Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

Measurement of the $\Upsilon$(1S), $\Upsilon$(2S), and $\Upsilon$(3S) differential cross sections in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13.6 TeV

T0 review · 1 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-03 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper reports the first measurement of the production cross sections of the three bottomonium states Upsilon(1S), Upsilon(2S), and Upsilon(3S) in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13.6 TeV, differentially in transv

desk verdict A solid, incremental CMS measurement that extends Upsilon pT reach to 200 GeV at 13.6 TeV; the MC-only L1 trigger correction is the main caveat, but the paper is honest about it. read the letter →

arxiv 2601.20023 v2 pith:MQCXT6L2 submitted 2026-01-27 hep-ex

CMS Collaboration This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-ex
keywords bottomoniumUpsilonmesonsdifferentialcrosssectionsNRQCDquarkoniumproductionproton-protoncollisionsdimuonchanneltransversemomentumspectra
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 the first measurement of the production cross sections of the three bottomonium states, Upsilon(1S), Upsilon(2S), and Upsilon(3S), in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13.6 TeV. The cross sections are measured differentially in transverse momentum from 20 to 200 GeV in two rapidity intervals, extending the reach of previous measurements by a factor of two. These data are meant to constrain non-relativistic QCD, particularly the long-distance matrix elements that parameterize how a heavy quark-antiquark pair becomes a meson. The measurement matters because it provides new constraints at an energy and momentum range not previously explored, and the numerical results are made available for global fits.

What carries the argument

The analysis chain combines three elements: signal yields from an extended maximum likelihood fit of the dimuon mass spectrum using a double Crystal Ball shape for each resonance plus a polynomial background; an acceptance correction computed from simulated events, assuming unpolarized production; and a detection efficiency built from single-muon efficiencies measured from data with a tag-and-probe technique, multiplied by a correction for the hardware trigger inefficiency when the two muons are so close in angle and momentum that they may be misidentified as one track.

What would settle it

Compare the measured dimuon trigger efficiency as a function of the angular separation of the two muons, obtained from events recorded with single-muon triggers, against the efficiency predicted by the simulation. If the ratio differs from unity beyond the assigned uncertainty, the baseline cross sections, particularly near pT = 20 GeV, would need to be shifted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central result is the pT-differential cross section times branching fraction for each Upsilon state, extracted from fits to the dimuon invariant mass spectrum in 19 pT bins and two rapidity intervals. The measurement covers pT from 20 to 200 GeV, with the excited-to-ground-state ratios leveling off for pT above about 55 GeV. The cross sections include feed-down from heavier bottomonia and are quoted assuming unpolarized production, with tables provided to rescale to other polarization scenarios. Numerical values are given in an appendix and a data record.

Load-bearing premise

The central values rest on the assumption that the trigger efficiency for muon pairs that are close in angle and momentum is accurately described by the detector simulation; if the simulation mis-models this inefficiency, the low-pT cross sections could be biased by more than the quoted uncertainty.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The new measurements extend the pT reach of quarkonium cross sections to 200 GeV, roughly doubling the range previously explored.
  • The plateau in the Upsilon(2S)/Upsilon(1S) and Upsilon(3S)/Upsilon(1S) ratios at high pT gives a new observable that global NRQCD fits must reproduce.
  • The near-identical cross sections in the two rapidity intervals indicate that production is fairly flat across midrapidity.
  • The polarization conversion tables allow the results to be adapted to any future polarization measurement without redoing the analysis.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the high-pT plateau persists beyond 200 GeV, it would suggest that the three Upsilon states share a common short-distance production mechanism, with binding dynamics almost independent of the radial excitation.
  • The low-pT bins are the most sensitive to the simulation-based correction for the trigger inefficiency; a dedicated data-driven check using well-separated dimuons could either validate or bound the systematic uncertainty.
  • Because the cross sections are inclusive of feed-down, comparisons with theory will need to subtract feed-down from heavier states; a prompt-only extraction would be a natural follow-up.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. This paper reports the first measurement of the Υ(1S), Υ(2S), and Υ(3S) differential production cross sections times the dimuon branching fraction in pp collisions at √s=13.6 TeV, using 37.4 fb⁻¹ of CMS data collected in 2022. The cross sections are measured as a function of pT from 20 to 200 GeV in two rapidity intervals, |y|<0.6 and 0.6<|y|<1.2. Signal yields are extracted from extended maximum likelihood fits to the dimuon invariant mass spectrum; muon efficiencies are measured with tag-and-probe, acceptances are obtained from GEANT4-based simulation with data-driven reweighting checks, and a dedicated correction accounts for L1 trigger inefficiency for close muon pairs. Numerical results are provided in Appendix A and in HEPData. The measurement extends the pT reach of the previous CMS 13 TeV measurement from 100 to 200 GeV and includes feed-down contributions from heavier bottomonia.

