Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 6 minor 1 cited by

Fresh look at the LHC limits on vector leptoquarks

T0 review · 1 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper argues that LHC limits on vector leptoquark masses and couplings strengthen substantially when single production, indirect t-channel exchange, and its interference with Standard Model Drell-Yan are added to pair production, and…

desk verdict Useful vLQ recasting with genuinely new QCD-QED pair production and per-species interference results, but the V2/eV2 exclusion curves rest on an EFT stand-in below the mass range where the paper validates it. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.18295 v1 pith:37PNUGZL submitted 2025-07-24 hep-ph hep-ex

Arijit Das , Tanumoy Mandal , Subhadip Mitra , Rachit Sharma This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phhep-ex
keywords vectorleptoquarksLHCexclusionlimitspairproductionsingleindirectDrell-YaninterferenceQCD-QEDmixedeffectivefieldtheory
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

Vector leptoquarks are hypothetical colour-triplet bosons that couple a quark to a lepton, and their pair-production searches are usually taken as the model-independent way to bound their masses. This paper argues that the true LHC exclusion reach is considerably better, because several production modes all feed the same dimuon-plus-jets final state: pair production, single production, indirect t-channel exchange, and the interference of that exchange with the Standard Model Drell-Yan process. The interference can add to or subtract from the Standard Model background depending on the leptoquark's quantum numbers, so the improvement over pair-production-only limits is not uniform. The paper also shows that QCD-QED mixed pair production raises the model-independent mass limits, noticeably for highly charged species, and that an effective-operator description agrees with the full theory for leptoquark masses above roughly 3-4 TeV. If the paper is right, current LHC data already exclude vector leptoquarks over a wider mass-coupling region than the existing literature claims.

What carries the argument

The argument is carried by a bookkeeping scheme that classifies every contribution to the dimuon-plus-jets final state by its order in $\alpha_s$, $\alpha_e$, and the leptoquark coupling $x$, so that the pair-production cross section is written as $\sigma_{PP}=\sigma^{200}+\sigma^{110}+\sigma^{020}+x^2(\sigma^{101}+\sigma^{011})+x^4\sigma^{002}$, with the QCD-QED mixed term $\sigma^{110}$ coming from gluon-photon fusion and carrying the model-independent mass-shift effect. Single production is split into two-body and three-body contributions, and the nonresonant contribution is split into indirect production and its interference with the Standard Model Drell-Yan background. The other load-bearing object is the effective-operator description obtained by integrating out the t-channel leptoquark, which turns the indirect and interference amplitudes into four-fermion operators and is used to obtain the $V_2$ and $\tilde V_2$ exclusion curves. The sign of the interference term, which is determined by the chiral structure of the leptoquark Yukawa coupling, decides whether the combined signal exceeds or falls below the pair-production-only expectation.

What would settle it

Compute the $V_2$ and $\tilde V_2$ indirect and interference cross sections with the full t-channel propagator, without integrating the leptoquark out, at masses of 2, 2.5, and 3 TeV for first-generation couplings, and compare the resulting 95% CL exclusion contours with the EFT-based curves; a shift larger than the analysis's stated uncertainties would move the claimed excluded regions.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim, stated in the paper's own terms, is that a systematic combination of all vLQ production mechanisms that yield dimuon-plus-dijet events gives markedly stronger 95% CL exclusion limits in the mass-coupling plane than the pair-production-only analyses that dominate the literature, and that including the QCD-QED mixed pair-production channel shifts the model-independent mass limits by hundreds of GeV for high-charge species. The five species considered are $U_1$, $\tilde U_1$, $V_2$, $\tilde V_2$, and $U_3$. The interference of indirect production with Standard Model Drell-Yan can be constructive or destructive: for example, $U_1$ and $V_2$ with $L$-$R$-type couplings subtract from the background, while $\tilde U_1$ and certain $V_2$ couplings add to it, so the size of the limit improvement depends on the species and on the chirality of the coupling. In the high-mass regime the indirect and interference contributions dominate, and the limits obtained by integrating out the t-channel leptoquark coincide with the full-theory limits for $M_{\rm LQ}\gtrsim 3$-$4$ TeV for couplings to first- and second-generation quarks. At large coupling $x\simeq\sqrt{4\pi}$ the extrapolated maximum mass exclusions reach tens of TeV for several couplings.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the effective-operator approximation used for the $V_2$ and $\tilde V_2$ indirect and interference contributions is accurate down to the lowest masses at which limits are drawn (about 2 TeV), even though the paper's own comparison shows the EFT and the full theory agree only around 3-4 TeV for first- and second-generation couplings.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Nominal model-independent 95% CL mass limits rise by up to a few hundred GeV once QCD-QED mixed pair production is included; the largest shifts occur for the highest-charge species, with photon-PDF uncertainties quoted as large as or larger than the shift.
  • Because indirect production and its interference fall off more slowly with mass than resonant production, the high-mass dimuon tail sets coupling limits out to several TeV; extrapolating the coupling to the perturbative boundary $x\simeq\sqrt{4\pi}$ gives maximum mass exclusions of tens of TeV for some couplings.
  • The direction of the improvement is set by the interference sign: destructively interfering species such as $U_1$ and $V_2$ gain most from the dimuon-tail analysis, while constructively interfering species such as $\tilde U_1$ keep the direct-search limits as the stronger constraint.
  • For first- and second-generation quark couplings the effective-operator and full-theory exclusions agree once $M_{\rm LQ}\gtrsim 3$-$4$ TeV, so the EFT-based curves are reliable in that high-mass region; the matching mass moves higher for third-generation couplings.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the EFT matching scale is a genuine validity boundary, then the $V_2$ and $\tilde V_2$ exclusion curves below about 3-4 TeV should be recomputed with the full t-channel propagator before being used for model-building; the paper identifies this limitation but does not fully resolve it.
  • The same count-every-topology logic should transfer to other coloured mediators with dilepton-plus-jets signatures; the sign of their interference with Standard Model Drell-Yan would determine whether combined searches improve or degrade the limit.
  • The reported sensitivity of the QCD-QED mass shift to the photon PDF suggests that a better-determined photon PDF, or a PDF set that includes data-driven constraints, would either confirm or shrink the improved limits; this can be tested with existing LHC data.
  • The tens-of-TeV extrapolated limits at $x\simeq\sqrt{4\pi}$ should be interpreted with a dedicated perturbative-unitarity check per coupling; without it those numbers are kinematic bounds rather than rigorous exclusions.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

