Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 2 cited by

A joint explanation for the soft lepton and monojet LHC excesses in the wino-bino model

T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-06 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Soft-lepton and monojet excesses at the LHC are jointly consistent with a wino-bino supersymmetric spectrum in which a wino-like neutralino pair sits about 20 GeV above a nearly pure bino dark matter candidate.

desk verdict Useful new recasts and a coherent wino-bino excess story, but the headline B10 depends on a post-hoc bin-merging fix for CMS-SUS-18-004, so treat the (320,20) preferred point as tentative. read the letter →

arxiv 2506.21676 v1 pith:JXLJSHWF submitted 2025-06-26 hep-ph

Diyar Agin , Benjamin Fuks , Mark D. Goodsell , Taylor Murphy This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-ph
keywords supersymmetryelectroweakinoswino-binomodelcompressedspectraLHCexcessessoftleptonsmonojetsearchdarkmatterrelicdensity
topics Dark Matter
open problems Dark Matter
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 argues that several modest excesses seen in LHC Run 2 data are not independent accidents but overlapping views of the same compressed supersymmetric spectrum. By recasting the CMS soft-lepton analysis, which previously had no public recast, and combining it with the ATLAS soft-lepton searches and the CMS monojet search, the authors find that a wino-bino(+) parameter region around a second-neutralino mass of roughly 330 GeV and a mass split of about 20 GeV fits the combined data better than the Standard Model. The paper reports combined Bayes factors up to 7.3 for the alternative likelihood. The same region passes close to the band where a nearly pure bino freezes out with the observed dark matter relic abundance, so the excesses, if real, would point to the mass and properties of the dark matter particle.

What carries the argument

The argument rests on a full recast of the CMS-SUS-18-004 soft-lepton search built from the provided simplified likelihood, covariance matrices and cutflows; on a Bayes factor $B_{10}$, defined as the ratio of profiled signal-plus-background to background-only likelihoods, which directly shows where the model beats the Standard Model; and on an alternative simplified likelihood that merges two pairs of $m_{\ell\ell}$ bins, correcting an observed-limit discrepancy. This modified likelihood is the one that produces the headline $B_{10}=7.3$ at $(320,20)$ GeV, while the unmodified likelihood gives a combined $B_{10}=4.9$ at the same point.

What would settle it

If the CMS collaboration releases a full statistical model and it shows that the point $(m_{\tilde\chi_2^0},\Delta m)=(320,20)$ GeV is excluded, or if Run 3 data show the soft-lepton and monojet excesses fading to background, the claimed preference would be refuted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

In the wino-bino(+) simplified model, an MSSM limit with decoupled higgsinos where only two parameters matter, the heavier neutralino mass $m_{\tilde\chi_2^0}$ and the splitting $\Delta m$, the paper claims the data favour $m_{\tilde\chi_2^0} \sim 320\text{--}330$ GeV and $\Delta m \sim 20$ GeV over background-only. At those values all four analyses have favouring Bayes factors $B_{10} > 1$. The preferred point overlaps the band in which bino-wino coannihilation during freeze-out gives $\Omega h^2 \simeq 0.12$, making the bino LSP a viable thermal dark matter candidate. The authors present this as the first time combined compressed-electroweakino and monojet data point to a specific dark matter mass and its properties.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the modified CMS simplified likelihood, created by merging the Ultra and High $m_{\ell\ell}$ bins and two three-lepton low-mass bins, correctly captures the experimental correlations that the unmodified simplified likelihood fails to reproduce; the paper itself notes that the unmodified likelihood does not match the CMS observed limit and acknowledges a subtle error in the recast cannot be excluded.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Run 3 searches in soft-lepton plus missing-energy and monojet channels should accumulate more events near $m_{\tilde\chi_2^0} \sim 320$ GeV and $\Delta m \sim 20$ GeV if the signal is real.
  • The multijet recast of ATLAS-SUSY-2018-22 gives only weak constraints on the wino-bino region, so it does not undermine the excess interpretation; it excludes bino LSP masses below roughly 170 GeV.
  • A nearly pure bino with mass around $m_{\tilde\chi_1^0} \sim 300$ GeV coannihilating with winos can simultaneously explain the LHC excesses and the Planck relic abundance, assuming standard freeze-out cosmology.
  • The compatibility of the CMS excess region with the ATLAS soft-lepton and monojet regions is demonstrated by overlapping $B_{10} > 1$ contours in the $m_{\tilde\chi_2^0}$ versus $\Delta m$ plane.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the excesses are real, the small mass splitting implies the chargino may travel a detectable distance before decaying, so displaced-track or disappearing-chargino searches are an independent corroboration the paper does not perform.
  • A full statistical model from CMS, with all control regions and correlations, would settle whether the bin-merging likelihood is the right description; the paper itself asks for exactly this input.
  • The dark matter band shifts by about 6-7 GeV in $\Delta m$ as the higgsino decoupling scale $\mu$ is raised, so mapping the simplified wino-bino scenario onto a complete MSSM moves the predicted target; this mapping sensitivity is an implicit caveat.
  • The same recast machinery could be applied to other compressed electroweakino templates that may fit the combined data even better, a possibility the paper notes but does not pursue.
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