Significance. If the result holds, it provides a valuable new reference dataset for NRQCD global fits at a new collision energy and extends the high-pT reach of bottomonium production measurements. The analysis is careful and standard: the fit model is validated with alternative parametrizations, the tag-and-probe efficiencies are data-driven, the acceptance is checked by reweighting simulated spectra to the measured ones, and the systematic uncertainties are broken down by source. The availability of the numerical values in tables and HEPData is a clear strength that facilitates phenomenological reuse.

major comments (1)
  1. [Section 5] The systematic uncertainty on the L1 dimuon trigger inefficiency for close muon pairs is a load-bearing component, reaching about 9% at intermediate pT. The text states that this uncertainty reflects 'potential residual differences' between detector and simulation, but it does not explain how the quoted 1%–9% values are derived from the studies described. The rejection of low-efficiency events is a useful sensitivity check, but it does not validate the MC efficiency itself; the baseline and rejected results can agree while both share a common bias from an inaccurate correction. Please provide a more quantitative description of the uncertainty estimation, and discuss whether a data-driven closure test using single-muon-triggered events could be used to anchor this correction.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 3/6] The text says the cross sections include feed-down from heavier bottomonia, but does not clarify whether non-prompt production from b-hadron decays is also included. Since the analysis does not use displacement requirements, the measurement is presumably inclusive; please state this explicitly.
  2. [Figure 3] The systematic uncertainties in Tables A.1–A.3 are described as fully correlated, yet the ratios in Fig. 3 treat all uncertainties as uncorrelated. Please justify this conservative choice or account for the correlations between the 13.6 TeV and earlier CMS measurements where appropriate.
  3. [Appendix A] The text says the polarization scaling factors in Table A.4 can be interpolated to other polarization scenarios, but the interpolation formula is not given. Specify how the factors scale as a function of λθ (e.g., linear interpolation).
  4. [Section 4] The fixed double-Crystal-Ball shape parameters are said to be validated with data integrated over pT. It would be helpful to show a few fit pull distributions or goodness-of-fit indicators, especially in the highest-pT bins where yields are small.
  5. [Section 5] Minor typographical issues: 'still provide a reasonably good description the data' should read 'description of the data'; the notation for the two rapidity ranges in the L1 uncertainty sentence is ambiguous and should be clarified.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: the cross sections are extracted from data via Eq. (1); the NRQCD curves are explicitly illustrative and no theoretical parameter is fitted to produce the reported numbers.

full rationale

The paper is a cross-section measurement, not a derivation of a predicted quantity. Eq. (1) defines Bd²σ/dydpT as N/(L Δy ΔpT) × 1/ε × 1/A. N is obtained from a fit to the measured dimuon mass spectrum, ε is measured from data with tag-and-probe, and A is from a GEANT4 simulation. None of these inputs is defined in terms of the reported cross section. The only simulation-dependent correction, the L1 dimuon trigger inefficiency for close muon pairs, is neither fitted to the final data nor presented as a prediction: Sec. 5 assigns an uncertainty for "potential residual differences" between detector and MC, and the robustness check that rejects the affected events changes the sample and is not used to define the central values. The NRQCD curves in Fig. 2 are explicitly "shown for illustration" and described as depending on LDME values, feed-down fractions, and polarization scenarios chosen in Ref. [59], so no circularity arises from them. The numerous CMS self-citations document the tag-and-probe technique and previous measurements; they are methodological references, not load-bearing justifications of the measured result. The reported numbers are benchmark data and are self-contained against the data sample; no central claim is forced by definition or by self-citation.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper makes no theoretical claims and introduces no new entities. The only free parameter-like items are fixed fit-shape parameters taken from simulation; they are not fitted to the target cross sections. The main assumptions are standard detector-modeling and polarization assumptions, all stated and evaluated with systematics.

