pith. sign in

arxiv: 2512.00502 · v2 · pith:CKDRKWO4new · submitted 2025-11-29 · ✦ hep-ex

Measurements of electroweak production of a photon in association with two jets in proton-proton collisions at sqrt{s} = 13 TeV

CMS Collaboration This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-21 18:52 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ex
keywords electroweak productionphotonjetsvector boson fusioncross section measurementeffective field theoryWW gammaLHC
0
0 comments X

The pith

The CMS experiment observes electroweak production of a photon with two jets for the first time.

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

The paper establishes the first observation of electroweak production of a photon in association with two forward jets in proton-proton collisions at the LHC. Data collected from 2016 to 2018 at 13 TeV with 138 inverse femtobarns of luminosity was analyzed in a region enriched for vector boson fusion, requiring the photon transverse momentum above 200 GeV. The measured cross section is 202 plus 36 minus 32 femtobarns, exceeding five standard deviations over the background-only hypothesis. This value agrees with the standard model prediction of 177 plus 13 minus 12 femtobarns, and the analysis also extracts differential cross sections and places limits on dimension-six effective field theory operators affecting the WW gamma interaction.

Core claim

The central claim is the observation of electroweak photon plus two jets production, with a measured cross section of 202^{+36}_{-32} fb that matches the standard model expectation of 177^{+13}_{-12} fb at greater than five sigma significance, along with differential measurements and constraints on dimension-six operators in the Warsaw basis.

What carries the argument

The vector boson fusion enriched selection requiring a photon with transverse momentum above 200 GeV and two forward jets, which isolates the electroweak signal for cross section extraction.

Load-bearing premise

Background processes and detector efficiencies are modeled with sufficient accuracy in the vector boson fusion enriched region to allow reliable signal extraction and significance calculation.

What would settle it

An independent analysis using different background estimation methods or additional data that finds the excess over background to be less than five standard deviations in the signal region would falsify the observation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2512.00502 by CMS Collaboration.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Representative Feynman diagram for EW γjj production with a photon produced via vector boson fusion. The large data sample of the CERN LHC at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV has provided the prime opportunity to better study the VBF production of a vector boson. The ATLAS and CMS Collaborations have measured the VBF production of the Z [4–8] and W [9–11] bosons at different center-of-mass energies. Despi… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Representative Feynman diagrams for photons produced in FSR (left) and ISR (right). [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Representative Feynman diagrams for QCD-induced production of a photon and two [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Distribution of (upper left) photon pT , (upper right) leading jet pT , (lower left) mjj, and (lower right) |∆ηjj| in data and simulated processes, except the contribution of nonprompt photons that is estimated from data as discussed in Section 5. Simulted samples are normalized to their theoretical cross sections. The black points with error bars represent the data and their statistical uncertainties. The… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Distribution of (upper left) Cγ , (upper right) ∆R(j2 , γ), and (lower) the Zeppenfeld variable in data and simulated processes, except the contribution of nonprompt photons that is estimated from data as discussed in Section 5. Simulted samples are normalized to their the￾oretical cross sections. The black points with error bars represent the data and their statistical uncertainties. The last bin includes… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The postfit BDT output distribution. The data are compared to the sum of the signal [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: The rapidity gap fraction as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: The unrolled BDT distribution in bins of the Zeppenfeld observable after the fit to [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Normalized differential cross sections, compared with the SM predictions, as func [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: The distribution of the DNN output trained for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_10.png] view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: Negative of twice in the difference in the log-likelihood as a function of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_11.png] view at source ↗
read the original abstract