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. This manuscript presents new public recasts of the CMS soft-lepton search CMS-SUS-18-004 (in HackAnalysis) and the ATLAS multijet search ATLAS-SUSY-2018-22 (in MadAnalysis 5), validates them against official cutflows and exclusion contours, and combines them with earlier recasts of ATLAS soft-lepton and CMS monojet analyses. For the wino-bino(+) simplified model the authors find a region around m(chi_2^0) ~ 320-340 GeV and Delta m ~ 20 GeV in which the data are better described by the model plus background than by background alone, with combined profile-likelihood ratios B10 ~ 4.5-7.3. They further show that the same region lies near the band where a nearly pure bino LSP has the observed relic abundance, and they discuss how the simplified model can be embedded in the MSSM. The paper also constrains a frustrated dark matter model with the new ATLAS multijet recast.

Significance. If the claimed preference is robust, the paper would provide a coherent, testable explanation of several mild LHC excesses and a dark-matter candidate, and it would supply the community with two validated recasting tools, with inputs deposited on Zenodo. The validations against official cutflows and exclusion curves are generally good, and the relic-density calculation is performed independently of the LHC fit. However, the headline numerical result depends on a post-hoc modification of the CMS simplified likelihood, and the full-likelihood result is weaker; the paper's own text acknowledges a possible recast error. The significance is therefore conditional on resolving this statistical-model issue.