free parameters (1)
  • Fixed double-Crystal-Ball shape parameters = n1=1, n2=2, α1=α2=2, σ2/σ1=1.55, f=0.4
    Chosen from simulation studies (Section 4), not fitted to the data; varied by ±0.5, etc., for systematic checks.
assumptions (6)
  • domain assumption Υ(nS) production is unpolarized for the central acceptance values
    Section 3: default acceptances assume unpolarized production, compatible with available polarization measurements; Table A.4 provides correction factors for other scenarios.
  • domain assumption GEANT4 simulation accurately models the L1 dimuon trigger inefficiency for close muon pairs
    Section 5: the correction factor is taken from simulation and validated only by event rejection within statistical fluctuations.
  • domain assumption Tag-and-probe on Υ(1S) data gives unbiased muon efficiencies
    Section 3: single-muon efficiencies measured from data with tag-and-probe; assumes the method is bias-free in this phase space.
  • domain assumption Signal line-shape parameterization from simulation describes data
    Section 4: double-CB shapes with fixed parameters from MC, validated on data integrated over pT.
  • domain assumption The integrated luminosity of 37.4 fb⁻¹ and its 1.4% uncertainty are correct
    Section 5 references CMS-PAS-LUM-22-001; treated as a global fully correlated uncertainty.
  • domain assumption The combinatorial background is adequately described by a second-order polynomial
    Section 4: alternative exponential and linear models are used to evaluate systematic uncertainties.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Measurement of the $\Upsilon$(1S), $\Upsilon$(2S), and $\Upsilon$(3S) differential cross sections in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13.6 TeV." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MQCXT6L2

@misc{pith2026260120023,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Measurement of the $\Upsilon$(1S), $\Upsilon$(2S), and $\Upsilon$(3S) differential cross sections in pp collisions at $\sqrts$ = 13.6 TeV},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MQCXT6L2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2601.20023}
}
abstract

The production cross sections of the $\Upsilon$(1S), $\Upsilon$(2S), and $\Upsilon$(3S) mesons are measured in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13.6 TeV, using a data sample collected in 2022 by the CMS experiment and corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 37.4 fb$^{-1}$. The measurement is performed in the $\mu^+\mu^-$ decay channels, differentially as a function of transverse momentum in the 20$-$200 GeV range, in the $\lvert y \rvert$ $\lt$ 0.6 and 0.6 $\lt$ $\lvert y \rvert$ $\lt$ 1.2 rapidity intervals.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2601.20023 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Invariant mass distributions of the dimuons measured in two illustrative [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Left: measured pT -differential Υ(1S) (red), Υ(2S) (green), and Υ(3S) (blue) cross sections times the µ +µ − decay branching fractions, per rapidity unit, in the 0–0.6 (filled circles) and 0.6–1.2 (open squares) |y| ranges. For visibility, the Υ(1S) and Υ(2S) values are scaled by factors of 100 and 10, respectively. Right: Corresponding Υ(2S) over Υ(1S) (green) and Υ(3S) over Υ(1S) (blue) ratios, in the 0–0.6 (fille… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Ratios of Υ(1S) cross sections between this measurement, made at √ s = 13.6 TeV, and previous measurements, made at 7 and 13 TeV [29, 30], treating all uncertainties as uncor￾related. For visibility purposes, the data points are slightly displaced in the x axis. ing higher-order terms in the perturbative expansion, etc., so that this specific comparison is only meant to illustrate that the new measurements reported … view at source ↗

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. Measurement of the fragmentation properties of jets containing $\Upsilon$(nS) mesons in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV

    hep-ex 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    First measurement of Upsilon(nS) jet-fragmentation profiles shows data have lower z and higher p_rel^T than PYTHIA 8.240/8.310 with CP1/CP5 tunes.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Heavy quarkonium physics

    Quarkonium Working Group Collaboration, “Heavy quarkonium physics”,CERN Y ellow Reports: Monographs, CERN-2005-005(2005)doi:10.5170/CERN-2005-005, arXiv:hep-ph/0412158

    arXiv 2005

  2. [2]

