Compact Muon Solenoid
LHC, CERN
Visit us: CMS Public Website, CMS Physics ;
Contact us: CMS Publications Committee
| CMS-PAS-B2G-21-002 | ||
| Search for resonances decaying to three W bosons in the hadronic final state at $\sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV | ||
| CMS Collaboration | ||
| July 2021 | ||
| Abstract: A search for heavy resonances X decaying in cascade to three W bosons via a scalar radion R, X $\to$ WR $\to$ WWW, with two or three massive, Lorentz-boosted jets is presented. The search is performed with proton-proton collision data recorded at $\sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV collected by the CMS experiment during 2016-2018, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 137 fb$^{-1}$. Two final states are simultaneously probed, one where the two W bosons produced by the R decay are reconstructed as separate jets, and one where they are reconstructed as a single merged jet. The data observed are in agreement with the standard model expectations. Results are combined with a complementary and orthogonal search in the single-lepton channel to set the most stringent limits to date on the production cross section of an extended warped extra-dimensional model. | ||
|
Links:
CDS record (PDF) ;
CADI line (restricted) ;
These preliminary results are superseded in this paper, PRD 106 (2022) 012002. The superseded preliminary plots can be found here. |
||
| Figures | |
png pdf |
Figure 1:
Schematic diagrams of the decay of a KK excitation ${\mathrm{W} _{\mathrm {KK}}}$ to the final states considered in this analysis. Left: three individually reconstructed W bosons; right: one individually reconstructed W boson and two W bosons reconstructed as a single large-radius jet, which is predominant for $ {{m}_{\mathrm{R}}} \le 0.2 {{m}_{{\mathrm{W} _{\mathrm {KK}}}}} $. |
png pdf |
Figure 2:
Upper row: distributions of ${m_{\mathrm {jj}}}$ (left), ${m^{\text {max}}_{\text {j}}}$ (center), and the deep-WH value of the highest-mass jet with $ {m^{\text {max}}_{\text {j}}} > $ 100 GeV, for preselected events with $ {N_{\text {j}}} = $ 2. Lower row: distributions of ${m_{\mathrm {jjj}}}$ (left), ${m^{\text {max}}_{\text {j}}}$ (center), and the deep-W value for the highest-mass jet with 60 $ < {m^{\text {max}}_{\text {j}}} < $ 100 GeV, for preselected events with $ {N_{\text {j}}} = $ 3. |
png pdf |
Figure 2-a:
Upper row: distributions of ${m_{\mathrm {jj}}}$ (left), ${m^{\text {max}}_{\text {j}}}$ (center), and the deep-WH value of the highest-mass jet with $ {m^{\text {max}}_{\text {j}}} > $ 100 GeV, for preselected events with $ {N_{\text {j}}} = $ 2. Lower row: distributions of ${m_{\mathrm {jjj}}}$ (left), ${m^{\text {max}}_{\text {j}}}$ (center), and the deep-W value for the highest-mass jet with 60 $ < {m^{\text {max}}_{\text {j}}} < $ 100 GeV, for preselected events with $ {N_{\text {j}}} = $ 3. |
png pdf |
Figure 2-b:
Upper row: distributions of ${m_{\mathrm {jj}}}$ (left), ${m^{\text {max}}_{\text {j}}}$ (center), and the deep-WH value of the highest-mass jet with $ {m^{\text {max}}_{\text {j}}} > $ 100 GeV, for preselected events with $ {N_{\text {j}}} = $ 2. Lower row: distributions of ${m_{\mathrm {jjj}}}$ (left), ${m^{\text {max}}_{\text {j}}}$ (center), and the deep-W value for the highest-mass jet with 60 $ < {m^{\text {max}}_{\text {j}}} < $ 100 GeV, for preselected events with $ {N_{\text {j}}} = $ 3. |
png pdf |
Figure 2-c:
Upper row: distributions of ${m_{\mathrm {jj}}}$ (left), ${m^{\text {max}}_{\text {j}}}$ (center), and the deep-WH value of the highest-mass jet with $ {m^{\text {max}}_{\text {j}}} > $ 100 GeV, for preselected events with $ {N_{\text {j}}} = $ 2. Lower row: distributions of ${m_{\mathrm {jjj}}}$ (left), ${m^{\text {max}}_{\text {j}}}$ (center), and the deep-W value for the highest-mass jet with 60 $ < {m^{\text {max}}_{\text {j}}} < $ 100 GeV, for preselected events with $ {N_{\text {j}}} = $ 3. |
png pdf |
Figure 2-d:
Upper row: distributions of ${m_{\mathrm {jj}}}$ (left), ${m^{\text {max}}_{\text {j}}}$ (center), and the deep-WH value of the highest-mass jet with $ {m^{\text {max}}_{\text {j}}} > $ 100 GeV, for preselected events with $ {N_{\text {j}}} = $ 2. Lower row: distributions of ${m_{\mathrm {jjj}}}$ (left), ${m^{\text {max}}_{\text {j}}}$ (center), and the deep-W value for the highest-mass jet with 60 $ < {m^{\text {max}}_{\text {j}}} < $ 100 GeV, for preselected events with $ {N_{\text {j}}} = $ 3. |
png pdf |
Figure 2-e:
Upper row: distributions of ${m_{\mathrm {jj}}}$ (left), ${m^{\text {max}}_{\text {j}}}$ (center), and the deep-WH value of the highest-mass jet with $ {m^{\text {max}}_{\text {j}}} > $ 100 GeV, for preselected events with $ {N_{\text {j}}} = $ 2. Lower row: distributions of ${m_{\mathrm {jjj}}}$ (left), ${m^{\text {max}}_{\text {j}}}$ (center), and the deep-W value for the highest-mass jet with 60 $ < {m^{\text {max}}_{\text {j}}} < $ 100 GeV, for preselected events with $ {N_{\text {j}}} = $ 3. |
png pdf |
Figure 2-f:
Upper row: distributions of ${m_{\mathrm {jj}}}$ (left), ${m^{\text {max}}_{\text {j}}}$ (center), and the deep-WH value of the highest-mass jet with $ {m^{\text {max}}_{\text {j}}} > $ 100 GeV, for preselected events with $ {N_{\text {j}}} = $ 2. Lower row: distributions of ${m_{\mathrm {jjj}}}$ (left), ${m^{\text {max}}_{\text {j}}}$ (center), and the deep-W value for the highest-mass jet with 60 $ < {m^{\text {max}}_{\text {j}}} < $ 100 GeV, for preselected events with $ {N_{\text {j}}} = $ 3. |
png pdf |
Figure 3:
Schematic of the 2D jet mass regions for two-jet events (left) and 3D jet mass regions for three-jet events (right), indicating the location of the six orthogonal signal regions SR1-6, indicated by the colored areas. SR4 and SR5 differ by the requirement of exactly three and two W-tagged jets, respectively. |
png pdf |
Figure 4:
Upper row: scale factors (SFs) for W (dark blue), $\mathrm{t} ^2$ (light blue), and ${\mathrm{q} /\mathrm{g}}$ (yellow) matched jets in the low ${m_{\text {j}}}$ bins, LL (left) and LH (right), as a function of the deep-W discriminant value. Lower row: SFs for $\mathrm{t} ^2$ (light blue), $\mathrm{t} ^{3,4}$ (green), and ${\mathrm{q} /\mathrm{g}}$ (yellow) matched jets in the high ${m_{\text {j}}}$ bins, HL (left) and HH (right), as a function of the deep-WH discriminant value. For each discriminant value bin, the sum of the SF-corrected jet yields is required to be equal to the observed data. The factors $\text {SF}_{k}^\mathrm{W}, \text {SF}_k^{\mathrm{t} ^2}$, and $\text {SF}_k^{\mathrm{t} ^{3,4}}$ are derived from the ${\text {PS}_{1\ell}}$ sample, as described in Section yyyyy, while $\text {SF}_{k}^{{\mathrm{q} /\mathrm{g}}}$ is derived from the preselected sample, as described in Section xxxxx. The statistical and parton shower (PS) uncertainties are shown by the shaded bands. These SFs are used to correct the simulated deep-W ($\mathrm{W} \mathrm{H} $) spectra for each matched jet type in the corresponding ${m_{\text {j}}}$ and ${{{p_{\mathrm {T}}} ^{\text {j}}}}$ ranges. The signal jets (categorized as $\mathrm{W}$, ${\mathrm{R} ^{\ell \mathrm{q} \mathrm{q}}}$, ${\mathrm{R} ^{3\mathrm{q}}}$, or $ {\mathrm{R} ^{4\mathrm{q}}}$) receive SF corrections from their corresponding standard model proxy jet as described in Section zzzzz, where ${\mathrm{R} ^{\ell \mathrm{q} \mathrm{q}}}$ corresponds to $\mathrm{W}$, and $\mathrm{R} ^{3\mathrm{q},4\mathrm{q}}$ to $\mathrm{t} ^{3,4}$. |
png pdf |
Figure 4-a:
Upper row: scale factors (SFs) for W (dark blue), $\mathrm{t} ^2$ (light blue), and ${\mathrm{q} /\mathrm{g}}$ (yellow) matched jets in the low ${m_{\text {j}}}$ bins, LL (left) and LH (right), as a function of the deep-W discriminant value. Lower row: SFs for $\mathrm{t} ^2$ (light blue), $\mathrm{t} ^{3,4}$ (green), and ${\mathrm{q} /\mathrm{g}}$ (yellow) matched jets in the high ${m_{\text {j}}}$ bins, HL (left) and HH (right), as a function of the deep-WH discriminant value. For each discriminant value bin, the sum of the SF-corrected jet yields is required to be equal to the observed data. The factors $\text {SF}_{k}^\mathrm{W}, \text {SF}_k^{\mathrm{t} ^2}$, and $\text {SF}_k^{\mathrm{t} ^{3,4}}$ are derived from the ${\text {PS}_{1\ell}}$ sample, as described in Section yyyyy, while $\text {SF}_{k}^{{\mathrm{q} /\mathrm{g}}}$ is derived from the preselected sample, as described in Section xxxxx. The statistical and parton shower (PS) uncertainties are shown by the shaded bands. These SFs are used to correct the simulated deep-W ($\mathrm{W} \mathrm{H} $) spectra for each matched jet type in the corresponding ${m_{\text {j}}}$ and ${{{p_{\mathrm {T}}} ^{\text {j}}}}$ ranges. The signal jets (categorized as $\mathrm{W}$, ${\mathrm{R} ^{\ell \mathrm{q} \mathrm{q}}}$, ${\mathrm{R} ^{3\mathrm{q}}}$, or $ {\mathrm{R} ^{4\mathrm{q}}}$) receive SF corrections from their corresponding standard model proxy jet as described in Section zzzzz, where ${\mathrm{R} ^{\ell \mathrm{q} \mathrm{q}}}$ corresponds to $\mathrm{W}$, and $\mathrm{R} ^{3\mathrm{q},4\mathrm{q}}$ to $\mathrm{t} ^{3,4}$. |
png pdf |
Figure 4-b:
Upper row: scale factors (SFs) for W (dark blue), $\mathrm{t} ^2$ (light blue), and ${\mathrm{q} /\mathrm{g}}$ (yellow) matched jets in the low ${m_{\text {j}}}$ bins, LL (left) and LH (right), as a function of the deep-W discriminant value. Lower row: SFs for $\mathrm{t} ^2$ (light blue), $\mathrm{t} ^{3,4}$ (green), and ${\mathrm{q} /\mathrm{g}}$ (yellow) matched jets in the high ${m_{\text {j}}}$ bins, HL (left) and HH (right), as a function of the deep-WH discriminant value. For each discriminant value bin, the sum of the SF-corrected jet yields is required to be equal to the observed data. The factors $\text {SF}_{k}^\mathrm{W}, \text {SF}_k^{\mathrm{t} ^2}$, and $\text {SF}_k^{\mathrm{t} ^{3,4}}$ are derived from the ${\text {PS}_{1\ell}}$ sample, as described in Section yyyyy, while $\text {SF}_{k}^{{\mathrm{q} /\mathrm{g}}}$ is derived from the preselected sample, as described in Section xxxxx. The statistical and parton shower (PS) uncertainties are shown by the shaded bands. These SFs are used to correct the simulated deep-W ($\mathrm{W} \mathrm{H} $) spectra for each matched jet type in the corresponding ${m_{\text {j}}}$ and ${{{p_{\mathrm {T}}} ^{\text {j}}}}$ ranges. The signal jets (categorized as $\mathrm{W}$, ${\mathrm{R} ^{\ell \mathrm{q} \mathrm{q}}}$, ${\mathrm{R} ^{3\mathrm{q}}}$, or $ {\mathrm{R} ^{4\mathrm{q}}}$) receive SF corrections from their corresponding standard model proxy jet as described in Section zzzzz, where ${\mathrm{R} ^{\ell \mathrm{q} \mathrm{q}}}$ corresponds to $\mathrm{W}$, and $\mathrm{R} ^{3\mathrm{q},4\mathrm{q}}$ to $\mathrm{t} ^{3,4}$. |
png pdf |
Figure 4-c:
Upper row: scale factors (SFs) for W (dark blue), $\mathrm{t} ^2$ (light blue), and ${\mathrm{q} /\mathrm{g}}$ (yellow) matched jets in the low ${m_{\text {j}}}$ bins, LL (left) and LH (right), as a function of the deep-W discriminant value. Lower row: SFs for $\mathrm{t} ^2$ (light blue), $\mathrm{t} ^{3,4}$ (green), and ${\mathrm{q} /\mathrm{g}}$ (yellow) matched jets in the high ${m_{\text {j}}}$ bins, HL (left) and HH (right), as a function of the deep-WH discriminant value. For each discriminant value bin, the sum of the SF-corrected jet yields is required to be equal to the observed data. The factors $\text {SF}_{k}^\mathrm{W}, \text {SF}_k^{\mathrm{t} ^2}$, and $\text {SF}_k^{\mathrm{t} ^{3,4}}$ are derived from the ${\text {PS}_{1\ell}}$ sample, as described in Section yyyyy, while $\text {SF}_{k}^{{\mathrm{q} /\mathrm{g}}}$ is derived from the preselected sample, as described in Section xxxxx. The statistical and parton shower (PS) uncertainties are shown by the shaded bands. These SFs are used to correct the simulated deep-W ($\mathrm{W} \mathrm{H} $) spectra for each matched jet type in the corresponding ${m_{\text {j}}}$ and ${{{p_{\mathrm {T}}} ^{\text {j}}}}$ ranges. The signal jets (categorized as $\mathrm{W}$, ${\mathrm{R} ^{\ell \mathrm{q} \mathrm{q}}}$, ${\mathrm{R} ^{3\mathrm{q}}}$, or $ {\mathrm{R} ^{4\mathrm{q}}}$) receive SF corrections from their corresponding standard model proxy jet as described in Section zzzzz, where ${\mathrm{R} ^{\ell \mathrm{q} \mathrm{q}}}$ corresponds to $\mathrm{W}$, and $\mathrm{R} ^{3\mathrm{q},4\mathrm{q}}$ to $\mathrm{t} ^{3,4}$. |
png pdf |
Figure 4-d:
Upper row: scale factors (SFs) for W (dark blue), $\mathrm{t} ^2$ (light blue), and ${\mathrm{q} /\mathrm{g}}$ (yellow) matched jets in the low ${m_{\text {j}}}$ bins, LL (left) and LH (right), as a function of the deep-W discriminant value. Lower row: SFs for $\mathrm{t} ^2$ (light blue), $\mathrm{t} ^{3,4}$ (green), and ${\mathrm{q} /\mathrm{g}}$ (yellow) matched jets in the high ${m_{\text {j}}}$ bins, HL (left) and HH (right), as a function of the deep-WH discriminant value. For each discriminant value bin, the sum of the SF-corrected jet yields is required to be equal to the observed data. The factors $\text {SF}_{k}^\mathrm{W}, \text {SF}_k^{\mathrm{t} ^2}$, and $\text {SF}_k^{\mathrm{t} ^{3,4}}$ are derived from the ${\text {PS}_{1\ell}}$ sample, as described in Section yyyyy, while $\text {SF}_{k}^{{\mathrm{q} /\mathrm{g}}}$ is derived from the preselected sample, as described in Section xxxxx. The statistical and parton shower (PS) uncertainties are shown by the shaded bands. These SFs are used to correct the simulated deep-W ($\mathrm{W} \mathrm{H} $) spectra for each matched jet type in the corresponding ${m_{\text {j}}}$ and ${{{p_{\mathrm {T}}} ^{\text {j}}}}$ ranges. The signal jets (categorized as $\mathrm{W}$, ${\mathrm{R} ^{\ell \mathrm{q} \mathrm{q}}}$, ${\mathrm{R} ^{3\mathrm{q}}}$, or $ {\mathrm{R} ^{4\mathrm{q}}}$) receive SF corrections from their corresponding standard model proxy jet as described in Section zzzzz, where ${\mathrm{R} ^{\ell \mathrm{q} \mathrm{q}}}$ corresponds to $\mathrm{W}$, and $\mathrm{R} ^{3\mathrm{q},4\mathrm{q}}$ to $\mathrm{t} ^{3,4}$. |