1 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper presents updated LHC exclusion limits on vector leptoquarks (U1, eU1, V2, eV2, U3) by recasting existing ATLAS and CMS searches in dimuon-plus-jets and high-mass dimuon channels. The authors combine four production mechanisms: pair production (PP), single production (SP), t-channel indirect production (IP), and indirect interference with the SM Drell-Yan background (II). They report model-independent mass limits in Table III, coupling exclusions in the mass-coupling plane in Figs. 4 and 6, two-coupling exclusions in Fig. 5, and a comparison of the full vLQ theory with an effective-operator description in Fig. 7. A distinctive feature is the inclusion of QCD-QED mixed pair production, which shifts mass limits appreciably for highly charged species, and the use of the dimuon tail to constrain couplings at large mass. For V2 and eV2, the IP and II contributions are computed in an effective-operator approximation because the full-theory interference evaluation in MadGraph fails with the authors' FeynRules models; this is stated transparently in Sec. IVF and footnote 2.

Significance. If the results are taken at face value, the paper provides the most complete current recast of LHC limits for vector leptoquarks, systematically combining all leading production channels and validating the dimuon-tail limits against the recent CMS non-resonant search. The explicit treatment of interference sign and the demonstration that QCD-QED mixed pair production strengthens model-independent mass limits for high-charge species are useful and clearly presented. The paper is also commendably transparent about its main technical limitation, the effective-operator workaround for V2/eV2. However, because that approximation is validated only in a mass range that does not cover the full extent of the presented contours, the central claim that the limits account for all relevant production mechanisms is not uniformly supported.

