets is fixed to 2 $ \pi/3 < \Delta\phi < 7\pi/ $ 8. In the 3jet topology, each jet is considered as a reference, and its azimuthal separations ($ \Delta\phi{,} $ 1 and $ \Delta\phi{,} $ 2) to other neighbouring jets (with $ p_{\mathrm {T,1}}^{\text {nbr}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T,2}}^{\text {nbr}} $) are computed. Each neighbouring jet with $ \Delta\phi $ within the specified interval increments the entries of the numerator, whereas the denominator simply counts the number of jets in the event. 
png pdf 
Figure 2:
Probability matrix for the $ N(p_{\mathrm{T}},n) $ distribution built using PYTHIA8 simulated events. The horizontal axis corresponds to the generatorlevel jet $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, and the vertical axis to the reconstructedlevel jet $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $. The 4 $ \times $ 4 structure of the matrix corresponds to the bins of neighbouring jets $ n $ (labelled in the uppermost row and rightmost column), and indicates migrations among those bins. The horizontal and vertical axes of each cell correspond to the $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ of the jets, and each cell indicates the migrations among the jet $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ bins. The range of colours covers from 10$^{6} $ to 1, and indicates the probability of migrations from a given (generator) particlelevel bin to the corresponding (reconstructed) detectorlevel bin. 
png pdf 
Figure 3:
Bintobin correlation matrix for the $ R_{\Delta\phi}(p_{\mathrm{T}}) $ distribution at the particle level, where the value 1 ($$1) corresponds to fully (anti)correlated bins. For illustration purposes, only bins with (anti)correlations larger (smaller) than 0.05 ($$0.05) are shown also as text. 
png pdf 
Figure 4:
The $ R_{\Delta\phi}(p_{\mathrm{T}}) $ observable as a function of $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, compared with MC generator predictions at LO (left) and at NLO (right) accuracy. The LO predictions are obtained with PYTHIA8 tunes CUETP8M1 and CUETP8M2, and HERWIG++ tune UEEE5CTEQ6L1 MC event generators. The NLO predictions are obtained with POWHEG interfaced with each of the aforementioned MC event generators. The experimental data are represented with black dots and the MC predictions with coloured lines. The lower panel of each plot shows the ratio between MC predictions and experimental data. The total experimental uncertainties are indicated by the vertical error bars (upper panels) and coloured band (lower panels) correspondingly. 
png pdf 
Figure 5:
Theoretical predictions for the cross sections corresponding to the numerator (left) and denominator (right) of the $ R_{\Delta\phi}(p_{\mathrm{T}}) $ ratio, Eq. (1), obtained using the NNPDF3.1 NLO PDF set. The coloured bands represent the LO and NLO scale uncertainties derived with a sixpoint variation of $ \mu_\mathrm{R} $ and $ \mu_\mathrm{F} $ from the central reference value. The lower panels show the ratios to the respective LO predictions. 
png pdf 
Figure 6:
Nonperturbative correction factors for the numerator (upper left) and denominator (upper right) of the $ R_{\Delta\phi}(p_{\mathrm{T}}) $ ratio, Eq. (1), using PYTHIA8 with tunes CUETP8M1 and CUETP8M2, HERWIG++ with tune UEEE5CTEQ6L1, and POWHEG interfaced with each of them. The lower plot shows the NP correction factors (blue line) for $ R_{\Delta\phi}(p_{\mathrm{T}}) $ and their uncertainties. 
png pdf 
Figure 7:
Electroweak corrections for the numerator (blue) and denominator (green) of Eq. (1), and for the $ R_{\Delta\phi}(p_{\mathrm{T}}) $ ratio itself (red). The solid lines correspond to the additive combination of NLO EW corrections to the QCD process (NLO QCD$ \,+\, $EW), and the markers represent the multiplicative combination (NLO QCD$ \,\times\, $EW). 