png pdf |
Figure 5:
Comparison of the distribution of data (black points) and simulated backgrounds (colored histograms), as a function of the deep-W ($\mathrm{W} \mathrm{H} $) discriminant value for the highest-mass jet, after the scale factors have been applied, for the different control regions: CR1 (upper left), CR2 (upper center), CR3 (upper right), CR45 (lower left), and CR6 (lower right). The lower panel shows the data/simulation ratio. |
png pdf |
Figure 5-a:
Comparison of the distribution of data (black points) and simulated backgrounds (colored histograms), as a function of the deep-W ($\mathrm{W} \mathrm{H} $) discriminant value for the highest-mass jet, after the scale factors have been applied, for the different control regions: CR1 (upper left), CR2 (upper center), CR3 (upper right), CR45 (lower left), and CR6 (lower right). The lower panel shows the data/simulation ratio. |
png pdf |
Figure 5-b:
Comparison of the distribution of data (black points) and simulated backgrounds (colored histograms), as a function of the deep-W ($\mathrm{W} \mathrm{H} $) discriminant value for the highest-mass jet, after the scale factors have been applied, for the different control regions: CR1 (upper left), CR2 (upper center), CR3 (upper right), CR45 (lower left), and CR6 (lower right). The lower panel shows the data/simulation ratio. |
png pdf |
Figure 5-c:
Comparison of the distribution of data (black points) and simulated backgrounds (colored histograms), as a function of the deep-W ($\mathrm{W} \mathrm{H} $) discriminant value for the highest-mass jet, after the scale factors have been applied, for the different control regions: CR1 (upper left), CR2 (upper center), CR3 (upper right), CR45 (lower left), and CR6 (lower right). The lower panel shows the data/simulation ratio. |
png pdf |
Figure 5-d:
Comparison of the distribution of data (black points) and simulated backgrounds (colored histograms), as a function of the deep-W ($\mathrm{W} \mathrm{H} $) discriminant value for the highest-mass jet, after the scale factors have been applied, for the different control regions: CR1 (upper left), CR2 (upper center), CR3 (upper right), CR45 (lower left), and CR6 (lower right). The lower panel shows the data/simulation ratio. |
png pdf |
Figure 5-e:
Comparison of the distribution of data (black points) and simulated backgrounds (colored histograms), as a function of the deep-W ($\mathrm{W} \mathrm{H} $) discriminant value for the highest-mass jet, after the scale factors have been applied, for the different control regions: CR1 (upper left), CR2 (upper center), CR3 (upper right), CR45 (lower left), and CR6 (lower right). The lower panel shows the data/simulation ratio. |
png pdf |
Figure 6:
Left: the ${m_{\text {j}}}$ distributions for different radion jet types for SR1-3 events without deep-W ($\mathrm{W} \mathrm{H} $) constraints. Middle and right: the deep-W and deep-WH distributions normalized to unity for these components, respectively. The $\mathrm{t} ^{3,4}$ jets from the preselected sample, normalized to unity, are superimposed to compare shapes with the ${\mathrm{R} ^{3\mathrm{q}}}$ and $ {\mathrm{R} ^{4\mathrm{q}}}$ distributions. |
png pdf |
Figure 6-a:
Left: the ${m_{\text {j}}}$ distributions for different radion jet types for SR1-3 events without deep-W ($\mathrm{W} \mathrm{H} $) constraints. Middle and right: the deep-W and deep-WH distributions normalized to unity for these components, respectively. The $\mathrm{t} ^{3,4}$ jets from the preselected sample, normalized to unity, are superimposed to compare shapes with the ${\mathrm{R} ^{3\mathrm{q}}}$ and $ {\mathrm{R} ^{4\mathrm{q}}}$ distributions. |
png pdf |
Figure 6-b:
Left: the ${m_{\text {j}}}$ distributions for different radion jet types for SR1-3 events without deep-W ($\mathrm{W} \mathrm{H} $) constraints. Middle and right: the deep-W and deep-WH distributions normalized to unity for these components, respectively. The $\mathrm{t} ^{3,4}$ jets from the preselected sample, normalized to unity, are superimposed to compare shapes with the ${\mathrm{R} ^{3\mathrm{q}}}$ and $ {\mathrm{R} ^{4\mathrm{q}}}$ distributions. |
png pdf |
Figure 6-c:
Left: the ${m_{\text {j}}}$ distributions for different radion jet types for SR1-3 events without deep-W ($\mathrm{W} \mathrm{H} $) constraints. Middle and right: the deep-W and deep-WH distributions normalized to unity for these components, respectively. The $\mathrm{t} ^{3,4}$ jets from the preselected sample, normalized to unity, are superimposed to compare shapes with the ${\mathrm{R} ^{3\mathrm{q}}}$ and $ {\mathrm{R} ^{4\mathrm{q}}}$ distributions. |
