CMSSUS21009 ; CERNEP2023127  
Search for new physics in multijet events with at least one photon and large missing transverse momentum in protonproton collisions at 13 TeV  
CMS Collaboration  
28 July 2023  
JHEP 10 (2023) 046  
Abstract: A search for new physics in final states consisting of at least one photon, multiple jets, and large missing transverse momentum is presented, using protonproton collision events at a centerofmass energy of 13 TeV. The data correspond to an integrated luminosity of 137 fb$ ^{1} $, recorded by the CMS experiment at the CERN LHC from 2016 to 2018. The events are divided into mutually exclusive bins characterized by the missing transverse momentum, the number of jets, the number of btagged jets, and jets consistent with the presence of hadronically decaying W, Z, or Higgs bosons. The observed data are found to be consistent with the prediction from standard model processes. The results are interpreted in the context of simplified models of pair production of supersymmetric particles via strong and electroweak interactions. Depending on the details of the signal models, gluinos and squarks of masses up to 2.35 and 1.43 TeV, respectively, and electroweakinos of masses up to 1.23 TeV are excluded at 95% confidence level.  
Links: eprint arXiv:2307.16216 [hepex] (PDF) ; CDS record ; inSPIRE record ; CADI line (restricted) ; 
Figures & Tables  Summary  Additional Figures & Tables  References  CMS Publications 

Figures  
png pdf 
Figure 1:
Diagrams of simplified models of gluino pair production: T5qqqqHG (upper left), T5bbbbZG (upper right), T5ttttZG (lower left), and top squark pair production: T6ttZG (lower right). The models are defined in the text. 
png pdf 
Figure 1a:
Diagram representing the T5qqqqHG simplified model of gluino pair production. 
png pdf 
Figure 1b:
Diagram representing the T5bbbbZG simplified model of gluino pair production. 
png pdf 
Figure 1c:
Diagram representing the T5ttttZG simplified model of gluino pair production. 
png pdf 
Figure 1d:
Diagram representing the T6ttZG simplified model of top squark pair production. 
png pdf 
Figure 2:
Diagrams of simplified models of electroweakino pair production: TChiWG (upper), TChiNG (lower left), and TChiNGnn (lower right). Only the $ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} $ and $ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\mp} $ cases are shown for the TChiWG and TChiNG models, respectively. The models are defined in the text. ``Soft'' indicates particles with momentum too low to be detectable. 
png pdf 
Figure 2a:
Diagram representing the TChiWG simplified model of electroweakino pair production. Only the $ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} $ case is shown. 
png pdf 
Figure 2b:
Diagram representing the TChiNG simplified model of electroweakino pair production. Only the $ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\mp} $ case is shown. ``Soft'' indicates particles with momentum too low to be detectable. 
png pdf 
Figure 2c:
Diagram representing the TChiNGnn simplified model of electroweakino pair production. 
png pdf 
Figure 3:
The definitions and indexing schemes for the SP (left) and EW (right) SRs and low$ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ CRs, in the planes of $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $, $ N_{\text{jets}} $, and $ N_{\mathrm{b}\text{tags}} $ (left) and $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $, $ \text{V}\text{}$ and $\mathrm{H}\text{tag} $ (right). The gray blocks correspond to the low$ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ CRs, the blue blocks to the SP SRs, and the red blocks to the EW SRs. 
png pdf 
Figure 3a:
The definitions and indexing schemes for the SP SR and low$ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ CRs, in the plane of $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $, $ N_{\text{jets}} $, and $ N_{\mathrm{b}\text{tags}} $. The gray blocks correspond to the low$ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ CRs and the blue blocks to the SP SRs. 
png pdf 
Figure 3b:
The definitions and indexing schemes for the EW SRs and low$ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ CRs, in the plane of $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $, $ \text{V}\text{ and }\mathrm{H}\text{tag} $. The gray blocks correspond to the low$ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ CRs and the red blocks to the EW SRs. 
png pdf 
Figure 4:
Left: the relative contributions of events with light lepton(s) or $ \tau_\mathrm{h} $ candidate(s) in the SRs and CRs (upper panel), and the corresponding transfer factors (TFs; see text), along with their statistical uncertainties (lower panel). Right: a comparison between the expected and predicted lost lepton event yields from simulated $ \mathrm{W}\gamma{+}\text{jets} $ and $ \mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}\gamma{+}\text{jets} $ processes in each of the SR bins. The vertical error bars indicate the statistical uncertainty in the simulation and the hashed bands in the lower panel indicate the systematic uncertainties. 
png pdf 
Figure 4a:
The relative contributions of events with light lepton(s) or $ \tau_\mathrm{h} $ candidate(s) in the SRs and CRs (upper panel), and the corresponding transfer factors (TFs; see text), along with their statistical uncertainties (lower panel). 
png pdf 
Figure 4b:
A comparison between the expected and predicted lost lepton event yields from simulated $ \mathrm{W}\gamma{+}\text{jets} $ and $ \mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}\gamma{+}\text{jets} $ processes in each of the SR bins. The vertical error bars indicate the statistical uncertainty in the simulation and the hashed bands in the lower panel indicate the systematic uncertainties. 