png pdf 
Figure 8:
The $ R_{\Delta\phi}(p_{\mathrm{T}}) $ observable as a function of $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, compared with fixedorder theoretical calculations at NLO accuracy using the ABMP16 (upper left), CT18 (upper right), MSHT20 (lower left), and NNPDF3.1 (lower right) NLO PDF sets. The experimental data are indicated with blue dots (with error bars representing the total experimental uncertainty), the theoretical prediction for the default $ \alpha_\mathrm{S}(m_{\mathrm{Z}}) $ for each PDF set with black solid lines, the scale uncertainties with red bands, and the PDF uncertainties with green bands. The lower panel of each plot shows the ratio between experimental data and theoretical predictions. 
png pdf 
Figure 9:
Sensitivity of the $ R_{\Delta\phi}(p_{\mathrm{T}}) $ ratio to the strong coupling constant $ \alpha_\mathrm{S}(m_{\mathrm{Z}}) $. The data are indicated with blue dots with error bars representing the total experimental uncertainty. In each plot, the lines represent fixedorder NLO theoretical calculations obtained with ABMP16 (upper left), CT18 (upper right), MSHT20 (lower left) and NNPDF3.1 (lower right) NLO PDF sets. Solid green (red) lines indicate maximum (minimum) values, and dotted black lines intermediate values of $ \alpha_\mathrm{S}(m_{\mathrm{Z}}) $ for each PDF set. 
png pdf 
Figure 10:
Minimization of the $ \chi^2 $ between experimental measurements and theoretical predictions for the $ R_{\Delta\phi}(p_{\mathrm{T}}) $ ratio, with respect to $ \alpha_\mathrm{S}(m_{\mathrm{Z}}) $ for the ABMP16, CT18, MSHT20, and NNPDF3.1 NLO PDF sets. In this plot, only experimental uncertainties are included in the covariance matrix. The minimum value of $ \alpha_\mathrm{S}(m_{\mathrm{Z}}) $ found for each PDF set is indicated with a dashed line and corresponds to the central result. The experimental uncertainty is estimated from the $ \alpha_\mathrm{S}(m_{\mathrm{Z}}) $ values for which the $ \chi^2 $ is increased by one unit with respect to the minimum value. 
png pdf 
Figure 11:
Determination of $ \alpha_\mathrm{S}(m_{\mathrm{Z}}) $ from the $ R_{\Delta\phi}(p_{\mathrm{T}}) $ ratio with the NNPDF3.1 PDF set (red), in comparison with previous NLO determinations of $ \alpha_\mathrm{S}(m_{\mathrm{Z}}) $ from inclusive jet (magenta), dijet (green), and multijet (blue) measurements. The horizontal error bars indicate the total uncertainty (experimental and theoretical). The worldaverage $ \alpha_\mathrm{S}(m_{\mathrm{Z}}) $ value is represented by the vertical dashed black line and its uncertainty by the yellow band. 
png pdf 
Figure 12:
Running of the strong coupling $ \alpha_\mathrm{S}(Q) $ (dashed line) evolved using the current worldaverage value $ \alpha_\mathrm{S}(m_{\mathrm{Z}}) = $ 0.1180 $ \pm $ 0.0009 [5] together with its associated total uncertainty (yellow band). The four new extractions from the present analysis (Table 5) are shown as filled red circles, compared with results from the H1[93,94,90], ZEUS [95], D0 [11,12], CMS [14],17,18,22], and ATLAS [24,21] experiments. The vertical error bars indicate the total uncertainty (experimental and theoretical). All the experimental results shown in this figure are based on fixedorder predictions at NLO accuracy in pQCD. 
Tables  
png pdf 
Table 1:
The different HLT $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ thresholds used in the measurement and the corresponding integrated luminosities for each datataking year. 
png pdf 
Table 2:
Values of the $ R_{\Delta\phi}(p_{\mathrm{T}}) $ observable in different $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ intervals, and associated experimental uncertainties. 
png pdf 
Table 3:
Default and range of $ \alpha_\mathrm{S}(m_{\mathrm{Z}}) $ values used in the different NLO PDF sets. 
png pdf 
Table 4:
Results for $ \alpha_\mathrm{S}(m_{\mathrm{Z}}) $, associated uncertainties, and goodnessoffit per degree of freedom ($ \chi^2/n_\text{dof} $), obtained from the measured $ R_{\Delta\phi}(p_{\mathrm{T}}) $ distribution compared with theoretical predictions using different NLO PDF sets. 
png pdf 
Table 5:
Values of $ \alpha_\mathrm{S}(m_{\mathrm{Z}}) $ and $ \alpha_\mathrm{S}(Q) $ determined in four different jet $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ fitting subregions corresponding to an average scale $ \langle Q \rangle $ over each $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ interval. 