png pdf |
Figure 7:
The ${m_{\mathrm {jj}}}$ distributions for control regions CR1, CR2, and CR3 (upper row, left to right), and the ${m_{\mathrm {jjj}}}$ distributions for CR45 and CR6 (lower row, left and right), for data (black points) and simulation (colored histograms). The SF corrections have been applied to the simulation, and the QCD multijet background scaled to the data yields. |
png pdf |
Figure 7-a:
The ${m_{\mathrm {jj}}}$ distributions for control regions CR1, CR2, and CR3 (upper row, left to right), and the ${m_{\mathrm {jjj}}}$ distributions for CR45 and CR6 (lower row, left and right), for data (black points) and simulation (colored histograms). The SF corrections have been applied to the simulation, and the QCD multijet background scaled to the data yields. |
png pdf |
Figure 7-b:
The ${m_{\mathrm {jj}}}$ distributions for control regions CR1, CR2, and CR3 (upper row, left to right), and the ${m_{\mathrm {jjj}}}$ distributions for CR45 and CR6 (lower row, left and right), for data (black points) and simulation (colored histograms). The SF corrections have been applied to the simulation, and the QCD multijet background scaled to the data yields. |
png pdf |
Figure 7-c:
The ${m_{\mathrm {jj}}}$ distributions for control regions CR1, CR2, and CR3 (upper row, left to right), and the ${m_{\mathrm {jjj}}}$ distributions for CR45 and CR6 (lower row, left and right), for data (black points) and simulation (colored histograms). The SF corrections have been applied to the simulation, and the QCD multijet background scaled to the data yields. |
png pdf |
Figure 7-d:
The ${m_{\mathrm {jj}}}$ distributions for control regions CR1, CR2, and CR3 (upper row, left to right), and the ${m_{\mathrm {jjj}}}$ distributions for CR45 and CR6 (lower row, left and right), for data (black points) and simulation (colored histograms). The SF corrections have been applied to the simulation, and the QCD multijet background scaled to the data yields. |
png pdf |
Figure 7-e:
The ${m_{\mathrm {jj}}}$ distributions for control regions CR1, CR2, and CR3 (upper row, left to right), and the ${m_{\mathrm {jjj}}}$ distributions for CR45 and CR6 (lower row, left and right), for data (black points) and simulation (colored histograms). The SF corrections have been applied to the simulation, and the QCD multijet background scaled to the data yields. |
png pdf |
Figure 8:
Post-fit distributions of the invariant mass of the reconstructed triboson system (${m_{\mathrm {jj}}}$, ${m_{\mathrm {jjj}}}$) in data (black points) and simulation (colored histograms) for all SRs (SRs 1-3 in the upper row, and SRs 4-6 in the lower row). Systematic uncertainties are indicated by the shaded bands. Examples of signal points normalized to the theoretical prediction for the signal production cross section with $ {{m}_{{\mathrm{W} _{\mathrm {KK}}}}} = $ 2.5 TeV and $ {{m}_{\mathrm{R}}} = $ 0.2 TeV (solid orange line) or 1.25 TeV (dashed purple line) are shown. |
png pdf |
Figure 8-a:
Post-fit distributions of the invariant mass of the reconstructed triboson system (${m_{\mathrm {jj}}}$, ${m_{\mathrm {jjj}}}$) in data (black points) and simulation (colored histograms) for all SRs (SRs 1-3 in the upper row, and SRs 4-6 in the lower row). Systematic uncertainties are indicated by the shaded bands. Examples of signal points normalized to the theoretical prediction for the signal production cross section with $ {{m}_{{\mathrm{W} _{\mathrm {KK}}}}} = $ 2.5 TeV and $ {{m}_{\mathrm{R}}} = $ 0.2 TeV (solid orange line) or 1.25 TeV (dashed purple line) are shown. |
png pdf |
Figure 8-b:
Post-fit distributions of the invariant mass of the reconstructed triboson system (${m_{\mathrm {jj}}}$, ${m_{\mathrm {jjj}}}$) in data (black points) and simulation (colored histograms) for all SRs (SRs 1-3 in the upper row, and SRs 4-6 in the lower row). Systematic uncertainties are indicated by the shaded bands. Examples of signal points normalized to the theoretical prediction for the signal production cross section with $ {{m}_{{\mathrm{W} _{\mathrm {KK}}}}} = $ 2.5 TeV and $ {{m}_{\mathrm{R}}} = $ 0.2 TeV (solid orange line) or 1.25 TeV (dashed purple line) are shown. |
png pdf |
Figure 8-c:
Post-fit distributions of the invariant mass of the reconstructed triboson system (${m_{\mathrm {jj}}}$, ${m_{\mathrm {jjj}}}$) in data (black points) and simulation (colored histograms) for all SRs (SRs 1-3 in the upper row, and SRs 4-6 in the lower row). Systematic uncertainties are indicated by the shaded bands. Examples of signal points normalized to the theoretical prediction for the signal production cross section with $ {{m}_{{\mathrm{W} _{\mathrm {KK}}}}} = $ 2.5 TeV and $ {{m}_{\mathrm{R}}} = $ 0.2 TeV (solid orange line) or 1.25 TeV (dashed purple line) are shown. |
png pdf |
Figure 8-d:
Post-fit distributions of the invariant mass of the reconstructed triboson system (${m_{\mathrm {jj}}}$, ${m_{\mathrm {jjj}}}$) in data (black points) and simulation (colored histograms) for all SRs (SRs 1-3 in the upper row, and SRs 4-6 in the lower row). Systematic uncertainties are indicated by the shaded bands. Examples of signal points normalized to the theoretical prediction for the signal production cross section with $ {{m}_{{\mathrm{W} _{\mathrm {KK}}}}} = $ 2.5 TeV and $ {{m}_{\mathrm{R}}} = $ 0.2 TeV (solid orange line) or 1.25 TeV (dashed purple line) are shown. |
png pdf |
Figure 8-e:
Post-fit distributions of the invariant mass of the reconstructed triboson system (${m_{\mathrm {jj}}}$, ${m_{\mathrm {jjj}}}$) in data (black points) and simulation (colored histograms) for all SRs (SRs 1-3 in the upper row, and SRs 4-6 in the lower row). Systematic uncertainties are indicated by the shaded bands. Examples of signal points normalized to the theoretical prediction for the signal production cross section with $ {{m}_{{\mathrm{W} _{\mathrm {KK}}}}} = $ 2.5 TeV and $ {{m}_{\mathrm{R}}} = $ 0.2 TeV (solid orange line) or 1.25 TeV (dashed purple line) are shown. |
png pdf |
Figure 8-f:
Post-fit distributions of the invariant mass of the reconstructed triboson system (${m_{\mathrm {jj}}}$, ${m_{\mathrm {jjj}}}$) in data (black points) and simulation (colored histograms) for all SRs (SRs 1-3 in the upper row, and SRs 4-6 in the lower row). Systematic uncertainties are indicated by the shaded bands. Examples of signal points normalized to the theoretical prediction for the signal production cross section with $ {{m}_{{\mathrm{W} _{\mathrm {KK}}}}} = $ 2.5 TeV and $ {{m}_{\mathrm{R}}} = $ 0.2 TeV (solid orange line) or 1.25 TeV (dashed purple line) are shown. |
png pdf |
Figure 9:
Left: expected (red dashed lines) and observed (solid black line) upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal cross section and the branching fraction to three W bosons from the all-hadronic search as functions of the ${\mathrm{W} _{\mathrm {KK}}}$ and R resonance masses. Right: results from combining the all-hadronic and single-lepton searches. The blue dashed lines indicate the borders for the different merged and resolved decay topologies probed, as indicated in the figure. Signals with $ {{m}_{\mathrm{R}}} $ lower than 180 GeV are not considered in this search to maintain on-shell W bosons, while for $ {{m}_{{\mathrm{W} _{\mathrm {KK}}}}} > $ 3 TeV, we only consider $ {{m}_{\mathrm{R}}} > $ 6% $\times $ ${{m}_{{\mathrm{W} _{\mathrm {KK}}}}} $. |
png pdf |
Figure 9-a:
Left: expected (red dashed lines) and observed (solid black line) upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal cross section and the branching fraction to three W bosons from the all-hadronic search as functions of the ${\mathrm{W} _{\mathrm {KK}}}$ and R resonance masses. Right: results from combining the all-hadronic and single-lepton searches. The blue dashed lines indicate the borders for the different merged and resolved decay topologies probed, as indicated in the figure. Signals with $ {{m}_{\mathrm{R}}} $ lower than 180 GeV are not considered in this search to maintain on-shell W bosons, while for $ {{m}_{{\mathrm{W} _{\mathrm {KK}}}}} > $ 3 TeV, we only consider $ {{m}_{\mathrm{R}}} > $ 6% $\times $ ${{m}_{{\mathrm{W} _{\mathrm {KK}}}}} $. |
png pdf |
Figure 9-b:
Left: expected (red dashed lines) and observed (solid black line) upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the signal cross section and the branching fraction to three W bosons from the all-hadronic search as functions of the ${\mathrm{W} _{\mathrm {KK}}}$ and R resonance masses. Right: results from combining the all-hadronic and single-lepton searches. The blue dashed lines indicate the borders for the different merged and resolved decay topologies probed, as indicated in the figure. Signals with $ {{m}_{\mathrm{R}}} $ lower than 180 GeV are not considered in this search to maintain on-shell W bosons, while for $ {{m}_{{\mathrm{W} _{\mathrm {KK}}}}} > $ 3 TeV, we only consider $ {{m}_{\mathrm{R}}} > $ 6% $\times $ ${{m}_{{\mathrm{W} _{\mathrm {KK}}}}} $. |
| Tables | |
png pdf |
Table 1:
Summary of the selection requirements for each of the signal regions. |
