CMS logoCMS event Hgg
Compact Muon Solenoid
LHC, CERN

CMS-TOP-22-009 ; CERN-EP-2023-201
Inclusive and differential cross section measurements of $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\bar{\mathrm{b}} $ production in the lepton+jets channel at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV
JHEP 05 (2024) 042
Abstract: Measurements of inclusive and normalized differential cross sections of the associated production of top quark-antiquark and bottom quark-antiquark pairs, $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\bar{\mathrm{b}} $, are presented. The results are based on data from proton-proton collisions collected by the CMS detector at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 138 fb$ ^{-1} $. The cross sections are measured in the lepton+jets decay channel of the top quark pair, using events containing exactly one isolated electron or muon and at least five jets. Measurements are made in four fiducial phase space regions, targeting different aspects of the $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\bar{\mathrm{b}} $ process. Distributions are unfolded to the particle level through maximum likelihood fits, and compared with predictions from several event generators. The inclusive cross section measurements of this process in the fiducial phase space regions are the most precise to date. In most cases, the measured inclusive cross sections exceed the predictions with the chosen generator settings. The only exception is when using a particular choice of dynamic renormalization scale, $ {\mu_{\mathrm{R}}=\frac12 \prod_{i=\mathrm{t},\bar{\mathrm{t}},\mathrm{b},\bar{\mathrm{b}}} m_{\mathrm{T},i}^{1/4}} $, where $ {m_{\mathrm{T},i}^2=m_i^2+p_{\mathrm{T},i}^2} $ are the transverse masses of top and bottom quarks. The differential cross sections show varying degrees of compatibility with the theoretical predictions, and none of the tested generators with the chosen settings simultaneously describe all the measured distributions.
Figures & Tables Summary References CMS Publications
Figures

png pdf
Figure 1:
Jet (left) and b-tagged jet (right) multiplicity with the $ \geq $5 jets: $ \geq $3b selection prior to any fit, shown for both lepton channels and all data periods combined. For the purpose of visualisation, the contributions from simulation have been scaled by a common factor to match the yield in data. The $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{X} $ contribution includes the $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{H} $, $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{W} $, and $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{Z} $ processes. The shaded bands include all a priori uncertainties described in Section 7, including the $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} {\mathrm{B}} $ cross section uncertainty estimated from the nominal $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\bar{\mathrm{b}} $ simulation. Only effects on the shape of the distributions are considered. The last bins also contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 1-a:
Jet (left) and b-tagged jet (right) multiplicity with the $ \geq $5 jets: $ \geq $3b selection prior to any fit, shown for both lepton channels and all data periods combined. For the purpose of visualisation, the contributions from simulation have been scaled by a common factor to match the yield in data. The $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{X} $ contribution includes the $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{H} $, $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{W} $, and $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{Z} $ processes. The shaded bands include all a priori uncertainties described in Section 7, including the $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} {\mathrm{B}} $ cross section uncertainty estimated from the nominal $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\bar{\mathrm{b}} $ simulation. Only effects on the shape of the distributions are considered. The last bins also contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 1-b:
Jet (left) and b-tagged jet (right) multiplicity with the $ \geq $5 jets: $ \geq $3b selection prior to any fit, shown for both lepton channels and all data periods combined. For the purpose of visualisation, the contributions from simulation have been scaled by a common factor to match the yield in data. The $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{X} $ contribution includes the $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{H} $, $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{W} $, and $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{Z} $ processes. The shaded bands include all a priori uncertainties described in Section 7, including the $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} {\mathrm{B}} $ cross section uncertainty estimated from the nominal $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\bar{\mathrm{b}} $ simulation. Only effects on the shape of the distributions are considered. The last bins also contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 2:
Number of jets b tagged at the tight working point with the $ \geq $5 jets: $ \geq $3b (left) and $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b selections (right) prior to any fit, shown for all lepton channels and years combined. For the purpose of visualisation, the contributions from simulation have been scaled by a common factor to match the yield in data. The shaded bands include all uncertainties described in Section 7, including the $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} {\mathrm{B}} $ cross section uncertainty estimated from the nominal $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\bar{\mathrm{b}} $ simulation. Only effects on the shape of the distributions are considered. The last bins also contain the overflow. The vertical dashed lines indicate the ancillary regions.

png pdf
Figure 2-a:
Number of jets b tagged at the tight working point with the $ \geq $5 jets: $ \geq $3b (left) and $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b selections (right) prior to any fit, shown for all lepton channels and years combined. For the purpose of visualisation, the contributions from simulation have been scaled by a common factor to match the yield in data. The shaded bands include all uncertainties described in Section 7, including the $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} {\mathrm{B}} $ cross section uncertainty estimated from the nominal $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\bar{\mathrm{b}} $ simulation. Only effects on the shape of the distributions are considered. The last bins also contain the overflow. The vertical dashed lines indicate the ancillary regions.

png pdf
Figure 2-b:
Number of jets b tagged at the tight working point with the $ \geq $5 jets: $ \geq $3b (left) and $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b selections (right) prior to any fit, shown for all lepton channels and years combined. For the purpose of visualisation, the contributions from simulation have been scaled by a common factor to match the yield in data. The shaded bands include all uncertainties described in Section 7, including the $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} {\mathrm{B}} $ cross section uncertainty estimated from the nominal $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\bar{\mathrm{b}} $ simulation. Only effects on the shape of the distributions are considered. The last bins also contain the overflow. The vertical dashed lines indicate the ancillary regions.

png pdf
Figure 3:
Structural representation of the neural network used for the assignment of the additional b-jet pair. The neural network uses two sets of input variables:\ global event information is connected to three dense network layers, and jet-specific information is connected via convolutional network layers (CNN) and a long short-term memory (LSTM) cell. The input sequences are concatenated into one dense layer. The output layer consists of six nodes, each representing one of the six possible candidate jet combinations.

png pdf
Figure 4:
Response matrix for $ \Delta R(\smash[t]{\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\text{extra}}} ) $ in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b phase space. The $ x $ ($ y $) axes show the generator- (detector-)level observables. The upper figure includes the ancillary variable, unrolled on the same axis as the detector-level observable, so that the binning of the detector-level observable, stacked vertically, is repeated twice. For the lower figure, the ancillary variables are projected out to more easily visualize the correspondence between true and reconstructed values. The coloured bins show the finer binning used at reconstructed level (bins split in two), while the numbers show the values one would obtain when using the same binning at the generator and detector level.

png pdf
Figure 4-a:
Response matrix for $ \Delta R(\smash[t]{\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\text{extra}}} ) $ in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b phase space. The $ x $ ($ y $) axes show the generator- (detector-)level observables. The upper figure includes the ancillary variable, unrolled on the same axis as the detector-level observable, so that the binning of the detector-level observable, stacked vertically, is repeated twice. For the lower figure, the ancillary variables are projected out to more easily visualize the correspondence between true and reconstructed values. The coloured bins show the finer binning used at reconstructed level (bins split in two), while the numbers show the values one would obtain when using the same binning at the generator and detector level.

png pdf
Figure 4-b:
Response matrix for $ \Delta R(\smash[t]{\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\text{extra}}} ) $ in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b phase space. The $ x $ ($ y $) axes show the generator- (detector-)level observables. The upper figure includes the ancillary variable, unrolled on the same axis as the detector-level observable, so that the binning of the detector-level observable, stacked vertically, is repeated twice. For the lower figure, the ancillary variables are projected out to more easily visualize the correspondence between true and reconstructed values. The coloured bins show the finer binning used at reconstructed level (bins split in two), while the numbers show the values one would obtain when using the same binning at the generator and detector level.

png pdf
Figure 5:
Effect of the considered sources of uncertainties on the measurement of the normalized differential cross section of the $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of b jets in the $ \geq $5 jets: $ \geq $3b phase space, obtained by combining the impacts of associated nuisance parameters according to Eq. (2). The ordering of the various sources is similar for other observables and in the other phase space regions. The last bin of the distribution is not shown, since it has no associated parameter of interest but is constrained by the other bins as described in Section 6.3. The category ``other theory'' includes b quark fragmentation, top quark $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ modelling, PDF, $ h_{\mathrm{damp}} $, colour reconnection, and underlying event uncertainties. The category ``other experimental'' includes pileup and the integrated luminosity uncertainties.

