Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 6 cited by

Measurement of the Higgs boson production in association with top quarks in multilepton final states in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV with the ATLAS detector

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-04 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A simultaneous fit to six multilepton final states measures the ttH cross-section at 0.63 of the Standard Model prediction (3.3σ observed) and excludes |α|>62° for the top-Higgs CP-mixing angle at 68% confidence.

desk verdict Solid, standard-setting ATLAS multilepton ttH measurement; the flagged 2ℓSS1τhad concern is speculative and does not undermine the central result. read the letter →

arxiv 2510.23755 v2 pith:4SEDK7FB submitted 2025-10-27 hep-ex

Atlas Collaboration This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-ex
keywords Higgsbosontop-quarkYukawacouplingttHassociatedproductionmultileptonfinalstatessimplifiedtemplatecrosssectionsCP-mixingangleprofilelikelihoodfitLHCproton-protoncollisions
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

This paper reports a measurement of the associated production of a Higgs boson with a top-quark pair (ttH) in final states with multiple charged leptons, based on 140 inverse femtobarns of 13 TeV proton–proton collisions recorded by a multipurpose detector at the Large Hadron Collider. Six orthogonal channel definitions—two same-sign leptons, three leptons, four leptons, and three channels with hadronically decaying taus—are combined in a single profile-likelihood fit, with normalisations of the dominant backgrounds determined from control regions in the same fit. The central result is a measured ttH cross-section of 321 fb, i.e. 0.63 times the Standard Model prediction of 507 fb, with an observed (expected) significance of 3.3σ (5.3σ); this is compatible with the SM at about the 1.8σ level. The same events are used to measure the rate in three bins of Higgs transverse momentum, to fit the single-top-plus-Higgs process tHqb (signal strength 7.2+4.6/−4.0), and to constrain the CP-mixing angle of the top-Higgs coupling, excluding |α|>62° at 68% confidence. The paper itself notes two caveats: the quoted ratio excludes the theory uncertainty on the SM prediction, and the CP-fit minimum is sensitive to numerical instabilities.

What carries the argument

The analysis rests on a simultaneous profile-likelihood fit over six mutually exclusive final states, defined by light-lepton and tau multiplicities, with BDT/DNN discriminants separating ttH from ttW, ttZ, diboson, and misidentified-object backgrounds; normalisation factors for the main backgrounds are determined in control regions within the same fit. Because the Higgs cannot be unambiguously reconstructed, a graph neural network (or a boosted decision tree in the two-tau channels) estimates the Higgs transverse momentum, providing the migration matrices for the three measured pT,H bins. The CP interpretation interpolates between simulated samples with different mixing angles α and couplin

What would settle it

Replacing the default Monte Carlo model for the dominant ttW background with an independent generator in the same fit and checking whether the fitted signal strength shifts by more than the quoted systematic uncertainty would directly test the assumption; alternatively, a future measurement at roughly three times the luminosity would show whether the 0.63 ratio moves toward 1 (SM) or stays below.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is a measured ttH signal strength of σ_ttH/σ_SM = 0.63+0.20/−0.19 (σ_ttH = 321+102/−99 fb vs 507+35/−50 fb SM), with observed (expected) significance 3.3σ (5.3σ); the result is compatible with the Standard Model at about 1.8σ. The differential STXS fit gives ratios of 0.78, 0.08, and 1.19 in the Higgs-pT bins 0–120, 120–200, and >200 GeV, the low middle value tracing underfluctuations in the two-same-sign-lepton and one-lepton-plus-two-tau channels. A simultaneous fit returns μ_tHqb = 7.2+4.6/−4.0, and the CP interpretation excludes |α|>62° at 68% confidence level (expected 43°), with the pure CP-odd hypothesis excluded at 1.8σ observed.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the simulated generators and the machine-learned Higgs-pT estimator reproduce the shapes of signal and backgrounds in the multilepton phase space—the estimator's calibration is checked only via migration matrices computed in the same simulation (Fig. 3)—since the fit floats only overall normalisations; the paper explicitly notes the quoted ratio excludes the theory uncertainty on the SM prediction and that the CP fit's minimum is numerically u

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • At face value, the top-quark–Higgs coupling is within about 1.8σ of the Standard Model; no new physics is required to describe the inclusive rate.
  • The differential measurement shows no significant shape deviation in Higgs pT, but the 120–200 GeV bin is compatible with zero, so an enhanced or depleted coupling at intermediate pT is not excluded.
  • The tHqb signal strength of 7.2+4.6/−4.0 is above the Standard Model expectation and, if real, points to new physics in single-top-plus-Higgs production.
  • The CP constraint disfavours large CP-odd admixtures: |α|>62° is excluded at 68% confidence, consistent with a mostly CP-even Higgs-top interaction.
  • Since the observed significance (3.3σ) is below the SM expectation (5.3σ), repeating this measurement with more data is the direct route to deciding whether the low central value is a fluctuation.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the low ratio persists with Run-3 statistics, the most economical interpretation would be a modified top-Higgs coupling, since the same events point to a tHqb rate above the Standard Model.
  • The 120–200 GeV STXS bin (10+81/−76 fb vs 127 fb SM) is where an altered pT spectrum would first appear; a dedicated unfolded measurement with finer bins would sharpen this.
  • The analysis's dependence on simulated shapes for ttW and ttZ means the central value could move if those shapes are wrong; an independent re-fit using a different Monte Carlo generator for those backgrounds would quantify this.
  • Combining this multilepton result with the diphoton and bottom-quark channels cited in the paper would reduce the total uncertainty and test whether the deficit is multilepton-specific.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper presents a measurement of t-tbar-Higgs (ttH) production in multilepton final states using 140 fb^-1 of pp collisions at 13 TeV recorded by ATLAS. Six orthogonal channels (2ℓSS0τhad, 3ℓ0τhad, 4ℓ, 2ℓSS1τhad, 1ℓ2τhad, 2ℓ2τhad) are combined in a profile-likelihood fit. The inclusive measured cross-section ratio is σ_ttH/σ_SM = 0.63+0.20/−0.19, corresponding to σ_ttH = 321+102/−99 fb against an SM prediction of 507+35/−50 fb, with observed (expected) significance of 3.3σ (5.3σ). A STXS fit measures the cross-section in three bins of Higgs pT (0–120, 120–200, >200 GeV); a simultaneous fit gives μ_tHqb = 7.2+4.6/−4.0 with μ_ttH = 0.59+0.22/−0.20; and a CP-mixing scan excludes |α| > 62° at 68% CL (expected 43°). All results are reported as compatible with the SM within about 2σ.