major comments (2)
  1. [2.3, Table 10, Figure 5] The central claim that the wino mass is 'most likely' around 320 GeV with Delta m ~ 20 GeV and combined B10 = 7.3 rests on the modified simplified likelihood introduced in Section 2.3, in which two pairs of CMS-SUS-18-004 bins are merged. This modification was made after the full simplified likelihood failed to reproduce the published CMS observed limit for Delta m in [5,20] GeV, and the authors state that 'there could be a subtle error in our recast.' With the full likelihood, Table 10 gives CMS soft-lepton B10 = 0.85 and combined B10 = 4.90 for (320,20), so the exact best-fit point and the magnitude 7.3 are not supported by the primary statistical model. I request either an independent validation of the modified likelihood (for example, reproduction of the official observed limit for additional benchmark points, or use of a COMBINE model), or a presentation that makes the full-likelihood results primary and treats the modified likelihood only as a cross-check.
  2. [4.4, Figure 6] The dark-matter compatibility, called the 'most striking result,' depends on the position of the relic-density band, but the paper reports in Section 4.4 that the band shifts by 6-7 GeV in Delta m when mu is raised from 500 GeV to 2 TeV, and that the simplified-model samples are generated without true mixing matrices ('in some sense, a fake model'). Because the LHC-preferred region is narrow in Delta m, please state the exact (mu, At) values used for the band in Figure 6, quantify the uncertainty of the band location, and show explicitly whether the full preferred region remains within the band over the range of parameters allowed by direct detection. Without this, the compatibility is not yet quantitatively established.
minor comments (6)
  1. [2.2] The bullet for 'Higgsino180/10' lists (m_chi2^0, Delta m) = (160,3) GeV; this should be (180,10) GeV.
  2. [4.1, Eq. (4.1)] Although the text disclaims the terminology, referring to a profile likelihood ratio as a 'Bayes factor' and quoting B10 = 7.3 without a prior will be confusing to readers; consider renaming it or adding a prominent caveat in the abstract and conclusions.
  3. [Table 8] Several MB-GGd bins show differences larger than 50% (e.g., SR4 340010cuts -187.77% and SR4 400022cuts 73.22%); since the exclusion contour agrees well, please comment on whether these outliers affect the CFDM limits in Figure 3.
  4. [4.3, Table 10] The p-values listed are local and not corrected for the grid scan; a sentence noting this would prevent readers from interpreting them as global significances.
  5. [4.2] The text says 'the data favours a region around m_chi2^0 ~ 330 GeV and Delta m ~ 20 GeV' while the conclusions say 'around 320 GeV'; please harmonize these statements and tie them explicitly to the full-likelihood results.
  6. [4.3, Table 10] Please clarify the statistical independence of the two ATLAS soft-lepton analyses combined in one column of Table 10, since the combined B10 is a product of their individual factors.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No significant circularity; the headline B10 depends on a modified likelihood, but that is a robustness caveat rather than a circular reduction.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is not circular. The LHC preference claim is built from published CMS/ATLAS data using recasts validated against official cutflows and exclusion contours (Secs. 2.3 and 3.2), and the dark-matter band in Fig. 6 is produced by an independent MSSM scan with SARAH/SPheno/CalcHEP/micrOMEGAs (Sec. 4.4), so the alignment of the LHC-preferred region with the relic-density band is an independent coincidence rather than a fit input. Self-citations to the authors' HackAnalysis, BSMArt, and previous excess papers [7-10] supply tools and motivation but do not carry the argument alone; the exclusion and limit comparisons are against CMS and ATLAS results. The main caveat is the modified simplified likelihood for CMS-SUS-18-004 in Sec. 2.3. The paper states that with the full simplified likelihood "the observed limit disagrees with that reported by CMS" for moderate Delta m in [5,20] GeV and that "there could be a subtle error in our recast"; it then constructs an alternative likelihood by merging bins, and Table 10 shows the headline point (320,20) has CMS B10=0.85 with the full likelihood but 1.26 with the modified one, raising the combined B10 from 4.90 to 7.3. This is a genuine robustness problem for the magnitude and precise location of the claimed preference, but it is not circularity: no parameter is fitted to the claimed best-fit point and then renamed as a prediction, and the qualitative preference (B10>1 in multiple analyses, combined B10 ~ 4.5-4.9 for nearby points even with the full likelihood) does not reduce to the modified likelihood by construction. No equation in the paper equates a predicted quantity to its own input.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the wino-bino simplified model, standard cosmology, and the fidelity of the recasting tools, plus the ad hoc modified CMS likelihood. The best-fit masses are scanned and fitted to LHC data; the MSSM decoupling inputs are chosen by hand and shift the dark matter band.

free parameters (3)
  • m(chi_2^0) (wino-like neutralino mass) = ~320-330 GeV best fit; scanned 150-400 GeV
    The central claim identifies a preferred mass for the second neutralino; this is scanned and fitted to LHC data, not derived from first principles.
  • Delta m = m(chi_2^0) - m(chi_1^0) = ~20-22 GeV best fit; scanned 5-40 GeV
    The mass splitting controls the soft-lepton and monojet signatures; its best-fit value is extracted from the data.
  • MSSM decoupling inputs (mu, At, sfermion masses) = mu = 600 GeV, At = 1300 GeV, mh = 125 +/- 0.5 GeV (from Table 11)
    These inputs are chosen by hand to create a realistic wino-bino limit with small higgsino admixture. The dark matter relic band shifts by 6-7 GeV in Delta m as mu varies from 500 GeV to 2 TeV, so the central 'compatibility' depends on these choices.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The wino-bino simplified model with negligible bino-wino mixing and only off-shell W/Z decays captures the relevant LHC phenomenology.
    Invoked in the Introduction and Eq. (1.1). If mixing or additional decay modes are relevant, the recast efficiencies and the relic-density interpretation change.
  • domain assumption Standard cosmological freeze-out history for dark matter.
    Assumed in Section 4.4 when computing the relic abundance band; non-standard cosmology would move the band.
  • domain assumption The profile-likelihood ratio B10 is a usable proxy for model preference.
    Defined in Section 4.1; the authors explicitly note it 'does not have a strict statistical interpretation' and is called a Bayes factor only by abuse of notation.
  • domain assumption Lepton efficiency maps from the older CMS-SUS-16-048 analysis remain valid for CMS-SUS-18-004.
    Stated in Section 2.2: 'We must assume that these efficiencies are still relevant.' A failure here would bias signal yields in the central CMS soft-lepton recast.
  • ad hoc to paper The modified simplified likelihood for CMS-SUS-18-004, with two pairs of bins merged, is a valid statistical model.
    Introduced in Section 2.3 after the full simplified likelihood failed to reproduce the observed CMS limit. The bin-merging choices are motivated by observed under/overfluctuations and affect the headline best-fit point.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A joint explanation for the soft lepton and monojet LHC excesses in the wino-bino model." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JXLJSHWF