Summary 
A measurement of the $ R_{\Delta\phi}(p_{\mathrm{T}}) $ ratio, sensitive to azimuthal correlations in multijet events, has been presented using protonproton collision data collected by the CMS experiment at a centreofmass energy of 13 TeV and corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 134 fb$ ^{1} $. The experimental data are compared with predictions from Monte Carlo (MC) event generators, PYTHIA8 with tunes CUETP8M1 and CUETP8M2, HERWIG++ with tune UEEE5CTEQ6L1, and POWHEG interfaced with each one of them. Deviations between data and MC predictions are observed in all cases, except for PYTHIA8 tune CUETP8M2, which gives a good overall description of the measurement. The measurement is also compared with fixedorder perturbative quantum chromodynamics (pQCD) predictions at nexttoleadingorder (NLO) accuracy using the NLOJET++ package within the FASTNLO framework. Those predictions are extracted for four different NLO parton distribution function (PDF) sets, ABMP16, CT18, MSHT20, and NNPDF3.1. Corrections for nonperturbative (NP) effects are evaluated using all the aforementioned MC event generators, and are applied to the fixedorder predictions. The predictions are additionally corrected for electroweak (EW) effects that become important at large jet transverse momenta. Generally, the fixedorder predictions are in agreement with the experimental data in the phase space of this analysis, and they provide a good description of the measured $ R_{\Delta\phi}(p_{\mathrm{T}}) $ distribution for all PDF sets. {\tolerance=2400 Based on a comparison of the measured $ R_{\Delta\phi}(p_{\mathrm{T}}) $ distribution and the theoretical predictions, the strong coupling at the scale of the Z boson mass is: $ \alpha_\mathrm{S}(m_{\mathrm{Z}})= $ 0.1177 $_{0.0068}^{+0.0114} $ (scale) $ \pm $ 0.0013 (exp) $ \pm $ 0.0011 (NP) $ \pm $ 0.0010 (PDF) $ \pm $ 0.0003 (EW) $ \pm $ 0.0020 (PDF choice) $=$ 0.1177 $_{0.0074}^{+0.0117} $, using calculations based on the NNPDF3.1 NLO PDF set. Alternative $ \alpha_\mathrm{S}(m_{\mathrm{Z}}) $ results obtained with other PDF sets are compatible among each other, as well as with the central result of this work, and with the current world average, $ \alpha_\mathrm{S}(m_{\mathrm{Z}}) = $ 0.1180 $ \pm $ 0.0009. The spread of the $ \alpha_\mathrm{S}(m_{\mathrm{Z}}) $ values obtained from different PDF sets is used for the assignment of the ``PDF choice'' uncertainty quoted in the final strong coupling constant derived here. The dominant uncertainty in this measurement originates from the scale dependence of the NLO pQCD predictions, and is expected to be significantly reduced with the future inclusion of fixedorder predictions at nexttoNLO accuracy. The evolution of the strong coupling as a function of the energy scale, $ \alpha_\mathrm{S}(Q) $, has been tested up to $ Q\approx $ 2 TeV, a higher scale than that probed in previous H1, ZEUS, D0, CMS, and ATLAS measurements. This test has been performed by choosing as energy scale $ Q $ the average jet transverse momentum in the different intervals considered, and no deviation from the expected NLO pQCD running of the strong coupling is observed. 