Significance. If correct, this is the most precise ttH cross-section measurement in the multilepton final state with the full Run-2 dataset, and the STXS/CP results are the first in this channel at this luminosity. The manuscript's strengths are substantial: the six-channel likelihood structure with pre-defined control regions (Tables 4–5) is standard and internally consistent (321/507 = 0.63); the background normalisation factors are cross-checked against dedicated external measurements (λ_ttW = 1.18±0.07 vs Ref. [31]); the systematic decomposition (Table 6) is detailed; and validation regions are shown (Fig. 8). The paper is also careful to quote the SM-theory component of σ_SM separately (footnote 10) rather than folding it into the measurement uncertainty. The observed central value is 1.8σ below the SM (compatibility 7.2%), and the observed significance is well below expectation; the interpretation of the 2ℓSS1τhad-channel deficit is therefore the main point to be resolved.

major comments (3)
  1. [§8.1, Figs. 11(a) and 12, Table 5] The 2ℓSS1τhad channel returns μ = −0.72+0.56/−0.59, the largest per-channel deviation and a natural suspect for the shortfall between the observed (3.3σ) and expected (5.3σ) significances. The text attributes this to 'a downward fluctuation in data at high value of the 2ℓSS1τhad BDT', but no quantitative test supports that interpretation. The CRs that anchor the misidentified-τhad and non-prompt normalisations use a relaxed 2–3 jet selection while the SR requires ≥4 jets (Table 5), and the extrapolation uncertainty between them is described but not sized (Sec. 7). Please add: (a) a local goodness-of-fit or spurious-signal p-value for the SR BDT deficit; (b) the combined-fit result with this channel removed, to show how much the inclusive μ and the observed significance move; (c) the numerical value of the jet-multiplicity extrapolation uncertainty. This is load-bearing: the inclusive cen
  2. [§8.3, Fig. 17] The CP interpretation highlighted in the abstract (|α|>62° excluded at 68% CL) is derived from a fit whose best-fit point is stated in §8.3 to be 'sensitive to numerical instabilities' because the likelihood is flat around the minimum. This is a self-declared limitation of a headline claim. Please quantify the effect of the instability on the 68%/95% contours (grid density, minimiser variations, alternative profiling) and state whether it affects only the best-fit coordinates or the excluded-region boundary. Without this, the CP exclusion cannot be evaluated.
  3. [§5 (STXS/GNN paragraph), Fig. 3, Table 7] The STXS measurement and the CP analysis rely on the GNN/BDT estimate of the Higgs pT, but the text only asserts that 'no significant discrepancies between data and simulation were observed' for the MVA input variables; the supporting comparison is not shown. The migration matrices in Fig. 3 show diagonal fractions as low as ~61% in the 2ℓ2τhad channel, so the unfolding is sensitive to the response model. Please provide the data/MC validation of the pT,H-estimator inputs or a closure test of the migration, and state how a GNN response bias would be covered by the STXS migration systematics. The STXS uncertainties are large, so the conclusions are unlikely to change, but the current support is an unshown assertion.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 3] The colour-axis label reads 'Number of events' while the caption states that colours denote the fraction of events; relabel the axis (e.g., 'Fraction of events') to avoid confusion.
  2. [§8.1] Please specify how the 7.2% SM-compatibility value is computed (one- or two-sided p-value; which nuisance parameters are profiled) and whether the ±35/−50 fb uncertainty on the SM prediction enters the test or only the quoted ratio.
  3. [Fig. 12] The per-channel best-fit values and their stat./total decompositions are dense and partly illegible in the current rendering; a companion table listing each channel's μ with statistical and total uncertainties separately would improve usability.
  4. [§7 / Table 6] The 'Non-prompt normalisation' row contributes only ±0.02 to σ_ttH/σ_SM even though some individual factors (e.g., λ_eHF = 1.20±0.41) carry 20–40% uncertainties. One sentence explaining why the CR constraints are so strong would pre-empt a natural reader question.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the measurement is a profile-likelihood extraction with independently validated background normalisations.