png pdf 
Figure 5:
A comparison of the number of events with an electron misidentified as a photon in the SRs and the number estimated using the singleelectron CRs with simulated samples. The ratio of the expected and predicted event yields in each SR is shown in the lower panel. The shaded region in the lower panel indicates the systematic uncertainties in the predicted number of background events. 
png pdf 
Figure 6:
The distributions of the dilepton invariant mass (left) and the magnitude of the dilepton $ {\vec p}_{\mathrm{T}} $ plus the $ {\vec p}_{\mathrm{T}}^{\kern1pt\text{miss}} $ (right) for $ \ell\ell\gamma $ events in data and simulation. The error bars represent the statistical uncertainty in the data events. In the lower panel, the shaded region shows the statistical uncertainty in the simulation. 
png pdf 
Figure 6a:
The distribution of the magnitude of the dilepton $ {\vec p}_{\mathrm{T}} $ plus the $ {\vec p}_{\mathrm{T}}^{\kern1pt\text{miss}} $ for $ \ell\ell\gamma $ events in data and simulation. The error bars represent the statistical uncertainty in the data events. In the lower panel, the shaded region shows the statistical uncertainty in the simulation. 
png pdf 
Figure 6b:
The distribution of the magnitude of the dilepton $ {\vec p}_{\mathrm{T}} $ plus the $ {\vec p}_{\mathrm{T}}^{\kern1pt\text{miss}} $ for $ \ell\ell\gamma $ events in data and simulation. The error bars represent the statistical uncertainty in the data events. In the lower panel, the shaded region shows the statistical uncertainty in the simulation. 
png pdf 
Figure 7:
A comparison between $ \kappa $ estimated from simulation and from data in the zerophoton CR. The values are given for each $ N_{\text{jets}} $, $ N_{\mathrm{b}\text{tags}} $, $ \text{V}\text{tag} $, and $ \mathrm{H}\text{tag} $ bin, represented as $ r $. The blue bands in the lower panel represent the relative systematic uncertainty in $ \kappa $. 
png pdf 
Figure 8:
The numbers of predicted background events and observed events in the SRs and low$ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ CRs. The lostlepton, electron misidentified as photon, $ \mathrm{Z}\gamma{+}\text{jets} $, and $ \gamma{+}\text{jets} $ and QCD multijet backgrounds are stacked histograms. The observed numbers of events in data are presented as black points. For illustration, the expected event yields are presented for the signal model T5bbbbZG, for small (blue) and large (purple) differences in the masses of the $ \mathrm{\tilde{g}} $ and NLSP. Also shown is the expected distribution of events for the signal model TChiWG (red). The numerical values in parentheses in the legend entries for the signal models indicate the $ \mathrm{\tilde{g}} $ and NLSP mass values in GeVns for strong production and the NLSP mass value for electroweak production. The lower panel shows the ratio of the observed number of data events and the predicted backgrounds. The error bars represent the statistical uncertainty in the data events, and the shaded band represents the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the predicted background. The $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ bin 200300 GeV is used for the estimation of the $ \gamma{+}\text{jets} $ and QCD multijet background. 
png pdf 
Figure 9:
The 95% CL upper limits on the production cross sections for $ \mathrm{\tilde{g}} $ pairs, with $ \mathrm{\tilde{g}}\to\mathrm{b}\overline{\mathrm{b}}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} $ followed by $ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\to\mathrm{Z}\tilde{\mathrm{G}} $ or $ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\to\gamma\tilde{\mathrm{G}} $ (upper left, T5bbbbZG model), $ \mathrm{\tilde{g}}\to\mathrm{q}\overline{\mathrm{q}}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} $ followed by $ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\to\mathrm{H}\tilde{\mathrm{G}} $ or $ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\to\gamma\tilde{\mathrm{G}} $ (upper right, T5qqqqHG model), $ \mathrm{\tilde{g}}\to{\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} $ followed by $ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\to\mathrm{Z}\tilde{\mathrm{G}} $ or $ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\to\gamma\tilde{\mathrm{G}} $ (lower left, T5ttttZG model), or top squark pairs assuming the top squark decays to a top quark and a $ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} $ followed by $ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\to\mathrm{Z}\tilde{\mathrm{G}} $ or $ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\to\gamma\tilde{\mathrm{G}} $ (lower right, T6ttZG model). The thick black curve represents the observed exclusion contour and the thin black curves show the effect of varying the signal cross section within the theoretical uncertainties by $ \pm $1$\sigma_{\text{theory}} $. The thick red curve indicates the expected exclusion contour and the thin red curves show the variations from $ \pm$1$\sigma_{\text{experiment}} $ uncertainties. 
png pdf 
Figure 9a:
The 95% CL upper limits on the production cross sections for $ \mathrm{\tilde{g}} $ pairs, with $ \mathrm{\tilde{g}}\to\mathrm{b}\overline{\mathrm{b}}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} $ followed by $ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\to\mathrm{Z}\tilde{\mathrm{G}} $ or $ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\to\gamma\tilde{\mathrm{G}} $ (T5bbbbZG model). The thick black curve represents the observed exclusion contour and the thin black curves show the effect of varying the signal cross section within the theoretical uncertainties by $ \pm $1$\sigma_{\text{theory}} $. The thick red curve indicates the expected exclusion contour and the thin red curves show the variations from $ \pm$1$\sigma_{\text{experiment}} $ uncertainties. 
