Compact Muon Solenoid
LHC, CERN
Visit us: CMS Public Website, CMS Physics ;
Contact us: CMS Publications Committee
| CMS-PAS-SMP-20-016 | ||
| Measurement of the electroweak production of Z$\gamma$ and two jets in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV and constraints on dimension 8 operators | ||
| CMS Collaboration | ||
| March 2021 | ||
| Abstract: A measurement of the electroweak (EW) production of a Z boson, a photon, and two jets (Z$\gamma$jj) in proton-proton collisions and constraints on anomalous quartic gauge couplings are presented. Proton-proton collision data corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 137 fb$^{-1}$, collected with the CMS detector at the LHC, at a center of mass collision energy of $\sqrt{s}=$ 13 TeV are used. The signal is extracted by requiring a large dijet invariant mass ($m_{jj}$) and a large pseudorapidity separation between the two jets ($|\Delta\eta_{jj}|$). The fiducial cross section measured for the EW production is $\sigma_{\text{EW}} = $ 5.21 $\pm$ 0.76 fb = 5.21 $\pm$ 0.52 (stat) $\pm$ 0.56 (syst) fb. The observed and expected signal significance is higher than 5 standard deviations. Differential cross sections as functions of the photon, leptons and jets leading transverse momenta distributions and the $m_{jj}$-$|\Delta\eta_{jj}|$ two-dimensional distribution are measured. Exclusion limits on the dimension-eight operators $M_{0-7}$ and $T_{0-2,5-9}$ in the effective field theory framework at 95% confidence level are reported. | ||
|
Links:
CDS record (PDF) ;
CADI line (restricted) ;
These preliminary results are superseded in this paper, Submitted to PRD. The superseded preliminary plots can be found here. |
||
| Figures | |
png pdf |
Figure 1:
Representative Feynman diagrams for Z$\gamma $jj production. The diagrams (except lower right) involve only EW vertices: (upper left) bremsstrahlung, (upper center) multiperipheral, (upper right) VBF with TGCs, (lower left) VBS via W boson, (lower center) VBS with QGC, while the lower right diagram represents a QCD-induced contribution. |
png pdf |
Figure 1-a:
Representative Feynman diagrams for Z$\gamma $jj production. The diagrams (except lower right) involve only EW vertices: (upper left) bremsstrahlung, (upper center) multiperipheral, (upper right) VBF with TGCs, (lower left) VBS via W boson, (lower center) VBS with QGC, while the lower right diagram represents a QCD-induced contribution. |
png pdf |
Figure 1-b:
Representative Feynman diagrams for Z$\gamma $jj production. The diagrams (except lower right) involve only EW vertices: (upper left) bremsstrahlung, (upper center) multiperipheral, (upper right) VBF with TGCs, (lower left) VBS via W boson, (lower center) VBS with QGC, while the lower right diagram represents a QCD-induced contribution. |
png pdf |
Figure 1-c:
Representative Feynman diagrams for Z$\gamma $jj production. The diagrams (except lower right) involve only EW vertices: (upper left) bremsstrahlung, (upper center) multiperipheral, (upper right) VBF with TGCs, (lower left) VBS via W boson, (lower center) VBS with QGC, while the lower right diagram represents a QCD-induced contribution. |
png pdf |
Figure 1-d:
Representative Feynman diagrams for Z$\gamma $jj production. The diagrams (except lower right) involve only EW vertices: (upper left) bremsstrahlung, (upper center) multiperipheral, (upper right) VBF with TGCs, (lower left) VBS via W boson, (lower center) VBS with QGC, while the lower right diagram represents a QCD-induced contribution. |
png pdf |
Figure 1-e:
Representative Feynman diagrams for Z$\gamma $jj production. The diagrams (except lower right) involve only EW vertices: (upper left) bremsstrahlung, (upper center) multiperipheral, (upper right) VBF with TGCs, (lower left) VBS via W boson, (lower center) VBS with QGC, while the lower right diagram represents a QCD-induced contribution. |
png pdf |
Figure 1-f:
Representative Feynman diagrams for Z$\gamma $jj production. The diagrams (except lower right) involve only EW vertices: (upper left) bremsstrahlung, (upper center) multiperipheral, (upper right) VBF with TGCs, (lower left) VBS via W boson, (lower center) VBS with QGC, while the lower right diagram represents a QCD-induced contribution. |
png pdf |
Figure 2:
The pre-fit $m_{jj}$ distributions for the dilepton + $\gamma _{\text {barrel}}$ events are shown on the left for the dielectron and on the right for the dimuon categories with three years combined data-taking. The data are compared to the sum of the signal and the background contribution. The black points with error bars represent the data and their uncertainties, while the hatched bands represent the statistical uncertainty on the combined signal and background expectations. The last bin includes overflow events. The bottom pad shows the ratio of the data to the expectation. The last bin includes overflow events. |
png pdf |
Figure 2-a:
The pre-fit $m_{jj}$ distributions for the dilepton + $\gamma _{\text {barrel}}$ events are shown on the left for the dielectron and on the right for the dimuon categories with three years combined data-taking. The data are compared to the sum of the signal and the background contribution. The black points with error bars represent the data and their uncertainties, while the hatched bands represent the statistical uncertainty on the combined signal and background expectations. The last bin includes overflow events. The bottom pad shows the ratio of the data to the expectation. The last bin includes overflow events. |
png pdf |
Figure 2-b:
The pre-fit $m_{jj}$ distributions for the dilepton + $\gamma _{\text {barrel}}$ events are shown on the left for the dielectron and on the right for the dimuon categories with three years combined data-taking. The data are compared to the sum of the signal and the background contribution. The black points with error bars represent the data and their uncertainties, while the hatched bands represent the statistical uncertainty on the combined signal and background expectations. The last bin includes overflow events. The bottom pad shows the ratio of the data to the expectation. The last bin includes overflow events. |
png pdf |
Figure 3:
The pre-fit $m_{jj}$ distributions for the dilepton + $\gamma _{\text {endcap}}$ events are shown on the left for the dielectron and on the right for the dimuon categories with three years combined data-taking. The data are compared to the sum of the signal and the background contribution. The black points with error bars represent the data and their uncertainties, while the hatched bands represent the statistical uncertainty on the combined signal and background expectations. The last bin includes overflow events. The bottom pad shows the ratio of the data to the expectation. The last bin includes overflow events. |
png pdf |
Figure 3-a:
The pre-fit $m_{jj}$ distributions for the dilepton + $\gamma _{\text {endcap}}$ events are shown on the left for the dielectron and on the right for the dimuon categories with three years combined data-taking. The data are compared to the sum of the signal and the background contribution. The black points with error bars represent the data and their uncertainties, while the hatched bands represent the statistical uncertainty on the combined signal and background expectations. The last bin includes overflow events. The bottom pad shows the ratio of the data to the expectation. The last bin includes overflow events. |
png pdf |
Figure 3-b:
The pre-fit $m_{jj}$ distributions for the dilepton + $\gamma _{\text {endcap}}$ events are shown on the left for the dielectron and on the right for the dimuon categories with three years combined data-taking. The data are compared to the sum of the signal and the background contribution. The black points with error bars represent the data and their uncertainties, while the hatched bands represent the statistical uncertainty on the combined signal and background expectations. The last bin includes overflow events. The bottom pad shows the ratio of the data to the expectation. The last bin includes overflow events. |