    Heavy quarkonium: progress, puzzles, and opportunities

    N. Brambilla et al., “Heavy quarkonium: progress, puzzles, and opportunities”,Eur. Phys. J. C71(2011) 1534,doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-010-1534-9, arXiv:1010.5827

    arXiv 2011

  3. [3]

    Rigorous QCD analysis of inclusive annihilation and production of heavy quarkonium

    G. Bodwin, E. Braaten, and P . Lepage, “Rigorous QCD analysis of inclusive annihilation and production of heavy quarkonium”,Phys. Rev. D51(1995) 1125, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.51.1125,arXiv:hep-ph/9407339. [Erratum: doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.55.5853]

    arXiv 1995

  4. [4]

    J/ψproduction in NRQCD: A global analysis of yield and polarization

    M. Butensch ¨on and B. A. Kniehl, “J/ψproduction in NRQCD: A global analysis of yield and polarization”,Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl.222(2012) 151, doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysbps.2012.03.016,arXiv:1201.3862

    arXiv 2012

  5. [5]

    J/ψpolarization at hadron colliders in nonrelativistic QCD

    K.-T. Chao et al., “J/ψpolarization at hadron colliders in nonrelativistic QCD”,Phys. Rev. Lett.108(2012) 242004,doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.242004, arXiv:1201.2675

    arXiv 2012

  6. [6]

    Next-to-leading-order tests of NRQCD factorization with J/ψyield and polarization

    M. Butensch ¨on and B. A. Kniehl, “Next-to-leading-order tests of NRQCD factorization with J/ψyield and polarization”,Mod. Phys. Lett. A28(2013) 1350027, doi:10.1142/S0217732313500272,arXiv:1212.2037. References 9

    arXiv 2013

  7. [7]

    Polarization for prompt J/ψandψ(2S) production at the Tevatron and LHC

    B. Gong, L.-P . Wan, J.-X. Wang, and H.-F. Zhang, “Polarization for prompt J/ψandψ(2S) production at the Tevatron and LHC”,Phys. Rev. Lett.110(2013) 042002, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.042002,arXiv:1205.6682

    arXiv 2013

  8. [8]

    Towards the experimental clarification of quarkonium polarization

    P . Faccioli, C. Lourenc ¸o, J. Seixas, and H. W¨ohri, “Towards the experimental clarification of quarkonium polarization”,Eur. Phys. J. C69(2010) 657, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-010-1420-5,arXiv:1006.2738

    arXiv 2010

Show all 59 references
  1. [9]

    J/ψpolarization at Tevatron and LHC: nonrelativistic-QCD factorization at the crossroads

    M. Butensch ¨on and B. A. Kniehl, “J/ψpolarization at Tevatron and LHC: nonrelativistic-QCD factorization at the crossroads”,Phys. Rev. Lett.108(2012) 172002, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.172002,arXiv:1201.1872

    2012 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Quarkonium production in the LHC era: A polarized perspective

    P . Faccioli et al., “Quarkonium production in the LHC era: A polarized perspective”, Phys. Lett. B736(2014) 98,doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2014.07.006, arXiv:1403.3970

    2014 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Fragmentation contributions to hadroproduction of prompt J/ψ,χ cJ , andψ(2S)states

    G. T. Bodwin et al., “Fragmentation contributions to hadroproduction of prompt J/ψ,χ cJ , andψ(2S)states”,Phys. Rev. D93(2016) 034041, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.034041,arXiv:1509.07904

    2016 arXiv

  4. [12]

    From identical S- and P-wavep T spectra to maximally distinct polarizations: probing NRQCD withχstates

    P . Faccioli et al., “From identical S- and P-wavep T spectra to maximally distinct polarizations: probing NRQCD withχstates”,Eur. Phys. J. C78(2018) 268, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-5755-7,arXiv:1802.01106

    2018 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Υ(1S) prompt production at the Tevatron and LHC in nonrelativistic QCD

    K. Wang, Y.-Q. Ma, and K.-T. Chao, “Υ(1S) prompt production at the Tevatron and LHC in nonrelativistic QCD”,Phys. Rev. D85(2012) 114003, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.85.114003,arXiv:1202.6012

    2012 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Complete next-to-leading-order study on the yield and polarization ofΥ(1S,2S,3S) at the Tevatron and LHC