major comments (1)
  1. The V2 and eV2 IP and II contributions are obtained by integrating out the t-channel leptoquark and using the dimension-six operators of Table IV, as stated in Sec. IVF and footnote 2. The paper's own validation in Fig. 7 is performed only for U1 and eU1, and it shows that the full theory and the EFT agree only for M_lq ≳ 3-4 TeV. The V2/eV2 exclusion contours, however, are presented down to 2 TeV (and to 1 TeV in some panels, e.g., the lower edge of the PP-only comparison), with no full-theory cross-check for these species. Since IP and II dominate the high-coupling tails of the limits, the V2/eV2 boundaries below roughly 3-4 TeV rest on an unvalidated approximation; if the EFT overestimates or underestimates the interference there, the excluded regions would shift. I recommend either computing the full-theory IP and II for V2/eV2 with an independent matrix-element implementation or analytic expressions for benchmark masses, or restricting the asterisked IP*/II* contours and the associated exclusion statements to the validated mass range and showing only PP+SP below it.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Table III] The table heading says 'model-independent mass exclusion limits on various sLQ models', but the table lists vLQ species; this should be corrected to vLQ.
  2. [Fig. 7] The caption states that the exclusion limits from the effective-operator approach and the full theory are compared, but it does not mention that the comparison is shown only for U1 and eU1; please state explicitly that no full-theory validation is shown for V2 and eV2.
  3. [Sec. IVF] The sentence 'This would give us a reasonable estimation of the exclusion limits for those vLQs, especially when they couple to the first and second generation quarks, for M_lq ≳ 3-4 TeV' should be reconciled with the figure ranges; the contours extend well below 3 TeV, so the reader cannot tell which parts of the curves are claimed to be reliable.
  4. [Eq. (6)] The notation 'Nobs(M_lq)/Lexp = sigma_obs(M_lq) x epsilon_exp(M_lq)' should clarify that sigma_obs is the observed upper limit on the cross section times efficiency and that the equality with the sum over topologies holds at the boundary; the current presentation is slightly ambiguous.
  5. [Sec. II] The text following Eq. (2) defines the barred quantities as evaluated at x=1, but it does not explicitly state whether a common coupling x is assumed for all contributing couplings in the PP expressions; please clarify the convention, especially for channels in which different couplings enter.
  6. [Table V] The format of the table columns is confusing: each row lists 'x Limit' three times without clear column headers. Please restructure the table so that each coupling and its extrapolated limit are labeled unambiguously.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the exclusion limits are anchored to external ATLAS and CMS data, and the authors' self-citations are methodological tools rather than load-bearing inputs.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained in the relevant sense. All exclusion limits are obtained by equating signal yields to observed ATLAS/CMS upper limits (Eq. (6), using the ATLAS µµjj bound [58] and CMS dimuon spectra [68]), so the final numbers are anchored to external data, not to the authors' own outputs. The self-citations [29,36,37,55] supply recasting methodology, the FeynRules/UFO implementation, and the chi-squared procedure; these are tools whose results are cross-checked by the authors ('we have verified that both yield similar bounds') and against the external CMS search [69] ('Our exclusion limits derived from the high-pT dimuon searches agree well with their results'), so they are not load-bearing in a circular way. The paper's own limitations, such as the EFT workaround for V2/eV2 in Sec. IVF and footnote 2 ('we bypassed the problem by taking an effective-operator approach'), the stated validity only for M_lq ≳ 3-4 TeV, and the large NNPDF photon-PDF uncertainty ('the limits can vary significantly'), are genuine approximation and validity concerns that belong under correctness risk, not circularity. None of the paper's equations reduce a predicted quantity to a fitted input by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central limits rest on standard QCD/EW factorization, the experimental recasting assumption, and the benchmark choices for kappa and the EFT workaround for V2/eV2. No new particles or forces are introduced.

free parameters (2)
  • kappa (anomalous gluon coupling) = 0 and 1 (benchmark values)
    Free parameter in Eq. (1) controlling the non-minimal gluon interaction of vLQs; the paper presents mass limits for both benchmark choices.
  • Nobs mass anchor = 2 TeV
    In Eq. (6) the observed event count is taken at M_lq = 2 TeV as a conservative choice; lower mass points would give weaker limits.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption SM gauge symmetry and conserved baryon/lepton number restrict vLQ interactions to the Yukawa list in Table I.
    Sec. II states that diquark interactions are excluded and U_PMNS = 1; limits are not valid for models with these additional couplings.
  • domain assumption The vLQ mass basis is aligned with down-type quarks (down-aligned scenario).
    Sec. II says up-aligned results differ only slightly, and down-aligned is used for illustration.
  • domain assumption The Delphes-based detector simulation with tuned analysis cuts reproduces the ATLAS muon-muon-jet selection of Ref. [58].
    Sec. IIIA states the cuts are tuned and validated to mimic ATLAS; all efficiencies and limits depend on this equivalence.
  • ad hoc to paper For V2 and eV2, the t-channel vLQ exchange can be integrated out to four-fermion operators over the full mass range of the presented limits.
    Sec. IVF and footnote 2; used because MadGraph cannot evaluate the interference, but Fig. 7 validates the EFT only for M_lq >= 3-4 TeV.
  • domain assumption Initial state partons are described by NNPDF PDFs including the photon PDF.
    Sec. IIIA and Sec. IV; the QCD-QED pair production contribution depends on the photon PDF, which has large uncertainties.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Fresh look at the LHC limits on vector leptoquarks." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/37PNUGZL

@misc{pith2026250718295,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Fresh look at the LHC limits on vector leptoquarks},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/37PNUGZL}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.18295}
}
read the original abstract

Vector leptoquarks (vLQs) are popular candidates for searching for physics beyond the Standard Model. In this paper, we present updated exclusion limits on various vLQ species, accounting for all the relevant production mechanisms at the LHC. In particular, we highlight the critical role of indirect production and its interference with the Standard Model Drell-Yan process. This interference can be constructive or destructive, depending on the specific quantum numbers of the vLQ, and significantly impacts the sensitivity of current searches. Furthermore, we demonstrate that including QCD-QED mixed pair production channels leads to a noticeable shift in model-independent mass limits. Additionally, we examine the validity of the full theory with vLQs and corresponding effective operators in the high mass regime. Overall, our analysis yields a substantial improvement in the exclusion limits on vLQs compared to the existing results in the literature.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.18295 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. Representative Feynman diagrams for pair, single and indirect productions of vLQs. A generic vLQ is denoted by [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. The PP, SP, IP, and II contributions for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. Indirect interference contributions for different vLQs. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Exclusion limits on all vLQs when only one coupling is nonzero (see Ref. [ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Same as Fig [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. Single-coupling exclusion limits when the quark involved is a third-generation quark. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_6.png]
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: FIG. 7. Exclusion limits from the effective operator approach and the full theory in the high mass limit. [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_7.png]

