Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 3 minor 78 references

This paper presents the first search for the exotic Higgs decay into a pair of pseudoscalars, each decaying to two tau leptons, in the pseudoscalar mass range 15–60 GeV; no excess is found and branching-fraction limits are set.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-02 18:31 UTC pith:3J7XFXQW

load-bearing objection First ATLAS resolved four-tau H→aa search in 15–60 GeV; clean null result with internally consistent yields, though the dominant fake background is only validated in three-object regions. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2603.08323 v2 pith:3J7XFXQW submitted 2026-03-09 hep-ex

Search for decays of the Higgs boson into pair-produced pseudoscalar particles decaying into τ^+τ^-τ^+τ^- using pp collisions at sqrt{s}=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector

ATLAS Collaboration This is my paper
classification hep-ex
keywords Higgs bosonexotic decayspseudoscalartau leptonsfour-tau final statebranching fraction limitsLHC searchfake/non-prompt background
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper probes whether the 125 GeV Higgs boson can decay into two light pseudoscalar particles, each of which promptly decays to a tau-lepton pair, producing a final state of four tau leptons. Using 140 fb^-1 of proton-proton collision data at 13 TeV, the search finds no significant deviation from the Standard Model background. It sets upper limits on the branching fraction of this process at 95% confidence, ranging from 0.06 to 0.23 depending on the pseudoscalar mass. A sympathetic reader should see this as a careful, well-motivated extension of known searches to an unexplored mass window, closing a gap in direct constraints on light new particles coupled to the Higgs.

Core claim

The central claim is that, across pseudoscalar masses from 15 to 60 GeV, the observed event yields in two complementary signal regions are consistent with the Standard Model expectation, and therefore the branching fraction of the Higgs boson to four tau leptons through a pair of light pseudoscalars is bounded above at 95% confidence by values between 0.06 and 0.23. This is the first direct constraint on this particular final state in this mass range, and it complements a lower-mass search where the tau leptons are Lorentz-boosted. The result is derived from a statistical combination of a two-hadronic-tau and a one-hadronic-tau signal region, with the dominant background of fake or non-promp

What carries the argument

The analysis uses two signal regions (2ℓ2τhad and 3ℓ1τhad) defined by the number of hadronically decaying tau leptons, plus same-charge requirements and a Z-boson mass veto to suppress Drell-Yan background. The dominant background—fake/non-prompt leptons—is estimated with a data-driven fake-factor method, in which fake rates are measured in Z+jets control regions, refined in three validation regions with three final-state objects, and propagated to the signal regions with dedicated uncertainties. A profile-likelihood fit combines the two signal regions and sets limits using the CLs technique.

Load-bearing premise

The fake/non-prompt background estimate, which dominates the 3ℓ1τhad signal region, relies on the assumption that fake factors measured in Z+jets and three-object validation regions remain valid for the signal-region kinematic and composition; a larger uncaptured mismatch would shift the expected background and the derived limits.

What would settle it

A direct measurement of the fake factor in a control region with the same jet and lepton composition and kinematics as the 3ℓ1τhad signal region—or a future observation of a significant excess in that signal region with more data—would confirm or refute the robustness of the limits.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • If the Higgs boson decays to four tau leptons via a light pseudoscalar with a branching fraction above these limits in the 15–60 GeV mass range, such a decay is excluded with 95% confidence.
  • The new constraints complement existing searches for H→aa→4b, bbττ, and bbμμ, providing a unique handle on models where the pseudoscalar couples preferentially to leptons, such as type-III 2HDM+S scenarios with large tanβ.
  • The limits improve toward higher pseudoscalar masses, reaching 0.06 at 60 GeV; the sensitivity is largely limited by statistical uncertainty, so more collision data would directly strengthen the bounds.
  • The agreement between data and background in the validation regions, especially in the high-mass sideband, supports the reliability of the fake-factor method for this final state.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • A natural extension would be to combine this result with the lower-mass search (4–15 GeV) to produce a continuous exclusion curve across a wide mass range, which is not presented in this paper but would be straightforward to construct.
  • If the fake-factor method were to be tested in a signal-region-like phase space with an independent data sample, it would either validate or call into question the robustness of the limits, since the 3ℓ1τhad signal region relies heavily on a 21/28 background estimate.
  • The search's sensitivity is statistically limited; with the full Run 3 dataset (expected to be several times larger), the same analysis could nearly halve the limits, potentially reaching branching-fraction sensitivities around a few percent.
  • The absence of a signal also indirectly constrains models where the pseudoscalar mediates dark-matter interactions, because such a particle would be produced in Higgs decays with an observable rate unless its coupling to taus is unusually suppressed.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 3 minor