References  
1  C. G. Callan, Jr.  Broken scale invariance in scalar field theory  PRD 2 (1970) 1541  
2  K. Symanzik  Small distance behavior in field theory and power counting  Commun. Math. Phys. 18 (1970) 227  
3  K. Symanzik  Small distance behavior analysis and Wilson expansion  Commun. Math. Phys. 23 (1971) 49  
4  P. A. Baikov, K. G. Chetyrkin, and J. H. K \"u hn  Fiveloop running of the QCD coupling constant  PRL 118 (2017) 082002  1606.08659 
5  Particle Data Group , R. L. Workman et al.  Review of particle physics  Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2022 (2022) 083C01  
6  D. d'Enterria et al.  The strong coupling constant: State of the art and the decade ahead  Submitted to J. Phys. G, 2022  2203.08271 
7  CMS Collaboration  Precision luminosity measurement in protonproton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV in 2015 and 2016 at CMS  EPJC 81 (2021) 800  CMSLUM17003 2104.01927 
8  CMS Collaboration  CMS luminosity measurement for the 2017 datataking period at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV  CMS Physics Analysis Summary, 2018 link 
CMSPASLUM17004 
9  CMS Collaboration  CMS luminosity measurement for the 2018 datataking period at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV  CMS Physics Analysis Summary, 2019 link 
CMSPASLUM18002 
10  CDF Collaboration  Measurement of the strong coupling constant from inclusive jet production at the Tevatron $ \mathrm{\bar{p}p} $ collider  PRL 88 (2002) 042001  hepex/0108034 
11  D0 Collaboration  Determination of the strong coupling constant from the inclusive jet cross section in p$ \bar{\mathrm{p}} $ collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 1.96 TeV  PRD 80 (2009) 111107  0911.2710 
12  D0 Collaboration  Measurement of angular correlations of jets at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 1.96 TeV and determination of the strong coupling at high momentum transfers  PLB 718 (2012) 56  1207.4957 
13  B. Malaescu and P. Starovoitov  Evaluation of the strong coupling constant $ \alpha_s $ using the ATLAS inclusive jet crosssection data  EPJC 72 (2012) 2041  1203.5416 
14  CMS Collaboration  Measurement of the ratio of the inclusive 3jet cross section to the inclusive 2jet cross section in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 7 TeV and first determination of the strong coupling constant in the TeV range  EPJC 73 (2013) 2604  CMSQCD11003 1304.7498 
15  ATLAS Collaboration  Measurement of transverse energyenergy correlations in multijet events in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 7 TeV using the ATLAS detector and determination of the strong coupling constant $ \alpha_{\mathrm{s}}(m_Z) $  PLB 750 (2015) 427  1508.01579 
16  CMS Collaboration  Determination of the topquark pole mass and strong coupling constant from the $ \rm t \bar{t} $ production cross section in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 7 TeV  PLB 728 (2014) 496  CMSTOP12022 1307.1907 
17  CMS Collaboration  Measurement of the inclusive 3jet production differential cross section in protonproton collisions at 7 TeV and determination of the strong coupling constant in the TeV range  EPJC 75 (2015) 186  CMSSMP12027 1412.1633 
18  CMS Collaboration  Constraints on parton distribution functions and extraction of the strong coupling constant from the inclusive jet cross section in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 7 TeV  EPJC 75 (2015) 288  CMSSMP12028 1410.6765 
19  CMS Collaboration  Determination of the strong coupling constant $ \alpha_\mathrm{S}(m_\mathrm{Z}) $ from measurements of inclusive $ \mathrm{W}^{\pm} $ and Z boson production cross sections in protonproton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 7 and 8 TeV  JHEP 06 (2020) 018  CMSSMP18005 1912.04387 