@misc{pith2026250621676,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A joint explanation for the soft lepton and monojet LHC excesses in the wino-bino model},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JXLJSHWF}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2506.21676}
}
read the original abstract

We present new recasts of the CMS Run 2 soft-leptons + missing energy analysis and the ATLAS Run 2 multijet + missing energy analysis. These analyses are relevant for probing the parameter space of electroweak-charged particles with compressed spectra. We review these analyses and detail their implementation and validation in HackAnalysis (for CMS) and MadAnalysis 5 (ATLAS). We then use these new recasts to combine four LHC analyses to identify a region of parameter space of the "wino-bino" simplified model, which corresponds to a limit of the Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model in which higgsinos are decoupled, that is preferred over the Standard Model by excesses in the data. We find that the favoured region is compatible with the observed dark matter relic density, assuming freeze out within a standard cosmology, and we comment on the importance of this result and on how the simplified model should be mapped onto a complete supersymmetric model.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2506.21676 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Validation of the implementation of CMS-SUS-18-004 in HackAnalysis by com￾paring limits on the wino-bino parameter space. Top: “Full” simplified likelihood. Bottom: Alternative simplified likelihood, by combining two pairs of bins. See text for details. 9 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. 95% confidence level exclusion contours in the (mg˜, mχ˜ 0 1 ) mass plane. We compare the observed (red) and expected (blue) limits provided by ATLAS to predictions obtained with our implementation of ATLAS-SUSY-2018-22 in MadAnalysis 5 for gluino pair production followed by the decay ˜g → qq¯χ˜ 0 1 . Red cross markers represent excluded points while green dot markers correspond to allowed points. of soft-gluon emis… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. 95% confidence level exclusion constraints on the CFDM model obtained from the CMS-SUS-19-006 (blue) and ATLAS-SUSY-2018-22 (red crosses and green dots) multijet+Emiss T analyses. 4 Limits and preferred parameter space for the wino￾bino model 4.1 Statistical presentation In the following we shall present limits on the wino-bino(+) simplified model, including those from CMS monojet searches, and a combination of all … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (4 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Results for CMS monojet searches (left) and ATLAS soft-lepton+Emiss T (right) in the wino-bino scenario, overlaid with soft-lepton excluded regions reported by ATLAS and CMS. Top: Expected and observed limits. Bottom: Contours of Bayes factor B10. 19 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Results for only the CMS soft-lepton search in the wino-bino scenario, overlaid with soft-lepton excluded regions reported by ATLAS and CMS. Left: Likelihood ratio contours for the “full” simplified likelihood. Right: Likelihood ratio contours for the alternative simpl…
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: In the top right plot, we show the limits as computed in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_4.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Results for all considered searches in the wino-bino scenario, overlaid with soft￾lepton excluded regions reported by ATLAS and CMS. Top: Expected and observed limits using the “full” simplified likelihood. Bottom: Contours of Bayes factor B10 using the full likelihood…

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Deciphering compressed electroweakino excesses with MadAnalysis 5

    hep-ph 2025-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    MadAnalysis 5 v1.11 adds validated recasting of two ATLAS compressed-electroweakino searches and shows that a proposed NMSSM scenario fits the soft-lepton and monojet excesses less well than simpler models.

  2. BSMArt 2: simpler and faster parameter space scans

    hep-ph 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 4.0 of 10

    BSMArt version 2 adds new scanning algorithms including Affine MC, MLScanner, and CMA-ES variants to simplify and accelerate parameter space exploration in new physics models, demonstrated on soft lepton excess search...