Summary. This paper reports a search by the ATLAS Collaboration for exotic Higgs decays H→aa→τ+τ−τ+τ−, where a is a light pseudoscalar with mass between 15 and 60 GeV, using 140 fb−1 of pp collisions at √s=13 TeV. Two complementary signal regions are defined: 2ℓ2τhad and 3ℓ1τhad, targeting different τ decay topologies. The dominant background, from fake/non-prompt leptons, is estimated with a data-driven fake-factor method calibrated in Z+jets and refined in three-object validation regions; diboson backgrounds are taken from simulation. No significant excess is observed, and upper limits at 95% CL are set on B(H→aa→4τ) ranging from 0.23 (expected 0.15) at ma=15 GeV to 0.06 (expected 0.04) at ma=60 GeV. The combination of the two signal regions is statistically dominated, with the 3ℓ1τhad channel providing most of the sensitivity.

Significance. If the result is correct, this is the first ATLAS search for H→aa→4τ in the resolved-object mass range 15–60 GeV, filling an important gap between the existing low-mass boosted search and the kinematic limit of on-shell Higgs decays. The analysis is carefully executed: the fake-factor method uses dedicated control and validation regions, the profile-likelihood fit propagates systematic uncertainties, and the CLs limits are derived with pseudo-experiments. The paper explicitly documents the dominant FNP background and its assigned uncertainties, and the observed yields are consistent with the background-only hypothesis. The limits on B(H→aa→4τ) provide meaningful constraints on 2HDM+S / NMSSM scenarios, complementing CMS searches and other final states. The internal consistency of the reported yields and uncertainties is good, and the interpretation is appropriately conservative.

major comments (2)
  1. [§4 (FNP background estimation, paragraph beginning 'The main source of background...')] The transfer of fake factors from the three-object validation regions to the four-object signal regions is not directly validated for events containing two fake objects. The VRs are designed with the subleading object dominantly from fakes, so they predominantly probe single-fake configurations. In the 3ℓ1τhad SR, which is the sensitive channel (31 observed vs 28.0±4.6 expected, with FNP 21.1±4.7), a fraction of events may contain two fake leptons. The combinatoric weight is applied, but no closure test measures the double-fake component. The ~10% pre-fit non-closure is evaluated in the VRs, whose composition differs from the SR. A bias of 20–30% in the double-fake contribution would shift the expected background by 4–6 events, comparable to the quoted FNP uncertainty of 4.7, and could change the observed significance and the derived limits. Please provide an estimate of the double-fake
  2. [Table 1 and the systematic-uncertainty discussion (paragraph beginning 'The dominant systematic uncertainties...')] The paper states that composition-related uncertainties on the FNP background are 'less than 10%', but the total FNP uncertainty is 4.7 on 21.1 (≈22%). It is unclear how the total is partitioned among statistical precision, object-specific fake-factor uncertainties, modelling variations, and the 10% non-closure term. A quantitative breakdown would allow the reader to judge whether the double-fake composition difference is adequately covered. Without this breakdown, it is difficult to assess the robustness of the limits to the potential 20–30% bias described in the previous comment.
minor comments (3)
  1. [Introduction (signal simulation)] The claim that the acceptance for non-ggF Higgs production modes is 'negligible' compared to ggF is not quantified. A number or reference to a supporting study would strengthen the statement, since the limits assume inclusive Higgs production normalized to 55.6 pb.
  2. [Figure 1 caption] The caption describes the left panel as '1ℓ2τhad VR' and the right panel as 'ℓeτhad/ℓμτhad VR', but the left panel label in the figure reads 'l1hadτ2' and the right panel 'hadτµl & hadτle'. Consider making the labels and caption consistent for readability.
  3. [General presentation] Some references to equations or sections are missing (the paper has no numbered sections), and a few acronyms are used without definition (e.g., FNP is introduced but not spelled out). A brief notation table or a structure with numbered sections would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; direct experimental search with independent background estimate.