20  D. d'Enterria and A. Poldaru  Extraction of the strong coupling $ \alpha_\mathrm{S}(m_\mathrm{Z}) $ from a combined NNLO analysis of inclusive electroweak boson cross sections at hadron colliders  JHEP 06 (2020) 016  1912.11733 
21  ATLAS Collaboration  Determination of the strong coupling constant $ \alpha _\mathrm{s} $ from transverse energyenergy correlations in multijet events at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 8 TeV using the ATLAS detector  EPJC 77 (2017) 872  1707.02562 
22  CMS Collaboration  Measurement and QCD analysis of doubledifferential inclusive jet cross sections in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 8 TeV and cross section ratios to 2.76 and 7 TeV  JHEP 03 (2017) 156  CMSSMP14001 1609.05331 
23  CMS Collaboration  Measurement of the tripledifferential dijet cross section in protonproton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 8 TeV and constraints on parton distribution functions  EPJC 77 (2017) 746  CMSSMP16011 1705.02628 
24  ATLAS Collaboration  Measurement of dijet azimuthal decorrelations in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 8 TeV with the ATLAS detector and determination of the strong coupling  PRD 98 (2018) 092004  1805.04691 
25  CMS Collaboration  Measurement of jet substructure observables in $ \mathrm{t\overline{t}} $ events from protonproton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV  PRD 98 (2018) 092014  CMSTOP17013 1808.07340 
26  CMS Collaboration  Measurement of the $ \mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}} $ production cross section, the top quark mass, and the strong coupling constant using dilepton events in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV  EPJC 79 (2019) 368  CMSTOP17001 1812.10505 
27  CMS Collaboration  Measurement of $ \mathrm{t\bar t} $ normalised multidifferential cross sections in pp collisions at $ \sqrt s= $ 13 TeV, and simultaneous determination of the strong coupling strength, top quark pole mass, and parton distribution functions  EPJC 80 (2020) 658  CMSTOP18004 1904.05237 
28  ATLAS Collaboration  Determination of the strong coupling constant from transverse energyenergy correlations in multijet events at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector  JHEP 07 (2023) 085  2301.09351 
29  CMS Collaboration  Measurement and QCD analysis of doubledifferential inclusive jet cross sections in protonproton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV  JHEP 02 (2022) 142  CMSSMP20011 2111.10431 
30  CMS Collaboration  Measurement of multidifferential cross sections for dijet production in protonproton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} $ = 13 TeV  Submitted to EPJC, 2023  CMSSMP21008 2312.16669 
31  CMS Collaboration  Measurement of energy correlators inside jets and determination of the strong coupling $ \alpha_\mathrm{S}(m_\mathrm{Z}) $  Submitted to Phys. Rev. Lett, 2024  CMSSMP22015 2402.13864 
32  CMS Collaboration  HEPData record for this analysis  link  
33  CMS Collaboration  The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC  JINST 3 (2008) S08004  
34  CMS Collaboration  Performance of the CMS level1 trigger in protonproton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV  JINST 15 (2020) P10017  CMSTRG17001 2006.10165 
35  CMS Collaboration  The CMS trigger system  JINST 12 (2017) P01020  CMSTRG12001 1609.02366 
36  CMS Collaboration  Particleflow reconstruction and global event description with the CMS detector  JINST 12 (2017) P10003  CMSPRF14001 1706.04965 
37  CMS Collaboration  Technical proposal for the PhaseII upgrade of the Compact Muon Solenoid  CMS Technical Proposal CERNLHCC2015010, CMSTDR1502, 2015 CDS 

38  M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez  The anti$ k_{\mathrm{T}} $ jet clustering algorithm  JHEP 04 (2008) 063  0802.1189 
39  M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez  FastJet user manual  EPJC 72 (2012) 1896  1111.6097 
