Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 54 references

Differential cross-section measurements of $D^{\pm}$ and $D_{s}^{\pm}$ meson production in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV with the ATLAS detector

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-11 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper measures inclusive $D^\pm$ and $D_s^\pm$ meson production cross-sections in 13 TeV proton–proton collisions for $12 < p_{\mathrm{T}} < 100$ GeV and $|\eta| < 2.5$, and finds them consistent with next-to-leading-order QCD…

desk verdict A solid new ATLAS charm-production measurement that deserves refereeing; the main caveat is the MC-derived acceptance corrections, which would benefit from a closure test. read the letter →

arxiv 2412.15742 v2 pith:QKVYK4K3 submitted 2024-12-20 hep-ex

ATLAS Collaboration This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-ex
keywords D±mesonD_s±charmproductioncross-section13TeVproton–protoncollisionsgeneral-massvariable-flavour-numberschemeFONLLnon-promptfractionfiducial
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

The paper measures how often $D^\pm$ and $D_s^\pm$ charmed mesons are produced in 13 TeV proton–proton collisions, using the decay chains $D^\pm/D_s^\pm \to \phi(\mu\mu)\pi^\pm$ and reconstructing a two-muon-plus-pion vertex. It reports inclusive (prompt plus non-prompt) differential cross-sections in nine bins of transverse momentum from 12 to 100 GeV and five bins of absolute pseudorapidity below 2.5, based on 137 fb$^{-1}$ of data. The central claim is that the measurements are consistent with next-to-leading-order QCD predictions within the large theoretical uncertainties, with the GM-VFNS prediction tending to lie above the data at high $p_{\mathrm{T}}$. If this is right, the results provide the first differential $D_s^\pm$ measurement from this experiment and the first $D_s^\pm$ data reaching 100 GeV at the LHC, a benchmark for charm-production calculations in an unexplored kinematic range.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the semileptonic decay chain $D^\pm/D_s^\pm \to \phi(\mu\mu)\pi^\pm$, whose clean two-muon signature suppresses the large combinatorial background from hadronic activity. Signal yields come from a simultaneous unbinned fit to the $m_{\mu\mu\pi}$ invariant-mass distribution, with non-relativistic Voigtian peaks for the two mesons and a normalised quadratic-exponential background; the mass difference $m_{D_s^\pm} - m_{D^\pm}$ is constrained to its world-average value. The prompt/non-prompt composition is fixed by a template fit to the pseudo-proper lifetime $\tau = m_{\mu\mu\pi}\,L_{xy}/p_{\mathrm{T}}$, using convolution templates built from exponential, Gaussian, and error-function terms for charm and bottom decays. The cross-section in each bin is $d\sigma/dp_{\mathrm{T}} = S_i / (\int\!\mathcal{L}\,dt\, C_i\, \mathcal{B}\, \Delta_i p_{\mathrm{T}})$, where $S_i$ is the fitted yield, $C_i$ is the MC-derived acceptance-times-efficiency correction reweighted to data kinematics, $\mathcal{B}$ is the decay branching ratio, and $\Delta_i p_{\mathrm{T}}$ is the bin width.

What would settle it

Measure the same fiducial cross-sections in the same kinematic region using independent hadronic decay channels, such as $D^\pm\to K^\mp\pi^\pm\pi^\pm$ and $D_s^\pm\to\phi(K^+K^-)\pi^\pm$, or with separated prompt and non-prompt samples; a disagreement larger than the quoted systematic uncertainties would show that the semileptonic acceptance corrections or the lifetime-template reweighting are biased.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper establishes that charmed-meson production in the visible region $12 < p_{\mathrm{T}} < 100$ GeV, $|\eta| < 2.5$ is described by next-to-leading-order QCD within uncertainties. Signal yields for the two mesons are extracted simultaneously by an unbinned maximum-likelihood fit to the $m_{\mu\mu\pi}$ spectrum, with Voigtian signal shapes, a quadratic-exponential background, and the $D_s^\pm - D^\pm$ mass difference constrained by a Gaussian penalty. The conversion from yields to cross-sections applies bin-by-bin acceptance and efficiency corrections computed from simulated events, with the simulation reweighted to match the measured non-prompt fraction and the data $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ spectrum. The fiducial cross-section for $D^\pm$ in $12 < p_{\mathrm{T}} < 100$ GeV, $|\eta|<2.5$ is measured at about 10.8 $\mu$b with total uncertainties near 14–20 percent, and for $D_s^\pm$ at about 5.0 $\mu$b; GM-VFNS agrees for both, FONLL agrees for $D^\pm$, and no FONLL prediction exists for $D_s^\pm$.