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Vectorlike $\tau$ production through leptoquarks

    hep-ph 2025-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Leptoquark decays can dominate the production of heavy vectorlike tau partners at the LHC, offering new mono- and di-lepton search channels.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

75 extracted references · 26 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Lepton Number as the Fourth Color,

    Jogesh C. Pati and Abdus Salam, “Lepton Number as the Fourth Color,” Phys. Rev. D10, 275–289 (1974), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.D 11, 703–703 (1975)]

    work page 1974

  2. [2]

    Unity of All Elementary Par- ticle Forces,

    H. Georgi and S. L. Glashow, “Unity of All Elementary Par- ticle Forces,” Phys. Rev. Lett.32, 438–441 (1974)

    work page 1974

  3. [3]

    Unified Interac- tions of Leptons and Hadrons,

    Harald Fritzsch and Peter Minkowski, “Unified Interac- tions of Leptons and Hadrons,” Annals Phys.93, 193–266 (1975)

    work page 1975

  4. [4]

    Technicolor,

    Edward Farhi and Leonard Susskind, “Technicolor,” Phys. Rept.74, 277 (1981)

    1981

  5. [5]

    This process occurs at one higher order inαx than the six PPsub-categoriesandhasadifferentkinematicsthan that of the PP process

    Another contribution in the 3BSP processes arises when a vLQ is produced along with a lepton-jet pair from an off-shell vLQ, i.e.,pp→ ℓqℓ∗ q→ ℓqℓj. This process occurs at one higher order inαx than the six PPsub-categoriesandhasadifferentkinematicsthan that of the PP process. To obtain the total SP contribution to theℓℓjj final state, we follow the method...

    work page 1989

  6. [6]

    LIGHT LEPTO- QUARKS,

    Barbara Schrempp and Fridger Schrempp, “LIGHT LEPTO- QUARKS,” Phys. Lett. B153, 101–107 (1985)

    work page 1985

  7. [7]

    COMPOSITE LEPTOQUARKS,

    Jose Wudka, “COMPOSITE LEPTOQUARKS,” Phys. Lett. B 167, 337–342 (1986)

    work page 1986

  8. [8]

    R-parity violating supersymmetry,

    R. Barbieret al., “R-parity violating supersymmetry,” Phys. Rept.420, 1–202 (2005), arXiv:hep-ph/0406039

    arXiv 2005

Show all 75 references
  1. [9]

    Physics of leptoquarks in precision experiments and at particle colliders,

    I. Doršner, S. Fajfer, A. Greljo, J. F. Kamenik, and N. Košnik, “Physics of leptoquarks in precision experiments and at particle colliders,” Phys. Rept.641, 1–68 (2016), arXiv:1603.04993 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Exploring mixed lepton-quark interac- tions in non-resonant leptoquark production at the LHC,

    João Gonçalves, António P. Morais, António Onofre, and Roman Pasechnik, “Exploring mixed lepton-quark interac- tions in non-resonant leptoquark production at the LHC,” JHEP 11, 147 (2023), arXiv:2306.15460 [hep-ph]. 12

    2023 arXiv

  3. [11]

    b→cτ ¯ν anomaly from a minimal com- posite S1 leptoquark,

    Leandro Da Rold, “b→cτ ¯ν anomaly from a minimal com- posite S1 leptoquark,” (2023), arXiv:2311.04062 [hep- ph]

    2023 arXiv

  4. [12]

    ATLAS Public Results,

    “ATLAS Public Results,”https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/ bin/view/AtlasPublic

  5. [13]

    CMS Exotica Public Physics Results,

    “CMS Exotica Public Physics Results,” https: //twiki.cern.ch/twiki/bin/view/CMSPublic/ PhysicsResultsEXO

  6. [14]

    Leptoquark pair production in hadronic interactions,

    Johannes Blumlein, Edward Boos, and Alexander Kryukov, “Leptoquark pair production in hadronic interactions,” Z. Phys. C76, 137–153 (1997), arXiv:hep-ph/9610408

    1997 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Corner- ing Scalar Leptoquarks at LHC,

    Ilja Dorsner, Svjetlana Fajfer, and Admir Greljo, “Corner- ing Scalar Leptoquarks at LHC,” JHEP 10, 154 (2014), arXiv:1406.4831 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  8. [16]

    The leptoquark Hunter’s guide: Pair production,

    Bastian Diaz, Martin Schmaltz, and Yi-Ming Zhong, “The leptoquark Hunter’s guide: Pair production,” JHEP10, 097 (2017), arXiv:1706.05033 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Searching for Lepto- quarks at IceCube and the LHC,

    Ujjal Kumar Dey, Deepak Kar, Manimala Mitra, Michael Spannowsky, and Aaron C. Vincent, “Searching for Lepto- quarks at IceCube and the LHC,” Phys. Rev. D98, 035014 (2018), arXiv:1709.02009 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Revisiting scalar leptoquark at the LHC,