full rationale

The central result, sigma_ttH/sigma_SM = 0.63+0.20-0.19, is the free parameter of interest mu in the likelihood of Eq. (1), not a fitted input renamed as a prediction. Background normalisation factors such as lambda_ttW = 1.18 +/- 0.07 are determined in dedicated control regions and cross-checked against external ATLAS and CMS measurements, so they are not circular anchors for the ttH signal strength. The STXS differential measurement, the simultaneous ttH/tHqb fit, and the CP interpretation are separate likelihood fits using simulation templates or MC-interpolated parameterisations; none of their outputs is definitionally equal to an input parameter. The paper openly reports the 2lSS1tau_had channel best fit (-0.72) and the compatibility probability of the six channels (12.4%), which addresses the main statistical concern without concealing it; that concern is a modelling/statistical vulnerability, not a circular reduction. The cited ATLAS references [24], [31], [32] are prior experimental measurements and methodological precedents, not self-cited uniqueness theorems or ansatz-forcing derivations. The analysis is therefore self-contained as a measurement and does not exhibit circularity by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 7 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The measurement rests on standard simulation tools and data-anchored background normalisations rather than invented physics. The honest price is a set of in-situ normalisation factors (λ) and MC-shape assumptions whose validity bounds every quoted number. No new particles, forces, or symmetries are introduced.

free parameters (7)
  • ttW background normalisation λ_ttW = 1.18 ± 0.07
    Free parameter in the profile likelihood (Sec. 6.1); anchors the dominant irreducible background in the 2ℓSS0τhad and 3ℓ0τhad channels.
  • ttZ/γ* normalisation λ_ttZ = 1.09 ± 0.09
    Fitted using the 3ℓttZ control region (Sec. 6.1).
  • Diboson normalisations λ_WZ and λ_WW/ZZ = 1.06 ± 0.10 and 1.13 ± 0.17
    Two separate factors fitted in the 3ℓVV control region (Sec. 6.1).
  • Conversion normalisations λ_IntC and λ_MatC = 0.89 ± 0.16 and 1.13 ± 0.21
    Internal and material conversion backgrounds normalised in dedicated 3ℓCRs (Sec. 6.1, 6.2.1).
  • Non-prompt lepton normalisation factors (HF/LF, e/μ) = 0.68–1.20 (six values: λ_eHF=1.20±0.41, λ_μHF=1.12±0.16; λ_4ℓ μHF=0.91±0.06, eHF=0.93±0.13, eLF=1.17±0.22; λ_2ℓSS1τ eHF/
    Data-driven normalisations of reducible backgrounds in control regions (Secs. 6.2.1, 6.2.3).
  • Misidentified-τhad fake-factors (FF) = 0.20–0.45 (1-prong), 0.04–0.20 (3-prong)
    Measured in Z+jets/tt control regions and applied in the 1ℓ2τhad/2ℓ2τhad channels (Sec. 6.2.3).
  • Parameters of interest μ_ttH and μ_tHqb = μ_ttH = 0.63+0.20−0.19; μ_tHqb = 7.2+4.6−4.0; STXS μ = 0.78 / 0.08 / 1.19
    These are the advertised measurements themselves, not hidden fudge factors; listed for completeness of what is fitted to data (Sec. 8).
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption SM prediction for the ttH cross-section (σ_SM = 507+35−50 fb) from NLO QCD+EW calculations (Refs. [56–60]) is the benchmark to which the signal strength ratio is normalised.
    The ratio claim σ_ttH/σ_SM inherits the theory uncertainties quoted in the SM prediction; the paper excludes inclusive theory systematics from the ratio's uncertainty (footnote 10).
  • domain assumption Monte Carlo generators (Powheg Box v2 for ttH, Sherpa 2.2.10 for ttW, MadGraph5_aMC@NLO for ttZ) give unbiased template shapes in the multilepton phase space after in-situ normalisation.
    Sec. 3.1–3.2 and Sec. 7: shape systematics are derived from scale variations and generator comparisons, but the procedure assumes the nominal generators are within the envelope.
  • standard math Asymptotic approximation for the profile-likelihood test statistic is valid for the quoted significances and confidence intervals.
    Sec. 8, Eq. (1) and Ref. [120] (Cowan, Cranmer, Gross, Vitells).
  • domain assumption In the CP fit, signal yields are parameterised as smooth interpolations between MC samples at discrete (κ't, α) points.
    Sec. 3.1 ('yields are parameterised as a function of the model parameters by smoothly interpolating between generated MC samples'), following Ref. [24]; interpolation error is not separately quantified.
  • domain assumption Diagram removal is used to subtract the tHW–ttH overlap at NLO; s-channel tH is neglected because of its small cross-section.
    Sec. 3.1: 'The overlap of the tHW process with ttH at NLO was removed by using a diagram removal technique'; 'The s-channel has a very low cross-section and is neglected.'
  • domain assumption The GNN/BDT discriminants trained on simulation are unbiased in data, including the pT,H regression used for STXS binning.
    Sec. 5: 'no significant discrepancies between data and simulation were observed' — stated without a dedicated closure test for the pT,H estimator, whose migration matrix is computed from the same MC (Fig. 3).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Measurement of the Higgs boson production in association with top quarks in multilepton final states in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV with the ATLAS detector." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4SEDK7FB

@misc{pith2026251023755,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Measurement of the Higgs boson production in association with top quarks in multilepton final states in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrts=13$ TeV with the ATLAS detector},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4SEDK7FB}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2510.23755}
}
abstract