png pdf 
Figure 9b:
The 95% CL upper limits on the production cross sections for $ \mathrm{\tilde{g}}\to\mathrm{q}\overline{\mathrm{q}}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} $ followed by $ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\to\mathrm{H}\tilde{\mathrm{G}} $ or $ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\to\gamma\tilde{\mathrm{G}} $ (T5qqqqHG model). The thick black curve represents the observed exclusion contour and the thin black curves show the effect of varying the signal cross section within the theoretical uncertainties by $ \pm $1$\sigma_{\text{theory}} $. The thick red curve indicates the expected exclusion contour and the thin red curves show the variations from $ \pm$1$\sigma_{\text{experiment}} $ uncertainties. 
png pdf 
Figure 9c:
The 95% CL upper limits on the production cross sections for $ \mathrm{\tilde{g}}\to{\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} $ followed by $ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\to\mathrm{Z}\tilde{\mathrm{G}} $ or $ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\to\gamma\tilde{\mathrm{G}} $ (T5ttttZG model). The thick black curve represents the observed exclusion contour and the thin black curves show the effect of varying the signal cross section within the theoretical uncertainties by $ \pm $1$\sigma_{\text{theory}} $. The thick red curve indicates the expected exclusion contour and the thin red curves show the variations from $ \pm$1$\sigma_{\text{experiment}} $ uncertainties. 
png pdf 
Figure 9d:
The 95% CL upper limits on the production cross sections for top squark pairs assuming the top squark decays to a top quark and a $ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} $ followed by $ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\to\mathrm{Z}\tilde{\mathrm{G}} $ or $ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\to\gamma\tilde{\mathrm{G}} $ (T6ttZG model). The thick black curve represents the observed exclusion contour and the thin black curves show the effect of varying the signal cross section within the theoretical uncertainties by $ \pm $1$\sigma_{\text{theory}} $. The thick red curve indicates the expected exclusion contour and the thin red curves show the variations from $ \pm$1$\sigma_{\text{experiment}} $ uncertainties. 
png pdf 
Figure 10:
The expected and observed limits on the electroweakino mass in the TChiWG (upper), TChiNG (lower left), and TChiNGnn (lower right) models at 95% CL. For the TChiNG model (lower left), scenarios with degenerate charginos and neutralinos leading to the combined process $ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\mp}+\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}+(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}/\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0})\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm} $ (red) or the single process $ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0} $ (blue) are considered. 
png pdf 
Figure 10a:
The expected and observed limits on the electroweakino mass in the TChiWG model at 95% CL. 
png pdf 
Figure 10b:
The expected and observed limits on the electroweakino mass in the TChiNG model at 95% CL. For this model, scenarios with degenerate charginos and neutralinos leading to the combined process $ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\mp}+\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}+(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}/\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0})\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm} $ (red) or the single process $ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0} $ (blue) are considered. 
png pdf 
Figure 10c:
The expected and observed limits on the electroweakino mass in the TChiNGnn model at 95% CL. 
Tables  
png pdf 
Table 1:
Summary of the baseline selection criteria used to identify events of interest for this search. 
png pdf 
Table 2:
The systematic uncertainties in the predicted background and signal event yields (in %). A dash indicates that the source of uncertainty is not applicable or negligible. 
png pdf 
Table A1:
The number of events predicted and observed for the signal regions and the low$ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ regions used for the estimation of the $ \gamma{+}\text{jets} $ and QCD multijet backgrounds. 