full rationale

The analysis is a direct limit-setting measurement, not a derivation of a predicted quantity from fitted inputs. The central claim is the observed (expected) 95% CL upper limit on B(H->aa->4tau). The signal hypothesis is tested with a profile-likelihood ratio built from Poisson densities in the two signal regions; signal MC is generated independently with Powheg+Pythia and normalized to the inclusive Higgs cross section. The dominant FNP background is estimated with a data-driven fake-factor method: fake factors are first measured in a Z+jets control region, then refined in three validation regions that are kinematically similar but distinct from the signal regions, and a profile-likelihood fit to VR yields constrains nuisance parameters. The SR yields are not used to determine the background, so the background estimate is not fitted to the quantity being predicted. The paper explicitly flags a ~10% pre-fit non-closure in VRs and assigns it as an additional uncertainty, which is a systematic limitation, not a circular step. Cited prior ATLAS work (e.g., fake-factor tools [50], low-mass search [19]) is used for methodology and context, not to establish the central physics claim by self-citation. No equation reduces to another by construction, no fitted parameter is renamed a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem is imported. Therefore no significant circularity is present; the score of 1 reflects only the mild data-driven tuning in the background model, which is a systematic uncertainty rather than circular reasoning.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

1 free parameters · 5 axioms · 1 invented entities

The paper is an experimental search, so it contains no derivation with invented degrees of freedom. The only data-fitted quantity is the fake factor used in the background estimate. The remaining assumptions are standard experimental and statistical inputs. The pseudoscalar a is not invented by this paper but is the hypothesized signal entity for which limits are set.

free parameters (1)
  • Fake factor f for electrons, muons, and hadronic taus = Muons ~0.3–0.6; electrons ~0.01–0.09; tau_had ~0.25–0.5, binned in pT and eta/track multiplicity
    Measured in a Z+jets control region and refined in validation regions to estimate the dominant fake/non-prompt background in the signal regions. This is a data-driven calibration of the background model, not a signal parameter.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption The Sherpa 2.2.2 Monte Carlo simulation accurately models WZ and ZZ backgrounds in the signal regions.
    The diboson background with prompt leptons escaping the Z veto is estimated from MC; an incorrect normalization or shape would shift the expected background.
  • domain assumption The fake-factor method transfers fake/non-prompt rates from Z+jets control and validation regions to the signal regions.
    The dominant background in the 3ℓ1τhad SR relies on this transfer; the paper includes composition uncertainties but assumes no uncaptured mismatch.
  • domain assumption ATLAS detector simulation and reconstruction correctly model signal acceptance, efficiencies, and energy scales.
    The expected signal yields and limit interpretation depend on detector simulation for tau, electron, muon, and jet reconstruction.
  • standard math The CLs method with the modified test statistic provides valid frequentist upper limits.
    The limits are derived using the standard LHC statistical procedure; this is an accepted mathematical tool rather than a physics assumption.
  • domain assumption The inclusive Higgs production cross section is 55.6 pb.
    Signal yields are normalized to the Higgs production cross section from the LHC Higgs cross-section handbook; this is an external input from prior literature.
invented entities (1)
  • Light pseudoscalar a independent evidence
    purpose: BSM mediator in the signal model H→aa→τ+τ−τ+τ−; motivated by dark-matter mediators, neutral naturalness, and 2HDM+S models.
    The paper provides a falsifiable handle: a specific final state and mass-dependent branching-ratio limits. No discovery is claimed, but the entity is experimentally testable.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 45094 in / 9379 out tokens · 96205 ms · 2026-08-02T18:31:53.380859+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

A search for a pair of low-mass pseudoscalars $a$ that promptly decay into $\tau$-leptons is presented using 140 fb$^{-1}$ of proton-proton collision data at $13$ TeV centre-of-mass energy recorded with the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider. The result is used to place constraints on exotic decays of the Higgs boson into four $\tau$-leptons, $H\to aa\to \tau^+\tau^-\tau^+\tau^-$. This search focuses on events with either one or two $\tau$-leptons decaying into hadrons and neutrinos, and the remaining three or two $\tau$-leptons decaying into either electron or muon and neutrinos. No significant excess is observed above the expected Standard Model background and upper limits at the 95% confidence level on $\mathcal{B}(H\rightarrow aa\rightarrow \tau^+\tau^-\tau^+\tau^-)$ are set ranging from 0.06 to 0.23, depending on the mass $m_a$ ranging from 15 to 60 GeV.

