Pith. sign in

REVIEW 6 minor 64 references

Search for rare decays of the Z and Higgs bosons to a J/$\psi$ or $\psi$(2S) meson and a photon in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV

T0 review · 0 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read CMS finds no evidence for Z or Higgs boson decays to a J/ψ or ψ(2S) meson and a photon, and sets 95% CL upper limits on the branching fractions.

desk verdict A careful, honest null search with first CMS psi(2S) limits and an improved H->J/psi limit; no load-bearing flaws. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.15000 v2 pith:3PJJWBMZ submitted 2024-11-22 hep-ex

CMS Collaboration This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-ex
keywords raredecaysHiggsbosonZJ/psimesonpsi(2S)charmoniumbranchingfractionlimitsCMSLHC
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper searches for decays of the standard-model Z and Higgs bosons into a J/ψ or ψ(2S) meson plus a photon, with the charmonium meson decaying to two muons, using 123 fb⁻¹ of 13 TeV proton-proton collisions recorded by CMS. No evidence is seen for any of the four decay channels beyond standard-model expectations, and 95% confidence-level upper limits are placed on the branching fractions. If correct, these are the most sensitive CMS limits for these rare radiative decays to date, and the H→J/ψγ limit translates into a new constraint on the ratio of the Higgs couplings to charm quarks and photons.

What carries the argument

The analysis uses the invariant mass m_μμγ as the final discriminant, with signal modeled by double-sided Crystal Ball functions and the nonresonant QCD background modeled directly from data with power-law, exponential, and Bernstein polynomial functions. The discrete profiling method treats the choice and complexity of the background function as a discrete nuisance parameter, while a likelihood discriminator built from the Z, J/ψ, and muon spin-correlation angles separates Z→J/ψγ signal from background and |cos θ*| separates the gluon-fusion Higgs category.

What would settle it

A re-analysis that finds a localized excess of events at the expected Z or Higgs mass in the m_μμγ distribution, or an alternative background model constructed from a fully data-driven sideband interpolation that yields a significantly different limit, would challenge the result. Concretely, an excess of more than about three standard deviations at m_μμγ ≈ 91 or 125 GeV in the same event selection would contradict the no-excess claim.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the rare decays Z→J/ψγ, Z→ψ(2S)γ, H→J/ψγ, and H→ψ(2S)γ do not appear at rates above the standard-model predictions, and the data are consistent with background only. The observed 95% CL upper limits on the branching fractions are 0.6×10⁻⁶, 1.3×10⁻⁶, 2.6×10⁻⁴, and 9.9×10⁻⁴, respectively, improving on the previous CMS search and comparable to the latest ATLAS results. In the κ-framework interpretation, the H→J/ψγ limit constrains the ratio of Higgs coupling modifiers κ_c/κ_γ to the interval (−157, +199) at 95% CL, or κ_c ∈ (−166, +208) if κ_γ=1 is assumed.

Load-bearing premise

The claim relies on the assumption that the nonresonant QCD background in each signal region is smooth in m_μμγ and is well described by the power-law, exponential, and Bernstein families considered, so that a narrow signal peak would not be masked by an unmodeled localized background feature.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The new upper limits supersede the previous CMS results from 36 fb⁻¹, improving expected sensitivity by about a factor of two for H→J/ψγ and 30% for Z→J/ψγ through optimized event selection and the discrete profiling treatment of background shapes.
  • The κ_c/κ_γ constraint provides a probe of the Higgs-charm coupling that is complementary to direct searches for H→cc, and can be combined with those measurements in global fits.
  • These limits serve as the updated CMS reference for planning future HL-LHC searches for Z→ψ(nS)γ, whose standard-model branching fractions remain roughly two orders of magnitude below current sensitivity.
  • The 2.2σ downward fluctuation observed in the Z→ψ(2S)γ channel is consistent with background; if data continue to deviate with more statistics, the background model in that channel would merit closer scrutiny.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Combining these CMS limits with the ATLAS 139 fb⁻¹ results would likely yield even tighter combined constraints on the branching fractions and on κ_c/κ_γ.
  • The angular-discriminator and discrete-profiling techniques developed here could be transferred to searches for other rare radiative quarkonium decays, such as Z/H→Υ(nS)γ, where the spin correlations differ.
  • With further LHC data, the Z→J/ψγ search could approach the standard-model prediction near 10⁻⁸, making this channel a plausible future observation target rather than just an exclusion.
  • If the observed deficit in Z→ψ(2S)γ persists and grows, it would suggest the nonresonant background is overestimated in that region, warranting additional data-driven checks beyond the parametric families used.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