Summary 
A search for supersymmetry (SUSY) is presented using events with final states containing at least one photon, large missing transverse momentum, and jets that may or may not arise from b quarks. These signatures are motivated by models with gaugemediated SUSY breaking (GMSB), in which the lightest SUSY particle (LSP) is a gravitino ($ \tilde{\mathrm{G}} $) and the nexttoLSP (NLSP) is a chargino ($ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm} $) or neutralino ($ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} $), collectively called electroweakinos. Several simplified models of strong production of pairs of gluinos ($ \mathrm{\tilde{g}} $) and top squarks ($ \tilde{\mathrm{t}} $) are considered, with the gluino decaying to a pair of quarks along with an NLSP or the top squark decaying to a top quark and an NLSP; the NLSP then decays to a neutral gauge boson (photon, Z boson, or Higgs boson) and an LSP. Models of pair production of electroweakinos are also considered, with the neutralinos decaying as described above, and the charginos decaying to a W boson and an LSP. Compared to previous searches, this search achieves increased sensitivity to scenarios with small mass differences between the gluino and the NLSP with dedicated search regions based on identifying boosted massive bosons. In addition, the search strategy is expanded to provide sensitivity to the production of electroweakino pairs. The observations are consistent with the standard model expectations and 95% confidence level upper limits are set on the production cross sections of SUSY particles. In the GMSB simplified models, the lower gluino mass limit reaches up to 2.35 TeV for models with $ \mathrm{\tilde{g}}\to\mathrm{q}\overline{\mathrm{q}}\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} $ followed by $ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\to\mathrm{H}\tilde{\mathrm{G}} $ or $ \gamma\tilde{\mathrm{G}} $ with equal probability, and the top squark mass limit reaches up to 1.43 TeV for models with $ \tilde{\mathrm{t}} \to \mathrm{t} \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0} $ followed by $ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\to\mathrm{Z}\tilde{\mathrm{G}} $ or $ \gamma\tilde{\mathrm{G}} $ with equal probability. These results extend the previous mass limits [27] on gluinos and top squarks by 150200 GeV. For electroweakino pair production, chargino and neutralino masses up to 1.23 TeV are excluded, assuming winolike electroweakinos with decays $ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}\to\mathrm{W}\tilde{\mathrm{G}} $ and $ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\to\gamma\tilde{\mathrm{G}} $. The higgsinolike electroweakino mass limits reach up to 1.05 TeV for models with $ \tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}\to\gamma\tilde{\mathrm{G}} $, $ \mathrm{Z}\tilde{\mathrm{G}} $, or $ \mathrm{H}\tilde{\mathrm{G}} $ with 50, 25, and 25% branching fractions, respectively. These are the best mass limits to date on electroweakino production with photons in the final state. 
Additional Figures  
png pdf 
Additional Figure 1:
Distributions of the total number of AK4 jets (left) and the soft drop mass for the leading AK8 jet (right). The upper panel shows the distributions from simulated SM background contributions. The lower panel shows the distributions for several signal models (T5bbbbZg, TChiWG, and TChiNG) overlaid on the total simulated background distribution. The numerical values in parentheses in the legend entries for the signal models indicate the $ \mathrm{\tilde{g}} $ and NLSP mass values in GeVns for strong production and the NLSP mass value for electroweak production. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 1a:
Distributions of the total number of AK4 jets (left) and the soft drop mass for the leading AK8 jet (right). The upper panel shows the distributions from simulated SM background contributions. The lower panel shows the distributions for several signal models (T5bbbbZg, TChiWG, and TChiNG) overlaid on the total simulated background distribution. The numerical values in parentheses in the legend entries for the signal models indicate the $ \mathrm{\tilde{g}} $ and NLSP mass values in GeVns for strong production and the NLSP mass value for electroweak production. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 1b:
Distributions of the total number of AK4 jets (left) and the soft drop mass for the leading AK8 jet (right). The upper panel shows the distributions from simulated SM background contributions. The lower panel shows the distributions for several signal models (T5bbbbZg, TChiWG, and TChiNG) overlaid on the total simulated background distribution. The numerical values in parentheses in the legend entries for the signal models indicate the $ \mathrm{\tilde{g}} $ and NLSP mass values in GeVns for strong production and the NLSP mass value for electroweak production. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 2:
The expected event yields in the SRs and low$ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ CRs. The upper panel shows the distributions from simulated SM background contributions. The middle (bottom) panel shows the distributions for T5bbbbZg (T5qqqqHg) signal models, overlaid on the total simulated background distribution. The numerical values in parentheses in the legend entries for the signal models indicate the $ \mathrm{\tilde{g}} $ and NLSP mass values in GeVns. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 3:
The expected event yields in the SRs and low$ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ CRs. The upper panel shows the distributions from simulated SM background contributions. The middle (bottom) panel shows the distributions for T5ttttZg (T6ttZg) signal models, overlaid on the total simulated background distribution. The numerical values in parentheses in the legend entries for the signal models indicate the $ \mathrm{\tilde{g}} $ ($ \tilde{\mathrm{t}} $) and NLSP mass values in GeVns. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 4:
The expected event yields in the SRs and low$ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ CRs. The upper panel shows the distributions from simulated SM background contributions. The middle (bottom) panel shows the distributions for TChiWG (TChiNG) signal models, overlaid on the total simulated background distribution. The numerical values in parentheses in the legend entries for the signal models indicate the NLSP mass value in GeVns. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 5:
Distributions of the $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ (left) and the total number of AK4 jets (right) for single lepton + $ \gamma $ events in data and simulation. The lower panel presents the statistical uncertainty in the simulation as a shaded region, while the black points indicate the ratio of the data and simulation, with the error bars reflecting only the statistical uncertainty in the data. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 5a:
Distributions of the $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ (left) and the total number of AK4 jets (right) for single lepton + $ \gamma $ events in data and simulation. The lower panel presents the statistical uncertainty in the simulation as a shaded region, while the black points indicate the ratio of the data and simulation, with the error bars reflecting only the statistical uncertainty in the data. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 5b:
Distributions of the $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ (left) and the total number of AK4 jets (right) for single lepton + $ \gamma $ events in data and simulation. The lower panel presents the statistical uncertainty in the simulation as a shaded region, while the black points indicate the ratio of the data and simulation, with the error bars reflecting only the statistical uncertainty in the data. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 6:
Distributions of $ m_{\mathrm{T}}({\vec p}_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{e}}, {\vec p}_{\mathrm{T}}^{\kern1pt\text{miss}}) $ in the single electron control region in simulation. The distributions for several T5bbbbZg signal models are overlaid on the SM background. The numerical values in parentheses in the legend entries for the signal models indicate the $ \mathrm{\tilde{g}} $ and NLSP mass values in GeVns. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 7:
The normalized distributions of the $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ (upper left), the total number of AK4 jets (upper right), & the number of btagged jets (lower) for simulated $ \mathrm{Z}(\ell\ell)\gamma $ and $ \mathrm{Z}(\nu\nu)\gamma $ events. The $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ for $ \mathrm{Z}(\ell\ell)\gamma $ events is defined as the vector sum of the dilepton $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ and the standard $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $. The lower panels show the ratio of the simulated $ \mathrm{Z}(\ell\ell)\gamma $ and $ \mathrm{Z}(\nu\nu)\gamma $ events. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 7a:
The normalized distributions of the $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ (upper left), the total number of AK4 jets (upper right), & the number of btagged jets (lower) for simulated $ \mathrm{Z}(\ell\ell)\gamma $ and $ \mathrm{Z}(\nu\nu)\gamma $ events. The $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ for $ \mathrm{Z}(\ell\ell)\gamma $ events is defined as the vector sum of the dilepton $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ and the standard $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $. The lower panels show the ratio of the simulated $ \mathrm{Z}(\ell\ell)\gamma $ and $ \mathrm{Z}(\nu\nu)\gamma $ events. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 7b:
The normalized distributions of the $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ (upper left), the total number of AK4 jets (upper right), & the number of btagged jets (lower) for simulated $ \mathrm{Z}(\ell\ell)\gamma $ and $ \mathrm{Z}(\nu\nu)\gamma $ events. The $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ for $ \mathrm{Z}(\ell\ell)\gamma $ events is defined as the vector sum of the dilepton $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ and the standard $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $. The lower panels show the ratio of the simulated $ \mathrm{Z}(\ell\ell)\gamma $ and $ \mathrm{Z}(\nu\nu)\gamma $ events. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 7c:
The normalized distributions of the $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ (upper left), the total number of AK4 jets (upper right), & the number of btagged jets (lower) for simulated $ \mathrm{Z}(\ell\ell)\gamma $ and $ \mathrm{Z}(\nu\nu)\gamma $ events. The $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ for $ \mathrm{Z}(\ell\ell)\gamma $ events is defined as the vector sum of the dilepton $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ and the standard $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $. The lower panels show the ratio of the simulated $ \mathrm{Z}(\ell\ell)\gamma $ and $ \mathrm{Z}(\nu\nu)\gamma $ events. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 8:
Distribution of the number of btagged jets for $ \ell\ell\gamma $ events in data and simulation. In the upper panel, the data are scaled by the correction factor $ \beta $ to remove the contribution of $ \mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}\gamma{+}\text{jets} $ events. The lower panel shows the ratio between data and simulation. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 9:
A schematic diagram of the $ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss}\Delta\phi({\vec p}_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{jet}},{\vec p}_{\mathrm{T}}^{\kern1pt\text{miss}}) $ plane used in the ABCD method to estimate the multijet + $ \gamma $ background. The region labeled D is the SR and the other regions are the CRs. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 10:
Left: the upper panel shows the event yield in the low$ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ CRs as a function of the signal region bins in $ N_{\text{jets}} $, $ N_{\mathrm{b}\text{tags}} $, $ \text{V}\text{tag} $, and $ \mathrm{H}\text{tag} $; the the lower panel shows the ratio of the A and C regions, defined as $ R_{\text{low}p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss}} $. Right: the upper panel shows $ R_{\text{low}p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss}} $ and $ R_{\text{high}p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss}} $ from the simulation in the signal region bins; the lower panel shows the ratio of the two, defined as $ \kappa $. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 10a:
Left: the upper panel shows the event yield in the low$ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ CRs as a function of the signal region bins in $ N_{\text{jets}} $, $ N_{\mathrm{b}\text{tags}} $, $ \text{V}\text{tag} $, and $ \mathrm{H}\text{tag} $; the the lower panel shows the ratio of the A and C regions, defined as $ R_{\text{low}p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss}} $. Right: the upper panel shows $ R_{\text{low}p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss}} $ and $ R_{\text{high}p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss}} $ from the simulation in the signal region bins; the lower panel shows the ratio of the two, defined as $ \kappa $. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 10b:
Left: the upper panel shows the event yield in the low$ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ CRs as a function of the signal region bins in $ N_{\text{jets}} $, $ N_{\mathrm{b}\text{tags}} $, $ \text{V}\text{tag} $, and $ \mathrm{H}\text{tag} $; the the lower panel shows the ratio of the A and C regions, defined as $ R_{\text{low}p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss}} $. Right: the upper panel shows $ R_{\text{low}p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss}} $ and $ R_{\text{high}p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss}} $ from the simulation in the signal region bins; the lower panel shows the ratio of the two, defined as $ \kappa $. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 11:
The product of signal acceptance and efficiency for the signal models T5bbbbZg (upper left), T5qqqqHg (upper right), T5ttttZg (lower left), and T6ttZg (lower right). 