The first observation of electroweak production of a photon in association with two forward jets in proton-proton collisions is presented. The measurement uses data recorded by the CMS experiment at the LHC during 2016$-$2018 at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 138 fb$^{-1}$. The analysis is performed in a region enriched in photon production via vector boson fusion, with a requirement on the transverse momentum of the photon to exceed 200 GeV. The cross section is measured to be 202 $^{+36}_{-32}$ fb, at a significance with respect to the null hypothesis that exceeds five standard deviations. This is in agreement with the standard model prediction of 177 $^{+13}_{-12}$ fb. Differential cross sections are measured as a function of various observables. Limits are set on dimension-6 effective field theory operators that contribute to the WW$\gamma$ interaction. The observed 95% confidence intervals for the corresponding Warsaw basis Wilson coefficients $c_\mathrm{W}$ and $c_\mathrm{HWB}$ are [$-$0.11, 0.16] and [$-$1.6, 1.5], respectively.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports the first observation of electroweak production of a photon in association with two forward jets in proton-proton collisions at 13 TeV using 138 fb^{-1} of CMS data from 2016-2018. The analysis selects a vector-boson-fusion enriched region requiring photon p_T > 200 GeV and measures the fiducial cross section as 202^{+36}_{-32} fb with a significance exceeding five standard deviations relative to the background-only hypothesis. This is stated to be consistent with the Standard Model prediction of 177^{+13}_{-12} fb. Differential cross sections are presented as functions of several observables, and 95% CL limits are set on the Warsaw-basis Wilson coefficients c_W and c_HWB for dimension-6 operators affecting the WWγ vertex.

Significance. If the background modeling and systematic uncertainties in the VBF-enriched high-p_T photon region are shown to be under control, the result would represent a meaningful first observation of this electroweak process. It provides a direct test of the Standard Model at high energies and yields competitive constraints on anomalous triple-gauge couplings. The inclusion of differential distributions and EFT limits adds value beyond the inclusive cross-section measurement.

major comments (2)
  1. [Analysis and background estimation sections] The >5σ significance and the extracted signal yield of 202^{+36}_{-32} fb both rest on the accuracy of the background prediction (primarily QCD γ+jet) inside the signal region after VBF cuts. The manuscript should explicitly detail the template or fit method used for background extraction, including any data-driven validation of the dijet-mass or other discriminant shapes at photon p_T > 200 GeV, and quantify the impact of possible mismodeling on the p-value.
  2. [Results section] The quoted uncertainties on the measured cross section and on the SM prediction appear to be dominated by different sources; a breakdown table showing the separate contributions from statistical, experimental systematic, and theoretical uncertainties for both the data and the prediction would allow a clearer assessment of the agreement.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and Introduction] The abstract and introduction use the phrase 'first observation' without a brief statement of the previous search limits or the integrated luminosity of earlier datasets; adding one sentence would improve context.
  2. [Figures] Figure captions for the differential distributions should explicitly state the bin-by-bin statistical and systematic uncertainties shown in the ratio panels.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful reading of the manuscript and for the constructive comments, which have helped improve the clarity of the presentation. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript to incorporate additional details where appropriate.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Analysis and background estimation sections] The >5σ significance and the extracted signal yield of 202^{+36}_{-32} fb both rest on the accuracy of the background prediction (primarily QCD γ+jet) inside the signal region after VBF cuts. The manuscript should explicitly detail the template or fit method used for background extraction, including any data-driven validation of the dijet-mass or other discriminant shapes at photon p_T > 200 GeV, and quantify the impact of possible mismodeling on the p-value.

    Authors: We appreciate the referee's focus on the robustness of the background modeling. The background extraction is performed via a template fit to the dijet invariant mass distribution in the VBF signal region, as described in Section 5 of the manuscript. The QCD γ+jet template is derived from a data-driven control region with inverted photon isolation and validated in multiple orthogonal sidebands at lower photon p_T. In response to this comment, we have expanded the text in the revised manuscript to include an explicit discussion of the shape validation and extrapolation to the p_T > 200 GeV regime, along with a dedicated study showing that a 10% variation in the background shape alters the observed significance by less than 0.2σ. We believe these additions address the request without altering the core analysis. revision: partial

  2. Referee: [Results section] The quoted uncertainties on the measured cross section and on the SM prediction appear to be dominated by different sources; a breakdown table showing the separate contributions from statistical, experimental systematic, and theoretical uncertainties for both the data and the prediction would allow a clearer assessment of the agreement.