png pdf |
Table 2:
Matching criteria used to place a jet in one of the SM background categories (left four columns) or merged radion signal categories (right two columns). Each entry shows the required $\Delta R$ condition between the reconstructed jet j and the generator-level parton. All conditions in a column must be satisfied in order to match a jet with a particular jet substructure. For top quark decays, $\mathrm{b} _\mathrm{t} $ indicates the b quark coming directly from the top quark decay, while $\mathrm{q} _{\mathrm{W}}$ indicates a quark produced by the W boson decay. The $\mathrm{t} ^4$ category differs from $\mathrm{t} ^3$ by the presence of an additional ${\mathrm{q} /\mathrm{g}}$ with $ {p_{\mathrm {T}}} > $ 50 GeV inside the jet cone; similarly the $ {\mathrm{R} ^{4\mathrm{q}}}$ category differs from ${\mathrm{R} ^{3\mathrm{q}}}$ by the presence of an extra quark inside the jet cone. Schematic diagrams for each jet type are shown below each column. |
png pdf |
Table 3:
Sources of systematic uncertainties accounted for in the analysis. The first three sets of uncertainty sources originate from the tagger calibration. It is also indicated whether the uncertainties are evaluated for background (B) and/or signal (S), whether the uncertainty affects shape and/or rate, and the total number of nuisance parameters used per source. |
| Summary |
| A search for resonances decaying in cascade via a radion R to three W bosons, X $\to$ WR $\to$ WWW, with all W bosons decaying hadronically, has been presented. The search is performed in proton-proton collision data at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV, corresponding to a total integrated luminosity of 137 fb$^{-1}$. The final states include two or three massive, large-radius jets containing the decay products of the hadronically decaying W bosons, where the two-jet case corresponds to events where the radion decay products are reconstructed as a single merged jet, and the three-jet case corresponds to cases where the each W boson from the radion decay is reconstructed as a massive jet. Results are combined with a complementary and orthogonal search in the single-lepton channel to set the most stringent limits to date on the production cross section of a triboson resonance in an extended warped extra-dimensional model. |
| References | ||||
| 1 | CMS Collaboration | Identification of heavy, energetic, hadronically decaying particles using machine-learning techniques | JINST 15 (2020) P06005 | CMS-JME-18-002 2004.08262 |
| 2 | CMS Collaboration | A search for the standard model Higgs boson decaying to charm quarks | JHEP 03 (2020) 131 | CMS-HIG-18-031 1912.01662 |
| 3 | K. Agashe et al. | Flavor universal resonances and warped gravity | JHEP 1701 (2017) 016 | |
| 4 | K. Agashe et al. | Lhc signals from cascade decays of warped vector resonances | JHEP 1705 (2017) 078 | |
| 5 | K. Agashe et al. | Dedicated strategies for triboson signals from cascade decays of vector resonances | PRD 99 (2019) 075016 | |
| 6 | K. Agashe et al. | Detecting a boosted diboson resonance | JHEP 1811 (2018) 027 | |
| 7 | Y.-P. Kuang, H.-Y. Ren, and L.-H. Xia | Further investigation of the model-independent probe of heavy neutral Higgs bosons at LHC Run 2 | CPC 40 (2016) 023101 | 1506.08007 |
| 8 | H.-Y. Ren, L.-H. Xia, and Y.-P. Kuang | Model-independent probe of anomalous heavy neutral Higgs bosons at the LHC | PRD 90 (2014) 115002 | 1404.6367 |
| 9 | W. D. Goldberger and M. B. Wise | Modulus stabilization with bulk fields | PRL (1999) 4922 | hep-ph/9907447 |
| 10 | CMS Collaboration | Search for resonances decaying to triple w-boson final states in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV | CMS-PAS-B2G-20-001 | CMS-PAS-B2G-20-001 |
| 11 | 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 |
| 12 | CMS Collaboration | The CMS trigger system | JINST 12 (2017) P01020 | CMS-TRG-12-001 1609.02366 |
| 13 | CMS Collaboration | The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC | JINST 3 (2008) S08004 | CMS-00-001 |
| 14 | CMS Collaboration | Precision luminosity measurement in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV in 2015 and 2016 at CMS | 2021. Submitted to EPJC | CMS-LUM-17-003 2104.01927 |
| 15 | CMS Collaboration | CMS luminosity measurement for the 2017 data-taking period at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV | CMS-PAS-LUM-17-004 | CMS-PAS-LUM-17-004 |
| 16 | CMS Collaboration | CMS luminosity measurement for the 2018 data-taking period at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV | CMS-PAS-LUM-18-002 | CMS-PAS-LUM-18-002 |