png pdf |
Figure 4:
The post-fit 2D distributions of the dielectron (left) and dimuon (right) + $\gamma _{\text {barrel}}$ categories as a function of $m_\mathrm {jj}$ in bins of $|\Delta \eta _{\mathrm {jj}}|$. The horizontal axis is split into bins of $|\Delta \eta _{\mathrm {jj}}|$ of [2.5, 4.5], (4.5, 6.0], and $ >$ 6.0. The data are compared to the signal and background in the predictions. The black points with error bars represent the data and statistical uncertainties of data, the hatched bands represent the full uncertainties of the predictions. |
png pdf |
Figure 4-a:
The post-fit 2D distributions of the dielectron (left) and dimuon (right) + $\gamma _{\text {barrel}}$ categories as a function of $m_\mathrm {jj}$ in bins of $|\Delta \eta _{\mathrm {jj}}|$. The horizontal axis is split into bins of $|\Delta \eta _{\mathrm {jj}}|$ of [2.5, 4.5], (4.5, 6.0], and $ >$ 6.0. The data are compared to the signal and background in the predictions. The black points with error bars represent the data and statistical uncertainties of data, the hatched bands represent the full uncertainties of the predictions. |
png pdf |
Figure 4-b:
The post-fit 2D distributions of the dielectron (left) and dimuon (right) + $\gamma _{\text {barrel}}$ categories as a function of $m_\mathrm {jj}$ in bins of $|\Delta \eta _{\mathrm {jj}}|$. The horizontal axis is split into bins of $|\Delta \eta _{\mathrm {jj}}|$ of [2.5, 4.5], (4.5, 6.0], and $ >$ 6.0. The data are compared to the signal and background in the predictions. The black points with error bars represent the data and statistical uncertainties of data, the hatched bands represent the full uncertainties of the predictions. |
png pdf |
Figure 5:
The post-fit 2D distributions of the dielectron (left) and dimuon (right) + $\gamma _{\text {endcap}}$ categories as a function of $m_\mathrm {jj}$ in bins of $|\Delta \eta _{\mathrm {jj}}|$. The horizontal axis is split into bins of $|\Delta \eta _{\mathrm {jj}}|$ of [2.5, 4.5], (4.5, 6.0], and $ > $ 6.0. The data are compared to the signal and background in the predictions. The black points with error bars represent the data and statistical uncertainties of data, the hatched bands represent the full uncertainties of the predictions. |
png pdf |
Figure 5-a:
The post-fit 2D distributions of the dielectron (left) and dimuon (right) + $\gamma _{\text {endcap}}$ categories as a function of $m_\mathrm {jj}$ in bins of $|\Delta \eta _{\mathrm {jj}}|$. The horizontal axis is split into bins of $|\Delta \eta _{\mathrm {jj}}|$ of [2.5, 4.5], (4.5, 6.0], and $ > $ 6.0. The data are compared to the signal and background in the predictions. The black points with error bars represent the data and statistical uncertainties of data, the hatched bands represent the full uncertainties of the predictions. |
png pdf |
Figure 5-b:
The post-fit 2D distributions of the dielectron (left) and dimuon (right) + $\gamma _{\text {endcap}}$ categories as a function of $m_\mathrm {jj}$ in bins of $|\Delta \eta _{\mathrm {jj}}|$. The horizontal axis is split into bins of $|\Delta \eta _{\mathrm {jj}}|$ of [2.5, 4.5], (4.5, 6.0], and $ > $ 6.0. The data are compared to the signal and background in the predictions. The black points with error bars represent the data and statistical uncertainties of data, the hatched bands represent the full uncertainties of the predictions. |
png pdf |
Figure 6:
The post-fit distributions in the control region for the dielectron (left) and dimuon (right) + $\gamma _{\text {barrel}}$ categories as a function of $m_\mathrm {jj}$. The horizontal axis is split into bins of $m_{jj}$ of [150, 300), [300, 400), and [400,500). The black points with error bars represent the data and statistical uncertainties of data, the hatched bands represent the full uncertainties of the predictions. |