0 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper reports a search for the rare decays Z→J/ψγ, Z→ψ(2S)γ, H→J/ψγ, and H→ψ(2S)γ, using 123 fb−1 of proton-proton collision data at √s = 13 TeV collected by CMS. Events are selected with two opposite-sign muons consistent with a charmonium state and a photon, and are divided into seven signal regions and a control region. The signal is extracted from fits to the m(μμγ) distribution, with the QCD multijet background modeled by parametric functions and the discrete profiling method used to cover the shape uncertainty; electroweak backgrounds are taken from simulation. No significant excess is observed; the most notable feature is a 2.2 standard deviation deficit in the Z→ψ(2S)γ channel. Upper limits at 95% CL are set on the branching fractions: B(Z→J/ψγ) < 0.6×10−6, B(Z→ψ(2S)γ) < 1.3×10−6, B(H→J/ψγ) < 2.6×10−4, and B(H→ψ(2S)γ) < 9.9×10−4. The H→J/ψγ limit is interpreted in the κ framework, giving a constraint on κc/κγ of (−157, +199) at 95% CL, or (−166, +208) assuming κγ = 1.

Significance. If the results are correct, they provide the most stringent limits to date on Z→ψ(2S)γ and H→ψ(2S)γ from CMS and are competitive with the ATLAS 139 fb−1 results for the other two channels. The analysis is careful: the background modeling uses a discrete profiling method, an alternative Voigt signal shape is tested with an effect below 1%, and the CLs limits are cross-checked with pseudo-data, showing agreement within 5%. The interpretation of the H→J/ψγ limit as a constraint on κc/κγ is a valuable addition, as it provides a CMS-based constraint complementary to the ATLAS result. The paper also provides tabulated results in HEPData, which aids reproducibility.

minor comments (6)
  1. [Section 7, Eq. (1)] The equation for the ratio µ(H→J/ψγ)/µ(H→γγ) ends with the expression |Aind + Adir κc/κγ|^2 / ΓSM(H→J/ψγ), which is dimensionally opaque; please state the normalization convention for Aind and Adir and note that ΓSM is the width computed from the same amplitudes, so that the expression equals 1 when κc/κγ = 1.
  2. [Section 7, Fig. 4] The standalone fit to the control region that extracts μ(Z→μμγ) = 1.18 ± 0.12 is reported in the text, but the caption of Fig. 4 states that the resonant background contributions are added with the normalization fixed to the SM expectation; please clarify whether the displayed fit corresponds to the standalone fit or to a fit with fixed resonant normalizations.
  3. [Section 7] The statement that scale and PDF uncertainties 'are not varied in the fit' when deriving limits on B or σB is ambiguous; in particular, for the branching-fraction limits, which are obtained by assuming the SM production cross section, the paper should state explicitly whether the production cross-section uncertainty is included in the quoted result.
  4. [Section 6, Table 3] The row 'Resonant bkg. model' lists a 1% normalization uncertainty only for the Z→μμγ background, whereas the text says the alternative Voigtian function is used to cover model biases for both signal and resonant backgrounds; please clarify the extent of this uncertainty.
  5. [Abstract and text] The word 'subsequentially' in the abstract is a typo and should be 'subsequently'.
  6. [Section 4] The phrase 'The data set we used does not contain enough events' is informal for a journal article; consider rewording to 'The data set does not contain enough events'.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: observed limits are derived from data and MC signal templates, with external inputs used only for normalization and interpretation.