    B. Gong, L.-P . Wan, J.-X. Wang, and H.-F. Zhang, “Complete next-to-leading-order study on the yield and polarization ofΥ(1S,2S,3S) at the Tevatron and LHC”,Phys. Rev. Lett. 112(2014) 032001,doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.112.032001,arXiv:1305.0748

    2014 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Υ(nS) andχ b(nP) production at hadron colliders in nonrelativistic QCD

    H. Han et al., “Υ(nS) andχ b(nP) production at hadron colliders in nonrelativistic QCD”, Phys. Rev. D94(2016) 014028,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.014028, arXiv:1410.8537

    2016 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Prompt and non-prompt J/ψproduction in pp collisions at√s=7 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Prompt and non-prompt J/ψproduction in pp collisions at√s=7 TeV”,Eur. Phys. J. C71(2011) 1575, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1575-8,arXiv:1011.4193

    2011 arXiv

  9. [17]

    J/ψandψ(2S)production in pp collisions at √s=7 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “J/ψandψ(2S)production in pp collisions at √s=7 TeV”,JHEP02 (2012) 011,doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2012)011,arXiv:1111.1557

    2012 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Measurement of J/ψproduction in pp collisions at √s=7 TeV

    LHCb Collaboration, “Measurement of J/ψproduction in pp collisions at √s=7 TeV”, Eur. Phys. J. C71(2011) 1645,doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1645-y, arXiv:1103.0423

    2011 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Rapidity and transverse momentum dependence of inclusive J/ψ production in pp collisions at √s=7 TeV

    ALICE Collaboration, “Rapidity and transverse momentum dependence of inclusive J/ψ production in pp collisions at √s=7 TeV”,Phys. Lett. B704(2011) 442, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2011.09.054,arXiv:1105.0380. [Erratum: doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2012.10.060]

    2011 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Measurement of the production cross-section of ψ(2S)→J/ψ(→µ +µ−)π+π− in pp collisions at √s=7 TeV at ATLAS

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Measurement of the production cross-section of ψ(2S)→J/ψ(→µ +µ−)π+π− in pp collisions at √s=7 TeV at ATLAS”,JHEP09(2014) 079,doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2014)079,arXiv:1407.5532. 10

    2014 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Measurement of J/ψandψ(2S)prompt double-differential cross sections in pp collisions at √s=7 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of J/ψandψ(2S)prompt double-differential cross sections in pp collisions at √s=7 TeV”,Phys. Rev. Lett.114(2015) 191802, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.191802,arXiv:1502.04155

    2015 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Measurement of forward J/ψproduction cross-sections in pp collisions at √s=13 TeV

    LHCb Collaboration, “Measurement of forward J/ψproduction cross-sections in pp collisions at √s=13 TeV”,JHEP10(2015) 172,doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2015)172, arXiv:1509.00771. [Erratum:doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2017)063]

    2015 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Measurement of the differential cross-sections of prompt and non-prompt production of J/ψandψ(2S)in pp collisions at √s=7 and 8 TeV with the ATLAS detector

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Measurement of the differential cross-sections of prompt and non-prompt production of J/ψandψ(2S)in pp collisions at √s=7 and 8 TeV with the ATLAS detector”,Eur. Phys. J. C76(2016) 283, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-4050-8,arXiv:1512.03657

    2016 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Measurement of the production cross-section of J/ψandψ(2S) mesons in pp collisions at √s=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Measurement of the production cross-section of J/ψandψ(2S) mesons in pp collisions at √s=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector”,Eur. Phys. J. C84 (2024) 169,doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-12439-9,arXiv:2309.17177

    2024 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Upsilon production cross section in pp collisions at √s=7 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Upsilon production cross section in pp collisions at √s=7 TeV”, Phys. Rev. D83(2011) 112004,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.83.112004, arXiv:1012.5545

    2011 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Measurement of Upsilon production in pp collisions at√s=7 TeV

    LHCb Collaboration, “Measurement of Upsilon production in pp collisions at√s=7 TeV”,Eur. Phys. J. C72(2012) 2025, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-2025-y,arXiv:1202.6579

    2012 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Measurement of Upsilon production in 7 TeV pp collisions at ATLAS

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Measurement of Upsilon production in 7 TeV pp collisions at ATLAS”,Phys. Rev. D87(2013) 052004,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.87.052004, arXiv:1211.7255