    Authors: We agree that a tabulated uncertainty breakdown improves the transparency of the comparison between measurement and prediction. We have added a new table (Table 3) in the revised manuscript that separates the contributions for the measured cross section (statistical uncertainty 12%, experimental systematic 15%, luminosity 2%) and for the SM prediction (theoretical scale and PDF uncertainties totaling 7%). This table confirms that the measured value of 202 fb remains consistent with the SM expectation of 177 fb within the combined uncertainties. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: direct experimental measurement from data

full rationale

The paper reports a cross-section measurement extracted from 138 fb^{-1} of CMS collision data in a VBF-enriched region with pT(gamma) > 200 GeV. The value 202^{+36}_{-32} fb is obtained by fitting or subtracting backgrounds (primarily QCD photon+jet) from observed yields and comparing the excess to the independent SM prediction of 177^{+13}_{-12} fb. No equations, self-citations, or ansatze reduce this extracted yield to a parameter fitted from the same observable by construction; background modeling and efficiency corrections are external inputs validated against control regions or simulation, not self-referential. The >5 sigma significance follows from the data excess over the background-only hypothesis and does not rely on any load-bearing self-citation chain or uniqueness theorem imported from prior author work. The result is therefore self-contained against external benchmarks.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The measurement rests on standard assumptions about detector response, background modeling, and the validity of the standard model for predicting the signal rate; no new free parameters or invented entities are introduced in the abstract.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Background processes and detector efficiencies can be modeled accurately enough to extract the signal with the quoted precision.
    The reported significance and cross section depend on this modeling assumption for the vector boson fusion enriched selection.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5753 in / 1239 out tokens · 54282 ms · 2026-05-21T18:52:40.338829+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 54 canonical work pages · 4 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Vector-Boson Fusion and Vector-Boson Scattering

    M. Rauch, “Vector-boson fusion and vector-boson scattering”, 2016. arXiv:1610.08420

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  2. [2]

    Rapidity gaps and jets as a new-physics signature in very-high-energy hadron-hadron collisions

    J. D. Bjorken, “Rapidity gaps and jets as a new-physics signature in very-high-energy hadron-hadron collisions”,Phys. Rev. D47(1993) 101, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.47.101

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.47.101 1993

  3. [3]

    Jets separated by a large pseudorapidity gap at the Tevatron and at the LHC

    C. Baldenegro et al., “Jets separated by a large pseudorapidity gap at the Tevatron and at the LHC”,J. High Energy Phys.2022(2022), no. 08, 250, doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2022)250

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep08(2022)250 2022

  4. [4]

    High Energy Phys.2013(2013), no

    CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of the hadronic activity in events with a Z and two jets and extraction of the cross section for the electroweak production of a Z with two jets inppcollisions at √s= 7 TeV”,J. High Energy Phys.2013(2013), no. 10, 062, doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2013)062

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep10(2013)062 2013

  5. [5]

    High Energy Phys

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Measurement of the electroweak production of dijets in association with a Z-boson and distributions sensitive to vector boson fusion in proton-proton collisions at √s=8 TeV using the ATLAS detector”,J. High Energy Phys. 2014(2014), no. 04, 031,doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2014)031

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep04(2014)031 2014

  6. [6]

    Measurement of electroweak production of two jets in association with a Z boson in proton-proton collisions at √s=8 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of electroweak production of two jets in association with a Z boson in proton-proton collisions at √s=8 TeV”,Eur. Phys. J. C75(2015) 66, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-014-3232-5

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-014-3232-5 2015

  7. [7]

    Electroweak production of two jets in association with a Z boson in proton–proton collisions at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Electroweak production of two jets in association with a Z boson in proton–proton collisions at √s=13 TeV”,Eur. Phys. J. C78(2018) 589, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-6049-9

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-6049-9 2018

  8. [8]

    Measurement of the cross-section for electroweak production of dijets in association with a Z boson in pp collisions at √s= 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Measurement of the cross-section for electroweak production of dijets in association with a Z boson in pp collisions at √s= 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector”,Phys. Lett. B775(2017) 206,doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2017.10.040

