CMS-PAS-SUS-23-004

CMS-PAS-SUS-23-004
Search for dark matter production in association with a single top quark
CMS Collaboration
19 July 2024

Abstract: A search for the production of a single top quark in association with invisible particles is performed on 138 fb $^{-1}$ of LHC proton-proton collision data collected at $\sqrt{s}=$ 13 TeV. In this search, a flavor-changing neutral current produces a single top quark or antiquark and an invisible state nonresonantly. The invisible state consists of a hypothetical spin-1 particle acting as a new mediator and decaying to two spin-1/2 dark matter candidates. The analysis searches for events in which the top (anti)quark decays hadronically. No significant excess compatible with that signature is observed. Exclusion limits on the masses of the spin-1 mediator and the dark matter candidates are derived and compared to constraints from the dark matter relic density measurements. In a vector (axial vector) coupling scenario, masses of the spin-1 mediator are excluded up to 1.85 (1.85) TeV with an expectation of 2.0 (2.0) TeV whereas masses of the dark matter candidates are excluded up to 750 (550) GeV with an expectation of 850 (650) GeV.
Links: CDS record (PDF) ; CADI line (restricted) ; These preliminary results are superseded in this paper, Submitted to JHEP. The superseded preliminary plots can be found here.

Figures & Tables	Summary	References	CMS Publications

Figures
png pdf	Figure 1: Representative Feynman diagram of nonresonant mono-top production at tree level via a flavor-changing neutral current mediated by the spin-1 boson V. The off-shell up quark (u) decays into an on-shell top quark (t) and a V boson. The V boson decays directly to a pair of DM candidates $\chi$ and $\overline{\chi}$ .
png pdf	Figure 2: Prefit distribution of the magnitude of the hadronic recoil $U_{\text{T}}$ in the inclusive SR, which contains all events from the SR (top-pass) as well as from the SR (top-fail). The background processes are stacked together and an representative mono-top signal (vector coupling scenario) with a mediator mass of 1 TeV and a DM candidate mass of 150 GeV is overlaid as an orange line. The mono-top signal is scaled such that the total number of signal events is equal to the total number of background events. The grey band represents the systematic and statistical uncertainties on the simulated events.
png pdf	Figure 3: Prefit distribution of the magnitude of the hadronic recoil $U_{\text{T}}$ in the SR (top-pass) and SR (top-fail). The background processes are stacked together and an representative mono-top signal (vector coupling scenario) with a mediator mass of 1 TeV and a DM candidate mass of 150 GeV is overlaid as an orange line. The mono-top signal is scaled such that the total number of signal events is equal to the total number of background events. The grey band represents the systematic and statistical uncertainties on the simulated events.
png pdf	Figure 3-a: Prefit distribution of the magnitude of the hadronic recoil $U_{\text{T}}$ in the SR (top-pass) and SR (top-fail). The background processes are stacked together and an representative mono-top signal (vector coupling scenario) with a mediator mass of 1 TeV and a DM candidate mass of 150 GeV is overlaid as an orange line. The mono-top signal is scaled such that the total number of signal events is equal to the total number of background events. The grey band represents the systematic and statistical uncertainties on the simulated events.
png pdf	Figure 3-b: Prefit distribution of the magnitude of the hadronic recoil $U_{\text{T}}$ in the SR (top-pass) and SR (top-fail). The background processes are stacked together and an representative mono-top signal (vector coupling scenario) with a mediator mass of 1 TeV and a DM candidate mass of 150 GeV is overlaid as an orange line. The mono-top signal is scaled such that the total number of signal events is equal to the total number of background events. The grey band represents the systematic and statistical uncertainties on the simulated events.
png pdf	Figure 4: Categorization of events into SRs and CRs, which are sensitive to specific process, namely the mono-top signal, $\text{V}+\text{jets}$ processes and $\text{t}\bar{\text{t}}$ production.