    Priyotosh Bandyopadhyay and Rusa Mandal, “Revisiting scalar leptoquark at the LHC,” Eur. Phys. J. C 78, 491 (2018), arXiv:1801.04253 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  11. [19]

    The leptoquark Hunter’s guide: large coupling,

    Martin Schmaltz and Yi-Ming Zhong, “The leptoquark Hunter’s guide: large coupling,” JHEP 01, 132 (2019), arXiv:1810.10017 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Enhancing scalar productions with lepto- quarks at the LHC,

    Arvind Bhaskar, Debottam Das, Bibhabasu De, and Sub- hadip Mitra, “Enhancing scalar productions with lepto- quarks at the LHC,” Phys. Rev. D 102, 035002 (2020), arXiv:2002.12571 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Lepton-Quark Fu- sion at Hadron Colliders, precisely,

    Admir Greljo and Nudzeim Selimovic, “Lepton-Quark Fu- sion at Hadron Colliders, precisely,” JHEP03, 279 (2021), arXiv:2012.02092 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Novel Lep- toquark Pair Production at LHC,

    Ilja Doršner, Svjetlana Fajfer, and Ajla Lejlić, “Novel Lep- toquark Pair Production at LHC,” JHEP 05, 167 (2021), arXiv:2103.11702 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Com- bined constraints on first generation leptoquarks,

    Andreas Crivellin, Dario Müller, and Luc Schnell, “Com- bined constraints on first generation leptoquarks,” Phys. Rev. D103, 115023 (2021), [Addendum: Phys.Rev.D 104, 055020 (2021)], arXiv:2104.06417 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Distinguishingsignaturesofscalar leptoquarks at hadron and muon colliders,

    Priyotosh Bandyopadhyay, Anirban Karan, Rusa Mandal, andSnehashisParashar,“Distinguishingsignaturesofscalar leptoquarks at hadron and muon colliders,” Eur. Phys. J. C 82, 916 (2022), arXiv:2108.06506 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Leptoquark- assisted singlet-mediated di-Higgs production at the LHC,

    Arvind Bhaskar, Debottam Das, Bibhabasu De, Subhadip Mitra,ArunaKumarNayak, andCyrinNeeraj,“Leptoquark- assisted singlet-mediated di-Higgs production at the LHC,” Phys. Lett. B833, 137341 (2022), arXiv:2205.12210 [hep- ph]

    2022 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Phenomenology of scalar leptoquarks at the LHC in explaining the ra- diative neutrino masses, muon g-2, and lepton flavor vi- olating observables,

    Snehashis Parashar, Anirban Karan, Avnish, Priyotosh Bandyopadhyay, and Kirtiman Ghosh, “Phenomenology of scalar leptoquarks at the LHC in explaining the ra- diative neutrino masses, muon g-2, and lepton flavor vi- olating observables,” Phys. Rev. D 106, 095040 (2022), arXiv:2...

    2022 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Precise probing and discrimination of third- generation scalar leptoquarks,

    Anupam Ghosh, Partha Konar, Debashis Saha, and Satya- jit Seth, “Precise probing and discrimination of third- generation scalar leptoquarks,” Phys. Rev. D108, 035030 (2023), arXiv:2304.02890 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  20. [28]

    On the sensitivity reach of LQ pro- duction with preferential couplings to third generation fermions at the LHC,

    A. Flórez, J. Jones-Pérez, A. Gurrola, C. Rodriguez, and J. Peñuela Parra, “On the sensitivity reach of LQ pro- duction with preferential couplings to third generation fermions at the LHC,” Eur. Phys. J. C 83, 1023 (2023), arXiv:2307.11070 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  21. [29]

    LHC Study of Third-Generation Scalar Leptoquarks with Machine- LearnedLikelihoods,

    Ernesto Arganda, Daniel A. Díaz, Andres D. Perez, Rosa M. Sandá Seoane, and Alejandro Szynkman, “LHC Study of Third-Generation Scalar Leptoquarks with Machine- LearnedLikelihoods,” (2023),arXiv:2309.05407[hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Fresh look at the LHC limits on scalar leptoquarks,

    Arvind Bhaskar, Arijit Das, Tanumoy Mandal, Subhadip Mi- tra, and Rachit Sharma, “Fresh look at the LHC limits on scalar leptoquarks,” Phys. Rev. D109, 055018 (2024), arXiv:2312.09855 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Gravitationalwaves from color restoration in a leptoquark model of radiative neutrino masses,

    Mårten Bertenstam, Marco Finetti, António P. Morais, Ro- manPasechnik, andJohanRathsman,“Gravitationalwaves from color restoration in a leptoquark model of radiative neutrino masses,” (2025), arXiv:2501.01286 [hep-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Jet substructure probe on scalar lepto- quark models via top polarization,