A measurement of the associated production of a top-quark pair with the Higgs boson ($t\bar{t}H$) in multilepton final states is presented. The analysis is based on a data sample of proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV recorded with the ATLAS detector at the CERN Large Hadron Collider and corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 140 fb$^{-1}$. Six final states defined by the number and flavour of reconstructed charged leptons are combined in a simultaneous likelihood fit to extract the $t\bar{t}H$ signal and constrain the most relevant backgrounds. The measured $t\bar{t}H$ cross-section normalised to Standard Model (SM) prediction is $\sigma_{t\bar tH}/\sigma^{\text{SM}}=0.63^{+0.20}_{-0.19}$. This result corresponds to an observed (expected) significance of 3.3$\sigma$ (5.3$\sigma$). Additionally, two other fits are used to measure the $t\bar{t}H$ cross-section differentially in bins of the Higgs boson transverse momentum in the simplified template cross-section framework, and to extract the associated production cross-section of a single top-quark with the Higgs boson ($tH$) together with the $t\bar{t}H$ one. The $CP$ structure of the top quark-Higgs boson Yukawa coupling is probed through analysis of $t\bar{t}H$ and $tH$ events. The results are compatible with the SM hypothesis, and values of the mixing angle between $CP$-even and $CP$-odd top-Higgs Yukawa couplings of $| \alpha | > 62^\circ$ are excluded at 68\% confidence level.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 6 Pith papers

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

  1. Benchmarking Machine Learning Architectures for ttH Multilepton Signal Sensitivity

    hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A controlled benchmark of six ML classifiers on a new simulated ttH multilepton dataset finds symmetry-constrained graph models (Particle Transformer, LorentzNet) and azimuthal RoPE encoding outperform tabular baselines.

  2. Combination of Higgs boson measurements at $\sqrt{s} =$ 13 TeV and their interpretations by the ATLAS experiment

    hep-ex 2026-08 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    The combined ATLAS Higgs measurements agree with the Standard Model and yield a self-coupling modifier kappa_lambda = 1.3 (+3.1/-1.6), a total width of 3.6 (+2.1/-1.6) MeV, and a b-quark running mass of 2.73 (+0.27/-0...

  3. Search for $\textit{tH}$ production in the $ H \to \tau\tau$ decay mode, and a combination with other searches, using $\textit{pp}$ collisions at 13 TeV and 13.6 TeV with the ATLAS detector

    hep-ex 2026-07 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    ATLAS's combined tH search, including a new H→ττ channel, measures μ_tH = 3.3 ± 1.6 times the SM, with 2.3σ observed significance and an observed 95% CL limit of 6.1×SM.

  4. Next-to-next-to-leading order event generation for $t\bar{t}H$ production with approximate two-loop amplitude

    hep-ph 2026-03 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    First NNLO+PS (MiNNLOPS) generator for ttH production, combining soft-Higgs and high-energy approximate two-loop amplitudes pointwise, with one-loop-level validation.

  5. Unveiling Light-Quark Yukawa Flavor Structure via Dihadron Fragmentation at Lepton Colliders

    hep-ph 2025-12 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A dihadron fragmentation azimuthal asymmetry at e+e− colliders can probe light-quark Yukawa couplings linearly and separate y_u from y_d at the 10^-4 level.

  6. Study of $t\bar{t}H$ and $tH$ production in the $H\to\tau\tau$ channel in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV and 13.6 TeV with the ATLAS detector

    hep-ex 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Simultaneous measurement of ttH (mu=1.51) and tH (mu=-0.4) in fully hadronic H→tau tau final states at 13/13.6 TeV, consistent with the Standard Model.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

121 extracted references · 98 linked inside Pith · cited by 6 Pith papers

  1. [31]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Measurement of the total and differential cross-sections of𝑡¯𝑡𝑊 production in𝑝𝑝collisions at √𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP05(2024) 131, arXiv:2401.05299 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2024

  2. [1]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Observation of a new particle in the search for the Standard Model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC, Phys. Lett. B716(2012) 1, arXiv:1207.7214 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2012

  3. [2]

    CMS Collaboration, Observation of a new boson at a mass of 125 GeV with the CMS experiment at the LHC, Phys. Lett. B716(2012) 30, arXiv:1207.7235 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2012

  4. [3]

    Evans and P

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

    2008

  5. [4]

    ATLAS Collaboration, A detailed map of Higgs boson interactions by the ATLAS experiment ten years after the discovery, Nature607(2022) 52, arXiv:2207.00092 [hep-ex], Erratum: Nature612(2022) E24

    arXiv 2022

  6. [5]

    CMS Collaboration,Combination and interpretation of differential Higgs boson production cross sections in proton–proton collisions at√𝑠=13TeV, (2025), arXiv:2504.13081 [hep-ex]. 38

    arXiv 2025

  7. [6]

    J. F. Gunion and X.-G. He, Determining the𝐶𝑃Nature of a Neutral Higgs Boson at the CERN Large Hadron Collider, Phys. Rev. Lett.76(1996) 4468, arXiv:hep-ph/9602226

    arXiv 1996

  8. [7]

    Ellis, D

    J. Ellis, D. S. Hwang, K. Sakurai and M. Takeuchi, Disentangling Higgs-top couplings in associated production, JHEP04(2014) 004, arXiv:1312.5736 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2014

Show all 121 references
  1. [8]