40  CMS Collaboration  Pileup mitigation at CMS in 13 TeV data  JINST 15 (2020) P09018  CMSJME18001 2003.00503 
41  CMS Collaboration  Jet energy scale and resolution in the CMS experiment in pp collisions at 8 TeV  JINST 12 (2017) P02014  CMSJME13004 1607.03663 
42  CMS Collaboration  Jet algorithms performance in 13 TeV data  CMS Physics Analysis Summary, 2017 CMSPASJME16003 
CMSPASJME16003 
43  CMS Collaboration  Performance of missing transverse momentum reconstruction in protonproton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV using the CMS detector  JINST 14 (2019) P07004  CMSJME17001 1903.06078 
44  CMS Collaboration  Performance of the CMS electromagnetic calorimeter in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV  Technical Report CERNEP2024014, 003, 2024 CMSPASEGM18002 

45  T. Sjöstrand et al.  An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2  Comput. Phys. Commun. 191 (2015) 159  1410.3012 
46  CMS Collaboration  Event generator tunes obtained from underlying event and multiparton scattering measurements  EPJC 76 (2016) 155  CMSGEN14001 1512.00815 
47  CMS Collaboration  Extraction and validation of a new set of CMS PYTHIA8 tunes from underlyingevent measurements  EPJC 80 (2020) 4  CMSGEN17001 1903.12179 
48  S. Schmitt  TUnfold: an algorithm for correcting migration effects in high energy physics  JINST 7 (2012) T10003  1205.6201 
49  V. Blobel  Unfolding  Chapter 6, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd, 2013 link 

50  GEANT4 Collaboration  GEANT 4a simulation toolkit  NIM A 506 (2003) 250  
51  J. Alwall et al.  The automated computation of treelevel and nexttoleading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations  JHEP 07 (2014) 079  1405.0301 
52  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 
53  M. Bähr et al.  Herwig++ physics and manual  EPJC 58 (2008) 639  0803.0883 
54  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 
55  C. Bierlich et al.  Robust independent validation of experiment and theory: Rivet version 3  SciPost Phys. 8 (2020) 026  1912.05451 
56  B. R. Webber  A QCD model for jet fragmentation including soft gluon interference  NPB 238 (1984) 492  
57  M. H. Seymour and A. Siódmok  Constraining MPI models using $ \sigma_{\text{eff}} $ and recent Tevatron and LHC underlying event data  JHEP 10 (2013) 113  1307.5015 
58  D. Stump et al.  Inclusive jet production, parton distributions, and the search for new physics  JHEP 10 (2003) 046  hepph/0303013 
59  B. Andersson  The Lund model  Volume 7, Cambridge University Press, ISBN~9780521017343, 978052145, 9780511881497, 2005 link 

60  NNPDF Collaboration  Parton distributions with QED corrections  NPB 877 (2013) 290  1308.0598 
61  NNPDF Collaboration  Unbiased global determination of parton distributions and their uncertainties at NNLO and at LO  NPB 855 (2012) 153  1107.2652 
62  CMS Collaboration  Investigations of the impact of the parton shower tuning in Pythia 8 in the modelling of $ \mathrm{t\overline{t}} $ at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 8 and 13 TeV  CMS Physics Analysis Summary, 2016 CMSPASTOP16021 
CMSPASTOP16021 
63  NNPDF Collaboration  Parton distributions for the LHC Run II  JHEP 04 (2015) 040  1410.8849 
64  P. Nason  A new method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms  JHEP 11 (2004) 040  hepph/0409146 
65  S. Frixione, P. Nason, and C. Oleari  Matching NLO QCD computations with parton shower simulations: the POWHEG method  JHEP 11 (2007) 070  0709.2092 
66  Z. Nagy  Threejet cross sections in hadronhadron collisions at nexttoleading order  PRL 88 (2002) 122003  hepph/0110315 
67  Z. Nagy  Nexttoleading order calculation of threejet observables in hadronhadron collision  PRD 68 (2003) 094002  hepph/0307268 
68  T. Kluge, K. Rabbertz, and M. Wobisch  FastNLO: Fast pQCD calculations for PDF fits  in 14th International Workshop on Deep Inelastic Scattering, 2006 link 