png pdf	Figure 5: Graphical illustration of the statistical model used for the estimation of the major background processes. This model is implemented for each bin of the hadronic recoil distribution, separately for the top-pass and top-fail regions. Each region containing charged leptons is included in this model twice, once for electrons and once for muons.
png pdf	Figure 6: Postfit distributions in the SRs after the background-only fit across all analysis regions. The $U_{\text{T}}$ distributions only contain events in the signal region, in which the top tagging requirement for the leading \text{AK15} jet is either passed (on the left) or failed (on the right). The orange line displays the prefit distribution of the mono-top signal with a mediator mass of 1 TeV and a DM candidate mass of 150 GeV for the vector coupling scenario, scaled such that the total number of signal events is equal to the total number of events of the postfit background prediction. The grey band represents the systematic and statistical uncertainties on the simulated events after the fit.
png pdf	Figure 6-a: Postfit distributions in the SRs after the background-only fit across all analysis regions. The $U_{\text{T}}$ distributions only contain events in the signal region, in which the top tagging requirement for the leading \text{AK15} jet is either passed (on the left) or failed (on the right). The orange line displays the prefit distribution of the mono-top signal with a mediator mass of 1 TeV and a DM candidate mass of 150 GeV for the vector coupling scenario, scaled such that the total number of signal events is equal to the total number of events of the postfit background prediction. The grey band represents the systematic and statistical uncertainties on the simulated events after the fit.
png pdf	Figure 6-b: Postfit distributions in the SRs after the background-only fit across all analysis regions. The $U_{\text{T}}$ distributions only contain events in the signal region, in which the top tagging requirement for the leading \text{AK15} jet is either passed (on the left) or failed (on the right). The orange line displays the prefit distribution of the mono-top signal with a mediator mass of 1 TeV and a DM candidate mass of 150 GeV for the vector coupling scenario, scaled such that the total number of signal events is equal to the total number of events of the postfit background prediction. The grey band represents the systematic and statistical uncertainties on the simulated events after the fit.
png pdf	Figure 7: Upper limits at 95% CL on $\sigma\mathcal{B}$ presented in the two-dimensional plane spanned by the mediator and DM candidate masses for a mediator mass between 200 GeV and 2500 GeV and a DM candidate mass between 50 GeV and 1250 GeV only considering on-shell decays of the mediator to the DM candidates. The mediator has vector couplings to quarks and DM candidates in the upper plot and axial vector couplings in the lower plot. In the upper plot, $g_{\text{q}}$ and $g_{\text{DM}}$ represent the values of the vector couplings $(g_{\text{V}}^{U})_{13}$ and $g_{\text{V}}^{\chi}$ of the mediator to quarks and to DM candidates, while they represent the values of the respective axial vector couplings $(g_{\text{A}}^{U})_{13}$ and $g_{\text{A}}^{\chi}$ in the lower plot. The median expected exclusion range is indicated by a black solid line, demonstrating the search sensitivity of the analysis. The 68 $\,%$ probability interval of the expected upper limit is shown in black dashed lines. Contours of theory predictions for constant values of $\sigma\mathcal{B}$ are shown in grey dashed lines. The observed exclusion contour of mediator and DM candidate masses is represented by the red solid line. The exclusion contour obtained from measurements of the DM relic density $\Omega_{\text{nbm}}h^{2}$ by the Planck collaboration is shown in the grey solid line.