    Anupam Ghosh, Partha Konar, Tousik Samui, and Ritesh K. Singh, “Jet substructure probe on scalar lepto- quark models via top polarization,” JHEP07, 145 (2025), arXiv:2505.16328 [hep-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  25. [33]

    New physics explanations of aµ in light of the FNAL muong− 2 measurement,

    Peter Athron, Csaba Balázs, Douglas H. J. Jacob, Wojciech Kotlarski, Dominik Stöckinger, and Hyejung Stöckinger- Kim, “New physics explanations of aµ in light of the FNAL muong− 2 measurement,” JHEP 09, 080 (2021), arXiv:2104.03691 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Measurement of the anoma- lousprecessionfrequencyofthemuonintheFermilabMuon g− 2 Experiment,

    T. Albahriet al. (Muon g-2), “Measurement of the anoma- lousprecessionfrequencyofthemuonintheFermilabMuon g− 2 Experiment,” Phys. Rev. D 103, 072002 (2021), arXiv:2104.03247 [hep-ex]

    2021

  27. [35]

    MeasurementofthePositiveMuon Anomalous Magnetic Moment to0.46ppm,

    B.Abi et al.(Muong-2),“MeasurementofthePositiveMuon Anomalous Magnetic Moment to0.46ppm,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 141801 (2021), arXiv:2104.03281 [hep-ex]

    2021

  28. [36]

    Measurement of the Pos- itive Muon Anomalous Magnetic Moment to 0.20 ppm,

    D. P. Aguillardet al. (Muon g-2), “Measurement of the Pos- itive Muon Anomalous Magnetic Moment to 0.20 ppm,” Phys. Rev. Lett. 131, 161802 (2023), arXiv:2308.06230 [hep-ex]

    2023

  29. [37]

    Sin- gle Productions of Colored Particles at the LHC: An Ex- ample with Scalar Leptoquarks,

    Tanumoy Mandal, Subhadip Mitra, and Satyajit Seth, “Sin- gle Productions of Colored Particles at the LHC: An Ex- ample with Scalar Leptoquarks,” JHEP 07, 028 (2015), arXiv:1503.04689 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  30. [38]

    RD(∗) motivatedS1 leptoquark scenarios: Impact of inter- ference on the exclusion limits from LHC data,

    Tanumoy Mandal, Subhadip Mitra, and Swapnil Raz, “RD(∗) motivatedS1 leptoquark scenarios: Impact of inter- ference on the exclusion limits from LHC data,” Phys. Rev. D 99, 055028 (2019), arXiv:1811.03561 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Addressing the RD(∗) anomalies with an S1 leptoquark from SO(10) grand unification,

    Ufuk Aydemir, Tanumoy Mandal, and Subhadip Mitra, “Addressing the RD(∗) anomalies with an S1 leptoquark from SO(10) grand unification,” Phys. Rev. D101, 015011 (2020), arXiv:1902.08108 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Hunting for scalar leptoquarks with boosted tops and light leptons,

    Kushagra Chandak, Tanumoy Mandal, and Subhadip Mi- tra, “Hunting for scalar leptoquarks with boosted tops and light leptons,” Phys. Rev. D 100, 075019 (2019), arXiv:1907.11194 [hep-ph]

    2019 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Precise limits on the charge-2/3 U1 vector leptoquark,

    Arvind Bhaskar, Diganta Das, Tanumoy Mandal, Subhadip Mitra, and Cyrin Neeraj, “Precise limits on the charge-2/3 U1 vector leptoquark,” Phys. Rev. D104, 035016 (2021), arXiv:2101.12069 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Improving third-generation leptoquark searches with combined signals and boosted top quarks,

    Arvind Bhaskar, Tanumoy Mandal, Subhadip Mitra, and Mohit Sharma, “Improving third-generation leptoquark searches with combined signals and boosted top quarks,” Phys. Rev. D104, 075037 (2021), arXiv:2106.07605 [hep- ph]

    2021 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Combined explanation of W-mass, 13 muon g-2, RK(*) and RD(*) anomalies in a singlet-triplet scalarleptoquarkmodel,

    Arvind Bhaskar, Anirudhan A. Madathil, Tanumoy Mandal, and Subhadip Mitra, “Combined explanation of W-mass, 13 muon g-2, RK(*) and RD(*) anomalies in a singlet-triplet scalarleptoquarkmodel,”Phys.Rev.D 106,115009(2022), arXiv:2204.09031 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  36. [44]

    An economical model for B-flavour and aµ anomalies from SO(10) grand unification,

    Ufuk Aydemir, Tanumoy Mandal, Subhadip Mitra, and Shoaib Munir, “An economical model for B-flavour and aµ anomalies from SO(10) grand unification,” (2022), arXiv:2209.04705 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Boosted top quark inspired leptoquark searches at the muon collider,

    Arvind Bhaskar and Manimala Mitra, “Boosted top quark inspired leptoquark searches at the muon collider,” Phys. Lett. B868, 139656 (2025), arXiv:2409.15992 [hep-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Collider signatures of a scalar leptoquark and vectorlike lepton in light of muon anomaly,