png pdf
Figure 6:
Measured inclusive cross sections for each considered phase space, compared to predictions from different $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\bar{\mathrm{b}} $ simulation approaches shown as coloured symbols. The predictions include uncertainties (horizontal bars) due to the limited number of simulated events. The blue colour is reserved for models using massive b quarks and NLO QCD $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\bar{\mathrm{b}} $ MEs, while red is used for the inclusive $ \mathrm{t} \bar{\mathrm{t}} $ generators at NLO in QCD with massless b quarks. The right panel shows the ratios between the predicted and measured cross sections, with the black bars showing the relative uncertainties in the measurements.

png pdf
Figure 7:
The $ |\eta| $ of the third-hardest b jet in $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ ($ |\eta(b_{3})| $) in the $ \geq $5 jets: $ \geq $3b phase space (upper) and the $ |\eta| $ of the subleading additional b jet ($ |\eta(b_{2}^{\text{extra}})| $) in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b phase space (lower) after the fit to data, shown for both lepton channels and all data periods combined. The distributions are shown separately for each ancillary region, as defined in Section 6.1. In the $ \geq $5 jets: $ \geq $3b ($ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b) phase space the ancillary regions are defined as $ \leq $2, 2, and $ \geq $3 ($ \leq $3 and $ \geq $3) tight b-tagged jets. The shaded bands include all uncertainties described in Section 7 after profiling the nuisance parameters in the fit, estimated by sampling the predicted yields from the fit covariance matrix. The blue line shows the sum of the predicted yields for all processes before the fit to data, using the nominal $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\bar{\mathrm{b}} $ samples and its corresponding cross section for the signal. In the ratio panel the expected yields before the fit to data are shown relative to the predicted yields after the fit to data. The last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 7-a:
The $ |\eta| $ of the third-hardest b jet in $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ ($ |\eta(b_{3})| $) in the $ \geq $5 jets: $ \geq $3b phase space (upper) and the $ |\eta| $ of the subleading additional b jet ($ |\eta(b_{2}^{\text{extra}})| $) in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b phase space (lower) after the fit to data, shown for both lepton channels and all data periods combined. The distributions are shown separately for each ancillary region, as defined in Section 6.1. In the $ \geq $5 jets: $ \geq $3b ($ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b) phase space the ancillary regions are defined as $ \leq $2, 2, and $ \geq $3 ($ \leq $3 and $ \geq $3) tight b-tagged jets. The shaded bands include all uncertainties described in Section 7 after profiling the nuisance parameters in the fit, estimated by sampling the predicted yields from the fit covariance matrix. The blue line shows the sum of the predicted yields for all processes before the fit to data, using the nominal $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\bar{\mathrm{b}} $ samples and its corresponding cross section for the signal. In the ratio panel the expected yields before the fit to data are shown relative to the predicted yields after the fit to data. The last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 7-b:
The $ |\eta| $ of the third-hardest b jet in $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ ($ |\eta(b_{3})| $) in the $ \geq $5 jets: $ \geq $3b phase space (upper) and the $ |\eta| $ of the subleading additional b jet ($ |\eta(b_{2}^{\text{extra}})| $) in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b phase space (lower) after the fit to data, shown for both lepton channels and all data periods combined. The distributions are shown separately for each ancillary region, as defined in Section 6.1. In the $ \geq $5 jets: $ \geq $3b ($ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b) phase space the ancillary regions are defined as $ \leq $2, 2, and $ \geq $3 ($ \leq $3 and $ \geq $3) tight b-tagged jets. The shaded bands include all uncertainties described in Section 7 after profiling the nuisance parameters in the fit, estimated by sampling the predicted yields from the fit covariance matrix. The blue line shows the sum of the predicted yields for all processes before the fit to data, using the nominal $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\bar{\mathrm{b}} $ samples and its corresponding cross section for the signal. In the ratio panel the expected yields before the fit to data are shown relative to the predicted yields after the fit to data. The last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 8:
The $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of all light jets in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $3b, $ \geq $3 light phase space (upper) and the azimuthal angle between the hardest remaining light jet and the softest b jet ($ |\Delta\phi(\mathrm{lj}_{1}^{\text{extra}},\mathrm{b}_{\text{soft}})| $) in the $ \geq $7 jets: $ \geq $4b, $ \geq $3 light phase space (lower) after the fit to data, shown for both lepton channels and all data periods combined. The distributions are shown separately for each ancillary region, as defined in Section 6.1. In the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $3b, $ \geq $3 light ($ \geq $7 jets: $ \geq $4b, $ \geq $3 light ) phase space the ancillary regions are defined as $ \leq $2, 2, and $ \geq $3 ($ \leq $3 and $ \geq $3) tight b-tagged jets. The shaded bands include all uncertainties described in Section 7 after profiling the nuisance parameters in the fit, estimated by sampling the predicted yields from the fit covariance matrix. The blue line shows the sum of the predicted yields for all processes before the fit to data, using the nominal $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\bar{\mathrm{b}} $ samples and its corresponding cross section for the signal. In the ratio panel the expected yields before the fit to data are shown relative to the predicted yields after the fit to data. The last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 8-a:
The $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of all light jets in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $3b, $ \geq $3 light phase space (upper) and the azimuthal angle between the hardest remaining light jet and the softest b jet ($ |\Delta\phi(\mathrm{lj}_{1}^{\text{extra}},\mathrm{b}_{\text{soft}})| $) in the $ \geq $7 jets: $ \geq $4b, $ \geq $3 light phase space (lower) after the fit to data, shown for both lepton channels and all data periods combined. The distributions are shown separately for each ancillary region, as defined in Section 6.1. In the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $3b, $ \geq $3 light ($ \geq $7 jets: $ \geq $4b, $ \geq $3 light ) phase space the ancillary regions are defined as $ \leq $2, 2, and $ \geq $3 ($ \leq $3 and $ \geq $3) tight b-tagged jets. The shaded bands include all uncertainties described in Section 7 after profiling the nuisance parameters in the fit, estimated by sampling the predicted yields from the fit covariance matrix. The blue line shows the sum of the predicted yields for all processes before the fit to data, using the nominal $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\bar{\mathrm{b}} $ samples and its corresponding cross section for the signal. In the ratio panel the expected yields before the fit to data are shown relative to the predicted yields after the fit to data. The last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 8-b:
The $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of all light jets in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $3b, $ \geq $3 light phase space (upper) and the azimuthal angle between the hardest remaining light jet and the softest b jet ($ |\Delta\phi(\mathrm{lj}_{1}^{\text{extra}},\mathrm{b}_{\text{soft}})| $) in the $ \geq $7 jets: $ \geq $4b, $ \geq $3 light phase space (lower) after the fit to data, shown for both lepton channels and all data periods combined. The distributions are shown separately for each ancillary region, as defined in Section 6.1. In the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $3b, $ \geq $3 light ($ \geq $7 jets: $ \geq $4b, $ \geq $3 light ) phase space the ancillary regions are defined as $ \leq $2, 2, and $ \geq $3 ($ \leq $3 and $ \geq $3) tight b-tagged jets. The shaded bands include all uncertainties described in Section 7 after profiling the nuisance parameters in the fit, estimated by sampling the predicted yields from the fit covariance matrix. The blue line shows the sum of the predicted yields for all processes before the fit to data, using the nominal $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\bar{\mathrm{b}} $ samples and its corresponding cross section for the signal. In the ratio panel the expected yields before the fit to data are shown relative to the predicted yields after the fit to data. The last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 9:
Correlations between the parameters of interest $ \vec{\mu} $ in the fit for $ |\eta(b_{3})| $ in the $ \geq $5 jets: $ \geq $3b phase space.