png pdf	Figure 7-a: Upper limits at 95% CL on $\sigma\mathcal{B}$ presented in the two-dimensional plane spanned by the mediator and DM candidate masses for a mediator mass between 200 GeV and 2500 GeV and a DM candidate mass between 50 GeV and 1250 GeV only considering on-shell decays of the mediator to the DM candidates. The mediator has vector couplings to quarks and DM candidates in the upper plot and axial vector couplings in the lower plot. In the upper plot, $g_{\text{q}}$ and $g_{\text{DM}}$ represent the values of the vector couplings $(g_{\text{V}}^{U})_{13}$ and $g_{\text{V}}^{\chi}$ of the mediator to quarks and to DM candidates, while they represent the values of the respective axial vector couplings $(g_{\text{A}}^{U})_{13}$ and $g_{\text{A}}^{\chi}$ in the lower plot. The median expected exclusion range is indicated by a black solid line, demonstrating the search sensitivity of the analysis. The 68 $\,%$ probability interval of the expected upper limit is shown in black dashed lines. Contours of theory predictions for constant values of $\sigma\mathcal{B}$ are shown in grey dashed lines. The observed exclusion contour of mediator and DM candidate masses is represented by the red solid line. The exclusion contour obtained from measurements of the DM relic density $\Omega_{\text{nbm}}h^{2}$ by the Planck collaboration is shown in the grey solid line.
png pdf	Figure 7-b: Upper limits at 95% CL on $\sigma\mathcal{B}$ presented in the two-dimensional plane spanned by the mediator and DM candidate masses for a mediator mass between 200 GeV and 2500 GeV and a DM candidate mass between 50 GeV and 1250 GeV only considering on-shell decays of the mediator to the DM candidates. The mediator has vector couplings to quarks and DM candidates in the upper plot and axial vector couplings in the lower plot. In the upper plot, $g_{\text{q}}$ and $g_{\text{DM}}$ represent the values of the vector couplings $(g_{\text{V}}^{U})_{13}$ and $g_{\text{V}}^{\chi}$ of the mediator to quarks and to DM candidates, while they represent the values of the respective axial vector couplings $(g_{\text{A}}^{U})_{13}$ and $g_{\text{A}}^{\chi}$ in the lower plot. The median expected exclusion range is indicated by a black solid line, demonstrating the search sensitivity of the analysis. The 68 $\,%$ probability interval of the expected upper limit is shown in black dashed lines. Contours of theory predictions for constant values of $\sigma\mathcal{B}$ are shown in grey dashed lines. The observed exclusion contour of mediator and DM candidate masses is represented by the red solid line. The exclusion contour obtained from measurements of the DM relic density $\Omega_{\text{nbm}}h^{2}$ by the Planck collaboration is shown in the grey solid line.
png pdf	Figure 8: Postfit distributions in the $\mathrm{W}(\mathrm{e})$ CRs after the background-only fit across all analysis regions. The $U_{\text{T}}$ distributions only contain events, in which the top tagging requirement for the leading \text{AK15} jet is either passed (on the left) or failed (on the right). The grey band represents the systematic and statistical uncertainties on the simulated events after the fit.
png pdf	Figure 8-a: Postfit distributions in the $\mathrm{W}(\mathrm{e})$ CRs after the background-only fit across all analysis regions. The $U_{\text{T}}$ distributions only contain events, in which the top tagging requirement for the leading \text{AK15} jet is either passed (on the left) or failed (on the right). The grey band represents the systematic and statistical uncertainties on the simulated events after the fit.
png pdf	Figure 8-b: Postfit distributions in the $\mathrm{W}(\mathrm{e})$ CRs after the background-only fit across all analysis regions. The $U_{\text{T}}$ distributions only contain events, in which the top tagging requirement for the leading \text{AK15} jet is either passed (on the left) or failed (on the right). The grey band represents the systematic and statistical uncertainties on the simulated events after the fit.
png pdf	Figure 9: Postfit distributions in the $\mathrm{W}(\mu)$ CRs after the background-only fit across all analysis regions. The $U_{\text{T}}$ distributions only contain events, in which the top tagging requirement for the leading \text{AK15} jet is either passed (on the left) or failed (on the right). The grey band represents the systematic and statistical uncertainties on the simulated events after the fit.
png pdf	Figure 9-a: Postfit distributions in the $\mathrm{W}(\mu)$ CRs after the background-only fit across all analysis regions. The $U_{\text{T}}$ distributions only contain events, in which the top tagging requirement for the leading \text{AK15} jet is either passed (on the left) or failed (on the right). The grey band represents the systematic and statistical uncertainties on the simulated events after the fit.