    Nivedita Ghosh, Santosh Kumar Rai, and Tousik Samui, “Collider signatures of a scalar leptoquark and vectorlike lepton in light of muon anomaly,” Phys. Rev. D107, 035028 (2023), arXiv:2206.11718 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Right-handed neutrino pair production via second- generation leptoquarks,

    Arvind Bhaskar, Yash Chaurasia, Kuldeep Deka, Tanu- moy Mandal, Subhadip Mitra, and Ananya Mukher- jee, “Right-handed neutrino pair production via second- generation leptoquarks,” Phys. Lett. B843, 138039 (2023), arXiv:2301.11889 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Right-handed neutrino production through first-generation leptoquarks,

    Gokul Duraikandan, Rishabh Khanna, Tanumoy Man- dal, Subhadip Mitra, and Rachit Sharma, “Right-handed neutrino production through first-generation leptoquarks,” Phys. Rev. D111, 075032 (2025), arXiv:2412.19751 [hep- ph]

    2025 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Leptoquark-induced CLFV decays with a light SM-singlet scalar,

    Bibhabasu De, “Leptoquark-induced CLFV decays with a light SM-singlet scalar,” Phys. Lett. B855, 138784 (2024), arXiv:2405.06970 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Dark Matter Induced Proton Decays,

    Ranjeet Kumar and Rahul Srivastava, “Dark Matter Induced Proton Decays,” (2025), arXiv:2506.04370 [hep-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Leptoquark summary plot for scalar or vec- tor models , Tech. Rep. (CERN, Geneva, 2024) https://cds.cern.ch/record/2903898/files/ATL-PHYS- PUB-2024-012.pdf

    2024

  44. [52]

    CMS Exotica Summary plots for 13 TeV data: Leptoquark summary plot,

    “CMS Exotica Summary plots for 13 TeV data: Leptoquark summary plot,” https://twiki.cern.ch/twiki/pub/ CMSPublic/SummaryPlotsEXO13TeV/barplot_QE_QMU_ QTAU_QNU_2025March.pdf (2025)

    2025

  45. [53]

    ProbingColorOctet Electrons at the LHC,

    TanumoyMandalandSubhadipMitra,“ProbingColorOctet Electrons at the LHC,” Phys. Rev. D87, 095008 (2013), arXiv:1211.6394 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Probing Compositeness with the CMSeejj andeej Data,

    Tanumoy Mandal, Subhadip Mitra, and Satyajit Seth, “Probing Compositeness with the CMSeejj andeej Data,” Phys. Lett. B 758, 219–225 (2016), arXiv:1602.01273 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Vector leptoquark contributions to lepton dipole moments,

    Arvind Bhaskar, Diganta Das, Soumyadip Kundu, Anirud- han A. Madathil, Tanumoy Mandal, and Subhadip Mitra, “Vector leptoquark contributions to lepton dipole moments,” Phys. Rev. D 111, 015045 (2025), arXiv:2408.11798 [hep-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  48. [56]

    TooLQit: Leptoquark Models and Limits,

    Arvind Bhaskar, Yash Chaurasia, Arijit Das, Atirek Kumar, Tanumoy Mandal, Subhadip Mitra, Cyrin Neeraj, and Rachit Sharma, “TooLQit: Leptoquark Models and Limits,” (2024), arXiv:2412.19729 [hep-ph]

    2024 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Leptoquark production at high energye+e− colliders,

    J. Blümlein and E. Boos, “Leptoquark production at high energye+e− colliders,” Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl.37, 181– 192 (1994)

    1994

  50. [58]

    Fresh look at the lhc limits on scalar leptoquarks,

    Arvind Bhaskar, Arijit Das, Tanumoy Mandal, Subhadip Mi- tra, and Rachit Sharma, “Fresh look at the lhc limits on scalar leptoquarks,” Phys. Rev. D109, 055018 (2024)

    2024

  51. [59]

    Search for pairs of scalar lep- toquarks decaying into quarks and electrons or muons in√s = 13 TeVpp collisions with the ATLAS detector,

    Georges Aadet al. (ATLAS), “Search for pairs of scalar lep- toquarks decaying into quarks and electrons or muons in√s = 13 TeVpp collisions with the ATLAS detector,” JHEP 10, 112 (2020), arXiv:2006.05872 [hep-ex]

    2020 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Search for pair production of second-generation leptoquarks at√s = 13 TeV,

    Albert M Sirunyanet al. (CMS), “Search for pair production of second-generation leptoquarks at√s = 13 TeV,” Phys. Rev. D99, 032014 (2019), arXiv:1808.05082 [hep-ex]

    2019 arXiv

  53. [61]

    FeynRules 2.0 - A complete toolboxfortree-levelphenomenology,

    Adam Alloul, Neil D. Christensen, Céline Degrande, Claude Duhr, and Benjamin Fuks, “FeynRules 2.0 - A complete toolboxfortree-levelphenomenology,”Comput.Phys.Com- mun. 185, 2250–2300 (2014), arXiv:1310.1921 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  54. [62]