full rationale

The paper's central results are a direct search: signal templates come from leading-order Monte Carlo with spin correlations, resonant backgrounds are modeled from simulation, and the nonresonant QCD multijet background is fitted directly from data using power-law, exponential, and Bernstein families with the discrete profiling method treating the function choice as a discrete nuisance parameter. Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits are obtained from a profile-likelihood fit with the CLs procedure; no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no equation reduces a fitted quantity to the claimed output. The SM branching-fraction predictions in Table 1 enter as reference values for the statement that no excess beyond the SM is observed, but the limits on branching fractions are normalized using the SM Z and H production cross sections and the measured psi(nS) to mu-mu branching fractions, not using the predicted rare-decay branching fractions themselves. The kappa_c/kappa_gamma interpretation uses mu(H->gamma gamma) from CMS Ref. [63] and amplitudes from Ref. [20]; Ref. [63] is a prior CMS measurement, not a quantity fitted in this analysis, so it is independent external support rather than a circular input. The weakest assumption, smoothness of the nonresonant background, is a modeling assumption mitigated by the multiple function families and the F-test-based discrete profiling, and is not circular. No self-citation chain forces the result, and the comparison with ATLAS limits provides an external check. Therefore no significant circularity is found.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No new particles, forces, or conserved quantities are introduced; the analysis searches for standard model decays. No physics parameters are fitted to data to derive the claimed limits; signal and background normalizations are fixed to external measurements or treated as nuisance parameters. The parametric background shapes are a modeling assumption, not a free physics input.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The standard model predictions for the branching fractions of Z/H to psi(nS) gamma (Table 1) are correct.
    Used to define expected signal rates and to interpret the absence of excess. If these were wrong, the comparison 'no evidence larger than predicted' would shift, though the limits themselves are model-independent for the given signal model.
  • domain assumption The GEANT4 detector simulation accurately reproduces muon and photon reconstruction efficiencies, resolutions, and trigger responses.
    Signal acceptance, signal shape, and background estimates from MC rely on simulation. Sections 2 and 3.
  • domain assumption The nonresonant QCD multijet background is smoothly varying in m_mu_mu_gamma and is adequately described by the parametric families (power-law, exponential, Bernstein) with the discrete profiling method.
    This is the data-driven background model; a sharp unmodeled feature at the signal mass would bias limits. Sections 5 and 6.
  • domain assumption The direct and indirect amplitudes Adir and Aind for H->J/psi gamma, taken from Ref [20], and the H->gamma gamma signal strength from Ref [63], are valid inputs for the kappa_c/kappa_gamma interpretation.
    The coupling interpretation in Section 7 uses these external results; if they are inaccurate the kappa_c/kappa_gamma interval shifts.
  • domain assumption The PDFs (NNPDF3.1) and cross-section calculations (FEWZ, LHC Higgs handbook) describe signal production rates.
    Used to normalize signal expectations and to convert signal strengths to branching fractions. Section 3 and systematic uncertainties in Section 6.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Search for rare decays of the Z and Higgs bosons to a J/$\psi$ or $\psi$(2S) meson and a photon in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/3PJJWBMZ

@misc{pith2026241115000,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Search for rare decays of the Z and Higgs bosons to a J/$\psi$ or $\psi$(2S) meson and a photon in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrts$ = 13 TeV},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/3PJJWBMZ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.15000}
}
abstract