Review history (2 revisions) →

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

78 extracted references · 65 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Silveira and A

    V. Silveira and A. Zee,Scalar Phantoms, Phys. Lett. B161(1985) 136

    1985

  2. [2]

    Pospelov, A

    M. Pospelov, A. Ritz, and M. Voloshin,Secluded WIMP Dark Matter, Phys. Lett. B662(2008) 53, arXiv:0711.4866 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  3. [3]

    Draper, T

    P. Draper, T. Liu, C. E. M. Wagner, L.-T. Wang, and H. Zhang,Dark Light-Higgs Bosons, Phys. Rev. Lett.106(2011) 121805, arXiv:1009.3963 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  4. [4]

    S. Ipek, D. McKeen, and A. E. Nelson, Renormalizable model for the Galactic Center gamma-ray excess from dark matter annihilation, Phys. Rev. D90(2014) 055021, arXiv:1404.3716 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  5. [5]

    Martin, J

    A. Martin, J. Shelton, and J. Unwin, Fitting the Galactic Center Gamma-Ray Excess with Cascade Annihilations, Phys. Rev. D90(2014) 103513, arXiv:1405.0272 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  6. [6]

    Clowe et al.,A Direct Empirical Proof of the Existence of Dark Matter, Astrophys.J.648(2006) L109, arXiv:astro-ph/0608407 [astro-ph]

    D. Clowe et al.,A Direct Empirical Proof of the Existence of Dark Matter, Astrophys.J.648(2006) L109, arXiv:astro-ph/0608407 [astro-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  7. [7]

    Burdman, Z

    G. Burdman, Z. Chacko, H.-S. Goh, and R. Harnik,Folded supersymmetry and the LEP paradox, JHEP02(2006) 009, arXiv:hep-ph/0609152

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  8. [8]

    Craig, A

    N. Craig, A. Katz, M. Strassler, and R. Sundrum,Naturalness in the Dark at the LHC, JHEP07(2015) 105, arXiv:1501.05310 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  9. [9]

    Curtin and C

    D. Curtin and C. B. Verhaaren,Discovering Uncolored Naturalness in Exotic Higgs Decays, JHEP12(2015) 1, arXiv:1506.06141 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  10. [10]

    Profumo, M

    S. Profumo, M. J. Ramsey-Musolf, and G. Shaughnessy, Singlet Higgs phenomenology and the electroweak phase transition, JHEP08(2007) 010, arXiv:0705.2425 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  11. [11]

    Blinov, J

    N. Blinov, J. Kozaczuk, D. E. Morrissey, and C. Tamarit, Electroweak Baryogenesis from Exotic Electroweak Symmetry Breaking, Phys. Rev. D92(2015) 035012, arXiv:1504.05195 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  12. [12]

    Curtin, R

    D. Curtin, R. Essig, S. Gori, P. Jaiswal, A. Katz, et al.,Exotic decays of the 125 GeV Higgs boson, Phys. Rev. D90(2014) 075004, arXiv:1312.4992 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  13. [13]

    P. D. G. Collaboration,Review of particle physics, 2024 030001

    2024

  14. [14]

    Evans and P

    L. Evans and P. Bryant,LHC Machine, JINST3(2008) S08001

    2008

  15. [15]

    R. E. Shrock and M. Suzuki,Invisible Decays of Higgs Bosons, Phys. Lett. B110(1982) 250

    1982

  16. [16]

    M. J. Strassler and K. M. Zurek,Echoes of a hidden valley at hadron colliders, Phys. Lett. B651(2007) 374, arXiv:hep-ph/0604261

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  17. [17]

    Schabinger and J

    R. Schabinger and J. D. Wells,Minimal spontaneously broken hidden sector and its impact on Higgs boson physics at the CERN Large Hadron Collider, Phys. Rev. D72(2005) 093007, arXiv:hep-ph/0509209

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  18. [18]

    Patt and F

    B. Patt and F. Wilczek,Higgs-field portal into hidden sectors, 2006, arXiv:hep-ph/0605188

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  19. [19]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Search for Higgs boson exotic decays into Lorentz-boosted light bosons in the four-𝜏final state at√𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Lett. B870(2025) 139843, arXiv:2503.05463 [hep-ex]. 11

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  20. [20]

    CMS Collaboration,Search for a very light NMSSM Higgs boson produced in decays of the 125GeV scalar boson and decaying into𝜏leptons in𝑝𝑝collisions at√𝑠=8TeV, JHEP01(2016) 079, arXiv:1510.06534 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  21. [21]