    UFO - The Universal FeynRules Output,

    Celine Degrande, Claude Duhr, Benjamin Fuks, David Grellscheid, Olivier Mattelaer, and Thomas Reiter, “UFO - The Universal FeynRules Output,” Comput. Phys. Commun. 183, 1201–1214 (2012), arXiv:1108.2040 [hep-ph]

    2012 arXiv

  55. [63]

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

    J. Alwall, R. Frederix, S. Frixione, V. Hirschi, F. Maltoni, O.Mattelaer,H.S.Shao,T.Stelzer,P.Torrielli, andM.Zaro, “The automated computation of tree-level and next-to- leading order differential cross sections, and their match- ing to parton shower simulations,” JHEP07, 079 ...

    2014 arXiv

  56. [64]

    An open-source machine learning framework for global analyses of parton distribu- tions,

    Richard D. Ballet al. (NNPDF), “An open-source machine learning framework for global analyses of parton distribu- tions,” Eur. Phys. J. C81, 958 (2021), arXiv:2109.02671 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  57. [65]

    A comprehensive guide to the physics and usage of PYTHIA 8.3,

    Christian Bierlich et al. , “A comprehensive guide to the physics and usage of PYTHIA 8.3,” (2022), 10.21468/Sci- PostPhysCodeb.8, arXiv:2203.11601 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  58. [66]

    DELPHES 3, A modular framework for fast simulation of a generic collider experiment,

    J. de Favereau, C. Delaere, P. Demin, A. Giammanco, V. Lemaître, A. Mertens, and M. Selvaggi (DELPHES 3), “DELPHES 3, A modular framework for fast simulation of a generic collider experiment,” JHEP02, 057 (2014), arXiv:1307.6346 [hep-ex]

    2014 arXiv

  59. [67]

    The anti-kt jet clustering algorithm,

    Matteo Cacciari, Gavin P. Salam, and Gregory Soyez, “The anti-kt jet clustering algorithm,” JHEP 04, 063 (2008), arXiv:0802.1189 [hep-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  60. [68]

    FastJet User Manual,

    Matteo Cacciari, Gavin P. Salam, and Gregory Soyez, “FastJet User Manual,” Eur. Phys. J. C72, 1896 (2012), arXiv:1111.6097 [hep-ph]

    2012 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Search for resonant and nonresonant new phenomena in high-mass dilepton final states at √s = 13 TeV,

    Albert M Sirunyan et al. (CMS), “Search for resonant and nonresonant new phenomena in high-mass dilepton final states at √s = 13 TeV,” JHEP 07, 208 (2021), arXiv:2103.02708 [hep-ex]

    2021 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Search for t-channel scalar and vector leptoquark exchange in the high-mass dimuon and dielectron spectra in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV,

    Aram Hayrapetyan et al. (CMS), “Search for t-channel scalar and vector leptoquark exchange in the high-mass dimuon and dielectron spectra in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV,” (2025), arXiv:2503.20023 [hep-ex]

    2025

  63. [71]

    Searchforpairproduction ofscalarandvectorleptoquarksdecayingtomuonsandbot- tom quarks in proton-proton collisions at s=13 TeV,

    AramHayrapetyan et al.(CMS),“Searchforpairproduction ofscalarandvectorleptoquarksdecayingtomuonsandbot- tom quarks in proton-proton collisions at s=13 TeV,” Phys. Rev. D109, 112003 (2024), arXiv:2402.08668 [hep-ex]

    2024 arXiv

  64. [72]

    Inclusivenonresonantmul- tilepton probes of new phenomena at√s=13 TeV,

    ArmenTumasyan et al.(CMS),“Inclusivenonresonantmul- tilepton probes of new phenomena at√s=13 TeV,” Phys. Rev. D105, 112007 (2022), arXiv:2202.08676 [hep-ex]

    2022 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Perturbative unitarity constraints on generic Yukawa interactions,

    Lukas Allwicher, Pere Arnan, Daniele Barducci, and Marco Nardecchia, “Perturbative unitarity constraints on generic Yukawa interactions,” JHEP 10, 129 (2021), arXiv:2108.00013 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  66. [74]

    On the EFT validity for Drell–Yan tails at the LHC,

    Lukas Allwicher, Darius A. Faroughy, Matheus Martines, Ol- cyr Sumensari, and Felix Wilsch, “On the EFT validity for Drell–Yan tails at the LHC,” Eur. Phys. J. C85, 463 (2025), arXiv:2412.14162 [hep-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  67. [75]

    SMEFT ATLAS: The Landscape Beyond the Standard Model,

    Jason Aebischer, Andrzej J. Buras, and Jacky Kumar, “SMEFT ATLAS: The Landscape Beyond the Standard Model,” (2025), arXiv:2507.05926 [hep-ph]. 14

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.