png pdf |
Figure 6-a:
The post-fit distributions in the control region for the dielectron (left) and dimuon (right) + $\gamma _{\text {barrel}}$ categories as a function of $m_\mathrm {jj}$. The horizontal axis is split into bins of $m_{jj}$ of [150, 300), [300, 400), and [400,500). The black points with error bars represent the data and statistical uncertainties of data, the hatched bands represent the full uncertainties of the predictions. |
png pdf |
Figure 6-b:
The post-fit distributions in the control region for the dielectron (left) and dimuon (right) + $\gamma _{\text {barrel}}$ categories as a function of $m_\mathrm {jj}$. The horizontal axis is split into bins of $m_{jj}$ of [150, 300), [300, 400), and [400,500). The black points with error bars represent the data and statistical uncertainties of data, the hatched bands represent the full uncertainties of the predictions. |
png pdf |
Figure 7:
The post-fit distributions in the control region for the dielectron (left) and dimuon (right) + $\gamma _{\text {endcap}}$ categories as a function of $m_\mathrm {jj}$. The horizontal axis is split into bins of $m_{jj}$ of [150, 300), [300, 400), and [400,500). The black points with error bars represent the data and statistical uncertainties of data, the hatched bands represent the full uncertainties of the predictions. |
png pdf |
Figure 7-a:
The post-fit distributions in the control region for the dielectron (left) and dimuon (right) + $\gamma _{\text {endcap}}$ categories as a function of $m_\mathrm {jj}$. The horizontal axis is split into bins of $m_{jj}$ of [150, 300), [300, 400), and [400,500). The black points with error bars represent the data and statistical uncertainties of data, the hatched bands represent the full uncertainties of the predictions. |
png pdf |
Figure 7-b:
The post-fit distributions in the control region for the dielectron (left) and dimuon (right) + $\gamma _{\text {endcap}}$ categories as a function of $m_\mathrm {jj}$. The horizontal axis is split into bins of $m_{jj}$ of [150, 300), [300, 400), and [400,500). The black points with error bars represent the data and statistical uncertainties of data, the hatched bands represent the full uncertainties of the predictions. |
png pdf |
Figure 8:
Unfolded differential cross section as a function of the leading lepton $p_{\mathrm{T}}$, leading jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$, leading photon $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ and $m_{jj}$-$|\Delta \eta _{jj}|$ for EW Z$\gamma $jj. |
png pdf |
Figure 8-a:
Unfolded differential cross section as a function of the leading lepton $p_{\mathrm{T}}$, leading jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$, leading photon $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ and $m_{jj}$-$|\Delta \eta _{jj}|$ for EW Z$\gamma $jj. |
png pdf |
Figure 8-b:
Unfolded differential cross section as a function of the leading lepton $p_{\mathrm{T}}$, leading jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$, leading photon $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ and $m_{jj}$-$|\Delta \eta _{jj}|$ for EW Z$\gamma $jj. |
png pdf |
Figure 8-c:
Unfolded differential cross section as a function of the leading lepton $p_{\mathrm{T}}$, leading jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$, leading photon $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ and $m_{jj}$-$|\Delta \eta _{jj}|$ for EW Z$\gamma $jj. |
png pdf |
Figure 8-d:
Unfolded differential cross section as a function of the leading lepton $p_{\mathrm{T}}$, leading jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$, leading photon $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ and $m_{jj}$-$|\Delta \eta _{jj}|$ for EW Z$\gamma $jj. |
png pdf |
Figure 9:
Unfolded differential cross section as a function of the leading lepton $p_{\mathrm{T}}$, leading photon $p_{\mathrm{T}}$, leading jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ and $m_{jj}$-$|\Delta \eta _{jj}|$ for EW+QCD Z$\gamma $jj. |
png pdf |
Figure 9-a:
Unfolded differential cross section as a function of the leading lepton $p_{\mathrm{T}}$, leading photon $p_{\mathrm{T}}$, leading jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ and $m_{jj}$-$|\Delta \eta _{jj}|$ for EW+QCD Z$\gamma $jj. |
png pdf |
Figure 9-b:
Unfolded differential cross section as a function of the leading lepton $p_{\mathrm{T}}$, leading photon $p_{\mathrm{T}}$, leading jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ and $m_{jj}$-$|\Delta \eta _{jj}|$ for EW+QCD Z$\gamma $jj. |
png pdf |
Figure 9-c:
Unfolded differential cross section as a function of the leading lepton $p_{\mathrm{T}}$, leading photon $p_{\mathrm{T}}$, leading jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ and $m_{jj}$-$|\Delta \eta _{jj}|$ for EW+QCD Z$\gamma $jj. |
png pdf |
Figure 9-d:
Unfolded differential cross section as a function of the leading lepton $p_{\mathrm{T}}$, leading photon $p_{\mathrm{T}}$, leading jet $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ and $m_{jj}$-$|\Delta \eta _{jj}|$ for EW+QCD Z$\gamma $jj. |
png pdf |
Figure 10:
The $m_{\mathrm{Z} \gamma}$ distribution for events satisfying the aQGC region selection, which is used to set constraints on the anomalous coupling parameters. The bins of $m_{\mathrm{Z} \gamma}$ are [100, 400, 600, 800, 1000, 1200, 2000) GeV, where the last bin includes overflow. The red line represents a nonzero $F_{\mathrm {T,8}}$ value and the blue line represents a nonzero $F_{\mathrm {T,9}}$ value, which would significantly enhance the yields at high $m_{\mathrm{Z} \gamma}$. The hatched bands represent the statistical uncertainties in the predictions. |
| Tables | |
png pdf |
Table 1:
Summary of the five sets of event-selection criteria used to define events in the control region selection, EW signal extraction, fiducial cross section measurement region, and region used to search for aQGC contributions. |
png pdf |
Table 2:
The impact of the systematic uncertainties on the EW signal strength measurement. |
png pdf |
Table 3:
Post-fit signal and background yields and observed event counts in data after the selection in the search for EW signal. The $\gamma _{\text {barrel}}$ and $\gamma _{\text {endcap}}$ represent events with photons in the ECAL barrel and endcaps, respectively. |
png pdf |
Table 4:
The signal strengths and differential cross section from expectation and fit calculated as part of the unfolding of $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma}$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{j_1}$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\ell _1}$ observables for EW Z$\gamma $jj. |
png pdf |
Table 5:
The signal strengths and differential cross section from expectation and fit calculated as part of the unfolding of 2D $m_{jj}$-$|\Delta \eta _{jj}|$ observables for EW Z$\gamma $jj. |
png pdf |
Table 6:
The signal strengths and differential cross section from expectation and fit calculated as part of the unfolding of $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma}$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{j_1}$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\ell _1}$ observables for EW+QCD Z$\gamma $jj. |
png pdf |
Table 7:
The signal strengths and differential cross section from expectation and fit calculated as part of the unfolding of 2D $m_{jj}$-$|\Delta \eta _{jj}|$ observables for EW+QCD Z$\gamma $jj. |
png pdf |
Table 8:
The 95% CL expected and observed exclusion limits for $F_{\mathrm {M}_{0-7}}$ and $F_{\mathrm {T}_{0-2,5-9}}$ parameters. The observed limits without considering the systematic uncertainties are also reported. The last column presents the scattering energy values for which the amplitude would violate unitarity for the observed value of the aQGC parameter. |