    CMS Collaboration, Search for light pseudoscalar boson pairs produced from decays of the125GeV Higgs boson in final states with two muons and two nearby tracks in𝑝𝑝collisions at√𝑠=13TeV, Phys. Lett. B800(2020) 135087, arXiv:1907.07235 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  22. [22]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Search for the Higgs boson produced in association with a𝑊 boson and decaying to four𝑏-quarks via two spin-zero particles in𝑝𝑝collisions at13TeV with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C76(2016) 605, arXiv:1606.08391 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  23. [23]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Search for the Higgs boson produced in association with a vector boson and decaying into two spin-zero particles in the𝐻→𝑎𝑎→4𝑏 channel in𝑝𝑝 collisions at√𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP10(2018) 031, arXiv:1806.07355 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  24. [24]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Search for Higgs boson decays into two new low-mass spin-0 particles in the 4𝑏channel with the ATLAS detector using𝑝𝑝collisions at√𝑠=13TeV, Phys. Rev. D102(2020) 112006, arXiv:2005.12236 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  25. [25]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Search for decays of the Higgs boson into scalar particles decaying into four or six𝑏-quarks using𝑝𝑝collisions at√𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D112(2025) 072005, arXiv:2507.01165 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  26. [26]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Search for Resonant and Nonresonant Higgs Boson Pair Production in the 𝑏 ¯𝑏𝜏+𝜏− Decay Channel in𝑝𝑝Collisions at√𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS Detector, Phys. Rev. Lett.121(2018) 191801, arXiv:1808.00336 [hep-ex], Erratum: Phys. Rev. Lett.122(2019) 089901

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  27. [27]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Search for Higgs boson decays into a pair of pseudoscalar particles in the 𝑏𝑏𝜇𝜇final state with the ATLAS detector in𝑝𝑝collisions at√𝑠=13TeV, Phys. Rev. D105(2022) 012006, arXiv:2110.00313 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  28. [28]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Search for new light gauge bosons in Higgs boson decays to four-lepton final states in𝑝𝑝collisions at√𝑠=8TeV with the ATLAS detector at the LHC, Phys. Rev. D92(2015) 092001, arXiv:1505.07645 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  29. [29]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Search for Higgs boson decays to beyond-the-Standard-Model light bosons in four-lepton events with the ATLAS detector at√𝑠=13TeV, JHEP06(2018) 166, arXiv:1802.03388 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  30. [30]

    Belyaev, J

    A. Belyaev, J. Pivarski, A. Safonov, S. Senkin, and A. Tatarinov, LHC discovery potential of the lightest NMSSM Higgs boson in the h1 -> a1 a1 -> 4 muons channel, Phys. Rev. D81(2010) 075021, arXiv:1002.1956 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  31. [31]

    ATLAS Collaboration,The ATLAS Experiment at the CERN Large Hadron Collider, JINST3(2008) S08003

    2008

  32. [32]

    Avoni et al.,The new LUCID-2 detector for luminosity measurement and monitoring in ATLAS, JINST13(2018) P07017

    G. Avoni et al.,The new LUCID-2 detector for luminosity measurement and monitoring in ATLAS, JINST13(2018) P07017

    2018

  33. [33]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Performance of the ATLAS trigger system in 2015, Eur. Phys. J. C77(2017) 317, arXiv:1611.09661 [hep-ex]. 12

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  34. [34]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Software and computing for Run 3 of the ATLAS experiment at the LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C85(2025) 234, arXiv:2404.06335 [hep-ex], Erratum: Eur. Phys. J. C85(2025) 907

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  35. [35]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Electron and photon efficiencies in LHC Run 2 with the ATLAS experiment, JHEP05(2024) 162, arXiv:2308.13362 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  36. [36]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Muon reconstruction and identification efficiency in ATLAS using the full Run 2𝑝𝑝collision data set at√𝑠=13TeV, Eur. Phys. J. C81(2021) 578, arXiv:2012.00578 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  37. [37]

    Cacciari, G

    M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez,The anti-𝑘𝑡 jet clustering algorithm, JHEP04(2008) 063, arXiv:0802.1189 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  38. [38]