A search is presented for rare decays of the Z and Higgs bosons to a photon and a J/$\psi$ or a $\psi$(2S) meson, with the charmonium state subsequentially decaying to a pair of muons. The data set corresponds to an integrated luminosity of 123 fb$^{-1}$ of proton-proton collisions at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV collected with the CMS detector at the LHC. No evidence for branching fractions of these rare decay channels larger than predicted in the standard model is observed. Upper limits at 95% confidence level are set: $\mathcal{B}$(H $\to$ J/$\psi \gamma$) $\lt$ 2.6 $\times$ 10$^{-4}$, $\mathcal{B}$(H $\to$ $\psi$(2S)$\gamma$) $\lt$ 9.9 $\times$ 10$^{-4}$, $\mathcal{B}$(Z $\to$ J/$\psi \gamma$) $\lt$ 0.6 $\times$ 10$^{-6}$, and $\mathcal{B}$(Z $\to$ $\psi$(2S)$\gamma$) $\lt$ 1.3 $\times$ 10$^{-6}$. The ratio of the Higgs boson coupling modifiers $\kappa_\mathrm{c} / \kappa_\gamma$ is constrained to be in the interval ($-$157, $+$199) at 95% confidence level. Assuming $\kappa_\gamma = 1$, this interval becomes ($-$166, $+$208).

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.15000 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Leading-order Feynman diagrams of Z and Higgs boson rare decays to J/ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The upper panels show the background-only fit using the power-law, exponential, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The upper panels show the background-only fit using the power-law, exponential, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The upper panel shows the results of the main background fit in the CR, using the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Observed and expected (with ±1, ±2 standard deviation bands) exclusion limits on the branching fraction of the (H, Z) → ψ(nS)γ decays. The upper limits on the H → J/ψγ signal strength are interpreted within the κ-framework [62] to constrain the c quark Yukawa coupling.…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

64 extracted references · 17 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Observation of a new particle in the search for the standard model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Observation of a new particle in the search for the standard model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC”, Phys. Lett. B 716 (2012) 1, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2012.08.020, arXiv:1207.7214

    arXiv 2012

  2. [2]

    Observation of a new boson at a mass of 125 GeV with the CMS experiment at the LHC

    CMS Collaboration, “Observation of a new boson at a mass of 125 GeV with the CMS experiment at the LHC”, Phys. Lett. B 716 (2012) 30, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2012.08.021, arXiv:1207.7235

    arXiv 2012

  3. [3]

    Observation of a new boson with mass near 125 GeV in pp collisions at √s = 7 and 8 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Observation of a new boson with mass near 125 GeV in pp collisions at √s = 7 and 8 TeV”, JHEP 06 (2013) 081, doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2013)081, arXiv:1303.4571

    arXiv 2013

  4. [4]

    Broken symmetry and the mass of gauge vector mesons

    F. Englert and R. Brout, “Broken symmetry and the mass of gauge vector mesons”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 13 (1964) 321, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.13.321

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.13.321 1964

  5. [5]

    Broken symmetries and the masses of gauge bosons

    P . W. Higgs, “Broken symmetries and the masses of gauge bosons”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 13 (1964) 508, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.13.508

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.13.508 1964

  6. [6]

    A portrait of the Higgs boson by the CMS experiment ten years after the discovery

    CMS Collaboration, “A portrait of the Higgs boson by the CMS experiment ten years after the discovery.”, Nature 607 (2022) 60, doi:10.1038/s41586-022-04892-x , arXiv:2207.00043

    arXiv 2022

  7. [7]

    A detailed map of Higgs boson interactions by the ATLAS experiment ten years after the discovery

    ATLAS Collaboration, “A detailed map of Higgs boson interactions by the ATLAS experiment ten years after the discovery”, Nature 607 (2022) 52, doi:10.1038/s41586-022-04893-w , arXiv:2207.00092. [Erratum: doi:10.1038/s41586-022-05581-5 ]

    arXiv 2022

  8. [8]

    Search for Higgs boson decay to a charm quark-antiquark pair in proton-proton collisions at √s = 13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Search for Higgs boson decay to a charm quark-antiquark pair in proton-proton collisions at √s = 13 TeV”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131 (2023) 061801, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.061801, arXiv:2205.05550

    arXiv 2023

Show all 64 references
  1. [9]

    Search for Higgs boson and observation of Z boson through their decay into a charm quark-antiquark pair in boosted topologies in proton-proton collisions at √s = 13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Search for Higgs boson and observation of Z boson through their decay into a charm quark-antiquark pair in boosted topologies in proton-proton collisions at √s = 13 TeV”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131 (2023) 041801, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.041801, arXiv:2211.14181. 14