| Summary |
| This note presents a measurement of the electroweak (EW) production of a Z boson, a photon, and two jets (Z$\gamma$jj) in $\sqrt{s}=$13 TeV data corresponding to 137$^{-1}$ fb of proton-proton collisions recorded by the CMS detector. Events were selected by requiring two opposite sign leptons with the same flavor from Z boson decaying, one identified photon, and two jets that have a large separation in pseudorapidity and a large dijet mass. The cross section for EW Z$\gamma$jj production is 5.21 $\pm$ 0.52 (stat) $\pm$ 0.56 (syst) fb $=$ 5.21 $\pm$ 0.76 fb, and the fiducial cross section of EW and QCD-induced production is 14.7 $\pm$ 0.80 (stat) $\pm$ 1.26 (syst) fb $=$ 14.7 $\pm$ 1.53 fb. The observed and expected signal significance is higher than 5 SD. Differential cross sections are measured for several observables and compared to standard model predictions computed at leading order. Within the uncertainties, the measurements agree with the predictions. Constraints set on the dimension-eight operators $M_{0-7}$, $T_{0-2,5-9}$ in effective field theory are either competitive with or more stringent than those previously obtained. |
| References | ||||
| 1 | ATLAS Collaboration | Observation of a new particle in the search for the standard model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC | PLB 716 (2012) 1 | 1207.7214 |
| 2 | CMS Collaboration | Observation of a new boson at a mass of 125 GeV with the CMS experiment at the LHC | PLB 716 (2012) 30 | CMS-HIG-12-028 1207.7235 |
| 3 | CMS Collaboration | Observation of a new boson with mass near 125 GeV in $ {\mathrm{p}}{\mathrm{p}} $ collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 7 and 8 TeV | JHEP 06 (2013) 081 | CMS-HIG-12-036 1303.4571 |
| 4 | ATLAS, CMS Collaboration | Measurements of the Higgs boson production and decay rates and constraints on its couplings from a combined ATLAS and CMS analysis of the LHC pp collision data at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 7 and 8 TeV | JHEP 08 (2016) 045 | 1606.02266 |
| 5 | CMS Collaboration | Combined measurements of Higgs boson couplings in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV | EPJC 79 (2019) 421 | CMS-HIG-17-031 1809.10733 |
| 6 | O. J. P. Éboli, M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia, and J. K. Mizukoshi | $ {\mathrm{p}}{\mathrm{p}} \rightarrow $ jje$ ^\pm \mu^\pm \nu\nu $ and jje$ ^\pm\mu^\mp\nu\nu $ at $ \cal $ O($ \alpha^6_{\rm em} $) and $ \cal $ O($ \alpha_{\rm em}^4 \alpha_{\rm s}^2 $) for the study of the quartic electroweak gauge boson vertex at CERN LHC | PRD 74 (2006) 073005 | hep-ph/0606118 |
| 7 | ATLAS Collaboration | Evidence for electroweak production of two jets in association with a $ Z\gamma $ pair in $ pp $ collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector | PLB 803 (2020) 135341 | 1910.09503 |
| 8 | CMS Collaboration | Measurement of the cross section for electroweak production of a Z boson, a photon and two jets in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV and constraints on anomalous quartic couplings | JHEP 06 (2020) 076 | CMS-SMP-18-007 2002.09902 |
| 9 | CMS Collaboration | The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC | JINST 3 (2008) S08004 | CMS-00-001 |
| 10 | CMS Collaboration | The CMS trigger system | JINST 12 (2017) P01020 | CMS-TRG-12-001 1609.02366 |
| 11 | 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 |
| 12 | 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 |
| 13 | P. Nason | A new method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms | JHEP 11 (2004) 040 | hep-ph/0409146 |
| 14 | S. Frixione, P. Nason, and C. Oleari | Matching NLO QCD computations with parton shower simulations: the POWHEG method | JHEP 11 (2007) 070 | 0709.2092 |
| 15 | 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 |