    Cacciari, G

    M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez,FastJet user manual, Eur. Phys. J. C72(2012) 1896, arXiv:1111.6097 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  39. [39]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Jet reconstruction and performance using particle flow with the ATLAS Detector, Eur. Phys. J. C77(2017) 466, arXiv:1703.10485 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  40. [40]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Topological cell clustering in the ATLAS calorimeters and its performance in LHC Run 1, Eur. Phys. J. C77(2017) 490, arXiv:1603.02934 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  41. [41]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Jet energy scale and resolution measured in proton–proton collisions at√𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C81(2021) 689, arXiv:2007.02645 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  42. [42]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Performance of pile-up mitigation techniques for jets in𝑝𝑝collisions at√𝑠=8TeV using the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C76(2016) 581, arXiv:1510.03823 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  43. [43]

    ATLAS Collaboration,ATLAS flavour-tagging algorithms for the LHC Run 2𝑝𝑝 collision dataset, Eur. Phys. J. C83(2023) 681, arXiv:2211.16345 [physics.data-an]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  44. [44]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Measurements of𝑏-jet tagging efficiency with the ATLAS detector using𝑡¯𝑡events at√𝑠=13TeV, JHEP08(2018) 089, arXiv:1805.01845 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  45. [45]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Identification of hadronic tau lepton decays using neural networks in the ATLAS experiment, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2019-033, 2019,url:https://cds.cern.ch/record/2688062

    arXiv 2019

  46. [46]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Reconstruction, Energy Calibration, and Identification of Hadronically Decaying Tau Leptons in the ATLAS Experiment for Run-2 of the LHC, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2015-045, 2015,url:https://cds.cern.ch/record/2064383

    arXiv 2015

  47. [47]

    ATLAS Collaboration,The performance of missing transverse momentum reconstruction and its significance with the ATLAS detector using140fb−1 of√𝑠=13TeV𝑝𝑝collisions, Eur. Phys. J. C85(2025) 606, arXiv:2402.05858 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  48. [48]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Performance of electron and photon triggers in ATLAS during LHC Run 2, Eur. Phys. J. C80(2020) 47, arXiv:1909.00761 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  49. [49]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Performance of the ATLAS muon triggers in Run 2, JINST15(2020) P09015, arXiv:2004.13447 [physics.ins-det]. 13

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  50. [50]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Tools for estimating fake/non-prompt lepton backgrounds with the ATLAS detector at the LHC, JINST18(2023) T11004, arXiv:2211.16178 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  51. [51]

    Bothmann et al.,Event generation with Sherpa 2.2, SciPost Phys.7(2019) 034, arXiv:1905.09127 [hep-ph]

    E. Bothmann et al.,Event generation with Sherpa 2.2, SciPost Phys.7(2019) 034, arXiv:1905.09127 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  52. [52]

    Gleisberg and S

    T. Gleisberg and S. Höche,Comix, a new matrix element generator, JHEP12(2008) 039, arXiv:0808.3674 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  53. [53]

    Schumann and F

    S. Schumann and F. Krauss, A parton shower algorithm based on Catani–Seymour dipole factorisation, JHEP03(2008) 038, arXiv:0709.1027 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  54. [54]

    Höche, F

    S. Höche, F. Krauss, M. Schönherr, and F. Siegert, A critical appraisal of NLO+PS matching methods, JHEP09(2012) 049, arXiv:1111.1220 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  55. [55]

    Höche, F

    S. Höche, F. Krauss, M. Schönherr, and F. Siegert, QCD matrix elements + parton showers. The NLO case, JHEP04(2013) 027, arXiv:1207.5030 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  56. [56]

    Catani, F

    S. Catani, F. Krauss, B. R. Webber, and R. Kuhn,QCD Matrix Elements + Parton Showers, JHEP11(2001) 063, arXiv:hep-ph/0109231

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2001

  57. [57]

    Höche, F

    S. Höche, F. Krauss, S. Schumann, and F. Siegert,QCD matrix elements and truncated showers, JHEP05(2009) 053, arXiv:0903.1219 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  58. [58]

    Buccioni et al.,OpenLoops 2, Eur

    F. Buccioni et al.,OpenLoops 2, Eur. Phys. J. C79(2019) 866, arXiv:1907.13071 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  59. [59]

    Cascioli, P

    F. Cascioli, P. Maierhöfer, and S. Pozzorini,Scattering Amplitudes with Open Loops, Phys. Rev. Lett.108(2012) 111601, arXiv:1111.5206 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  60. [60]