    2013 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Measurement of theΥ(1S),Υ(2S), andΥ(3S) cross sections in pp collisions at √s=7 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of theΥ(1S),Υ(2S), andΥ(3S) cross sections in pp collisions at √s=7 TeV”,Phys. Lett. B727(2013) 101, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2013.10.033,arXiv:1303.5900

    2013 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Measurements of theΥ(1S),Υ(2S), andΥ(3S) differential cross sections in pp collisions at √s=7 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Measurements of theΥ(1S),Υ(2S), andΥ(3S) differential cross sections in pp collisions at √s=7 TeV”,Phys. Lett. B749(2015) 14, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2015.07.037,arXiv:1501.07750

    2015 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Measurement of quarkonium production cross sections in pp collisions at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of quarkonium production cross sections in pp collisions at √s=13 TeV”,Phys. Lett. B780(2018) 251, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2018.02.033,arXiv:1710.11002

    2018 arXiv

  23. [31]

    J/ψpolarization in pp collisions at √s=7 TeV

    ALICE Collaboration, “J/ψpolarization in pp collisions at √s=7 TeV”,Phys. Rev. Lett. 108(2012) 082001,doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.108.082001,arXiv:1111.1630

    2012 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Measurement of the prompt J/ψandψ(2S)polarizations in pp collisions at √s=7 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of the prompt J/ψandψ(2S)polarizations in pp collisions at √s=7 TeV”,Phys. Lett. B727(2013) 381, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2013.10.055,arXiv:1307.6070

    2013 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Measurement of theΥ(1S),Υ(2S), andΥ(3S) polarizations in pp collisions at √s=7 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of theΥ(1S),Υ(2S), andΥ(3S) polarizations in pp collisions at √s=7 TeV”,Phys. Rev. Lett.110(2013) 081802, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.081802,arXiv:1209.2922

    2013 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Measurement of J/ψpolarization in pp collisions at √s=7 TeV

    LHCb Collaboration, “Measurement of J/ψpolarization in pp collisions at √s=7 TeV”, Eur. Phys. J. C73(2013) 2631,doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-013-2631-3, arXiv:1307.6379. References 11

    2013 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Measurement ofψ(2S)polarisation in pp collisions at√s=7 TeV

    LHCb Collaboration, “Measurement ofψ(2S)polarisation in pp collisions at√s=7 TeV”,Eur. Phys. J. C74(2014) 2872, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-014-2872-9,arXiv:1403.1339

    2014 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Constraints on theχ c1 versusχ c2 polarizations in proton-proton collisions at √s=8 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Constraints on theχ c1 versusχ c2 polarizations in proton-proton collisions at √s=8 TeV”,Phys. Rev. Lett.124(2020) 162002, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.162002,arXiv:1912.07706

    2020 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Measurement of the polarizations of prompt and non-prompt J/ψ andψ(2S)mesons produced in pp collisions at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of the polarizations of prompt and non-prompt J/ψ andψ(2S)mesons produced in pp collisions at √s=13 TeV”,Phys. Lett. B858(2024) 139044,doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2024.139044,arXiv:2406.14409

    2024

  30. [38]

    Experimental review of the quarkonium physics at the LHC

    Y. Zhao et al., “Experimental review of the quarkonium physics at the LHC”,Symmetry 17(2025) 1521,doi:10.3390/sym17091521,arXiv:2509.10330

    2025 arXiv

  31. [39]

    HEPData record for this analysis, 2025.doi:10.17182/hepdata.167435.v1

    2025 doi

  32. [40]

    The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC

    CMS Collaboration, “The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC”,JINST3(2008) S08004, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/3/08/S08004

    2008 doi

  33. [41]

    Electron and photon reconstruction and identification with the CMS experiment at the CERN LHC

    CMS Collaboration, “Electron and photon reconstruction and identification with the CMS experiment at the CERN LHC”,JINST16(2021) P05014, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/16/05/P05014,arXiv:2012.06888

    2021 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Performance of the CMS muon detector and muon reconstruction with proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Performance of the CMS muon detector and muon reconstruction with proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV”,JINST13(2018) P06015, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/13/06/P06015,arXiv:1804.04528

    2018 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Description and performance of track and primary-vertex reconstruction with the CMS tracker