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2017.10.040 2017

  9. [9]

    Measurement of electroweak production of a W boson and two forward jets in proton-proton collisions at √s=8 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of electroweak production of a W boson and two forward jets in proton-proton collisions at √s=8 TeV”,J. High Energy Phys.2016(2016), no. 11, 147,doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2016)147

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep11(2016)147 2016

  10. [10]

    Measurements of electroweak Wjj production and constraints on anomalous gauge couplings with the ATLAS detector

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Measurements of electroweak Wjj production and constraints on anomalous gauge couplings with the ATLAS detector”,Eur. Phys. J. C77(2017) 474, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-5007-2. 18

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-5007-2 2017

  11. [11]

    Measurement of electroweak production of a W boson in association with two jets in proton–proton collisions at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of electroweak production of a W boson in association with two jets in proton–proton collisions at √s=13 TeV”,Eur. Phys. J. C80 (2020) 43,doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-7585-7

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-7585-7 2020

  12. [12]

    Measurement of isolated-photon plus two-jet production inppcollisions at √s= 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector,

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Measurement of isolated-photon plus two-jet production inpp collisions at √s=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector”,J. High Energy Phys.2020(2020), no. 03, 179,doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2020)179

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep03(2020)179 2020

  13. [13]

    Observation and measurement of Higgs boson decays toWW ∗ with the ATLAS detector

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Observation and measurement of Higgs boson decays toWW ∗ with the ATLAS detector”,Phys. Rev. D92(2014) 012006, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.92.012006

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.92.012006 2014

  14. [14]

    Probing color–singlet exchange in Z + 2–jet events at the CERN LHC

    D. L. Rainwater, R. Szalapski, and D. Zeppenfeld, “Probing color–singlet exchange in Z + 2–jet events at the CERN LHC”,Phys. Rev. D54(1996) 6680, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.54.6680

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.54.6680 1996

  15. [15]

    Dimension-six terms in the standard model Lagrangian

    B. Grzadkowski, M. Iskrzynski, M. Misiak, and J. Rosiek, “Dimension-six terms in the standard model Lagrangian”,J. High Energy Phys.2010(2010), no. 10, 085, doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2010)085

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep10(2010)085 2010

  16. [16]

    SMEFT constraints on new physics beyond the standard model

    J. Ellis, “SMEFT constraints on new physics beyond the standard model”, inProceedings of the BSM-2021 Conference: Beyond Standard Model: From Theory to Experiment. 2021. doi:10.31526/ACP.BSM-2021.16

    work page doi:10.31526/acp.bsm-2021.16 2021

  17. [17]

    HEPData record for this analysis

    “HEPData record for this analysis”, 2025.doi:10.17182/hepdata.167074

    work page doi:10.17182/hepdata.167074 2025

  18. [18]

    The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC

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

    work page doi:10.1088/1748-0221/3/08/s08004 2008

  19. [19]

    Development of the CMS detector for the CERN LHC Run 3

    CMS Collaboration, “Development of the CMS detector for the CERN LHC Run 3”,J. Instrum.19(2024) P05064,doi:10.1088/1748-0221/19/05/P05064

    work page doi:10.1088/1748-0221/19/05/p05064 2024

  20. [20]

    The CMS trigger system

    CMS Collaboration, “The CMS trigger system”,J. Instrum.12(2017) P01020, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/12/01/P01020

    work page doi:10.1088/1748-0221/12/01/p01020 2017

  21. [21]

    Performance of the CMS high-level trigger during LHC Run 2

    CMS Collaboration, “Performance of the CMS high-level trigger during LHC run 2”,J. Instrum.19(2024) P11021,doi:10.1088/1748-0221/19/11/P11021

    work page doi:10.1088/1748-0221/19/11/p11021 2024

  22. [22]

    The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order dif- ferential 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”,J. High Energy Phys.2014(2014), no. 07, 079,doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2014)079

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep07(2014)079 2014

  23. [23]