png pdf
Figure 10:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $5 jets: $ \geq $3b fiducial phase space, for the inclusive jet multiplicity (upper left), the b jet multiplicity (upper right), the inclusive jet $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ (middle left, \smash $ H_{\mathrm{T}}^{{\mathrm{j}} } $), the $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of b jets (middle right, \smash $ H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{b}} $), the $ |\eta| $ of the third b jet (lower left), and the $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ of the third b jet (lower right). The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section prediction obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols with different shapes. For $ N_{\text{jets}} $, $ N_{\mathrm{b}} $, \smash $ H_{\mathrm{T}}^{{\mathrm{j}} } $, \smash $ H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{b}} $, and $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}_{3}) $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 10-a:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $5 jets: $ \geq $3b fiducial phase space, for the inclusive jet multiplicity (upper left), the b jet multiplicity (upper right), the inclusive jet $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ (middle left, \smash $ H_{\mathrm{T}}^{{\mathrm{j}} } $), the $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of b jets (middle right, \smash $ H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{b}} $), the $ |\eta| $ of the third b jet (lower left), and the $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ of the third b jet (lower right). The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section prediction obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols with different shapes. For $ N_{\text{jets}} $, $ N_{\mathrm{b}} $, \smash $ H_{\mathrm{T}}^{{\mathrm{j}} } $, \smash $ H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{b}} $, and $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}_{3}) $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 10-b:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $5 jets: $ \geq $3b fiducial phase space, for the inclusive jet multiplicity (upper left), the b jet multiplicity (upper right), the inclusive jet $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ (middle left, \smash $ H_{\mathrm{T}}^{{\mathrm{j}} } $), the $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of b jets (middle right, \smash $ H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{b}} $), the $ |\eta| $ of the third b jet (lower left), and the $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ of the third b jet (lower right). The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section prediction obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols with different shapes. For $ N_{\text{jets}} $, $ N_{\mathrm{b}} $, \smash $ H_{\mathrm{T}}^{{\mathrm{j}} } $, \smash $ H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{b}} $, and $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}_{3}) $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 10-c:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $5 jets: $ \geq $3b fiducial phase space, for the inclusive jet multiplicity (upper left), the b jet multiplicity (upper right), the inclusive jet $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ (middle left, \smash $ H_{\mathrm{T}}^{{\mathrm{j}} } $), the $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of b jets (middle right, \smash $ H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{b}} $), the $ |\eta| $ of the third b jet (lower left), and the $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ of the third b jet (lower right). The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section prediction obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols with different shapes. For $ N_{\text{jets}} $, $ N_{\mathrm{b}} $, \smash $ H_{\mathrm{T}}^{{\mathrm{j}} } $, \smash $ H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{b}} $, and $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}_{3}) $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 10-d:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $5 jets: $ \geq $3b fiducial phase space, for the inclusive jet multiplicity (upper left), the b jet multiplicity (upper right), the inclusive jet $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ (middle left, \smash $ H_{\mathrm{T}}^{{\mathrm{j}} } $), the $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of b jets (middle right, \smash $ H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{b}} $), the $ |\eta| $ of the third b jet (lower left), and the $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ of the third b jet (lower right). The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section prediction obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols with different shapes. For $ N_{\text{jets}} $, $ N_{\mathrm{b}} $, \smash $ H_{\mathrm{T}}^{{\mathrm{j}} } $, \smash $ H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{b}} $, and $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}_{3}) $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 10-e:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $5 jets: $ \geq $3b fiducial phase space, for the inclusive jet multiplicity (upper left), the b jet multiplicity (upper right), the inclusive jet $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ (middle left, \smash $ H_{\mathrm{T}}^{{\mathrm{j}} } $), the $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of b jets (middle right, \smash $ H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{b}} $), the $ |\eta| $ of the third b jet (lower left), and the $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ of the third b jet (lower right). The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section prediction obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols with different shapes. For $ N_{\text{jets}} $, $ N_{\mathrm{b}} $, \smash $ H_{\mathrm{T}}^{{\mathrm{j}} } $, \smash $ H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{b}} $, and $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}_{3}) $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 10-f:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $5 jets: $ \geq $3b fiducial phase space, for the inclusive jet multiplicity (upper left), the b jet multiplicity (upper right), the inclusive jet $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ (middle left, \smash $ H_{\mathrm{T}}^{{\mathrm{j}} } $), the $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of b jets (middle right, \smash $ H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{b}} $), the $ |\eta| $ of the third b jet (lower left), and the $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ of the third b jet (lower right). The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section prediction obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols with different shapes. For $ N_{\text{jets}} $, $ N_{\mathrm{b}} $, \smash $ H_{\mathrm{T}}^{{\mathrm{j}} } $, \smash $ H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{b}} $, and $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}_{3}) $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 11:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b fiducial phase space, for the inclusive jet $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper left), the $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of b jets (upper right), the $ |\eta| $ of the third b jet (middle left), the $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ of the third b jet (middle right), the $ |\eta| $ of the fourth b jet (lower left), and the $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ of the fourth b jet (lower right). The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols with different shapes. For $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 11-a:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b fiducial phase space, for the inclusive jet $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper left), the $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of b jets (upper right), the $ |\eta| $ of the third b jet (middle left), the $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ of the third b jet (middle right), the $ |\eta| $ of the fourth b jet (lower left), and the $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ of the fourth b jet (lower right). The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols with different shapes. For $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 11-b:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b fiducial phase space, for the inclusive jet $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper left), the $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of b jets (upper right), the $ |\eta| $ of the third b jet (middle left), the $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ of the third b jet (middle right), the $ |\eta| $ of the fourth b jet (lower left), and the $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ of the fourth b jet (lower right). The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols with different shapes. For $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 11-c:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b fiducial phase space, for the inclusive jet $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper left), the $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of b jets (upper right), the $ |\eta| $ of the third b jet (middle left), the $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ of the third b jet (middle right), the $ |\eta| $ of the fourth b jet (lower left), and the $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ of the fourth b jet (lower right). The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols with different shapes. For $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 11-d:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b fiducial phase space, for the inclusive jet $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper left), the $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of b jets (upper right), the $ |\eta| $ of the third b jet (middle left), the $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ of the third b jet (middle right), the $ |\eta| $ of the fourth b jet (lower left), and the $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ of the fourth b jet (lower right). The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols with different shapes. For $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 11-e:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b fiducial phase space, for the inclusive jet $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper left), the $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of b jets (upper right), the $ |\eta| $ of the third b jet (middle left), the $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ of the third b jet (middle right), the $ |\eta| $ of the fourth b jet (lower left), and the $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ of the fourth b jet (lower right). The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols with different shapes. For $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 11-f:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b fiducial phase space, for the inclusive jet $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper left), the $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of b jets (upper right), the $ |\eta| $ of the third b jet (middle left), the $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ of the third b jet (middle right), the $ |\eta| $ of the fourth b jet (lower left), and the $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ of the fourth b jet (lower right). The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols with different shapes. For $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 12:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b fiducial phase space, for the average $ \Delta R $ of all possible $ \mathrm{b}\mathrm{b} $ pairs (upper left), the largest invariant mass of any $ \mathrm{b}\mathrm{b} $ pair (upper right), the invariant mass (middle left), $ \Delta R $ (middle right), $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (lower left), and $ |\eta| $ (lower right) of the extra b-jet pair. The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols. For $ m_{\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 12-a:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b fiducial phase space, for the average $ \Delta R $ of all possible $ \mathrm{b}\mathrm{b} $ pairs (upper left), the largest invariant mass of any $ \mathrm{b}\mathrm{b} $ pair (upper right), the invariant mass (middle left), $ \Delta R $ (middle right), $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (lower left), and $ |\eta| $ (lower right) of the extra b-jet pair. The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols. For $ m_{\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 12-b:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b fiducial phase space, for the average $ \Delta R $ of all possible $ \mathrm{b}\mathrm{b} $ pairs (upper left), the largest invariant mass of any $ \mathrm{b}\mathrm{b} $ pair (upper right), the invariant mass (middle left), $ \Delta R $ (middle right), $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (lower left), and $ |\eta| $ (lower right) of the extra b-jet pair. The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols. For $ m_{\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 12-c:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b fiducial phase space, for the average $ \Delta R $ of all possible $ \mathrm{b}\mathrm{b} $ pairs (upper left), the largest invariant mass of any $ \mathrm{b}\mathrm{b} $ pair (upper right), the invariant mass (middle left), $ \Delta R $ (middle right), $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (lower left), and $ |\eta| $ (lower right) of the extra b-jet pair. The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols. For $ m_{\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 12-d:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b fiducial phase space, for the average $ \Delta R $ of all possible $ \mathrm{b}\mathrm{b} $ pairs (upper left), the largest invariant mass of any $ \mathrm{b}\mathrm{b} $ pair (upper right), the invariant mass (middle left), $ \Delta R $ (middle right), $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (lower left), and $ |\eta| $ (lower right) of the extra b-jet pair. The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols. For $ m_{\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 12-e:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b fiducial phase space, for the average $ \Delta R $ of all possible $ \mathrm{b}\mathrm{b} $ pairs (upper left), the largest invariant mass of any $ \mathrm{b}\mathrm{b} $ pair (upper right), the invariant mass (middle left), $ \Delta R $ (middle right), $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (lower left), and $ |\eta| $ (lower right) of the extra b-jet pair. The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols. For $ m_{\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 12-f:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b fiducial phase space, for the average $ \Delta R $ of all possible $ \mathrm{b}\mathrm{b} $ pairs (upper left), the largest invariant mass of any $ \mathrm{b}\mathrm{b} $ pair (upper right), the invariant mass (middle left), $ \Delta R $ (middle right), $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (lower left), and $ |\eta| $ (lower right) of the extra b-jet pair. The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols. For $ m_{\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 13:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b fiducial phase space, for the $ |\eta| $ (upper left) and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper right) of the first extra b jet, the $ |\eta| $ (middle left) and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (middle right) of the second extra b jet, and the inclusive jet multiplicity (lower left). The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols. For $ N_{\text{jets}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 13-a:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b fiducial phase space, for the $ |\eta| $ (upper left) and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper right) of the first extra b jet, the $ |\eta| $ (middle left) and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (middle right) of the second extra b jet, and the inclusive jet multiplicity (lower left). The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols. For $ N_{\text{jets}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 13-b:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b fiducial phase space, for the $ |\eta| $ (upper left) and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper right) of the first extra b jet, the $ |\eta| $ (middle left) and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (middle right) of the second extra b jet, and the inclusive jet multiplicity (lower left). The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols. For $ N_{\text{jets}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 13-c:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b fiducial phase space, for the $ |\eta| $ (upper left) and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper right) of the first extra b jet, the $ |\eta| $ (middle left) and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (middle right) of the second extra b jet, and the inclusive jet multiplicity (lower left). The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols. For $ N_{\text{jets}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 13-d:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b fiducial phase space, for the $ |\eta| $ (upper left) and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper right) of the first extra b jet, the $ |\eta| $ (middle left) and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (middle right) of the second extra b jet, and the inclusive jet multiplicity (lower left). The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols. For $ N_{\text{jets}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 13-e:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b fiducial phase space, for the $ |\eta| $ (upper left) and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (upper right) of the first extra b jet, the $ |\eta| $ (middle left) and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (middle right) of the second extra b jet, and the inclusive jet multiplicity (lower left). The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols. For $ N_{\text{jets}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 14:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b fiducial phase space, for the invariant mass (upper left), $ \Delta R $ (upper right), $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (lower left), and $ |\eta| $ (lower right) of the additional b-jet pair not originating from decaying top quarks. The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols. For $ m_{\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 14-a:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b fiducial phase space, for the invariant mass (upper left), $ \Delta R $ (upper right), $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (lower left), and $ |\eta| $ (lower right) of the additional b-jet pair not originating from decaying top quarks. The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols. For $ m_{\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 14-b:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b fiducial phase space, for the invariant mass (upper left), $ \Delta R $ (upper right), $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (lower left), and $ |\eta| $ (lower right) of the additional b-jet pair not originating from decaying top quarks. The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols. For $ m_{\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 14-c:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b fiducial phase space, for the invariant mass (upper left), $ \Delta R $ (upper right), $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (lower left), and $ |\eta| $ (lower right) of the additional b-jet pair not originating from decaying top quarks. The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols. For $ m_{\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 14-d:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b fiducial phase space, for the invariant mass (upper left), $ \Delta R $ (upper right), $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (lower left), and $ |\eta| $ (lower right) of the additional b-jet pair not originating from decaying top quarks. The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols. For $ m_{\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 15:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b fiducial phase space, for the $ |\eta| $ (left) and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (right) of the first (upper row) and second (lower row) additional b of the b-jet pair not originating from decaying top quarks. The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols. For $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 15-a:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b fiducial phase space, for the $ |\eta| $ (left) and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (right) of the first (upper row) and second (lower row) additional b of the b-jet pair not originating from decaying top quarks. The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols. For $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 15-b:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b fiducial phase space, for the $ |\eta| $ (left) and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (right) of the first (upper row) and second (lower row) additional b of the b-jet pair not originating from decaying top quarks. The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols. For $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 15-c:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b fiducial phase space, for the $ |\eta| $ (left) and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (right) of the first (upper row) and second (lower row) additional b of the b-jet pair not originating from decaying top quarks. The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols. For $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 15-d:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b fiducial phase space, for the $ |\eta| $ (left) and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ (right) of the first (upper row) and second (lower row) additional b of the b-jet pair not originating from decaying top quarks. The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols. For $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 16:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $3b, $ \geq $3 light (left) and $ \geq $7 jets: $ \geq $4b, $ \geq $3 light (right) fiducial phase space regions, for the $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of light jets (upper row), the $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ of the extra light jet (middle row), and the $ \Delta\phi $ between the extra light jet and the softest b jet (lower row). The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols with different shapes. For $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 16-a:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $3b, $ \geq $3 light (left) and $ \geq $7 jets: $ \geq $4b, $ \geq $3 light (right) fiducial phase space regions, for the $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of light jets (upper row), the $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ of the extra light jet (middle row), and the $ \Delta\phi $ between the extra light jet and the softest b jet (lower row). The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols with different shapes. For $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 16-b:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $3b, $ \geq $3 light (left) and $ \geq $7 jets: $ \geq $4b, $ \geq $3 light (right) fiducial phase space regions, for the $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of light jets (upper row), the $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ of the extra light jet (middle row), and the $ \Delta\phi $ between the extra light jet and the softest b jet (lower row). The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols with different shapes. For $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 16-c:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $3b, $ \geq $3 light (left) and $ \geq $7 jets: $ \geq $4b, $ \geq $3 light (right) fiducial phase space regions, for the $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of light jets (upper row), the $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ of the extra light jet (middle row), and the $ \Delta\phi $ between the extra light jet and the softest b jet (lower row). The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols with different shapes. For $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 16-d:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $3b, $ \geq $3 light (left) and $ \geq $7 jets: $ \geq $4b, $ \geq $3 light (right) fiducial phase space regions, for the $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of light jets (upper row), the $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ of the extra light jet (middle row), and the $ \Delta\phi $ between the extra light jet and the softest b jet (lower row). The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols with different shapes. For $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 16-e:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $3b, $ \geq $3 light (left) and $ \geq $7 jets: $ \geq $4b, $ \geq $3 light (right) fiducial phase space regions, for the $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of light jets (upper row), the $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ of the extra light jet (middle row), and the $ \Delta\phi $ between the extra light jet and the softest b jet (lower row). The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols with different shapes. For $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 16-f:
Predicted and observed normalized differential cross sections in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $3b, $ \geq $3 light (left) and $ \geq $7 jets: $ \geq $4b, $ \geq $3 light (right) fiducial phase space regions, for the $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of light jets (upper row), the $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ of the extra light jet (middle row), and the $ \Delta\phi $ between the extra light jet and the softest b jet (lower row). The data are represented by points, with inner (outer) vertical bars indicating the systematic (total) uncertainties, also represented as blue (grey) bands. Cross section predictions obtained at the particle level from different simulation approaches are shown, including their statistical uncertainties, as coloured symbols with different shapes. For $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ and $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $, the last bins contain the overflow.