    2023 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Direct constraint on the Higgs-charm coupling from a search for Higgs boson decays into charm quarks with the ATLAS detector

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Direct constraint on the Higgs-charm coupling from a search for Higgs boson decays into charm quarks with the ATLAS detector”, Eur. Phys. J. C 82 (2022) 717, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-022-10588-3 , arXiv:2201.11428

    2022 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Higgs boson decays to quarkonia and the Hcc coupling

    G. T. Bodwin, F. Petriello, S. Stoynev, and M. Velasco, “Higgs boson decays to quarkonia and the Hcc coupling”, Phys. Rev. D 88 (2013) 053003, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.88.053003, arXiv:1306.5770

    2013 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Enhanced Higgs boson coupling to charm pairs

    C. Delaunay, T. Golling, G. Perez, and Y. Soreq, “Enhanced Higgs boson coupling to charm pairs”, Phys. Rev. D 89 (2014) 033014, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.89.033014, arXiv:1310.7029

    2014 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Rare and exclusive few-body decays of the Higgs, Z, W bosons, and the top quark

    D. d’Enterria and V . D. Le, “Rare and exclusive few-body decays of the Higgs, Z, W bosons, and the top quark”, J. Phys. G (2024) doi:10.1088/1361-6471/ad3c59, arXiv:2312.11211

    2024

  6. [14]

    Handbook of LHC Higgs cross sections: 4. Deciphering the nature of the Higgs sector

    LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, “Handbook of LHC Higgs cross sections: 4. Deciphering the nature of the Higgs sector”, CERN Yellow Reports: Monographs 2/2017 (2018) doi:10.23731/CYRM-2017-002, arXiv:1610.07922

    2018 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Relativistic corrections to Higgs boson decays to quarkonia

    G. T. Bodwin et al., “Relativistic corrections to Higgs boson decays to quarkonia”, Phys. Rev. D 90 (2014) 113010, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.90.113010, arXiv:1407.6695

    2014 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Rare exclusive decays of the Z-boson revisited

    T.-C. Huang and F. Petriello, “Rare exclusive decays of the Z-boson revisited”, Phys. Rev. D 92 (2015) 014007, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.014007, arXiv:1411.5924

    2015 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Exclusive radiative Higgs decays as probes of light-quark Yukawa couplings

    M. K ¨onig and M. Neubert, “Exclusive radiative Higgs decays as probes of light-quark Yukawa couplings”, JHEP 08 (2015) 012, doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2015)012, arXiv:1505.03870

    2015 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Z-boson decays to a vector quarkonium plus a photon

    G. T. Bodwin, H. S. Chung, J.-H. Ee, and J. Lee, “ Z-boson decays to a vector quarkonium plus a photon”, Phys. Rev. D 97 (2018) 016009, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.97.016009, arXiv:1709.09320

    2018 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Addendum: New approach to the resummation of logarithms in Higgs-boson decays to a vector quarkonium plus a photon [Phys. Rev. D 95, 054018 (2017)]

    G. T. Bodwin, H. S. Chung, J.-H. Ee, and J. Lee, “Addendum: New approach to the resummation of logarithms in Higgs-boson decays to a vector quarkonium plus a photon [Phys. Rev. D 95, 054018 (2017)]”, Phys. Rev. D 96 (2017) 116014, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.96.116014, arXiv:1710.09872

    2017 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Order v4 corrections to Higgs boson decay into J/ψ + γ

    N. Brambilla et al., “Order v4 corrections to Higgs boson decay into J/ψ + γ”, Phys. Rev. D 100 (2019) 054038, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.100.054038, arXiv:1907.06473

    2019 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Z-boson radiative decays to an S-wave quarkonium at NNLO and NLL accuracy

    W.-L. Sang, D.-S. Yang, and Y.-D. Zhang, “Z-boson radiative decays to an S-wave quarkonium at NNLO and NLL accuracy”, Phys. Rev. D 108 (2023) 014021, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.108.014021, arXiv:2302.06439