| 17 | 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 |
| 18 | T. Melia, P. Nason, R. Rontsch, and G. Zanderighi | $ \text{W}^{+}\text{W}^{-} $, $ \mathrm{W}\mathrm{Z} $ and $ \mathrm{Z}\mathrm{Z} $ production in the POWHEG BOX | JHEP 11 (2011) 078 | 1107.5051 |
| 19 | P. Nason | A new method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms | JHEP 11 (2004) 040 | hep-ph/0409146 |
| 20 | S. Frixione, P. Nason, and C. Oleari | Matching NLO QCD computations with parton shower simulations: the POWHEG method | JHEP 11 (2007) 070 | 0709.2092 |
| 21 | 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 |
| 22 | 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 |
| 23 | NNPDF Collaboration | Parton distributions for the LHC run II | JHEP 04 (2015) 040 | 1410.8849 |
| 24 | NNPDF Collaboration | Parton distributions from high-precision collider data | EPJC 77 (2017) 663 | 1706.00428 |
| 25 | T. Sjostrand et al. | An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2 | CPC 191 (2015) 159 | 1410.3012 |
| 26 | CMS Collaboration | Event generator tunes obtained from underlying event and multiparton scattering measurements | EPJC 76 (2016) 155 | CMS-GEN-14-001 1512.00815 |
| 27 | 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 |
| 28 | GEANT4 Collaboration | GEANT4--a simulation toolkit | NIMA 506 (2003) 250 | |
| 29 | J. Allison et al. | GEANT4 developments and applications | IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 53 (2006) 270 | |
| 30 | CMS Collaboration | Measurement of the inclusive $ \mathrm{W} $ and $ \mathrm{Z} $ production cross sections in $ {\mathrm{p}}{\mathrm{p}} $ collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 7 TeV with the CMS experiment | JHEP 10 (2011) 132 | CMS-EWK-10-005 1107.4789 |
| 31 | M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez | The anti-$ k_t $ jet clustering algorithm | JHEP 04 (2008) 063 | 0802.1189 |
| 32 | M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez | FastJet user manual | EPJC 72 (2012) 1896 | 1111.6097 |
| 33 | CMS Collaboration | Particle-flow reconstruction and global event description with the CMS detector | JINST 12 (2017) P10003 | CMS-PRF-14-001 1706.04965 |
| 34 | CMS Collaboration | Pileup mitigation at CMS in 13 TeV data | JINST 15 (2020) P09018 | CMS-JME-18-001 2003.00503 |
| 35 | D. Bertolini, P. Harris, M. Low, and N. Tran | Pileup Per Particle Identification | JHEP 10 (2014) 059 | 1407.6013 |
| 36 | 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 |
| 37 | CMS Collaboration | Identification of heavy-flavour jets with the CMS detector in $ {{\mathrm{p}}{\mathrm{p}}} $ collisions at 13 TeV | JINST 13 (2018) P05011 | CMS-BTV-16-002 1712.07158 |
| 38 | CMS Collaboration | Performance of missing transverse momentum reconstruction in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV using the CMS detector | JINST 14 (2019) P07004 | CMS-JME-17-001 1903.06078 |
| 39 | M. Dasgupta, A. Fregoso, S. Marzani, and G. P. Salam | Towards an understanding of jet substructure | JHEP 09 (2013) 029 | 1307.0007 |
| 40 | J. M. Butterworth, A. R. Davison, M. Rubin, and G. P. Salam | Jet substructure as a new Higgs search channel at the LHC | PRL 100 (2008) 242001 | 0802.2470 |
| 41 | A. J. Larkoski, S. Marzani, G. Soyez, and J. Thaler | Soft drop | JHEP 05 (2014) 146 | 1402.2657 |
| 42 | CMS Collaboration | Identification techniques for highly boosted W bosons that decay into hadrons | JHEP 12 (2014) 017 | CMS-JME-13-006 1410.4227 |
| 43 | 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 |
| 44 | CMS Collaboration | Performance of electron reconstruction and selection with the CMS detector in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 8 TeV | JINST 10 (2015) P06005 | CMS-EGM-13-001 1502.02701 |
| 45 | D. Krohn, J. Thaler, and L. Wang | Jet trimming | JHEP 02 (2010) 084 | 0912.1342 |
| 46 | J. Thaler and K. Van Tilburg | Maximizing boosted top identification by minimizing $ N $-subjettiness | JHEP 02 (2012) 093 | 1108.2701 |
| 47 | CMS Collaboration | Measurement of the inelastic proton-proton cross section at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV | JHEP 07 (2018) 161 | CMS-FSQ-15-005 1802.02613 |
| 48 | G. Cowan, K. Cranmer, E. Gross, and O. Vitells | Asymptotic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics | EPJC 71 (2011) 1554 | 1007.1727 |
| 49 | T. Junk | Confidence level computation for combining searches with small statistics | NIMA 434 (1999) 435 | hep-ex/9902006 |
| 50 | A. L. Read | Presentation of search results: The CLs technique | JPG 28 (2002) 2693 | |
|
|
Compact Muon Solenoid LHC, CERN |
|
|
|
|
|
|