    He, G.-N

    X.-G. He, G.-N. Li and Y.-J. Zheng, Probing Higgs boson CP properties with𝑡¯𝑡𝐻at the LHC and the 100 TeV pp collider, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A30(2015) 1550156, arXiv:1501.00012 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  2. [9]

    Boudjema, D

    F. Boudjema, D. Guadagnoli, R. M. Godbole and K. A. Mohan, Laboratory-frame observables for probing the top-Higgs boson interaction, Phys. Rev. D92(2015) 015019, arXiv:1501.03157 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  3. [10]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Study of the spin and parity of the Higgs boson in diboson decays with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C75(2015) 476, arXiv:1506.05669 [hep-ex], Erratum: Eur. Phys. J. C76(2016) 152

    2015 arXiv

  4. [11]

    CMS Collaboration,Constraints on the spin-parity and anomalous HVV couplings of the Higgs boson in proton collisions at7and8TeV, Phys. Rev. D92(2015) 012004, arXiv:1411.3441 [hep-ex]

    2015 arXiv

  5. [12]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Measurement of the𝐶𝑃properties of Higgs boson interactions with 𝜏-leptons with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C83(2023) 563, arXiv:2212.05833 [hep-ex]

    2023 arXiv

  6. [13]

    CMS Collaboration,Constraints on anomalous Higgs boson couplings to vector bosons and fermions from the production of Higgs bosons using the𝜏𝜏final state, Phys. Rev. D108(2023) 032013, arXiv:2205.05120 [hep-ex]

    2023 arXiv

  7. [14]

    Fontes, J

    D. Fontes, J. C. Romão, R. Santos and J. P. Silva, Large pseudoscalar Yukawa couplings in the complex 2HDM, JHEP2015(2015) 60, arXiv:1502.01720v2 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  8. [15]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Observation of Higgs boson production in association with a top quark pair at the LHC with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Lett. B784(2018) 173, arXiv:1806.00425 [hep-ex]

    2018 arXiv

  9. [16]

    CMS Collaboration,Observation of𝑡 ¯𝑡𝐻Production, Phys. Rev. Lett.120(2018) 231801, arXiv:1804.02610 [hep-ex]

    2018 arXiv

  10. [17]

    ATLAS Collaboration,𝐶𝑃 Properties of Higgs Boson Interactions with Top Quarks in the𝑡¯𝑡𝐻 and 𝑡𝐻Processes Using𝐻→𝛾𝛾with the ATLAS Detector, Phys. Rev. Lett.125(2020) 061802, arXiv:2004.04545 [hep-ex]

    2020 arXiv

  11. [18]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Measurement of the properties of Higgs boson production at√𝑠=13TeV in the𝐻→𝛾𝛾channel using139fb −1 of𝑝𝑝collision data with the ATLAS experiment, JHEP07(2023) 088, arXiv:2207.00348 [hep-ex]

    2023 arXiv

  12. [19]

    CMS Collaboration,Measurements of Higgs boson production cross sections and couplings in the diphoton decay channel at√𝑠=13TeV, JHEP07(2021) 027, arXiv:2103.06956 [hep-ex]

    2021 arXiv

  13. [20]

    CMS Collaboration,Measurements of𝑡 ¯𝑡𝐻Production and the𝐶𝑃Structure of the Yukawa Interaction between the Higgs Boson and Top Quark in the Diphoton Decay Channel, Phys. Rev. Lett.125(2020) 061801, arXiv:2003.10866 [hep-ex]. 39

    2020 arXiv

  14. [21]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Higgs boson production cross-section measurements and their EFT interpretation in the4ℓdecay channel at√𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C80(2020) 957, arXiv:2004.03447 [hep-ex], Erratum: Eur. Phys. J. C81(2021) 29, Erratum: Eur. Phys. J. C81(...

    2020 arXiv

  15. [22]

    CMS Collaboration,Constraints on anomalous Higgs boson couplings to vector bosons and fermions in its production and decay using the four-lepton final state, Phys. Rev. D104(2021) 052004, arXiv:2104.12152 [hep-ex]

    2021 arXiv

  16. [23]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Differential cross-section measurements of Higgs boson production in the 𝐻→𝜏 +𝜏− decay channel in𝑝𝑝collisions at√𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP03(2025) 010, arXiv:2407.16320 [hep-ex]

    2025 arXiv

  17. [24]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Probing the𝐶𝑃nature of the top-Higgs Yukawa coupling in𝑡¯𝑡𝐻and𝑡𝐻 events with𝐻→𝑏 ¯𝑏decays using the ATLAS detector at the LHC, Phys. Lett. B849(2024) 138469, arXiv:2303.05974 [hep-ex]

    2024 arXiv

  18. [25]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Measurement of the associated production of a top-antitop-quark pair and a Higgs boson decaying into a𝑏 ¯𝑏pair in𝑝𝑝collisions at √𝑠=13TeV using the ATLAS detector at the LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C85(2025) 210, arXiv:2407.10904 [hep-ex]

    2025 arXiv

  19. [26]

    CMS Collaboration,Measurement of the𝑡 ¯𝑡𝐻and𝑡𝐻production rates in the𝐻→𝑏 ¯𝑏decay channel using proton–proton collision data at√𝑠=13TeV, JHEP02(2025) 097, arXiv:2407.10896 [hep-ex]