    2023 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Z-boson decays into S-wave quarkonium plus a photon up to O(αsv2) corrections

    G.-Y. Wang, X.-C. Zheng, X.-G. Wu, and G.-Z. Xu, “Z-boson decays into S-wave quarkonium plus a photon up to O(αsv2) corrections”, 2023. arXiv:2312.08796

    2023 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Review of Particle Physics

    Particle Data Group Collaboration, “Review of Particle Physics”, Phys. Rev. D 110 (2024) 030001, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.030001

    2024 doi

  16. [24]

    Search for rare decays of Z and Higgs bosons to J/ ψ and a photon in proton-proton collisions at √s = 13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Search for rare decays of Z and Higgs bosons to J/ ψ and a photon in proton-proton collisions at √s = 13 TeV”, Eur. Phys. J. C 79 (2019) 94, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-6562-5 , arXiv:1810.10056. References 15

    2019 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Searches for exclusive Higgs and Z boson decays into J/ψγ, ψ(2S)γ, and Υ(nS)γ at √s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Searches for exclusive Higgs and Z boson decays into J/ψγ, ψ(2S)γ, and Υ(nS)γ at √s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector”, Phys. Lett. B 786 (2018) 134, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2018.09.024, arXiv:1807.00802

    2018 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Searches for exclusive Higgs and Z boson decays into a vector quarkonium state and a photon using 139 fb−1 of ATLAS √s = 13 TeV proton-proton collision data

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Searches for exclusive Higgs and Z boson decays into a vector quarkonium state and a photon using 139 fb−1 of ATLAS √s = 13 TeV proton-proton collision data”, Eur. Phys. J. C 83 (2023) 781, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-023-11869-1 , arXiv:2208.03122

    2023 arXiv

  19. [27]

    HEPData record for this analysis

    “HEPData record for this analysis”, 2024. doi:10.17182/hepdata.154897

    2024 doi

  20. [28]

    The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC

    CMS Collaboration, “The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC”, JINST 3 (2008) S08004, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/3/08/S08004

    2008 doi

  21. [29]

    Performance of the CMS Level-1 trigger in proton-proton collisions at √s = 13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Performance of the CMS Level-1 trigger in proton-proton collisions at √s = 13 TeV”, JINST 15 (2020) P10017, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/15/10/P10017, arXiv:2006.10165

    2020 arXiv

  22. [30]

    The CMS trigger system

    CMS Collaboration, “The CMS trigger system”, JINST 12 (2017) P01020, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/12/01/P01020, arXiv:1609.02366

    2017 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Description and performance of track and primary-vertex reconstruction with the CMS tracker

    CMS Collaboration, “Description and performance of track and primary-vertex reconstruction with the CMS tracker”, JINST 9 (2014) P10009, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/9/10/P10009, arXiv:1405.6569

    2014 arXiv

  24. [32]

    The CMS phase-1 pixel detector upgrade

    CMS Tracker Collaboration, “The CMS phase-1 pixel detector upgrade”, JINST 16 (2021) P02027, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/16/02/P02027, arXiv:2012.14304

    2021 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Track impact parameter resolution for the full pseudorapidity coverage in the 2017 dataset with the CMS phase-1 pixel detector

    CMS Collaboration, “Track impact parameter resolution for the full pseudorapidity coverage in the 2017 dataset with the CMS phase-1 pixel detector”, CMS Detector Performance Summary CMS-DP-2020-049, 2020

    2017

  26. [34]

    Performance of photon reconstruction and identification with the CMS detector in proton-proton collisions at √s = 8 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Performance of photon reconstruction and identification with the CMS detector in proton-proton collisions at √s = 8 TeV”, JINST 10 (2015) P08010, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/10/08/P08010, arXiv:1502.02702

    2015 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Electron and photon reconstruction and identification with the CMS experiment at the CERN LHC

    CMS Collaboration, “Electron and photon reconstruction and identification with the CMS experiment at the CERN LHC”, JINST 16 (2021) P05014, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/16/05/P05014, arXiv:2012.06888