png pdf
Figure 17:
Observed $ z $ score for each of the theoretical predictions, given the unfolded normalized differential cross sections and their covariances. A lower value indicates a better agreement between prediction and measurement. The dashed line at $ z= $ 2 indicates a $ p $-value of 5%. Predictions for which the $ z $ score exceeds the visible range of the figure are marked with arrows ($ \to $).

png pdf
Figure A1:
Post-fit nuisance parameter values and relative impacts on the fiducial cross section, for the fit of $ |\eta| $ of the b jet with third-highest $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ in the $ \geq $5 jets: $ \geq $3b phase space. The nuisance parameters are defined such that the prefit value is zero with unity uncertainty.

png pdf
Figure A2:
Post-fit nuisance parameter values and relative impacts on the fiducial cross section, for the fit of $ |\eta| $ of the subleading extra b jet in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b phase space. The nuisance parameters are defined such that the prefit value is zero with unity uncertainty.

png pdf
Figure A3:
Post-fit nuisance parameter values and relative impacts on the fiducial cross section, for the fit of $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of light jets in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $3b, $ \geq $3 light phase space. The nuisance parameters are defined such that the prefit value is zero with unity uncertainty.

png pdf
Figure A4:
Post-fit nuisance parameter values and relative impacts on the fiducial cross section, for the fit of $ \Delta\phi $ between leading light jet and softest b jet in the $ \geq $7 jets: $ \geq $4b, $ \geq $3 light phase space. The nuisance parameters are defined such that the prefit value is zero with unity uncertainty.

png pdf
Figure B1:
Effect of the considered sources of uncertainties on the measurement of the normalized differential cross section of the $ |\eta| $ of the b jet with third-highest $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ in the $ \geq $5 jets: $ \geq $3b phase space, obtained by combining the impacts of associated nuisance parameters. The last bin of the distribution is not shown, since it has no associated parameter of interest but is constrained by the other bins. The category ``other theory'' includes b quark fragmentation, top quark $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ modelling, PDF, $ h_{\mathrm{damp}} $, colour reconnection, and underlying event uncertainties. The category ``other experimental'' includes pileup and the integrated luminosity uncertainties.

png pdf
Figure B2:
Effect of the considered sources of uncertainties on the measurement of the normalized differential cross section of the $ |\eta| $ of the subleading extra b jet in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b phase space, obtained by combining the impacts of associated nuisance parameters. The last bin of the distribution is not shown, since it has no associated parameter of interest but is constrained by the other bins. The category ``other theory'' includes b quark fragmentation, top quark $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ modelling, PDF, $ h_{\mathrm{damp}} $, colour reconnection, and underlying event uncertainties. The category ``other experimental'' includes pileup and the integrated luminosity uncertainties.

png pdf
Figure B3:
Effect of the considered sources of uncertainties on the measurement of the normalized differential cross section of the $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of light jets in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $3b, $ \geq $3 light phase space, obtained by combining the impacts of associated nuisance parameters. The last bin of the distribution is not shown, since it has no associated parameter of interest but is constrained by the other bins. The category ``other theory'' includes b quark fragmentation, top quark $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ modelling, PDF, $ h_{\mathrm{damp}} $, colour reconnection, and underlying event uncertainties. The category ``other experimental'' includes pileup and the integrated luminosity uncertainties.

png pdf
Figure B4:
Effect of the considered sources of uncertainties on the measurement of the normalized differential cross section of the $ \Delta\phi $ between leading light jet and softest b jet in the $ \geq $7 jets: $ \geq $4b, $ \geq $3 light phase space, obtained by combining the impacts of associated nuisance parameters. The last bin of the distribution is not shown, since it has no associated parameter of interest but is constrained by the other bins. The category ``other theory'' includes b quark fragmentation, top quark $ p_{\mathrm{T}} $ modelling, PDF, $ h_{\mathrm{damp}} $, colour reconnection, and underlying event uncertainties. The category ``other experimental'' includes pileup and the integrated luminosity uncertainties.

png pdf
Figure C1:
Correlations between the parameters of interest $ \vec{\mu} $ in the fit of the $ |\eta| $ of the subleading extra b jet in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $4b phase space.

png pdf
Figure C2:
Correlations between the parameters of interest $ \vec{\mu} $ in the fit of the $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of light jets in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $3b, $ \geq $3 light phase space.

png pdf
Figure C3:
Correlations between the parameters of interest $ \vec{\mu} $ in the fit of the $ \Delta\phi $ between leading light jet and softest b jet in the $ \geq $7 jets: $ \geq $4b, $ \geq $3 light phase space.

png pdf
Figure D1:
Ratio of normalized differential cross section predictions of the POWHEG+OL+P8 $\mathrm{t\bar{t}b\bar{b}}$ 4FS modeling approach with different $ \mu_{\mathrm{R}} $ and $ \mu_{\mathrm{F}} $ scale settings relative to the measured normalized differential cross sections for the number of jets (upper) and $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of jets (lower) in the $ \geq $5 jets: $ \geq $3b phase space. The systematic (total) uncertainties of the measurement are represented as grey (blue) bands. Variations of the $ \mu_{\mathrm{R}} $ ($ \mu_{\mathrm{F}} $) scale relative to the nominal scale setting are shown in orange (purple). The last bin in the distributions contains the overflow.

png pdf
Figure D1-a:
Ratio of normalized differential cross section predictions of the POWHEG+OL+P8 $\mathrm{t\bar{t}b\bar{b}}$ 4FS modeling approach with different $ \mu_{\mathrm{R}} $ and $ \mu_{\mathrm{F}} $ scale settings relative to the measured normalized differential cross sections for the number of jets (upper) and $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of jets (lower) in the $ \geq $5 jets: $ \geq $3b phase space. The systematic (total) uncertainties of the measurement are represented as grey (blue) bands. Variations of the $ \mu_{\mathrm{R}} $ ($ \mu_{\mathrm{F}} $) scale relative to the nominal scale setting are shown in orange (purple). The last bin in the distributions contains the overflow.

png pdf
Figure D1-b:
Ratio of normalized differential cross section predictions of the POWHEG+OL+P8 $\mathrm{t\bar{t}b\bar{b}}$ 4FS modeling approach with different $ \mu_{\mathrm{R}} $ and $ \mu_{\mathrm{F}} $ scale settings relative to the measured normalized differential cross sections for the number of jets (upper) and $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of jets (lower) in the $ \geq $5 jets: $ \geq $3b phase space. The systematic (total) uncertainties of the measurement are represented as grey (blue) bands. Variations of the $ \mu_{\mathrm{R}} $ ($ \mu_{\mathrm{F}} $) scale relative to the nominal scale setting are shown in orange (purple). The last bin in the distributions contains the overflow.

png pdf
Figure D2:
Ratio of normalized differential cross section predictions of the POWHEG+OL+P8} $\mathrm{t\bar{t}b\bar{b}}$ 4FS modeling approach with different $ \mu_{\mathrm{R}} $ and $ \mu_{\mathrm{F}} $ scale settings relative to the measured normalized differential cross sections for the extra light jet (upper) and $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of light jets (lower) in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $3b, $ \geq $3 light phase space. The systematic (total) uncertainties of the measurement are represented as grey (blue) bands. The systematic (total) uncertainties of the measurement are represented as grey (blue) bands. Variations of the $ \mu_{\mathrm{R}} $ ($ \mu_{\mathrm{F}} $) scale relative to the nominal scale setting are shown in orange (purple). The last bin in the distributions contains the overflow.

png pdf
Figure D2-a:
Ratio of normalized differential cross section predictions of the POWHEG+OL+P8} $\mathrm{t\bar{t}b\bar{b}}$ 4FS modeling approach with different $ \mu_{\mathrm{R}} $ and $ \mu_{\mathrm{F}} $ scale settings relative to the measured normalized differential cross sections for the extra light jet (upper) and $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of light jets (lower) in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $3b, $ \geq $3 light phase space. The systematic (total) uncertainties of the measurement are represented as grey (blue) bands. The systematic (total) uncertainties of the measurement are represented as grey (blue) bands. Variations of the $ \mu_{\mathrm{R}} $ ($ \mu_{\mathrm{F}} $) scale relative to the nominal scale setting are shown in orange (purple). The last bin in the distributions contains the overflow.