| 16 | T. Sjostrand et al. | An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2 | CPC 191 (2015) 159 | 1410.3012 |
| 17 | R. Frederix and S. Frixione | Merging meets matching in MC@NLO | JHEP 12 (2012) 061 | 1209.6215 |
| 18 | O. Mattelaer | On the maximal use of Monte Carlo samples: re-weighting events at NLO accuracy | EPJC 76 (2016) 674 | 1607.00763 |
| 19 | NNPDF Collaboration | Parton distributions for the LHC run II | JHEP 04 (2015) 040 | 1410.8849 |
| 20 | P. Skands, S. Carrazza, and J. Rojo | Tuning PYTHIA 8.1: the Monash 2013 tune | EPJC 74 (2014) 3024 | 1404.5630 |
| 21 | CMS Collaboration | Event generator tunes obtained from underlying event and multiparton scattering measurements | EPJC 76 (2016) 155 | CMS-GEN-14-001 1512.00815 |
| 22 | GEANT4 Collaboration | GEANT4--a simulation toolkit | NIMA 506 (2003) 250 | |
| 23 | GEANT4 Collaboration | GEANT4 developments and applications | IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 53 (2006) 270 | |
| 24 | CMS Collaboration | Particle-flow reconstruction and global event description with the CMS detector | JINST 12 (2017) P10003 | CMS-PRF-14-001 1706.04965 |
| 25 | M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez | The anti-$ {k_{\mathrm{T}}} $ jet clustering algorithm | JHEP 04 (2008) 063 | 0802.1189 |
| 26 | M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez | FastJet user manual | EPJC 72 (2012) 1896 | 1111.6097 |
| 27 | CMS Collaboration | Description and performance of track and primary-vertex reconstruction with the CMS tracker | JINST 9 (2014) P10009 | CMS-TRK-11-001 1405.6569 |
| 28 | 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 |
| 29 | CMS Collaboration | Energy calibration and resolution of the CMS electromagnetic calorimeter in $ {\mathrm{p}}{\mathrm{p}} $ collision at $ \sqrt{s}= $ 7 TeV | JINST 8 (2013) P09009 | CMS-EGM-11-001 1306.2016 |
| 30 | 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 |
| 31 | M. Cacciari and G. P. Salam | Pileup subtraction using jet areas | PLB 659 (2008) 119 | 0707.1378 |
| 32 | 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 |
| 33 | CMS Collaboration | Performance of photon reconstruction and identification with the CMS detector in proton-proton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 8 TeV | JINST 10 (2015) P08010 | CMS-EGM-14-001 1502.02702 |
| 34 | CMS Collaboration | Jet energy scale and resolution in the CMS experiment in $ {\mathrm{p}}{\mathrm{p}} $ collisions at 8 TeV | JINST 12 (2017) P02014 | CMS-JME-13-004 1607.03663 |
| 35 | CMS Collaboration | Pileup mitigation at CMS in 13 TeV data | JINST 15 (2020) P09018 | CMS-JME-18-001 2003.00503 |
| 36 | D. Rainwater, R. Szalapski, and D. Zeppenfeld | Probing color singlet exchange in Z+2-jets events at the CERN LHC | PRD 54 (1996) 6680 | hep-ph/9605444 |
| 37 | N. Kidonakis | Two-loop soft anomalous dimensions for single top quark associated production with a $ W^{-} $ or $ H^{-} $ | PRD 82 (2010) 054018 | 1005.4451 |
| 38 | J. Butterworth et al. | PDF4LHC recommendations for LHC Run II | JPG 43 (2016) 023001 | 1510.03865 |
| 39 | CMS Collaboration | CMS Luminosity Measurements for the 2016 Data Taking Period | CMS-PAS-LUM-17-001 | CMS-PAS-LUM-17-001 |
| 40 | 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 |
| 41 | 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 |
| 42 | S. S. Wilks | The large-sample distribution of the likelihood ratio for testing composite hypotheses | Ann. Math. Statist 9 (1938) 60 | |
| 43 | CMS Collaboration | Precise determination of the mass of the Higgs boson and tests of compatibility of its couplings with the standard model predictions using proton collisions at 7 and 8 TeV | EPJC 75 (2015) 212 | CMS-HIG-14-009 1412.8662 |
| 44 | E. d. S. Almeida, O. J. P. Éboli, and M. C. Gonzalez-Garcia | Unitarity constraints on anomalous quartic couplings | PRD 101 (2020), no. 11, 113003 | 2004.05174 |
|
|
Compact Muon Solenoid LHC, CERN |
|
|
|
|
|
|