    2025 arXiv

  20. [27]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Evidence for the associated production of the Higgs boson and a top quark pair with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D97(2018) 072003, arXiv:1712.08891 [hep-ex]

    2018 arXiv

  21. [28]

    CMS Collaboration,Measurement of the Higgs boson production rate in association with top quarks in final states with electrons, muons, and hadronically decaying tau leptons at√𝑠=13TeV , Eur. Phys. J. C81(2021) 378, arXiv:2011.03652 [hep-ex]

    2021 arXiv

  22. [29]

    CMS Collaboration,Search for𝐶𝑃 violation in𝑡¯𝑡𝐻 and𝑡𝐻 production in multilepton channels in proton–proton collisions at√𝑠=13TeV, JHEP07(2023) 092, arXiv:2208.02686 [hep-ex]

    2023 arXiv

  23. [30]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Search for the production of a Higgs boson in association with a single top quark in𝑝𝑝collisions at√𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS detector, (2025), arXiv:2508.14695 [hep-ex]

    2025

  24. [32]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Inclusive and differential cross-section measurements of𝑡¯𝑡𝑍production in𝑝𝑝collisions at√𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS detector, including EFT and spin-correlation interpretations, JHEP07(2024) 163, arXiv:2312.04450 [hep-ex]

    2024 arXiv

  25. [33]

    S. Badger et al., ‘Les Houches 2015: Physics at TeV Colliders Standard Model Working Group Report’, 9th Les Houches Workshop on Physics at TeV Colliders, 2016, arXiv:1605.04692 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Berger et al.,Simplified Template Cross Sections - Stage 1.1, (2019), arXiv:1906.02754 [hep-ph]

    N. Berger et al.,Simplified Template Cross Sections - Stage 1.1, (2019), arXiv:1906.02754 [hep-ph]. 40

    2019

  27. [35]

    Bahl et al.,Indirect CP probes of the Higgs-top-quark interaction: current LHC constraints and future opportunities, JHEP2020(2020) 127, arXiv:2007.08542 [hep-ph]

    H. Bahl et al.,Indirect CP probes of the Higgs-top-quark interaction: current LHC constraints and future opportunities, JHEP2020(2020) 127, arXiv:2007.08542 [hep-ph]

    2020 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Demartin, F

    F. Demartin, F. Maltoni, K. Mawatari, B. Page and M. Zaro, Higgs characterisation at NLO in QCD: CP properties of the top-quark Yukawa interaction, Eur. Phys. J. C74(2014) 3065, arXiv:1407.5089 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  29. [37]

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

    2008

  30. [38]

    ATLAS Collaboration,ATLAS Insertable B-Layer: Technical Design Report, ATLAS-TDR-19; CERN-LHCC-2010-013, 2010, url:https://cds.cern.ch/record/1291633, Addendum: ATLAS-TDR-19-ADD-1; CERN-LHCC-2012-009, 2012,url:https://cds.cern.ch/record/1451888

    2010

  31. [39]

    Abbott et al.,Production and integration of the ATLAS Insertable B-Layer, JINST13(2018) T05008, arXiv:1803.00844 [physics.ins-det]

    B. Abbott et al.,Production and integration of the ATLAS Insertable B-Layer, JINST13(2018) T05008, arXiv:1803.00844 [physics.ins-det]

    2018 arXiv

  32. [40]

    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. [41]

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

    2015 arXiv

  34. [42]

    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]

    2025 arXiv

  35. [43]

    ATLAS Collaboration, ATLAS data quality operations and performance for 2015–2018 data-taking, JINST15(2020) P04003, arXiv:1911.04632 [physics.ins-det]

    2015 arXiv

  36. [44]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Luminosity determination in𝑝𝑝collisions at√𝑠=13TeV using the ATLAS detector at the LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C83(2023) 982, arXiv:2212.09379 [hep-ex]

    2023 arXiv

  37. [45]

    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]

    2020 arXiv

  38. [46]

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

    2020 arXiv

  39. [47]

    ATLAS Collaboration,ATLAS Pythia 8 tunes to7TeV data, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2014-021, 2014, url:https://cds.cern.ch/record/1966419

    2014

  40. [48]

    Golonka and Z

    P. Golonka and Z. Was, PHOTOS Monte Carlo: a precision tool for QED corrections in𝑍and𝑊decays, Eur. Phys. J. C45(2006) 97, arXiv:hep-ph/0506026

    2006 arXiv

  41. [49]

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

    2013 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Pumplin et al., New Generation of Parton Distributions with Uncertainties from Global QCD Analysis, JHEP07(2002) 012, arXiv:hep-ph/0201195

    J. Pumplin et al., New Generation of Parton Distributions with Uncertainties from Global QCD Analysis, JHEP07(2002) 012, arXiv:hep-ph/0201195

    2002 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Nason and C

    P. Nason and C. Oleari, NLO Higgs boson production via vector-boson fusion matched with shower in POWHEG, JHEP02(2010) 037, arXiv:0911.5299 [hep-ph]. 41

    2010 arXiv

  44. [52]

    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]

    2010 arXiv

  45. [53]

    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

    2004 arXiv

  46. [54]

    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]

    2007 arXiv

  47. [55]

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

    2015 arXiv

  48. [56]

    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]

    2017 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Beenakker, S

    W. Beenakker, S. Dittmaier, M. Krämer, B. Plumper, M. Spira et al., NLO QCD corrections to𝑡¯𝑡𝐻production in hadron collisions, Nucl. Phys. B653(2003) 151, arXiv:hep-ph/0211352 [hep-ph]