png pdf
Figure D2-b:
Ratio of normalized differential cross section predictions of the POWHEG+OL+P8} $\mathrm{t\bar{t}b\bar{b}}$ 4FS modeling approach with different $ \mu_{\mathrm{R}} $ and $ \mu_{\mathrm{F}} $ scale settings relative to the measured normalized differential cross sections for the extra light jet (upper) and $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ of light jets (lower) in the $ \geq $6 jets: $ \geq $3b, $ \geq $3 light phase space. The systematic (total) uncertainties of the measurement are represented as grey (blue) bands. The systematic (total) uncertainties of the measurement are represented as grey (blue) bands. Variations of the $ \mu_{\mathrm{R}} $ ($ \mu_{\mathrm{F}} $) scale relative to the nominal scale setting are shown in orange (purple). The last bin in the distributions contains the overflow.
Tables

png pdf
Table 1:
Generator settings for different modeling approaches of $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\bar{\mathrm{b}} $ production. The top quark mass value is set to $ m_{\mathrm{t}} = $ 172.5 GeV for all generator setups, and for the generator setups using massive b quarks, the b quark mass value is set to $ m_{\mathrm{b}} = $ 4.75 GeV. In the scale settings, $ H_{\mathrm{T}} $ corresponds to the scalar $ m_{\mathrm{T}} $ sum, $ H_{\mathrm{T}} = \sum_{i=\mathrm{t},\bar{\mathrm{t}},\mathrm{b},\bar{\mathrm{b}},\mathrm{g}} m_{\mathrm{T},i} $, and \smash$ m_{\mathrm{T},i}=\sqrt{\smash[b]{m_i^2+p_{\mathrm{T},i}^2}} $ is the transverse mass. For generators setups using POWHEG the $ h_{\mathrm{damp}} $ value is specified. Other generator setups do not use this parameter and are marked with ($ \text{--} $).

png pdf
Table 2:
Generator settings for various minor background samples simulated with POWHEG [34-61-66] or MadGraph-5\_aMC@NLO [32]. The ``Group'' column refers to the grouping of processes in the maximum likelihood fits.

png pdf
Table 3:
Description of all measured observables for each of the four fiducial phase space regions. Observables marked as ($ \checkmark^\ast $) rely on the definition of additional b jets, and do not fully correspond to the 6j4b fiducial phase space defined at the particle level, but also require the presence of b jets without top (anti)quarks in their simulated history.

png pdf
Table 4:
Summary of the systematic uncertainty sources in the inclusive and differential $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\bar{\mathrm{b}} $ cross section measurements. The first column lists the source of the uncertainty. The second (third) column indicates the treatment of correlations of the uncertainties between different data-taking periods (processes), where $ \checkmark $ means fully correlated, $ \sim $ means partially correlated (i.e., contains sub-sources that are either fully correlated or uncorrelated), $ \times $ means uncorrelated, and $ \text{--} $ means not applicable.

png pdf
Table 5:
Contributions of the considered sources of uncertainty to the total uncertainty in the inclusive cross sections. For each group of uncertainty sources, the impacts of the corresponding nuisance parameters on the total cross section are combined, taking into account their correlation in the fit. The numbers show relative uncertainties (in %). The statistical uncertainty is obtained as the difference, in quadrature, between the total uncertainty and the sum of all systematic uncertainties.

png pdf
Table 6:
Measured and predicted inclusive cross sections in the four considered phase space regions (in fb).

png pdf
Table E1:
Observed $ z $ score for each of the theoretical predictions in the 5j3b phase space, given the unfolded data and covariance matrix. For the determination of the $ z $ score, only the measurement uncertainties are considered.

png pdf
Table E2:
Observed $ z $ score for each of the theoretical predictions in the 6j4b phase space, given the unfolded data and covariance matrix. For the determination of the $ z $ score, only the measurement uncertainties are considered.

png pdf
Table E3:
Observed $ z $ score for each of the theoretical predictions in the 6j4b phase space of the observables related to the $ \mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\text{extra}} $ pair, given the unfolded data and covariance matrix. For the determination of the $ z $ score, only the measurement uncertainties are considered.

png pdf
Table E4:
Observed $ z $ score for each of the theoretical predictions in the 6j4b phase space of the observables related to the $ \mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\text{add.}} $ pair, given the unfolded data and covariance matrix. For the determination of the $ z $ score, only the measurement uncertainties are considered.

png pdf
Table E5:
Observed $ z $ score for each of the theoretical predictions in the 6j3b3l phase space, given the unfolded data and covariance matrix. For the determination of the $ z $ score, only the measurement uncertainties are considered.

png pdf
Table E6:
Observed $ z $ score for each of the theoretical predictions in the 7j4b3l phase space, given the unfolded data and covariance matrix. For the determination of the $ z $ score, only the measurement uncertainties are considered.
Summary
Measurements of inclusive and normalized differential cross sections of the associated production of top quark-antiquark and bottom quark-antiquark pairs, $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\bar{\mathrm{b}} $, for events containing an electron or a muon, have been presented. These measurements use proton-proton collision data recorded by the CMS detector at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV and correspond to an integrated luminosity of 138 fb$ ^{-1} $.

The inclusive cross sections are measured in four fiducial phase space regions requiring different jet, b jet, and light jet multiplicities. With total uncertainties of 6-17%, depending on the phase space, these are the most precise measurements of the $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\bar{\mathrm{b}} $ cross section to date. The uncertainties are dominated by systematic sources, with the leading uncertainties originating from the calibration of the b tagging and of the jet energy scale, and from the choice of renormalization scale in the signal $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\bar{\mathrm{b}} $ and background $ \mathrm{t} \bar{\mathrm{t}} $ processes. In most cases, the measured inclusive cross sections exceed the predictions with the chosen generator settings. The only exception is when using a particular choice of dynamic renormalization scale, $ \smash[b]{\mu_{\mathrm{R}}=\frac12 \prod_{i=\mathrm{t},\bar{\mathrm{t}},\mathrm{b},\bar{\mathrm{b}}} m_{\mathrm{T},i}^{1/4}} $, where $ \smash{m_{\mathrm{T},i}^2=m_i^2+p_{\mathrm{T},i}^2} $ are the transverse masses of top and bottom quarks.

Differential cross section measurements are performed as a function of several observables in the aforementioned phase space regions. These observables mainly target b jets as well as additional light jets produced in association with the top quark pairs. In the phase space containing events with at least six jets, of which at least four are b tagged, the additional b-jet radiation is probed with two different approaches. The first approach uses observables defined purely at the particle level, without any reference to the top quark decay chains, by selecting the two b jets with the smallest angular separation. The second approach uses explicitly the b jets at the generator level that do not originate from top quark decays and identifies those jets at the detector level with a neural network discriminant. The differential measurements have relative uncertainties in the range of 2-50%, depending on the phase space and the observable.