png pdf	Figure 9-b: Postfit distributions in the $\mathrm{W}(\mu)$ CRs after the background-only fit across all analysis regions. The $U_{\text{T}}$ distributions only contain events, in which the top tagging requirement for the leading \text{AK15} jet is either passed (on the left) or failed (on the right). The grey band represents the systematic and statistical uncertainties on the simulated events after the fit.
png pdf	Figure 10: Postfit distributions in the $\mathrm{Z}(\mathrm{e}\mathrm{e})$ CRs after the background-only fit across all analysis regions. The $U_{\text{T}}$ distributions only contain events, in which the top tagging requirement for the leading \text{AK15} jet is either passed (on the left) or failed (on the right). The grey band represents the systematic and statistical uncertainties on the simulated events after the fit.
png pdf	Figure 10-a: Postfit distributions in the $\mathrm{Z}(\mathrm{e}\mathrm{e})$ CRs after the background-only fit across all analysis regions. The $U_{\text{T}}$ distributions only contain events, in which the top tagging requirement for the leading \text{AK15} jet is either passed (on the left) or failed (on the right). The grey band represents the systematic and statistical uncertainties on the simulated events after the fit.
png pdf	Figure 10-b: Postfit distributions in the $\mathrm{Z}(\mathrm{e}\mathrm{e})$ CRs after the background-only fit across all analysis regions. The $U_{\text{T}}$ distributions only contain events, in which the top tagging requirement for the leading \text{AK15} jet is either passed (on the left) or failed (on the right). The grey band represents the systematic and statistical uncertainties on the simulated events after the fit.
png pdf	Figure 11: Postfit distributions in the $\mathrm{Z}(\mu\mu)$ CRs after the background-only fit across all analysis regions. The $U_{\text{T}}$ distributions only contain events, in which the top tagging requirement for the leading \text{AK15} jet is either passed (on the left) or failed (on the right). The grey band represents the systematic and statistical uncertainties on the simulated events after the fit.
png pdf	Figure 11-a: Postfit distributions in the $\mathrm{Z}(\mu\mu)$ CRs after the background-only fit across all analysis regions. The $U_{\text{T}}$ distributions only contain events, in which the top tagging requirement for the leading \text{AK15} jet is either passed (on the left) or failed (on the right). The grey band represents the systematic and statistical uncertainties on the simulated events after the fit.
png pdf	Figure 11-b: Postfit distributions in the $\mathrm{Z}(\mu\mu)$ CRs after the background-only fit across all analysis regions. The $U_{\text{T}}$ distributions only contain events, in which the top tagging requirement for the leading \text{AK15} jet is either passed (on the left) or failed (on the right). The grey band represents the systematic and statistical uncertainties on the simulated events after the fit.
png pdf	Figure 12: Postfit distributions in the $\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}(\mathrm{e})$ CRs after the background-only fit across all analysis regions. The $U_{\text{T}}$ distributions only contain events, in which the top tagging requirement for the leading \text{AK15} jet is either passed (on the left) or failed (on the right). The grey band represents the systematic and statistical uncertainties on the simulated events after the fit.
png pdf	Figure 12-a: Postfit distributions in the $\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}(\mathrm{e})$ CRs after the background-only fit across all analysis regions. The $U_{\text{T}}$ distributions only contain events, in which the top tagging requirement for the leading \text{AK15} jet is either passed (on the left) or failed (on the right). The grey band represents the systematic and statistical uncertainties on the simulated events after the fit.
png pdf	Figure 12-b: Postfit distributions in the $\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}(\mathrm{e})$ CRs after the background-only fit across all analysis regions. The $U_{\text{T}}$ distributions only contain events, in which the top tagging requirement for the leading \text{AK15} jet is either passed (on the left) or failed (on the right). The grey band represents the systematic and statistical uncertainties on the simulated events after the fit.