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

68 extracted references · 8 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Constantin, S

    L. Constantin, S. Kraml and F. Mahmoudi, The LHC has ruled out Supersymmetry – really?, 2505.11251

    arXiv

  2. [2]

    ATLAS collaboration, Searches for electroweak production of supersymmetric particles with compressed mass spectra in √s = 13 TeV pp collisions with the ATLAS detector , Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020) 052005 [ 1911.12606]

    arXiv 2020

  3. [3]

    ATLAS collaboration, Search for chargino–neutralino pair production in final states with three leptons and missing transverse momentum in √s = 13 TeV pp collisions with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C 81 (2021) 1118 [ 2106.01676]

    arXiv 2021

  4. [4]

    CMS collaboration, Search for supersymmetry in final states with two or three soft leptons and missing transverse momentum in proton-proton collisions at √s = 13 TeV , JHEP 04 (2022) 091 [ 2111.06296]

    arXiv 2022

  5. [5]

    ATLAS collaboration, Search for new phenomena in events with an energetic jet and missing transverse momentum in pp collisions at √s =13 TeV with the ATLAS detector , Phys. Rev. D 103 (2021) 112006 [ 2102.10874]

    arXiv 2021

  6. [6]

    CMS collaboration, Search for new particles in events with energetic jets and large missing transverse momentum in proton-proton collisions at √s = 13 TeV , JHEP 11 (2021) 153 [2107.13021]

    arXiv 2021

  7. [7]

    D. Agin, B. Fuks, M.D. Goodsell and T. Murphy, Monojets reveal overlapping excesses for light compressed higgsinos, Phys. Lett. B 853 (2024) 138597 [ 2311.17149]

    arXiv 2024

  8. [8]

    D. Agin, B. Fuks, M.D. Goodsell and T. Murphy, Seeking a coherent explanation of LHC excesses for compressed spectra, Eur. Phys. J. C 84 (2024) 1218 [ 2404.12423]

    arXiv 2024

Show all 68 references
  1. [9]

    Goodsell, HackAnalysis 2: A powerful and hackable recasting tool , 2406.10042

    M.D. Goodsell, HackAnalysis 2: A powerful and hackable recasting tool , 2406.10042

    arXiv

  2. [10]

    Fuks, M.D

    B. Fuks, M.D. Goodsell and T. Murphy, Monojets from compressed weak frustrated dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 111 (2025) 055010 [ 2409.03014]

    2025 arXiv

  3. [11]

    ATLAS collaboration, ATLAS Run 2 searches for electroweak production of supersymmetric particles interpreted within the pMSSM , JHEP 05 (2024) 106 [ 2402.01392]. 27

    2024 arXiv

  4. [12]

    Altakach, S

    M.M. Altakach, S. Kraml, A. Lessa, S. Narasimha, T. Pascal, T. Reymermier et al., Global LHC constraints on electroweak-inos with SModelS v2.3 , SciPost Phys. 16 (2024) 101 [2312.16635]

    2024 arXiv

  5. [13]

    CMS collaboration, Combined search for electroweak production of winos, binos, higgsinos, and sleptons in proton-proton collisions at sqrts = 13 TeV, CMS-PAS-SUS-21-008

  6. [14]

    Planck collaboration, Planck 2018 results. VI. Cosmological parameters , Astron. Astrophys. 641 (2020) A6 [ 1807.06209]

    2020 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Buanes, I.n

    T. Buanes, I.n. Lara, K. Rolbiecki and K. Sakurai, LHC constraints on electroweakino dark matter revisited, Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023) 095021 [ 2208.04342]

    2023 arXiv

  8. [16]

    CMS collaboration, Search for new physics in events with two soft oppositely charged leptons and missing transverse momentum in proton-proton collisions at √s = 13 TeV, Phys. Lett. B 782 (2018) 440 [ 1801.01846]

    2018 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Fuks, Re-implementation of the soft lepton + missing energy analysis of CMS (35.9 fb-1; CMS-SUS-16-048), doi:10.14428/DVN/YA8E9V

    B. Fuks, Re-implementation of the soft lepton + missing energy analysis of CMS (35.9 fb-1; CMS-SUS-16-048), doi:10.14428/DVN/YA8E9V

    doi

  10. [18]