    2021 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Performance of the CMS muon detector and muon reconstruction with proton-proton collisions at √s = 13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Performance of the CMS muon detector and muon reconstruction with proton-proton collisions at √s = 13 TeV”, JINST 13 (2018) P06015, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/13/06/P06015, arXiv:1804.04528

    2018 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Particle-flow reconstruction and global event description with the CMS detector

    CMS Collaboration, “Particle-flow reconstruction and global event description with the CMS detector”, JINST 12 (2017) P10003, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/12/10/P10003, arXiv:1706.04965

    2017 arXiv

  30. [38]

    The anti-kT jet clustering algorithm

    M. Cacciari, G. P . Salam, and G. Soyez, “The anti-kT jet clustering algorithm”, JHEP 04 (2008) 063, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2008/04/063, arXiv:0802.1189

    2008 arXiv

  31. [39]

    FastJet user manual

    M. Cacciari, G. P . Salam, and G. Soyez, “FastJet user manual”, Eur. Phys. J. C 72 (2012) 1896, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1896-2 , arXiv:1111.6097. 16

    2012 arXiv

  32. [40]

    The catchment area of jets

    M. Cacciari, G. P . Salam, and G. Soyez, “The catchment area of jets”, JHEP 04 (2008) 005, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2008/04/005, arXiv:0802.1188

    2008 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Pileup mitigation at CMS in 13 TeV data

    CMS Collaboration, “Pileup mitigation at CMS in 13 TeV data”, JINST 15 (2020) P09018, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/15/09/p09018, arXiv:2003.00503

    2020 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Identification of heavy-flavour jets with the CMS detector in pp collisions at 13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Identification of heavy-flavour jets with the CMS detector in pp collisions at 13 TeV”, JINST 13 (2018) P05011, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/13/05/P05011, arXiv:1712.07158

    2018 arXiv

  35. [43]

    The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations

    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, doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2014)079, arXiv:1405.0301

    2014 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Particle polarization in high energy physics: an introduction and case studies on vector particle production at the LHC

    P . Faccioli and C. Lourenc ¸o, “Particle polarization in high energy physics: an introduction and case studies on vector particle production at the LHC”. Lecture Notes in Physics. Springer, 2022. doi:10.1007/978-3-031-08876-6

    2022 doi

  37. [45]

    Combining QCD and electroweak corrections to dilepton production in FEWZ

    Y. Li and F. Petriello, “Combining QCD and electroweak corrections to dilepton production in FEWZ”, Phys. Rev. D 86 (2012) 094034, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.86.094034, arXiv:1208.5967

    2012 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Extraction and validation of a new set of CMS PYTHIA8 tunes from underlying-event measurements

    CMS Collaboration, “Extraction and validation of a new set of CMS PYTHIA8 tunes from underlying-event measurements”, Eur. Phys. J. C 80 (2020) 4, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-7499-4 , arXiv:1903.12179

    2020 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Parton distributions with QED corrections

    NNPDF Collaboration, “Parton distributions with QED corrections”, Nucl. Phys. B 877 (2013) 290, doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2013.10.010, arXiv:1308.0598

    2013 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Unbiased global determination of parton distributions and their uncertainties at NNLO and at LO

    NNPDF Collaboration, “Unbiased global determination of parton distributions and their uncertainties at NNLO and at LO”, Nucl. Phys. B 855 (2012) 153, doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2011.09.024, arXiv:1107.2652

    2012 arXiv

  41. [49]

    G EANT 4—a simulation toolkit

    GEANT4 Collaboration, “G EANT 4—a simulation toolkit”, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 506 (2003) 250, doi:10.1016/S0168-9002(03)01368-8

    2003 doi

  42. [50]

    Charmonium spectroscopy from radiative decays of the J/ ψ and ψ′

    J. E. Gaiser, “Charmonium spectroscopy from radiative decays of the J/ ψ and ψ′”. PhD thesis, SLAC, 1982. Appendix F

    1982

  43. [51]