png pdf	Figure 13: Postfit distributions in the $\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}(\mu)$ CRs after the background-only fit across all analysis regions. The $U_{\text{T}}$ distributions only contain events, in which the top tagging requirement for the leading \text{AK15} jet is either passed (on the left) or failed (on the right). The grey band represents the systematic and statistical uncertainties on the simulated events after the fit.
png pdf	Figure 13-a: Postfit distributions in the $\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}(\mu)$ CRs after the background-only fit across all analysis regions. The $U_{\text{T}}$ distributions only contain events, in which the top tagging requirement for the leading \text{AK15} jet is either passed (on the left) or failed (on the right). The grey band represents the systematic and statistical uncertainties on the simulated events after the fit.
png pdf	Figure 13-b: Postfit distributions in the $\mathrm{t}\bar{\mathrm{t}}(\mu)$ CRs after the background-only fit across all analysis regions. The $U_{\text{T}}$ distributions only contain events, in which the top tagging requirement for the leading \text{AK15} jet is either passed (on the left) or failed (on the right). The grey band represents the systematic and statistical uncertainties on the simulated events after the fit.
png pdf	Figure 14: Postfit distributions in the $\gamma$ CRs after the background-only fit across all analysis regions. The $U_{\text{T}}$ distributions only contain events, in which the top tagging requirement for the leading \text{AK15} jet is either passed (on the left) or failed (on the right). The grey band represents the systematic and statistical uncertainties on the simulated events after the fit.
png pdf	Figure 14-a: Postfit distributions in the $\gamma$ CRs after the background-only fit across all analysis regions. The $U_{\text{T}}$ distributions only contain events, in which the top tagging requirement for the leading \text{AK15} jet is either passed (on the left) or failed (on the right). The grey band represents the systematic and statistical uncertainties on the simulated events after the fit.
png pdf	Figure 14-b: Postfit distributions in the $\gamma$ CRs after the background-only fit across all analysis regions. The $U_{\text{T}}$ distributions only contain events, in which the top tagging requirement for the leading \text{AK15} jet is either passed (on the left) or failed (on the right). The grey band represents the systematic and statistical uncertainties on the simulated events after the fit.

Tables
png pdf	Table 1: Requirements on the $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ of the object, which fired the trigger, for the $p_{\text{T}}^{\text{miss,no} \mu}$ trigger, the electron trigger, and the photon trigger, in 2016, 2017 and 2018.
png pdf	Table 2: The analysis pre-selection.
png pdf	Table 3: Analysis selections for the signal and background CRs. These selections are applied in addition to the pre-selections in Table 2. Each of the leptonic CRs exists twice, once for electron flavor and once for muon flavor.

Summary

A search for DM produced in association with a single top quark via a flavor changing neutral current, called nonresonant mono-top production, was presented. The analysis was performed using data collected by the CMS experiment in 2016, 2017, and 2018 at the LHC at

$\sqrt{s} =$ 13 TeV, and corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 138 fb

$^{-1}$ . The Lorentz boost of the top quark is exploited to cluster the products of the hadronic top quark decay into a large-radius jet. Furthermore, a machine-learning based discriminator is used to distinguish large-radius jets originating from a hadronic top quark decay and QCD-initiated large-radius jets. As an observable, the hadronic recoil is used. A robust statistical model was built to determine the main backgrounds in the signal regions from data in dedicated control regions. The data are consistent with the background-only hypothesis, and no evidence for DM produced in association with a single top quark was found. Limits at 95% confidence level are calculated for the product of the signal production cross section and the branching fraction of the mediator decaying into DM candidates. Limits were calculated for both a purely vector and purely axial vector coupling scenario between the mediator and the DM candidates as well as the standard model quarks of the first and third generation. The analysis excludes a mediator below a mass of up to 1.85 (1.85) TeV, where 2.0 (2.0) TeV is expected for the vector (axial vector) coupling scenario. Dark matter candidate masses below 750 (550) GeV, where 850 (650) GeV is expected, are excluded for the vector (axial vector) coupling scenario. In both cases, the exclusion limits are calculated for mediator masses

${\geq}$ 200 GeV and DM candidate masses

${\geq}$ ]50 GeV. The exclusion regions for the DM candidate masses from this analysis cover a wide phase space previously uncovered by the DM relic density measurement with the Planck telescope. To date, these are the most stringent exclusion limits for vector or axial vector coupled DM production via an up-top FCNC to date.