    Denner, S

    A. Denner, S. Dittmaier, and L. Hofer, Collier: A fortran-based complex one-loop library in extended regularizations, Comput. Phys. Commun.212(2017) 220, arXiv:1604.06792 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  61. [61]

    NNPDF Collaboration, R. D. Ball, et al.,Parton distributions for the LHC run II, JHEP04(2015) 040, arXiv:1410.8849 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  62. [62]

    Nason,A new method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms, JHEP11(2004) 040, arXiv:hep-ph/0409146

    P. Nason,A new method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms, JHEP11(2004) 040, arXiv:hep-ph/0409146

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  63. [63]

    Frixione, P

    S. Frixione, P. Nason, and C. Oleari, Matching NLO QCD computations with parton shower simulations: the POWHEG method, JHEP11(2007) 070, arXiv:0709.2092 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  64. [64]

    Alioli, P

    S. Alioli, P. Nason, C. Oleari, and E. Re,A general framework for implementing NLO calculations in shower Monte Carlo programs: the POWHEG BOX, JHEP06(2010) 043, arXiv:1002.2581 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  65. [65]

    Butterworth et al.,PDF4LHC recommendations for LHC Run II, J

    J. Butterworth et al.,PDF4LHC recommendations for LHC Run II, J. Phys. G43(2016) 023001, arXiv:1510.03865 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  66. [66]

    de Florian et al., Handbook of LHC Higgs Cross Sections: 4

    D. de Florian et al., Handbook of LHC Higgs Cross Sections: 4. Deciphering the Nature of the Higgs Sector, (2017), arXiv:1610.07922 [hep-ph]. 14

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  67. [67]

    Sjöstrand et al.,An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2, Comput

    T. Sjöstrand et al.,An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2, Comput. Phys. Commun.191(2015) 159, arXiv:1410.3012 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  68. [68]

    D. J. Lange,The EvtGen particle decay simulation package, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A462(2001) 152

    2001

  69. [69]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Measurement of the𝑍/𝛾∗ boson transverse momentum distribution in𝑝𝑝 collisions at√𝑠=7TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP09(2014) 145, arXiv:1406.3660 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  70. [70]

    ATLAS Collaboration,The ATLAS Simulation Infrastructure, Eur. Phys. J. C70(2010) 823, arXiv:1005.4568 [physics.ins-det]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  71. [71]

    Agostinelli et al.,Geant4– a simulation toolkit, Nucl

    S. Agostinelli et al.,Geant4– a simulation toolkit, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A506(2003) 250

    2003

  72. [72]

    Sjöstrand, S

    T. Sjöstrand, S. Mrenna, and P. Skands,A brief introduction to PYTHIA 8.1, Comput. Phys. Commun.178(2008) 852, arXiv:0710.3820 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  73. [73]

    NNPDF Collaboration, R. D. Ball, et al.,Parton distributions with LHC data, Nucl. Phys. B867(2013) 244, arXiv:1207.1303 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  74. [74]

    ATLAS Collaboration,The Pythia 8 A3 tune description of ATLAS minimum bias and inelastic measurements incorporating the Donnachie–Landshoff diffractive model, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2016-017, 2016,url:https://cds.cern.ch/record/2206965

    arXiv 2016

  75. [75]

    Cowan, K

    G. Cowan, K. Cranmer, E. Gross, and O. Vitells, Asymptotic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics, Eur. Phys. J. C71(2011) 1554, arXiv:1007.1727 [physics.data-an], Erratum: Eur. Phys. J. C73(2013) 2501

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  76. [76]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Electron and photon energy calibration with the ATLAS detector using LHC Run 2 data, JINST19(2024) P02009, arXiv:2309.05471 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  77. [77]

    A. L. Read,Presentation of search results: the𝐶𝐿𝑠 technique, J. Phys. G28(2002) 2693

    2002

  78. [78]

    Demokritos

    ATLAS Collaboration,ATLAS Computing Acknowledgements, ATL-SOFT-PUB-2026-001, 2026, url:https://cds.cern.ch/record/2952666. 15 The ATLAS Collaboration G. Aad 102, E. Aakvaag 17, B. Abbott 122, S. Abdelhameed 118a, K. Abeling 54, N.J. Abicht 48, S.H. Abidi 30, M. Aboelela 44, A. Aboulhorma 36e, H. Abramowicz 155, B.S. Acharya 68a,68b,m, A. Ackermann 62a, C....

    arXiv 2026