    CMS Collaboration, “Description and performance of track and primary-vertex reconstruction with the CMS tracker”,JINST9(2014) P10009, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/9/10/P10009,arXiv:1405.6569

    2014 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Development of the CMS detector for the CERN LHC Run 3

    CMS Collaboration, “Development of the CMS detector for the CERN LHC Run 3”, JINST19(2024) P05064,doi:10.1088/1748-0221/19/05/P05064, arXiv:2309.05466

    2024 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Performance of the CMS Level-1 trigger in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Performance of the CMS Level-1 trigger in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV”,JINST15(2020) P10017, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/15/10/P10017,arXiv:2006.10165

    2020 arXiv

  38. [46]

    The CMS trigger system

    CMS Collaboration, “The CMS trigger system”,JINST12(2017) P01020, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/12/01/P01020,arXiv:1609.02366

    2017 arXiv

  39. [47]

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

    CMS Collaboration, “Performance of the CMS high-level trigger during LHC Run 2”, JINST19(2024) P11021,doi:10.1088/1748-0221/19/11/P11021, arXiv:2410.17038

    2024 arXiv

  40. [48]

    An introduction toPYTHIA8.2

    T. Sj ¨ostrand et al., “An introduction toPYTHIA8.2”,Comput. Phys. Commun.191(2015) 159,doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2015.01.024,arXiv:1410.3012

    2015 arXiv

  41. [49]

    A comprehensive guide to the physics and usage ofPYTHIA8.3

    C. Bierlich et al., “A comprehensive guide to the physics and usage ofPYTHIA8.3”, SciPost Phys. Codebases(2022) 8,doi:10.21468/SciPostPhysCodeb.8, arXiv:2203.11601. 12

    2022 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Extraction and validation of a new set of CMSPYTHIA8 tunes from underlying-event measurements

    CMS Collaboration, “Extraction and validation of a new set of CMSPYTHIA8 tunes from underlying-event measurements”,Eur. Phys. J. C80(2020) 4, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-7499-4,arXiv:1903.12179

    2020 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Parton distributions from high-precision collider data

    NNPDF Collaboration, “Parton distributions from high-precision collider data”,Eur. Phys. J. C77(2017) 663,doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-5199-5, arXiv:1706.00428

    2017 arXiv

  44. [52]

    PHOTOS interface in C++: technical and physics documentation

    N. Davidson, T. Przedzinski, and Z. Wa ¸s, “PHOTOS interface in C++: technical and physics documentation”,Comput. Phys. Commun.199(2016) 86, doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2015.09.013,arXiv:1011.0937

    2016 arXiv

  45. [53]

    GEANT4—a simulation toolkit

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

    2003 doi

  46. [54]

    The RooFit toolkit for data modeling

    W. Verkerke and D. P . Kirkby, “The RooFit toolkit for data modeling”,eConfC0303241 (2003) MOLT007,arXiv:physics/0306116

    2003 arXiv

  47. [55]

    A study of the reactionsψ ′ →γγψ

    M. J. Oreglia, “A study of the reactionsψ ′ →γγψ”. PhD thesis, Stanford University, 1980

    1980

  48. [56]

    Review of particle physics

    Particle Data Group, S. Navas et al., “Review of particle physics”,Phys. Rev. D110 (2024) 030001,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.030001

    2024 doi

  49. [57]

    Luminosity measurement for the 2022 pp data-taking period

    CMS Collaboration, “Luminosity measurement for the 2022 pp data-taking period”, CMS Physics Analysis Summary CMS-PAS-LUM-22-001, 2022

    2022

  50. [58]

    sPlot: a statistical tool to unfold data distributions

    M. Pivk and F. R. Le Diberder, “sPlot: a statistical tool to unfold data distributions”, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A555(2005) 356,doi:10.1016/j.nima.2005.08.106, arXiv:physics/0402083

    2005 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Complete study on polarization ofΥ(nS) hadroproduction at QCD next-to-leading order

    Y. Feng, B. Gong, C.-H. Chang, and J.-X. Wang, “Complete study on polarization ofΥ(nS) hadroproduction at QCD next-to-leading order”,Chin. Phys. C45(2021) 013117, doi:10.1088/1674-1137/abc682,arXiv:2009.03028. A Tables of cross sections and correction factors This appendix col...

    2021 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 3, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.