References
1	V. C. Rubin and J. Ford , W. Kent	Rotation of the Andromeda Nebula from a Spectroscopic Survey of Emission Regions	Astrophys. J. 159 (1970) 379
2	M. Markevitch et al.	Direct constraints on the dark matter self-interaction cross-section from the merging galaxy cluster 1E0657-56	Astrophys. J. 606 (2004) 819	astro-ph/0309303
3	Planck Collaboration	Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters	Astron. Astrophys. 641 (2020) A6	1807.06209
4	M. Beltran et al.	Maverick dark matter at colliders	JHEP 09 (2010) 037	1002.4137
5	P. J. Fox, R. Harnik, J. Kopp, and Y. Tsai	Missing Energy Signatures of Dark Matter at the LHC	PRD 85 (2012) 056011	1109.4398
6	J. Goodman et al.	Constraints on Dark Matter from Colliders	PRD 82 (2010) 116010	1008.1783
7	A. Rajaraman, W. Shepherd, T. M. P. Tait, and A. M. Wijangco	LHC Bounds on Interactions of Dark Matter	PRD 84 (2011) 095013	1108.1196
8	ATLAS Collaboration	Search for new phenomena in final states with an energetic jet and large missing transverse momentum in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=$ 8 TeV with the ATLAS detector	EPJC 75 (2015) 299	1502.01518
9	Y. Bai and T. M. P. Tait	Searches with Mono-Leptons	PLB 723 (2013) 384	1208.4361
10	ATLAS Collaboration	Search for dark matter in events with a hadronically decaying W or Z boson and missing transverse momentum in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s} =$ 8 TeV with the ATLAS detector	PRL 112 (2014) 041802	1309.4017
11	CMS Collaboration	Search for physics beyond the standard model in final states with a lepton and missing transverse energy in proton-proton collisions at sqrt(s) = 8 TeV	PRD 91 (2015) 092005	CMS-EXO-12-060 1408.2745
12	N. F. Bell et al.	Searching for Dark Matter at the LHC with a Mono-Z	PRD 86 (2012) 096011	1209.0231
13	L. M. Carpenter et al.	Collider searches for dark matter in events with a Z boson and missing energy	PRD 87 (2013) 074005	1212.3352
14	ATLAS Collaboration	Search for dark matter in events with a Z boson and missing transverse momentum in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s} =$ 8 TeV with the ATLAS detector	PRD 90 (2014) 012004	1404.0051
15	L. Carpenter et al.	Mono-Higgs-boson: A new collider probe of dark matter	PRD 89 (2014) 075017	1312.2592
16	A. Berlin, T. Lin, and L.-T. Wang	Mono-Higgs Detection of Dark Matter at the LHC	JHEP 06 (2014) 078	1402.7074
17	CMS Collaboration	Search for new phenomena in monophoton final states in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt s =$ 8 TeV	PLB 755 (2016) 102	CMS-EXO-12-047 1410.8812
18	ATLAS Collaboration	Search for new phenomena in events with a photon and missing transverse momentum in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=$ 8 TeV with the ATLAS detector	PRD 91 (2015) 012008	1411.1559
19	CMS Collaboration	Search for new particles in events with energetic jets and large missing transverse momentum in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} =$ 13 TeV	JHEP 11 (2021) 153	CMS-EXO-20-004 2107.13021
20	ATLAS Collaboration	Search for new phenomena in events with an energetic jet and missing transverse momentum in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt {s} =$ 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector	PRD 103 (2021) 112006	2102.10874
21	CMS Collaboration	Search for dark matter in events with energetic, hadronically decaying top quarks and missing transverse momentum at $\sqrt{s}=$ 13 TeV	JHEP 06 (2018) 027	CMS-EXO-16-051 1801.08427