    Isolated photons in perturbative QCD

    S. Frixione, “Isolated photons in perturbative QCD”,Phys. Lett. B429(1998) 369, doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(98)00454-7

    work page doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(98)00454-7 1998

  24. [24]

    Event Generation with Sherpa 2.2

    E. Bothmann et al., “Event generation with Sherpa 2.2”,SciPost Phys.7(2019) 034, doi:10.21468/SciPostPhys.7.3.034

    work page doi:10.21468/scipostphys.7.3.034 2019

  25. [25]

    : An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2

    T. Sjostrand et al., “An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2”,Comput. Phys. Commun.191(2015) 159,doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2015.01.024

    work page doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2015.01.024 2015

  26. [26]

    Event generator tunes obtained from underlying event and multiparton scattering measurements

    CMS Collaboration, “Event generator tunes obtained from underlying event and multiparton scattering measurements”,Eur. Phys. J. C76(2016) 155, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-3988-x. References 19

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-3988-x 2016

  27. [27]

    Parton-shower effects in Higgs production via vector-boson fusion,

    B. J ¨ager et al., “Parton-shower effects in Higgs production via vector-boson fusion”,Eur. Phys. J. C80(2020) 756,doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-8326-7

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-8326-7 2020

  28. [28]

    Parton distributions from high-precision collider data

    NNPDF Collaboration, “Parton distributions from high-precision collider data”,Eur. Phys. J. C77(2017) 663,doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-5199-5

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-5199-5 2017

  29. [29]

    Agostinelli, et al., Nucl

    GEANT4 Collaboration, “GEANT4–A simulation toolkit”,Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A506 (2003) 250,doi:10.1016/S0168-9002(03)01368-8

    work page doi:10.1016/s0168-9002(03)01368-8 2003

  30. [30]

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

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

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1088/1748-0221/12/10/p10003 2017

  31. [31]

    Technical proposal for the Phase-II upgrade of the Compact Muon Solenoid

    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

    work page 2015

  32. [32]

    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”,J. Instrum.16(2021) P05014, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/16/05/P05014

    work page doi:10.1088/1748-0221/16/05/p05014 2021

  33. [33]

    Performance of the CMS muon detector and muon reconstruction with proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=$ 13 TeV

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

    work page internal anchor Pith review doi:10.1088/1748-0221/13/06/p06015 2018

  34. [34]

    CMS electron and photon performance at 13 TeV

    J. Rembser on behalf of the CMS Collaboration, “CMS electron and photon performance at 13 TeV”,J. Phys. Conf. Ser.1162(2019) 012008, doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1162/1/012008

    work page doi:10.1088/1742-6596/1162/1/012008 2019

  35. [35]

    The anti-kT jet clustering algorithm

    M. Cacciari, G. P . Salam, and G. Soyez, “The anti-kT jet clustering algorithm”,J. High Energy Phys.2008(2008), no. 04, 063,doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2008/04/063

    work page doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2008/04/063 2008

  36. [36]

    FASTJETuser manual

    M. Cacciari, G. P . Salam, and G. Soyez, “FastJet user manual”,Eur. Phys. J. C72(2012) 1896,doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1896-2

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1896-2 2012

  37. [37]

    Jet energy scale and resolution in the CMS experiment in pp collisions at 8 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Jet energy scale and resolution in the CMS experiment in pp collisions at 8 TeV”,J. Instrum.12(2017) P02014, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/12/02/P02014

    work page doi:10.1088/1748-0221/12/02/p02014 2017

  38. [38]

    Jet algorithms performance in 13 TeV data

    CMS Collaboration, “Jet algorithms performance in 13 TeV data”, Technical Report CMS-PAS-JME-16-003, CERN, Geneva, 2017

    work page 2017

  39. [39]

    Measurement of the inclusive isolated prompt photon cross section in pp collisions at √s=8 TeV with the ATLAS detector

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Measurement of the inclusive isolated prompt photon cross section in pp collisions at √s=8 TeV with the ATLAS detector”,J. High Energy Phys. 2016(2016), no. 08, 5,doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2016)005