hepph/0609285 
69  D. Britzger, K. Rabbertz, F. Stober, and M. Wobisch  New features in version 2 of the fastNLO project  fastNLO Collaboration, in 20th International Workshop on DeepInelastic Scattering and Related Subjects, 2012 link 
1208.3641 
70  A. Buckley et al.  LHAPDF6: parton density access in the LHC precision era  EPJC 75 (2015) 132  1412.7420 
71  J. Currie et al.  Infrared sensitivity of single jet inclusive production at hadron colliders  JHEP 10 (2018) 155  1807.03692 
72  M. Czakon, A. Mitov, and R. Poncelet  Nexttonexttoleading order study of threejet production at the LHC  PRL 127 (2021) 152001  2106.05331 
73  M. Alvarez et al.  NNLO QCD corrections to event shapes at the LHC  JHEP 03 (2023) 129  2301.01086 
74  M. Cacciari et al.  The topantitop crosssection at 1.8 TeV and 1.96 TeV: A study of the systematics due to parton densities and scale dependence  JHEP 04 (2004) 068  hepph/0303085 
75  S. Catani, D. de Florian, M. Grazzini, and P. Nason  Soft gluon resummation for Higgs boson production at hadron colliders  JHEP 07 (2003) 028  hepph/0306211 
76  A. Banfi, G. P. Salam, and G. Zanderighi  Phenomenology of event shapes at hadron colliders  JHEP 06 (2010) 038  1001.4082 
77  S. Alekhin, J. Blümlein, S. Moch, and R. Plačakyté  Parton distribution functions, $ \alpha_s $, and heavyquark masses for LHC Run II  PRD 96 (2017) 014011  1701.05838 
78  T.J. Hou et al.  New CTEQ global analysis of quantum chromodynamics with highprecision data from the LHC  PRD 103 (2021) 014013  1912.10053 
79  S. Bailey et al.  Parton distributions from LHC, HERA, Tevatron and fixed target data: MSHT20 PDFs  EPJC 81 (2021) 341  2012.04684 
80  NNPDF Collaboration  Parton distributions from highprecision collider data  EPJC 77 (2017) 663  1706.00428 
81  M. Reyer, M. Schönherr, and S. Schumann  Full NLO corrections to 3jet production and $ \mathbf {R_{32}} $ at the LHC  EPJC 79 (2019) 321  1902.01763 
82  Sherpa Collaboration  Event generation with Sherpa 2.2  SciPost Phys. 7 (2019) 034  1905.09127 
83  S. Actis et al.  Recursive generation of oneloop amplitudes in the Standard Model  JHEP 04 (2013) 037  1211.6316 
84  S. Actis et al.  RECOLA: REcursive Computation of OneLoop Amplitudes  Comput. Phys. Commun. 214 (2017) 140  1605.01090 
85  B. Biedermann et al.  Automation of NLO QCD and EW corrections with Sherpa and Recola  EPJC 77 (2017) 492  1704.05783 
86  M. Schönherr  An automated subtraction of NLO EW infrared divergences  EPJC 78 (2018) 119  1712.07975 
87  J. Pumplin et al.  Uncertainties of predictions from parton distribution functions. 2. The Hessian method  PRD 65 (2001) 014013  hepph/0101032 
88  W. T. Giele, S. A. Keller, and D. A. Kosower  Parton distribution function uncertainties  hepph/0104052  
89  ZEUS Collaboration  Jetradius dependence of inclusivejet crosssections in deep inelastic scattering at HERA  PLB 649 (2007) 12  hepex/0701039 
90  H1 Collaboration  Measurement of multijet production in ep collisions at high $ Q^2 $ and determination of the strong coupling $ \alpha_s $  EPJC 75 (2015) 65  1406.4709 
91  D. Britzger et al.  Determination of the strong coupling constant using inclusive jet cross section data from multiple experiments  EPJC 79 (2019) 68  1712.00480 
92  ZEUS Collaboration  Multijet production in neutral current deep inelastic scattering at HERA and determination of $ \alpha_s $  EPJC 44 (2005) 183  hepex/0502007 
93  H1 Collaboration  Jet production in ep collisions at high $ Q^2 $ and determination of $ \alpha_s $  EPJC 65 (2010) 363  0904.3870 
94  H1 Collaboration  Jet production in ep collisions at low $ Q^2 $ and determination of $ \alpha_s $  EPJC 67 (2010) 1  0911.5678 
95  ZEUS Collaboration  Inclusivejet photoproduction at HERA and determination of $ \alpha_s $  NPB 864 (2012) 1  1205.6153 
Compact Muon Solenoid LHC, CERN 