    2003 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Dawson, C

    S. Dawson, C. Jackson, L. Orr, L. Reina and D. Wackeroth,Associated Higgs boson production with top quarks at the CERN Large Hadron Collider: NLO QCD corrections, Phys. Rev. D68(2003) 034022, arXiv:hep-ph/0305087 [hep-ph]

    2003 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Zhang, W.-G

    Y. Zhang, W.-G. Ma, R.-Y. Zhang, C. Chen and L. Guo, QCD NLO and EW NLO corrections to𝑡¯𝑡𝐻production with top quark decays at hadron collider, Phys. Lett. B738(2014) 1, arXiv:1407.1110 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Frixione, V

    S. Frixione, V. Hirschi, D. Pagani, H. .-. Shao and M. Zaro, Weak corrections to Higgs hadroproduction in association with a top-quark pair, JHEP09(2014) 065, arXiv:1407.0823 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  53. [61]

    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, JHEP07(2014) 079, arXiv:1405.0301 [hep-ph]

    2014 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Artoisenet, R

    P. Artoisenet, R. Frederix, O. Mattelaer and R. Rietkerk, Automatic spin-entangled decays of heavy resonances in Monte Carlo simulations, JHEP03(2013) 015, arXiv:1212.3460 [hep-ph]

    2013 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Frixione, E

    S. Frixione, E. Laenen, P. Motylinski, C. White and B. R. Webber, Single-top hadroproduction in association with a𝑊boson, JHEP07(2008) 029, arXiv:0805.3067 [hep-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Demartin, B

    F. Demartin, B. Maier, F. Maltoni, K. Mawatari and M. Zaro, tWH associated production at the LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C77(2017) 34, arXiv:1607.05862 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  57. [65]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Studies on top-quark Monte Carlo modelling for Top2016, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2016-020, 2016,url:https://cds.cern.ch/record/2216168

    2016

  58. [66]

    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]. 42

    2019 arXiv

  59. [67]

    Gleisberg and S

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

    2008 arXiv

  60. [68]

    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]

    2012 arXiv

  61. [69]

    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]

    2017 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Buccioni et al.,OpenLoops 2, Eur

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

    2019 arXiv

  63. [71]

    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]

    2008 arXiv

  64. [72]

    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]

    2013 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Kallweit, J

    S. Kallweit, J. M. Lindert, P. Maierhöfer, S. Pozzorini and M. Schönherr,NLO QCD+EW predictions for V + jets including off-shell vector-boson decays and multijet merging, JHEP04(2016) 021, arXiv:1511.08692 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  66. [74]

    Gütschow, J

    C. Gütschow, J. M. Lindert and M. Schönherr, Multi-jet merged top-pair production including electroweak corrections, Eur. Phys. J. C78(2018) 317, arXiv:1803.00950 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  67. [75]

    Frederix, D

    R. Frederix, D. Pagani and M. Zaro,Large NLO corrections in𝑡¯𝑡𝑊± and𝑡 ¯𝑡𝑡 ¯𝑡hadroproduction from supposedly subleading EW contributions, JHEP02(2018) 031, arXiv:1711.02116 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  68. [76]

    Frederix and I

    R. Frederix and I. Tsinikos,On improving NLO merging forttW production, JHEP11(2021) 029, arXiv:2108.07826 [hep-ph]

    2021 arXiv

  69. [77]

    Buonocore et al.,Precise Predictions for the Associated Production of a𝑊Boson with a Top-Antitop Quark Pair at the LHC, Phys

    L. Buonocore et al.,Precise Predictions for the Associated Production of a𝑊Boson with a Top-Antitop Quark Pair at the LHC, Phys. Rev. Lett.131(2023) 231901, arXiv:2306.16311 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  70. [78]

    Frixione, E

    S. Frixione, E. Laenen, P. Motylinski and B. R. Webber,Angular correlations of lepton pairs from vector boson and top quark decays in Monte Carlo simulations, JHEP04(2007) 081, arXiv:hep-ph/0702198

    2007 arXiv

  71. [79]

    Catani, F

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

    2001 arXiv

  72. [80]

    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]

    2009 arXiv

  73. [81]

    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]

    2015 arXiv

  74. [82]

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

    2001

  75. [83]

    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]. 43

    2008 arXiv

  76. [84]

    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

    2016

  77. [85]

    A. D. Martin, W. J. Stirling, R. S. Thorne and G. Watt,Parton distributions for the LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C63(2009) 189, arXiv:0901.0002 [hep-ph]

    2009 arXiv

  78. [86]

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

    2010 arXiv

  79. [87]

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

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

    2003

  80. [88]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Vertex Reconstruction Performance of the ATLAS Detector at√𝑠=13TeV , ATL-PHYS-PUB-2015-026, 2015,url:https://cds.cern.ch/record/2037717

    2015

  81. [89]

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

    2024 arXiv

  82. [90]

    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]

    2021 arXiv

  83. [91]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Electron and photon performance measurements with the ATLAS detector using the 2015–2017 LHC proton–proton collision data, JINST14(2019) P12006, arXiv:1908.00005 [hep-ex]

    2015 arXiv

  84. [92]

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

    2017 arXiv

  85. [93]

    Cacciari, G

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

    2008 arXiv

  86. [94]