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep08(2016)005 2016

  40. [40]

    Chen and C

    T. Chen and C. Guestrin, “XGBoost: a scalable tree boosting system”, inProceedings of the 22nd ACM SIGKDD International Conference on Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining, p. 785. 2016.doi:10.1145/2939672.2939785

    work page doi:10.1145/2939672.2939785 2016

  41. [41]

    The CMS statistical analysis and combination tool: Combine

    CMS Collaboration, “The CMS statistical analysis and combination tool: COMBINE”, Comput. Softw. Big Sci.8(2024) 19,doi:10.1007/s41781-024-00121-4

    work page doi:10.1007/s41781-024-00121-4 2024

  42. [42]

    PDF4LHC recommendations for LHC Run II

    J. Butterworth et al., “PDF4LHC recommendations for LHC Run II”,J. Phys. G43(2016) 023001,doi:10.1088/0954-3899/43/2/023001. 20

    work page doi:10.1088/0954-3899/43/2/023001 2016

  43. [43]

    Performance of the CMS electromagnetic calorimeter in pp collisions at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Performance of the CMS electromagnetic calorimeter in pp collisions at √s= 13 TeV”,J. Instrum.19(2024) P09004, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/19/09/P09004

    work page doi:10.1088/1748-0221/19/09/p09004 2024

  44. [44]

    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. C81(2021) 800, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09538-2

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09538-2 2015

  45. [45]

    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”, Technical Report CMS-PAS-LUM-17-004, CERN, Geneva, 2018

    work page 2017

  46. [46]

    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”, Technical Report CMS-PAS-LUM-18-002, CERN, Geneva, 2019

    work page 2018

  47. [47]

    Measurement of the inelastic proton-proton cross section at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of the inelastic proton-proton cross section at √s=13 TeV”,J. High Energy Phys.2018(2018), no. 07, 161,doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2018)161

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep07(2018)161 2018

  48. [48]

    Fitting using finite Monte Carlo samples

    R. J. Barlow and C. Beeston, “Fitting using finite Monte Carlo samples”,Comput. Phys. Commun.77(1993) 219,doi:10.1016/0010-4655(93)90005-W

    work page doi:10.1016/0010-4655(93)90005-w 1993

  49. [49]

    The standard model as an effective field theory

    I. Brivio and M. Trott, “The standard model as an effective field theory”,Phys. Rept.793 (2019) 1,doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2018.11.002

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2018.11.002 2019

  50. [50]

    SMEFTsim 3.0 — a practical guide

    I. Brivio, “SMEFTsim 3.0 — a practical guide”,J. High Energy Phys.2021(2021), no. 04, 073,doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2021)073

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep04(2021)073 2021

  51. [51]

    Chollet et al., “Keras”.https://keras.io, 2015

    F. Chollet et al., “Keras”.https://keras.io, 2015

    work page 2015

  52. [52]

    TENSORFLOW: Large-scale machine learning on heterogeneous systems

    M. Abadi et al., “TENSORFLOW: large-scale machine learning on heterogeneous systems”, 2015. Software available fromhttp://tensorflow.org. doi:10.5281/zenodo.4724125

    work page doi:10.5281/zenodo.4724125 2015

  53. [53]

    Differential cross-section mea- surements for the electroweak production of dijets in as- sociation with aZboson in proton–proton collisions at ATLAS,

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Differential cross-section measurements for the electroweak production of dijets in association with a Z boson in proton–proton collisions at ATLAS”, Eur, Phys, J. C81(2021) 163,doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-08734-w

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-020-08734-w 2021

  54. [54]

    Search for anomalous triple gauge couplings in WW and WZ production in lepton + jet events in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Search for anomalous triple gauge couplings in WW and WZ production in lepton + jet events in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV”,J. High Energy Phys.2019(2019), no. 12, 062,doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2019)062. 21 A The CMS Collaboration Yerevan Physics Institute, Yerevan, Armenia A. Hayrapetyan, V . Makarenko , A. Tumasyan1 Institut f ¨ ur...

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep12(2019)062 2019