    Applied linear statistical models

    M. H. Kutner, C. J. Nachtsheim, J. Neter, and W. Li, “Applied linear statistical models”. Irwin, 1996. Fifth edition. ISBN 9780256117363

    1996

  44. [52]

    Handling uncertainties in background shapes: the discrete profiling method

    P . D. Dauncey, M. Kenzie, N. Wardle, and G. J. Davies, “Handling uncertainties in background shapes: the discrete profiling method”, JINST 10 (2015) P04015, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/10/04/P04015, arXiv:1408.6865

    2015 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Precision luminosity measurement in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV in 2015 and 2016 at CMS

    CMS Collaboration, “Precision luminosity measurement in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV in 2015 and 2016 at CMS”, Eur. Phys. J. C 81 (2021) 800, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09538-2 , arXiv:2104.01927

    2021 arXiv

  46. [54]

    CMS luminosity measurement for the 2017 data-taking period at√s = 13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “CMS luminosity measurement for the 2017 data-taking period at√s = 13 TeV”, CMS Physics Analysis Summary CMS-PAS-LUM-17-004, 2018

    2017

  47. [55]

    CMS luminosity measurement for the 2018 data-taking period at√s = 13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “CMS luminosity measurement for the 2018 data-taking period at√s = 13 TeV”, CMS Physics Analysis Summary CMS-PAS-LUM-18-002, 2019. References 17

    2018

  48. [56]

    Parton distributions for the LHC Run II

    NNPDF Collaboration, “Parton distributions for the LHC Run II”, JHEP 04 (2015) 040, doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2015)040, arXiv:1410.8849

    2015 arXiv

  49. [57]

    PDF4LHC recommendations for LHC Run II

    J. Butterworth et al., “PDF4LHC recommendations for LHC Run II”, J. Phys. G 43 (2016) 23001, doi:10.1088/0954-3899/43/2/023001, arXiv:1510.03865

    2016 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Procedure for the LHC Higgs boson search combination in Summer 2011

    CMS and ATLAS Collaborations, “Procedure for the LHC Higgs boson search combination in Summer 2011”, CMS Note CMS-NOTE-2011-005, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2011-11, 2011

    2011

  51. [59]

    Confidence level computation for combining searches with small statistics

    T. Junk, “Confidence level computation for combining searches with small statistics”, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 434 (1999) 435, doi:10.1016/S0168-9002(99)00498-2, arXiv:hep-ex/9902006

    1999 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Presentation of search results: the CL s technique

    A. L. Read, “Presentation of search results: the CL s technique”, J. Phys. G 28 (2002) 2693, doi:10.1088/0954-3899/28/10/313

    2002 doi

  53. [61]

    Asymptotic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics

    G. Cowan, K. Cranmer, E. Gross, and O. Vitells, “Asymptotic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics”, Eur. Phys. J. C 71 (2011) 1554, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1554-0 , arXiv:1007.1727. [Erratum: doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-013-2501-z ]

    2011 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Handbook of LHC Higgs cross sections: 3. Higgs properties

    LHC Higgs Cross Section Working Group, “Handbook of LHC Higgs cross sections: 3. Higgs properties”, CERN-2013-004 (2013) doi:10.5170/CERN-2013-004, arXiv:1307.1347

    2013 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Measurements of Higgs boson production cross sections and couplings in the diphoton decay channel at √s = 13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Measurements of Higgs boson production cross sections and couplings in the diphoton decay channel at √s = 13 TeV”, JHEP 07 (2021) 027, doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2021)027, arXiv:2103.06956

    2021 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Constraining the charm Yukawa and Higgs-quark coupling universality

    G. Perez, Y. Soreq, E. Stamou, and K. Tobioka, “Constraining the charm Yukawa and Higgs-quark coupling universality”, Phys. Rev. D 92 (2015) 033016, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.033016, arXiv:1503.00290. 18 19 A The CMS Collaboration Yerevan Physics Institute, Yerevan, Armenia A. H...

    2015 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.