22	CMS Collaboration	Search for monotop in the muon channel in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=$ 8 TeV	CMS Physics Analysis Summary CMS-PAS-B2G-15-001, 2016 CDS
23	N. Cabibbo	Unitary symmetry and leptonic decays	PRL 10 (1963) 531
24	M. Kobayashi and T. Maskawa	Cp-violation in the renormalizable theory of weak interaction	link
25	S. L. Glashow, J. Iliopoulos, and L. Maiani	Weak interactions with lepton--hadron symmetry.	link
26	J. Andrea, B. Fuks, and F. Maltoni	Monotops at the LHC	PRD 84 (2011) 074025	1106.6199
27	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
28	CMS Collaboration	The CMS trigger system	JINST 12 (2017) P01020	CMS-TRG-12-001 1609.02366
29	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
30	CMS Collaboration	The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC	JINST 3 (2008) S08004
31	CMS Collaboration	Particle-flow reconstruction and global event description with the CMS detector	JINST 12 (2017) P10003	CMS-PRF-14-001 1706.04965
32	M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez	The anti- $k_t$ jet clustering algorithm	JHEP 04 (2008) 063	0802.1189
33	M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez	FastJet user manual	EPJC 72 (2012) 1896	1111.6097
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	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
38	E. Bols et al.	Jet Flavour Classification Using DeepJet	JINST 15 (2020) P12012	2008.10519
39	H. Qu and L. Gouskos	ParticleNet: Jet Tagging via Particle Clouds	PRD 101 (2020) 056019	1902.08570
40	A. Albert et al.	Recommendations of the LHC Dark Matter Working Group: Comparing LHC searches for dark matter mediators in visible and invisible decay channels and calculations of the thermal relic density	Phys. Dark Univ. 26 (2019) 100377	1703.05703
41	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
42	T. Sjöstrand et al.	An Introduction to PYTHIA 8.2	Comput. Phys. Commun. 191 (2015) 159	1410.3012
43	DMsimp	DMsimp: Simplified dark matter models	link
44	P. Nason	A new method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms	JHEP 11 (2004) 040	hep-ph/0409146
45	S. Frixione, P. Nason, and C. Oleari	Matching NLO QCD computations with parton shower simulations: the POWHEG method	JHEP 11 (2007) 070	0709.2092
46	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
47	NNPDF Collaboration	Parton distributions from high-precision collider data	EPJC 77 (2017) 663	1706.00428
48	R. D. Ball et al.	Parton distributions with LHC data	NPB 867 (2013) 244	1207.1303
49	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
50	GEANT4 Collaboration	GEANT4--a simulation toolkit	NIM A 506 (2003) 250
51	M. Beneke, P. Falgari, S. Klein, and C. Schwinn	Hadronic top-quark pair production with NNLL threshold resummation	NPB 855 (2012) 695	1109.1536
52	M. Cacciari et al.	Top-pair production at hadron colliders with next-to-next-to-leading logarithmic soft-gluon resummation	PLB 710 (2012) 612	1111.5869
53	P. B ä rnreuther, M. Czakon, and A. Mitov	Percent-level-precision physics at the Tevatron: next-to-next-to-leading order QCD corrections to $\mathrm{q}\overline{\mathrm{q}}\to{\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}} \text{+X}$	PRL 109 (2012) 132001	1204.5201
54	M. Czakon and A. Mitov	NNLO corrections to top-pair production at hadron colliders: the all-fermionic scattering channels	JHEP 12 (2012) 054	1207.0236
55	M. Czakon and A. Mitov	NNLO corrections to top pair production at hadron colliders: the quark-gluon reaction	JHEP 01 (2013) 080	1210.6832