The results are compared to the predictions of several event generator setups, and it is found that none of them simultaneously describe all measured distributions in the various phase space regions. In the more inclusive phase space with five jets and three b jets, the agreement between data and predictions is generally poor, while in the phase space with six jets and four b jets, corresponding to the case in which the two additional b jets in $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\bar{\mathrm{b}} $ production are resolved, most predictions are compatible with the data within the larger experimental uncertainties. These measurements will help to further tune and refine the theoretical predictions and better assess the validity of the theoretical uncertainties estimated from the various $ {\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\bar{\mathrm{b}} $ event generators.
References
1 F. Buccioni, S. Kallweit, S. Pozzorini, and M. F. Zoller NLO QCD predictions for $ {\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\overline{\mathrm{b}} $ production in association with a light jet at the LHC JHEP 12 (2019) 015 1907.13624
2 T. Ježo, J. M. Lindert, N. Moretti, and S. Pozzorini New NLOPS predictions for $ {\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}}$ + $\mathrm{b} $-jet production at the LHC EPJC 78 (2018) 502 1802.00426
3 ATLAS Collaboration Search for the standard model Higgs boson decaying into $ \mathrm{b} \overline{\mathrm{b}} $ produced in association with top quarks decaying hadronically in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 8 TeV with the ATLAS detector JHEP 05 (2016) 160 1604.03812
4 ATLAS Collaboration Search for the standard model Higgs boson produced in association with top quarks and decaying into a $ \mathrm{b} \overline{\mathrm{b}} $ pair in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector PRD 97 (2018) 072016 1712.08895
5 ATLAS Collaboration Observation of Higgs boson production in association with a top quark pair at the LHC with the ATLAS detector PLB 784 (2018) 173 1806.00425
6 CMS Collaboration Search for $ {\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{H} $ production in the all-jet final state in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV JHEP 06 (2018) 101 CMS-HIG-17-022
1803.06986
7 CMS Collaboration Observation of $ {\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{H} $ production PRL 120 (2018) 231801 CMS-HIG-17-035
1804.02610
8 CMS Collaboration Search for $ {\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{H} $ production in the $ \mathrm{H}\to\mathrm{b}\overline{\mathrm{b}} $ decay channel with leptonic $ \mathrm{t} \overline{\mathrm{t}} $ decays in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV JHEP 03 (2019) 026 CMS-HIG-17-026
1804.03682
9 ATLAS Collaboration Search for four-top-quark production in the single-lepton and opposite-sign dilepton final states in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector PRD 99 (2019) 052009 1811.02305
10 ATLAS Collaboration Evidence for $ {\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} {\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} $ production in the multilepton final state in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector EPJC 80 (2020) 1085 2007.14858
11 ATLAS Collaboration Measurement of the $ {\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} {\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} $ production cross section in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector JHEP 11 (2021) 118 2106.11683
12 CMS Collaboration Search for standard model production of four top quarks in the lepton+jets channel in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 8 TeV JHEP 11 (2014) 154 CMS-TOP-13-012
1409.7339
13 CMS Collaboration Search for standard model production of four top quarks with same-sign and multilepton final states in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV EPJC 78 (2018) 140 CMS-TOP-17-009
1710.10614
14 CMS Collaboration Search for standard model production of four top quarks in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV PLB 772 (2017) 336 CMS-TOP-16-016
1702.06164
15 CMS Collaboration Search for the production of four top quarks in the single-lepton and opposite-sign dilepton final states in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV JHEP 11 (2019) 082 CMS-TOP-17-019
1906.02805
16 CMS Collaboration Search for production of four top quarks in final states with same-sign or multiple leptons in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV EPJC 80 (2020) 75 CMS-TOP-18-003
1908.06463
17 CMS Collaboration Evidence for four-top quark production in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV PLB 844 (2023) 138076 CMS-TOP-21-005
2303.03864
18 ATLAS Collaboration Observation of four-top-quark production in the multilepton final state with the ATLAS detector EPJC 83 (2023) 496 2303.15061
19 CMS Collaboration Observation of four top quark production in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV Submitted to PLB, 2023 CMS-TOP-22-013
2305.13439
20 Q.-H. Cao, S.-L. Chen, and Y. Liu Probing Higgs width and top quark Yukawa coupling from $ {\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{H} $ and $ {\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} {\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} $ productions PRD 95 (2017) 053004 1602.01934
21 Q.-H. Cao et al. Limiting top quark-Higgs boson interaction and Higgs-boson width from multitop productions PRD 99 (2019) 113003 1901.04567
22 M. Worek Next-to-leading order QCD corrections to $ {\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\overline{\mathrm{b}} $ production at the LHC in Proc. 33rd Int. Conf. of Theoretical Physics on Matter to the Deepest: Ustroń, Poland, 2009
Acta Phys. Pol. B 40 (2009) 2937
0910.4080
23 G. Bevilacqua et al. Assault on the NLO wishlist: $ \mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}\to{\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\overline{\mathrm{b}} $ JHEP 09 (2009) 109 0907.4723
24 A. Bredenstein, A. Denner, S. Dittmaier, and S. Pozzorini NLO QCD corrections to $ \mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}\to{\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\overline{\mathrm{b}}+\mathrm{X} $ at the LHC PRL 103 (2009) 012002 0905.0110
25 A. Bredenstein, A. Denner, S. Dittmaier, and S. Pozzorini NLO QCD corrections to $ {\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\overline{\mathrm{b}} $ production at the LHC: 2. Full hadronic results JHEP 03 (2010) 021 1001.4006
26 M. Worek On the next-to-leading order QCD $ K $-factor for $ {\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\overline{\mathrm{b}} $ production at the Tevatron JHEP 02 (2012) 043 1112.4325
27 A. Denner, J.-N. Lang, and M. Pellen Full NLO QCD corrections to off-shell $ {\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\overline{\mathrm{b}} $ production PRD 104 (2021) 056018 2008.00918
28 G. Bevilacqua et al. $ {\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\overline{\mathrm{b}} $ at the LHC: on the size of corrections and b-jet definitions JHEP 08 (2021) 008 2105.08404
29 S. Höche et al. Next-to-leading order QCD predictions for top-quark pair production with up to two jets merged with a parton shower PLB 748 (2015) 74 1402.6293
30 M. V. Garzelli, A. Kardos, and Z. Trócsányi Hadroproduction of $ {\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\overline{\mathrm{b}} $ final states at LHC: predictions at NLO accuracy matched with parton shower JHEP 03 (2015) 083 1408.0266
31 S. Höche et al. Next-to-leading order QCD predictions for top-quark pair production with up to three jets EPJC 77 (2017) 145 1607.06934
32 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
33 R. Frederix and S. Frixione Merging meets matching in MC@NLO JHEP 12 (2012) 061 1209.6215
34 S. Frixione, P. Nason, and G. Ridolfi A positive-weight next-to-leading-order Monte Carlo for heavy flavour hadroproduction JHEP 09 (2007) 126 0707.3088
35 F. Cascioli et al. NLO matching for $ {\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\overline{\mathrm{b}} $ production with massive b-quarks PLB 734 (2014) 210 1309.5912
36 G. Bevilacqua, M. V. Garzelli, and A. Kardos $ {\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\overline{\mathrm{b}} $ hadroproduction with massive bottom quarks with \textscPowHel 1709.06915
37 ATLAS Collaboration Study of heavy-flavor quarks produced in association with top-quark pairs at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 7 TeV using the ATLAS detector PRD 89 (2014) 072012 1304.6386
38 ATLAS Collaboration Measurements of fiducial cross-sections for $ \mathrm{t} \overline{\mathrm{t}} $ production with one or two additional b-jets in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 8 TeV using the ATLAS detector EPJC 76 (2016) 11 1508.06868