png pdf root 
Additional Figure 11a:
The product of signal acceptance and efficiency for the signal models T5bbbbZg (upper left), T5qqqqHg (upper right), T5ttttZg (lower left), and T6ttZg (lower right). 
png pdf root 
Additional Figure 11b:
The product of signal acceptance and efficiency for the signal models T5bbbbZg (upper left), T5qqqqHg (upper right), T5ttttZg (lower left), and T6ttZg (lower right). 
png pdf root 
Additional Figure 11c:
The product of signal acceptance and efficiency for the signal models T5bbbbZg (upper left), T5qqqqHg (upper right), T5ttttZg (lower left), and T6ttZg (lower right). 
png pdf root 
Additional Figure 11d:
The product of signal acceptance and efficiency for the signal models T5bbbbZg (upper left), T5qqqqHg (upper right), T5ttttZg (lower left), and T6ttZg (lower right). 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 12:
The product of signal acceptance and efficiency for the signal models TChiWG (left) and TChiNG (right), in the 2D representation of the NLSP mass and the bin index. 
png pdf root 
Additional Figure 12a:
The product of signal acceptance and efficiency for the signal models TChiWG (left) and TChiNG (right), in the 2D representation of the NLSP mass and the bin index. 
png pdf root 
Additional Figure 12b:
The product of signal acceptance and efficiency for the signal models TChiWG (left) and TChiNG (right), in the 2D representation of the NLSP mass and the bin index. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 13:
The observed significance for the signal models T5bbbbZg (upper left), T5qqqqHg (upper right), T5ttttZg (lower left), and T6ttZg (lower right). The negative significance values occur because of a deficiency of observed data relative to the prediction in sensitive bins. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 13a:
The observed significance for the signal models T5bbbbZg (upper left), T5qqqqHg (upper right), T5ttttZg (lower left), and T6ttZg (lower right). The negative significance values occur because of a deficiency of observed data relative to the prediction in sensitive bins. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 13b:
The observed significance for the signal models T5bbbbZg (upper left), T5qqqqHg (upper right), T5ttttZg (lower left), and T6ttZg (lower right). The negative significance values occur because of a deficiency of observed data relative to the prediction in sensitive bins. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 13c:
The observed significance for the signal models T5bbbbZg (upper left), T5qqqqHg (upper right), T5ttttZg (lower left), and T6ttZg (lower right). The negative significance values occur because of a deficiency of observed data relative to the prediction in sensitive bins. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 13d:
The observed significance for the signal models T5bbbbZg (upper left), T5qqqqHg (upper right), T5ttttZg (lower left), and T6ttZg (lower right). The negative significance values occur because of a deficiency of observed data relative to the prediction in sensitive bins. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 14:
The observed significance for the signal models TChiWG (left) and TChiNG (right). 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 14a:
The observed significance for the signal models TChiWG (left) and TChiNG (right). 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 14b:
The observed significance for the signal models TChiWG (left) and TChiNG (right). 
png pdf root 
Additional Figure 15:
The covariance matrix for the signal regions and the low$ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ CRs, derived from the CRonly fit under the backgroundonly hypothesis. 
png pdf root 
Additional Figure 16:
The correlation matrix for the signal regions and the low$ p_{\mathrm{T}}^\text{miss} $ CRs, derived from the CRonly fit under the backgroundonly hypothesis. 
Additional Tables  
png pdf 
Additional Table 1:
Cutflows for T5bbbbZg & T5qqqqHg signal samples. The event yields are scaled to 137 fb$ ^{1} $. 
png pdf 
Additional Table 2:
Cutflows for T5ttttZg & T6ttZg signal samples. The event yields are scaled to 137 fb$ ^{1} $. 
png pdf 
Additional Table 3:
Cutflows for TChiWG & TChiNG signal samples. The event yields are scaled to 137 fb$ ^{1} $. 