56	M. Czakon, P. Fiedler, and A. Mitov	Total Top-Quark Pair-Production Cross Section at Hadron Colliders Through $O(\alpha\frac{4}{S})$	PRL 110 (2013) 252004	1303.6254
57	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
58	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
59	E. Re	Single-top Wt-channel production matched with parton showers using the POWHEG method	EPJC 71 (2011) 1547	1009.2450
60	N. Kidonakis	Two-loop soft anomalous dimensions for single top quark associated production with $\mathrm{W^-}$ or $\mathrm{H^-}$	PRD 82 (2010) 054018	1005.4451
61	M. Aliev et al.	HATHOR: HAdronic Top and Heavy quarks crOss section calculatoR	Comput. Phys. Commun. 182 (2011) 1034	1007.1327
62	P. Kant et al.	HatHor for single top-quark production: Updated predictions and uncertainty estimates for single top-quark production in hadronic collisions	Comput. Phys. Commun. 191 (2015) 74	1406.4403
63	R. Frederix and S. Frixione	Merging meets matching in MC@NLO	JHEP 12 (2012) 061	1209.6215
64	J. M. Lindert et al.	Precise predictions for $V+$ jets dark matter backgrounds	EPJC 77 (2017) 829	1705.04664
65	T. Gehrmann et al.	$W^+W^-$ Production at Hadron Colliders in Next to Next to Leading Order QCD	PRL 113 (2014) 212001	1408.5243
66	F. Cascioli et al.	ZZ production at hadron colliders in NNLO QCD	PLB 735 (2014) 311	1405.2219
67	J. M. Campbell, R. K. Ellis, and C. Williams	Vector boson pair production at the LHC	JHEP 07 (2011) 018	1105.0020
68	M. Cacciari and G. P. Salam	Pileup subtraction using jet areas	PLB 659 (2008) 119	0707.1378
69	A. Buckley et al.	LHAPDF6: parton density access in the LHC precision era	EPJC 75 (2015) 132	1412.7420
70	J. Butterworth et al.	PDF4LHC recommendations for LHC Run II	JPG 43 (2016) 023001	1510.03865
71	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
72	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
73	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
74	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
75	CMS Collaboration	Jet energy scale and resolution performance with 13 TeV data collected by CMS in 2016-2018	CMS Detector Performance Summary CMS-DP-2020-019, 2020 CDS
76	CMS Collaboration	Jet energy scale and resolution measurement with Run 2 Legacy Data Collected by CMS at 13 TeV	CMS Detector Performance Summary CMS-DP-2021-033, 2021 CDS
77	R. J. Barlow and C. Beeston	Fitting using finite Monte Carlo samples	Comput. Phys. Commun. 77 (1993) 219
78	CMS Collaboration	The CMS statistical analysis and combination tool: \textscCombine	Submitted to Comput. Softw. Big. Sci, 2024	CMS-CAT-23-001 2404.06614
79	G. Cowan, K. Cranmer, E. Gross, and O. Vitells	Asymptotic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics	EPJC 71 (2011) 1554	1007.1727
80	A. L. Read	Presentation of search results: The CL(s) technique	JPG 28 (2002) 2693
81	A. L. Read	Modified frequentist analysis of search results (The CL(s) method)	in Workshop on Confidence Limits, 2000
82	T. Junk	Confidence level computation for combining searches with small statistics	NIM A 434 (1999) 435	hep-ex/9902006
83	T. Junk	Sensitivity, Exclusion and Discovery with Small Signals, LargeBackgrounds, and Large Systematic Uncertainties	for the CDF Collaboration, 2006
84	M. Backovic, K. Kong, and M. McCaskey	MadDM v.1.0: Computation of Dark Matter Relic Abundance Using MadGraph5	Physics of the Dark Universe 5-6 (2014) 18 link	1308.4955
85	F. Ambrogi et al.	MadDM v.3.0: a Comprehensive Tool for Dark Matter Studies	Phys. Dark Univ. 24 (2019) 100249	1804.00044