    Araz, Re-implementation of the soft lepton + missing energy analysis of CMS (35.9 fb-1; CMS-SUS-16-048), doi:10.14428/DVN/4WVPNQ

    J. Araz, Re-implementation of the soft lepton + missing energy analysis of CMS (35.9 fb-1; CMS-SUS-16-048), doi:10.14428/DVN/4WVPNQ

    doi

  11. [19]

    Conte, B

    E. Conte, B. Fuks and G. Serret, MadAnalysis 5, A User-Friendly Framework for Collider Phenomenology, Comput. Phys. Commun. 184 (2013) 222 [ 1206.1599]

    2013 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Conte, B

    E. Conte, B. Dumont, B. Fuks and C. Wymant, Designing and recasting LHC analyses with MadAnalysis 5, Eur. Phys. J. C74 (2014) 3103 [ 1405.3982]

    2014 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Conte and B

    E. Conte and B. Fuks, Confronting new physics theories to LHC data with MADANALYSIS 5, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A33 (2018) 1830027 [ 1808.00480]

    2018 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Goodsell and L

    M.D. Goodsell and L. Priya, Long dead winos , Eur. Phys. J. C 82 (2022) 235 [ 2106.08815]

    2022 arXiv

  15. [23]

    CMS Collaborationcollaboration, Simplified likelihood for the re-interpretation of public CMS results, CMS-NOTE-2017-001, CERN-CMS-NOTE-2017-001

    2017

  16. [24]

    Alwall, R

    J. Alwall, R. Frederix, S. Frixione, V. Hirschi, F. Maltoni, O. Mattelaer et al., The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations , J. High Energy Phys. 07 (2014) 079 [ 1405.0301]

    2014 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Degrande, C

    C. Degrande, C. Duhr, B. Fuks, D. Grellscheid, O. Mattelaer and T. Reiter, UFO - The Universal FeynRules Output , Comput. Phys. Commun. 183 (2012) 1201 [ 1108.2040]

    2012 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Darm´ e et al.,UFO 2.0: the ‘Universal Feynman Output’ format , Eur

    L. Darm´ e et al.,UFO 2.0: the ‘Universal Feynman Output’ format , Eur. Phys. J. C 83 (2023) 631 [ 2304.09883]

    2023 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Duhr and B

    C. Duhr and B. Fuks, A superspace module for the FeynRules package , Comput. Phys. Commun. 182 (2011) 2404 [ 1102.4191]

    2011 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Christensen, P

    N.D. Christensen, P. de Aquino, C. Degrande, C. Duhr, B. Fuks, M. Herquet et al., A Comprehensive approach to new physics simulations , Eur. Phys. J. C 71 (2011) 1541 [0906.2474]

    2011 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Alloul, N.D

    A. Alloul, N.D. Christensen, C. Degrande, C. Duhr and B. Fuks, FeynRules 2.0 - A complete toolbox for tree-level phenomenology, Comput. Phys. Commun. 185 (2014) 2250 [1310.1921]. 28

    2014 arXiv

  22. [30]

    NNPDF collaboration, Parton distributions from high-precision collider data , Eur. Phys. J. C 77 (2017) 663 [ 1706.00428]

    2017 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Buckley, J

    A. Buckley, J. Ferrando, S. Lloyd, K. Nordstr¨ om, B. Page, M. R¨ ufenacht et al.,LHAPDF6: parton density access in the LHC precision era , Eur. Phys. J. C 75 (2015) 132 [ 1412.7420]

    2015 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Mangano, M

    M.L. Mangano, M. Moretti, F. Piccinini and M. Treccani, Matching matrix elements and shower evolution for top-quark production in hadronic collisions , J. High Energy Phys. 01 (2007) 013 [ hep-ph/0611129]

    2007 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Alwall, S

    J. Alwall, S. de Visscher and F. Maltoni, QCD radiation in the production of heavy colored particles at the LHC , J. High Energy Phys. 02 (2009) 017 [ 0810.5350]

    2009 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Bierlich et al., A comprehensive guide to the physics and usage of PYTHIA 8.3 , SciPost Phys

    C. Bierlich et al., A comprehensive guide to the physics and usage of PYTHIA 8.3 , SciPost Phys. Codeb. 2022 (2022) 8 [ 2203.11601]