References  
1  F. Zwicky  Die Rotverschiebung von extragalaktischen Nebeln  Helv. Phys. Acta 6 (1933) 110  
2  V. C. Rubin and W. K. Ford Jr  Rotation of the Andromeda nebula from a spectroscopic survey of emission regions  Astrophys. J. 159 (1970) 379  
3  R. Barbieri and G. F. Giudice  Upper bounds on supersymmetric particle masses  NPB 306 (1988) 63  
4  S. Dimopoulos and G. F. Giudice  Naturalness constraints in supersymmetric theories with nonuniversal soft terms  PLB 357 (1995) 573  hepph/9507282 
5  R. Barbieri and D. Pappadopulo  Sparticles at their naturalness limits  JHEP 10 (2009) 061  0906.4546 
6  M. Papucci, J. T. Ruderman, and A. Weiler  Natural SUSY endures  JHEP 09 (2012) 035  1110.6926 
7  P. Ramond  Dual theory for free fermions  PRD 3 (1971) 2415  
8  Yu. A. Golfand and E. P. Likhtman  Extension of the algebra of Poincaré group generators and violation of P invariance  JETP Lett. 13 (1971) 323  
9  A. Neveu and J. H. Schwarz  Factorizable dual model of pions  NPB 31 (1971) 86  
10  D. V. Volkov and V. P. Akulov  Possible universal neutrino interaction  JETP Lett. 16 (1972) 438  
11  J. Wess and B. Zumino  A Lagrangian model invariant under supergauge transformations  PLB 49 (1974) 52  
12  J. Wess and B. Zumino  Supergauge transformations in four dimensions  NPB 70 (1974) 39  
13  P. Fayet  Supergauge invariant extension of the Higgs mechanism and a model for the electron and its neutrino  NPB 90 (1975) 104  
14  H. P. Nilles  Supersymmetry, supergravity and particle physics  Phys. Rep. 110 (1984) 1  
15  G. R. Farrar and P. Fayet  Phenomenology of the production, decay, and detection of new hadronic states associated with supersymmetry  PLB 76 (1978) 575  
16  D. EmmanuelCosta, P. Fileviez Perez, and R. Gonzalez Felipe  Natural gauge and gravitational coupling unification and the superpartner masses  PLB 648 (2007) 60  hepph/0610178 
17  H. Baer et al.  Radiative natural SUSY with a 125 GeV Higgs boson  PRL 109 (2012) 161802  1207.3343 
18  P. Fayet  Mixing between gravitational and weak interactions through the massive gravitino  PLB 70 (1977) 461  
19  H. Baer, M. Brhlik, C.h. Chen, and X. Tata  Signals for the minimal gauge mediated supersymmetry breaking model at the Fermilab Tevatron collider  PRD 55 (1997) 4463  hepph/9610358 
20  N. ArkaniHamed et al.  MARMOSET: The path from LHC data to the new standard model via onshell effective theories  hepph/0703088  
21  J. Alwall, P. C. Schuster, and N. Toro  Simplified models for a first characterization of new physics at the LHC  PRD 79 (2009) 075020  0810.3921 
22  J. Alwall, M.P. Le, M. Lisanti, and J. G. Wacker  Modelindependent jets plus missing energy searches  PRD 79 (2009) 015005  0809.3264 
23  D. Alves et al.  Simplified models for LHC new physics searches  JPG 39 (2012) 105005  1105.2838 
24  CMS Collaboration  Interpretation of searches for supersymmetry with simplified models  PRD 88 (2013) 052017  CMSSUS11016 1301.2175 
25  CMS Collaboration  Search for gaugemediated supersymmetry in events with at least one photon and missing transverse momentum in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV  PLB 780 (2018) 118  CMSSUS16046 1711.08008 
26  CMS Collaboration  Search for supersymmetry in events with at least one photon, missing transverse momentum, and large transverse event activity in protonproton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV  JHEP 12 (2017) 142  CMSSUS16047 1707.06193 
27  CMS Collaboration  Search for supersymmetry in events with a photon, jets, bjets, and missing transverse momentum in protonproton collisions at 13 TeV  EPJC 79 (2019) 444  CMSSUS18002 1901.06726 
28  ATLAS Collaboration  Search for supersymmetry in a final state containing two photons and missing transverse momentum in $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV pp collisions at the LHC using the ATLAS detector  EPJC 76 (2016) 517  1606.09150 
29  ATLAS Collaboration  Search for photonic signatures of gaugemediated supersymmetry in 13 TeV pp collisions with the ATLAS detector  PRD 97 (2018) 092006  1802.03158 
30  ATLAS Collaboration  Search for new phenomena in final states with photons, jets and missing transverse momentum in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector  JHEP 07 (2023) 021  2206.06012 
31  CMS Collaboration  HEPData record for this analysis  link  
32  CMS Collaboration  The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC  JINST 3 (2008) S08004  
33  CMS Collaboration  The CMS trigger system  JINST 12 (2017) P01020  CMSTRG12001 1609.02366 
34  CMS Collaboration  Particleflow reconstruction and global event description with the CMS detector  JINST 12 (2017) P10003  CMSPRF14001 1706.04965 
35  CMS Collaboration  Technical proposal for the PhaseII upgrade of the Compact Muon Solenoid  CMS Technical Proposal CERNLHCC2015010, CMSTDR1502, 2015 CDS 

36  M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez  The anti$ k_{\mathrm{T}} $ jet clustering algorithm  JHEP 04 (2008) 063  0802.1189 
37  M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez  FastJet user manual  EPJC 72 (2012) 1896  1111.6097 
38  M. Cacciari and G. P. Salam  Pileup subtraction using jet areas  PLB 659 (2008) 119  0707.1378 