    Cacciari, G

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

    2012 arXiv

  87. [95]

    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]

    2021 arXiv

  88. [96]

    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]

    2016 arXiv

  89. [97]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Forward jet vertex tagging using the particle flow algorithm, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2019-026, 2019,url:https://cds.cern.ch/record/2683100

    2019

  90. [98]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Selection of jets produced in13TeV proton–proton collisions with the ATLAS detector, ATLAS-CONF-2015-029, 2015,url:https://cds.cern.ch/record/2037702

    2015

  91. [99]

    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]

    2023 arXiv

  92. [100]

    ATLAS Collaboration,ATLAS𝑏-jet identification performance and efficiency measurement with𝑡¯𝑡 events in𝑝𝑝collisions at√𝑠=13TeV, Eur. Phys. J. C79(2019) 970, arXiv:1907.05120 [hep-ex]. 44

    2019 arXiv

  93. [101]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Measurement of the𝑐-jet mistagging efficiency in𝑡¯𝑡events using𝑝𝑝 collision data at√𝑠=13TeV collected with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C82(2022) 95, arXiv:2109.10627 [hep-ex]

    2022 arXiv

  94. [102]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Calibration of the light-flavour jet mistagging efficiency of the𝑏-tagging algorithms with𝑍+jets events using139fb−1 of ATLAS proton–proton collision data at√𝑠=13TeV, Eur. Phys. J. C83(2023) 728, arXiv:2301.06319 [hep-ex]

    2023 arXiv

  95. [103]

    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

    2019

  96. [104]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Reconstruction of hadronic decay products of tau leptons with the ATLAS experiment, Eur. Phys. J. C76(2016) 295, arXiv:1512.05955 [hep-ex]

    2016 arXiv

  97. [105]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Measurement of the tau lepton reconstruction and identification performance in the ATLAS experiment using𝑝𝑝collisions at√𝑠=13TeV, ATLAS-CONF-2017-029, 2017,url:https://cds.cern.ch/record/2261772

    2017

  98. [106]

    Cacciari, G

    M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam and G. Soyez,The catchment area of jets, JHEP04(2008) 005, arXiv:0802.1188 [hep-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  99. [107]

    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]

    2025 arXiv

  100. [108]

    Breiman,Random Forests, Machine Learning45(2001) 5

    L. Breiman,Random Forests, Machine Learning45(2001) 5

    2001

  101. [109]

    Altmann, L

    A. Altmann, L. Toloşi, O. Sander and T. Lengauer, Permutation importance: a corrected feature importance measure, Bioinformatics26(2010) 1340

    2010

  102. [110]

    CMS Collaboration,Measurement of the cross section of top quark–antiquark pair production in association with a𝑊boson in proton–proton collisions at√𝑠=13TeV, JHEP07(2023) 219, arXiv:2208.06485 [hep-ex]

    2023 arXiv

  103. [111]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Measurement of Higgs boson decay into𝑏-quarks in associated production with a top-quark pair in𝑝𝑝collisions at√𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP06(2022) 097, arXiv:2111.06712 [hep-ex]

    2022 arXiv

  104. [112]

    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]

    2023 arXiv

  105. [113]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Identification of Jets Containing𝑏-Hadrons with Recurrent Neural Networks at the ATLAS Experiment, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2017-003, 2017, url:https://cds.cern.ch/record/2255226

    2017

  106. [114]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Evaluation of QCD uncertainties for Higgs boson production through gluon fusion and in association with two top quarks for simplified template cross-section measurements, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2023-031, 2023,url:https://cds.cern.ch/record/2878797

    2023

  107. [115]

    Bellm et al.,Herwig 7.0/Herwig++ 3.0 release note, Eur

    J. Bellm et al.,Herwig 7.0/Herwig++ 3.0 release note, Eur. Phys. J. C76(2016) 196, arXiv:1512.01178 [hep-ph]. 45

    2016 arXiv

  108. [116]

    Höche, S

    S. Höche, S. Mrenna, S. Payne, C. T. Preuss and P. Skands, A Study of QCD Radiation in VBF Higgs Production with Vincia and Pythia, SciPost Phys.12(2022) 010, arXiv:2106.10987 [hep-ph]

    2022 arXiv

  109. [117]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Studies on the improvement of the matching uncertainty definition in top-quark processes simulated withPowheg+Pythia8, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2023-029, 2013, url:https://cds.cern.ch/record/2872787

    2023

  110. [118]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Study of top-quark pair modelling and uncertainties using ATLAS measurements at√𝑠=13TeV, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2020-023, 2020,url:https://cds.cern.ch/record/2730443

    2020

  111. [119]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Observation of four-top-quark production in the multilepton final state with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C83(2023) 496, arXiv:2303.15061 [hep-ex], Erratum: Eur. Phys. J. C84(2024) 156

    2023 arXiv

  112. [120]

    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

    2011 arXiv

  113. [121]

    Demokritos

    ATLAS Collaboration,ATLAS Computing Acknowledgements, ATL-SOFT-PUB-2025-001, 2025, url:https://cds.cern.ch/record/2922210. 46 The ATLAS Collaboration G. Aad 103, E. Aakvaag 17, B. Abbott 122, S. Abdelhameed 118a, K. Abeling 55, N.J. Abicht 49, S.H. Abidi 30, M. Aboelela 45, A....

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 4, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.