    2022 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Goodsell and A

    M.D. Goodsell and A. Joury, BSMArt: Simple and fast parameter space scans , Comput. Phys. Commun. 297 (2024) 109057 [ 2301.01154]

    2024 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Araz, Spey: Smooth inference for reinterpretation studies , SciPost Phys

    J.Y. Araz, Spey: Smooth inference for reinterpretation studies , SciPost Phys. 16 (2024) 032 [2307.06996]

    2024 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Heinrich, M

    L. Heinrich, M. Feickert, G. Stark and K. Cranmer, pyhf: pure-Python implementation of HistFactory statistical models, J. Open Source Softw. 6 (2021) 2823

    2021

  30. [38]

    B. Fuks, M. Klasen, D.R. Lamprea and M. Rothering, Precision predictions for electroweak superpartner production at hadron colliders with Resummino, Eur. Phys. J. C 73 (2013) 2480 [1304.0790]

    2013 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Fiaschi, B

    J. Fiaschi, B. Fuks, M. Klasen and A. Neuwirth, Electroweak superpartner production at 13.6 Tev with Resummino, Eur. Phys. J. C 83 (2023) 707 [ 2304.11915]

    2023 arXiv

  32. [40]

    CMS collaboration, The CMS Statistical Analysis and Combination Tool: Combine , Comput. Softw. Big Sci. 8 (2024) 19 [ 2404.06614]

    2024 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Rogan, Restframes, http://restframes.com/

    C. Rogan, Restframes, http://restframes.com/

  34. [42]

    ATLAS collaboration, Search for squarks and gluinos in final states with jets and missing transverse momentum using 139 fb −1 of √s =13 TeV pp collision data with the ATLAS detector, JHEP 02 (2021) 143 [ 2010.14293]

    2021 arXiv

  35. [43]

    CMS collaboration, Search for supersymmetry in proton-proton collisions at 13 TeV in final states with jets and missing transverse momentum , JHEP 10 (2019) 244 [ 1908.04722]

    2019 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Malte, S

    M. Malte, S. Bein and J. Sonneveld, Re-implementation of a search for supersymmetry in the HT/missing HT channel (137 fb-1; CMS-SUSY-19-006) , doi:10.14428/DVN/4DEJQM

    doi

  37. [45]

    Fuks et al., Proceedings of the second MadAnalysis 5 workshop on LHC recasting in Korea, Mod

    B. Fuks et al., Proceedings of the second MadAnalysis 5 workshop on LHC recasting in Korea, Mod. Phys. Lett. A 36 (2021) 2102001 [ 2101.02245]

    2021 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Drees, H

    M. Drees, H. Dreiner, D. Schmeier, J. Tattersall and J.S. Kim, CheckMATE: Confronting your Favourite New Physics Model with LHC Data , Comput. Phys. Commun. 187 (2015) 227 [1312.2591]

    2015 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Dercks, N

    D. Dercks, N. Desai, J.S. Kim, K. Rolbiecki, J. Tattersall and T. Weber, CheckMATE 2: From the model to the limit , Comput. Phys. Commun. 221 (2017) 383 [ 1611.09856]. 29

    2017 arXiv

  40. [48]

    CheckMATE collaboration, Constraining electroweak and strongly charged long-lived particles with CheckMATE, Eur. Phys. J. C 81 (2021) 968 [ 2104.04542]

    2021 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Carpenter, T

    L.M. Carpenter, T. Murphy and T.M.P. Tait, Distinctive signals of frustrated dark matter , J. High Energy Phys. 09 (2022) 175 [ 2205.06824]

    2022 arXiv

  42. [50]

    ATLAS collaboration, Search for squarks and gluinos in final states with jets and missing transverse momentum using 36 fb −1 of √s = 13 TeV pp collision data with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D 97 (2018) 112001 [ 1712.02332]

    2018 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Beenakker, C

    W. Beenakker, C. Borschensky, M. Kr¨ amer, A. Kulesza and E. Laenen, NNLL-fast: predictions for coloured supersymmetric particle production at the LHC with threshold and Coulomb resummation, JHEP 12 (2016) 133 [ 1607.07741]

    2016 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Beenakker, C

    W. Beenakker, C. Borschensky, M. Kr¨ amer, A. Kulesza, E. Laenen, J. Mamuˇ zi´ c et al., NNLL-fast 2.0: Coloured sparticle production at the LHC run 3 with √ S = 13.6 TeV , SciPost Phys. Core 7 (2024) 072 [ 2404.18837]