39 ATLAS Collaboration Measurements of inclusive and differential fiducial cross-sections of $ \mathrm{t} \overline{\mathrm{t}} $ production with additional heavy-flavour jets in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector JHEP 04 (2019) 046 1811.12113
40 CMS Collaboration Measurement of $ \mathrm{t} \overline{\mathrm{t}} $ production with additional jet activity, including b quark jets, in the dilepton decay channel using pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 8 TeV EPJC 76 (2016) 379 CMS-TOP-12-041
1510.03072
41 CMS Collaboration Measurement of the cross section ratio $ \sigma_{{\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\overline{\mathrm{b}}}/\sigma_{{\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{jj}} $ in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 8 TeV PLB 746 (2015) 132 CMS-TOP-13-010
1411.5621
42 CMS Collaboration Measurements of $ \mathrm{t} \overline{\mathrm{t}} $ cross sections in association with b jets and inclusive jets and their ratio using dilepton final states in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV PLB 776 (2018) 355 CMS-TOP-16-010
1705.10141
43 CMS Collaboration Measurement of the $ {\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} \mathrm{b}\overline{\mathrm{b}} $ production cross section in the all-jet final state in $ {\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}} $ collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV PLB 803 (2020) 135285 CMS-TOP-18-011
1909.05306
44 CMS Collaboration Measurement of the cross section for $ \mathrm{t} \overline{\mathrm{t}} $ production with additional jets and b jets in $ {\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}} $ collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV JHEP 07 (2020) 125 CMS-TOP-18-002
2003.06467
45 CMS Collaboration First measurement of the cross section for top quark pair production with additional charm jets using dileptonic final states in $ {\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}} $ collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV PLB 820 (2021) 136565 CMS-TOP-20-003
2012.09225
46 CMS Collaboration HEPData record for this analysis link
47 CMS Collaboration The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC JINST 3 (2008) S08004
48 CMS Tracker Group The CMS Phase-1 pixel detector upgrade JINST 16 (2021) P02027 2012.14304
49 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
50 CMS Collaboration The CMS trigger system JINST 12 (2017) P01020 CMS-TRG-12-001
1609.02366
51 T. Sjöstrand et al. An introduction to PYTHIA8.2 Comput. Phys. Commun. 191 (2015) 159 1410.3012
52 GEANT 4 Collaboration GEANT 4---a simulation toolkit NIM A 506 (2003) 250
53 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
54 F. Buccioni et al. OpenLoops 2 EPJC 79 (2019) 866 1907.13071
55 M. Bähr et al. HERWIG++ physics and manual EPJC 58 (2008) 639 0803.0883
56 J. Bellm et al. HERWIG 7.0/ HERWIG++ 3.0 release note EPJC 76 (2016) 196 1512.01178
57 CMS Collaboration Development and validation of HERWIG 7 tunes from CMS underlying-event measurements EPJC 81 (2021) 312 CMS-GEN-19-001
2011.03422
58 T. Gleisberg et al. Event generation with SHERPA 1.1 JHEP 02 (2009) 007 0811.4622
59 M. Czakon and A. Mitov top++: A program for the calculation of the top-pair cross-section at hadron colliders Comput. Phys. Commun. 185 (2014) 2930 1112.5675
60 N. Kidonakis Top quark production in Proc. Helmholtz International Summer School on Physics of Heavy Quarks and Hadrons, Dubna, Russia, 2013
DESY-PROC-2013-03
1311.0283
61 P. Nason A new method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms JHEP 11 (2004) 040 hep-ph/0409146
62 S. Frixione, P. Nason, and C. Oleari Matching NLO QCD computations with parton shower simulations: the POWHEG method JHEP 11 (2007) 070 0709.2092
63 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
64 S. Alioli, P. Nason, C. Oleari, and E. Re NLO single-top production matched with shower in POWHEG: $ s $- and $ t $-channel contributions JHEP 09 (2009) 111 0907.4076
65 E. Re Single-top $ \mathrm{W}\mathrm{t} $-channel production matched with parton showers using the POWHEG method EPJC 71 (2011) 1547 1009.2450
66 H. B. Hartanto, B. Jäger, L. Reina, and D. Wackeroth Higgs boson production in association with top quarks in the POWHEG box PRD 91 (2015) 094003 1501.04498
67 P. Artoisenet, R. Frederix, O. Mattelaer, and R. Rietkerk Automatic spin-entangled decays of heavy resonances in Monte Carlo simulations JHEP 03 (2013) 015 1212.3460
68 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
69 NNPDF Collaboration Parton distributions for the LHC run II JHEP 04 (2015) 040 1410.8849
70 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
71 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
72 CMS Collaboration Particle-flow reconstruction and global event description with the CMS detector JINST 12 (2017) P10003 CMS-PRF-14-001
1706.04965
73 CMS Collaboration Technical proposal for the Phase-II upgrade of the Compact Muon Solenoid CMS Technical Proposal CERN-LHCC-2015-010, CMS-TDR-15-02, 2015
CDS
74 CMS Collaboration Electron and photon reconstruction and identification with the CMS experiment at the CERN LHC JINST 16 (2021) P05014 CMS-EGM-17-001
2012.06888
75 CMS Collaboration Performance of the CMS muon detector and muon reconstruction with proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV JINST 13 (2018) P06015 CMS-MUO-16-001
1804.04528
76 CMS Collaboration Pileup mitigation at CMS in 13 TeV data JINST 15 (2020) P09018 CMS-JME-18-001
2003.00503
77 M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez The anti-$ k_{\mathrm{T}} $ jet clustering algorithm JHEP 04 (2008) 063 0802.1189
78 M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez FASTJET user manual EPJC 72 (2012) 1896 1111.6097
79 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
80 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
81 E. Bols et al. Jet flavour classification using DeepJet JINST 15 (2020) P12012 2008.10519
82 CMS Collaboration Performance summary of AK4 jet b tagging with data from proton-proton collisions at 13 TeV with the CMS detector CMS Detector Performance Note CMS-DP-2023-005, 2023
CDS
83 M. Cacciari and G. P. Salam Pileup subtraction using jet areas PLB 659 (2008) 119 0707.1378
84 CMS Collaboration Simulation of the silicon strip tracker pre-amplifier in early 2016 data CMS Detector Performance Note CMS-DP-2020-045, 2020
CDS
85 Y. LeCun et al. Handwritten digit recognition with a back-propagation network in Proc. 2nd Int. Conf. on Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems (NIPS'89): Denver CO, USA, 1989
link
86 S. Hochreiter and J. Schmidhuber Long short-term memory Neural Comput. 9 (1997) 1735
87 F. Chollet et al. keras: Deep learning for humans link
88 M. Abadi et al. TensorFlow: large-scale machine learning on heterogeneous distributed systems 1603.04467
89 D. P. Kingma and J. Ba Adam: a method for stochastic optimization in Proc. 3rd Int. Conf. on Learning Representations, San Diego CA, USA, 2015, [ICLR 201 (2015) 5] 1412.6980
90 N. Srivastava et al. Dropout: a simple way to prevent neural networks from overfitting J. Mach. Learn. Res. 15 (2014) 1929
91 S. Wertz moofit: a package for smooth binned likelihood fits link
92 J. Bradbury et al. jax: autograd and xla link
93 CMS Collaboration Precision luminosity measurement in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV in 2015 and 2016 at CMS EPJC 81 (2021) 800 CMS-LUM-17-003
2104.01927
94 CMS Collaboration CMS luminosity measurement for the 2017 data-taking period at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV CMS Physics Analysis Summary, 2018
CMS-PAS-LUM-17-004
CMS-PAS-LUM-17-004
95 CMS Collaboration CMS luminosity measurement for the 2018 data-taking period at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV CMS Physics Analysis Summary, 2019
CMS-PAS-LUM-18-002
CMS-PAS-LUM-18-002
96 M. Czakon et al. Top-pair production at the LHC through NNLO QCD and NLO EW JHEP 10 (2017) 186 1705.04105
97 S. Argyropoulos and T. Sjöstrand Effects of color reconnection on $ \mathrm{t} \overline{\mathrm{t}} $ final states at the LHC JHEP 11 (2014) 043 1407.6653
98 J. R. Christiansen and P. Z. Skands String formation beyond leading colour JHEP 08 (2015) 003 1505.01681
99 ATLAS Collaboration Measurement of b-quark fragmentation properties in jets using the decay $ {{\mathrm{B}^{\pm}}\to\mathrm{J}/\psi\mathrm{K^{\pm}}} $ in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector JHEP 12 (2021) 131 2108.11650
100 R. J. Barlow and C. Beeston Fitting using finite Monte Carlo samples Comput. Phys. Commun. 77 (1993) 219
101 J. S. Conway Incorporating nuisance parameters in likelihoods for multisource spectra in Workshop on Statistical Issues Related to Discovery Claims in Search Experiments and Unfolding (PHYSTAT ): Geneva, Switzerland, 2011
link
1103.0354
102 R. D. Cousins, J. T. Linnemann, and J. Tucker Evaluation of three methods for calculating statistical significance when incorporating a systematic uncertainty into a test of the background-only hypothesis for a Poisson process NIM A 595 (2008) 480 physics/0702156
Compact Muon Solenoid
LHC, CERN