39  CMS Collaboration  Pileup mitigation at CMS in 13 TeV data  JINST 15 (2020) P09018  CMSJME18001 2003.00503 
40  CMS Collaboration  Jet energy scale and resolution in the CMS experiment in pp collisions at 8 TeV  JINST 12 (2017) P02014  CMSJME13004 1607.03663 
41  CMS Collaboration  Jet algorithms performance in 13 TeV data  CMS Physics Analysis Summary, 2017 CMSPASJME16003 
CMSPASJME16003 
42  A. J. Larkoski, S. Marzani, G. Soyez, and J. Thaler  Soft drop  JHEP 05 (2014) 146  1402.2657 
43  CMS Collaboration  Identification of heavyflavour jets with the CMS detector in pp collisions at 13 TeV  JINST 13 (2018) P05011  CMSBTV16002 1712.07158 
44  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 
45  CMS Collaboration  Electron and photon reconstruction and identification with the CMS experiment at the CERN LHC  JINST 16 (2021) P05014  CMSEGM17001 2012.06888 
46  CMS Collaboration  Performance of the CMS muon detector and muon reconstruction with protonproton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV  JINST 13 (2018) P06015  CMSMUO16001 1804.04528 
47  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 
48  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 
49  T. Sjöstrand et al.  An Introduction to PYTHIA 8.2  Comput. Phys. Commun. 191 (2015) 159  1410.3012 
50  NNPDF Collaboration  Parton distributions for the LHC Run II  JHEP 04 (2015) 040  1410.8849 
51  NNPDF Collaboration  Parton distributions from highprecision collider data  EPJC 77 (2017) 663  1706.00428 
52  CMS Collaboration  Event generator tunes obtained from underlying event and multiparton scattering measurements  EPJC 76 (2016) 155  CMSGEN14001 1512.00815 
53  CMS Collaboration  Extraction and validation of a new set of CMS PYTHIA8 tunes from underlyingevent measurements  EPJC 80 (2020) 4  CMSGEN17001 1903.12179 
54  R. Frederix and S. Frixione  Merging meets matching in MC@NLO  JHEP 12 (2012) 061  1209.6215 
55  A. Kulesza and L. Motyka  Soft gluon resummation for the production of gluinogluino and squarkantisquark pairs at the LHC  PRD 80 (2009) 095004  0905.4749 
56  W. Beenakker et al.  Softgluon resummation for squark and gluino hadroproduction  JHEP 12 (2009) 041  0909.4418 
57  W. Beenakker et al.  NNLL resummation for squarkantisquark pair production at the LHC  JHEP 01 (2012) 076  1110.2446 
58  W. Beenakker et al.  Towards NNLL resummation: hard matching coefficients for squark and gluino hadroproduction  JHEP 10 (2013) 120  1304.6354 
59  W. Beenakker et al.  NNLL resummation for squark and gluino production at the LHC  JHEP 12 (2014) 023  1404.3134 
60  W. Beenakker et al.  NNLL resummation for stop pairproduction at the LHC  JHEP 05 (2016) 153  1601.02954 
61  W. Beenakker et al.  NNLLfast: predictions for coloured supersymmetric particle production at the LHC with threshold and Coulomb resummation  JHEP 12 (2016) 133  1607.07741 
62  GEANT4 Collaboration  GEANT 4a simulation toolkit  NIM A 506 (2003) 250  
63  S. Abdullin et al.  The fast simulation of the CMS detector at LHC  J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 331 (2011) 032049  
64  A. Giammanco  The fast simulation of the CMS experiment  J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 513 (2014) 022012  
65  CMS Collaboration  Measurement of the inclusive and differential $ {\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} \gamma $ cross sections in the singlelepton channel and EFT interpretation at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV  JHEP 12 (2021) 180  CMSTOP18010 2107.01508 
66  M. Cacciari et al.  The $ \mathrm{t} \overline{\mathrm{t}} $ 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 
67  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 
68  CMS Collaboration  Measurements of inclusive $ {\mathrm{W}} $ and $ {\mathrm{Z}} $ cross sections in $ {\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}} $ collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 7 TeV  JHEP 01 (2011) 080  CMSEWK10002 1012.2466 
69  A. Denner, S. Dittmaier, M. Hecht, and C. Pasold  NLO QCD and electroweak corrections to Z+$\gamma $ production with leptonic Zboson decays  JHEP 02 (2016) 057  1510.08742 
70  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 
71  CMS Collaboration  CMS luminosity measurement for the 2017 datataking period at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV  CMS Physics Analysis Summary, 2018 CMSPASLUM17004 
CMSPASLUM17004 
72  CMS Collaboration  CMS luminosity measurement for the 2018 datataking period at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV  CMS Physics Analysis Summary, 2019 CMSPASLUM18002 
CMSPASLUM18002 
73  CMS Collaboration  Search for supersymmetry in protonproton collisions at 13 TeV in final states with jets and missing transverse momentum  JHEP 10 (2019) 244  CMSSUS19006 1908.04722 
74  T. Junk  Confidence level computation for combining searches with small statistics  NIM A 434 (1999) 435  hepex/9902006 
75  A. L. Read  Presentation of search results: the $ \text{CL}_\text{s} $ technique  JPG 28 (2002) 2693  
76  G. Cowan, K. Cranmer, E. Gross, and O. Vitells  Asymptotic formulae for likelihoodbased tests of new physics  EPJC 71 (2011) 1554  1007.1727 
Compact Muon Solenoid LHC, CERN 