    2024 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Ashanujjaman, S

    S. Ashanujjaman, S. Banik, G. Coloretti, A. Crivellin, S.P. Maharathy and B. Mellado, Explaining the γγ +X excesses at ≈151.5 GeV via the Drell-Yan production of a Higgs triplet, Phys. Lett. B 862 (2025) 139298 [ 2402.00101]

    2025 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Crivellin, S

    A. Crivellin, S. Ashanujjaman, S. Banik, G. Coloretti, S.P. Maharathy and B. Mellado, Growing evidence for a Higgs triplet , Chin. Phys. C 49 (2025) 053107 [ 2404.14492]

    2025 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Banik and A

    S. Banik and A. Crivellin, Explanation of the excesses in associated di-photon production at 152 GeV in 2HDM , JHEP 10 (2024) 203 [ 2407.06267]

    2024 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Fowlie, The Bayes factor surface for searches for new physics , Eur

    A. Fowlie, The Bayes factor surface for searches for new physics , Eur. Phys. J. C 84 (2024) 426 [2401.11710]

    2024 arXiv

  49. [57]

    B. Fuks, M. Goodsell and T. Murphy, Datasets for two soft lepton and monojet excess papers, doi:10.5281/zenodo.15727335

    doi

  50. [58]

    Staub, SARAH, 0806.0538

    F. Staub, SARAH, 0806.0538

    arXiv

  51. [59]

    Staub, SARAH 4 : A tool for (not only SUSY) model builders , Comput

    F. Staub, SARAH 4 : A tool for (not only SUSY) model builders , Comput. Phys. Commun. 185 (2014) 1773 [ 1309.7223]

    2014 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Goodsell, K

    M.D. Goodsell, K. Nickel and F. Staub, Two-Loop Higgs mass calculations in supersymmetric models beyond the MSSM with SARAH and SPheno , Eur. Phys. J. C 75 (2015) 32 [ 1411.0675]

    2015 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Goodsell, S

    M.D. Goodsell, S. Liebler and F. Staub, Generic calculation of two-body partial decay widths at the full one-loop level , Eur. Phys. J. C 77 (2017) 758 [ 1703.09237]

    2017 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Porod, SPheno, a program for calculating supersymmetric spectra, SUSY particle decays and SUSY particle production at e+ e- colliders , Comput

    W. Porod, SPheno, a program for calculating supersymmetric spectra, SUSY particle decays and SUSY particle production at e+ e- colliders , Comput. Phys. Commun. 153 (2003) 275 [hep-ph/0301101]

    2003 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Porod and F

    W. Porod and F. Staub, SPheno 3.1: Extensions including flavour, CP-phases and models beyond the MSSM , Comput. Phys. Commun. 183 (2012) 2458 [ 1104.1573]

    2012 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Belyaev, N.D

    A. Belyaev, N.D. Christensen and A. Pukhov, CalcHEP 3.4 for collider physics within and beyond the Standard Model , Comput. Phys. Commun. 184 (2013) 1729 [ 1207.6082]

    2013 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Belanger, F

    G. Belanger, F. Boudjema, A. Pukhov and A. Semenov, micrOMEGAs: A Tool for dark matter studies , Nuovo Cim. C 033N2 (2010) 111 [ 1005.4133]. 30

    2010 arXiv

  58. [66]

    Belanger, F

    G. Belanger, F. Boudjema, A. Pukhov and A. Semenov, micrOMEGAs 3: A program for calculating dark matter observables , Comput. Phys. Commun. 185 (2014) 960 [ 1305.0237]

    2014 arXiv

  59. [67]

    Alguero, G

    G. Alguero, G. Belanger, F. Boudjema, S. Chakraborti, A. Goudelis, S. Kraml et al., micrOMEGAs 6.0: N-component dark matter , Comput. Phys. Commun. 299 (2024) 109133 [2312.14894]

    2024 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Duan, K.-I

    G.H. Duan, K.-I. Hikasa, J. Ren, L. Wu and J.M. Yang, Probing bino-wino coannihilation dark matter below the neutrino floor at the LHC , Phys. Rev. D 98 (2018) 015010 [1804.05238]. 31

    2018 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 6, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.