Load-bearing premise

The whole correction chain stands on the simulated events used to compute acceptance and efficiency: if, after reweighting, they do not reproduce the real detector response and the true mix of promptly produced and bottom-decay-produced $D$ mesons, the measured cross-sections are biased by more than the quoted uncertainties.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The $D_s^\pm$ differential cross-section becomes available for the first time from this experiment, and $D^\pm$ and $D_s^\pm$ data now extend to $p_{\mathrm{T}} = 100$ GeV, beyond the reach of earlier $D_s^\pm$ measurements.
  • The agreement with GM-VFNS and FONLL gives a quantitative validation of next-to-leading-order charm production in the visible region, while the high-$p_{\mathrm{T}}$ tendency of GM-VFNS to sit above the data identifies where scale and fragmentation uncertainties should be revisited.
  • The measured 13-to-7 TeV ratio of fiducial cross-sections is consistent with both theoretical predictions, supporting the predicted energy scaling of charm production.
  • The published cross-sections provide a normalisation for physics analyses that count heavy-hadron decays as signal or background, including searches for lepton-flavour-violating $\tau$ decays.

Reading between the lines

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

  • Because many scale and PDF uncertainties cancel, the $D_s^\pm/D^\pm$ cross-section ratio as a function of $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ would test fragmentation and strangeness-suppression effects more sharply than the absolute rates, and the paper's tables make that ratio directly computable.
  • If the GM-VFNS high-$p_{\mathrm{T}}$ tendency is real rather than a scale-uncertainty artefact, it would point to missing physics in the massive- versus massless-scheme matching; a future FONLL prediction for $D_s^\pm$ would settle whether the same trend appears in both schemes.
  • The non-prompt fractions extracted here carry large uncertainties and are explicitly not compared with theory; a dedicated prompt/non-prompt separation in the same kinematic range would show whether the inclusive agreement hides compensating discrepancies between charm and bottom contributions.
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. This paper reports measurements of the inclusive and differential production cross-sections of D± and D_s± mesons at sqrt(s)=13 TeV using 137 fb^-1 of ATLAS data, reconstructed in the decay channel D±/D_s± -> phi(mu mu) pi± in the range 12 < pT < 100 GeV and |eta| < 2.5. The yields are extracted from unbinned fits to the mu-mu-pi invariant mass, and the non-prompt fraction is constrained by a pseudo-proper-lifetime template fit. The differential cross-sections as functions of pT and |eta| are compared with GM-VFNS and FONLL predictions, and fiducial inclusive cross-sections are given for several pT thresholds. The central claim is that the NLO predictions are consistent with the data within the large theoretical uncertainties, with the caveat of a trend toward a high-pT deviation.

Significance. If the measurement is correct, this is the first ATLAS differential D_s± cross-section measurement and the first LHC D_s± measurement up to pT=100 GeV, extending the kinematic reach of charm-production data in a region where GM-VFNS and FONLL predictions differ non-negligibly. The paper is careful to quote statistical, systematic, and branching-ratio uncertainties separately and to document the fit models and the propagation of the non-prompt fraction uncertainty. These features make the result useful for testing heavy-quark production calculations and fragmentation-function inputs, even though no public code or closure-test suite is provided.

major comments (3)
  1. [§5.3 Eq. (4), §6 Kinematics] The correction factors C_i and C_j in Eq. (4) are computed bin-by-bin from Pythia8 LO MC events whose pT spectrum is reweighted to the distribution extracted from data (Section 6, 'Kinematics'), and the quoted systematic propagates only the statistical uncertainty of the data spectrum. Because the average efficiency in a bin is sensitive to the assumed true pT shape, and the 12–15 GeV bin lies in the steep trigger-efficiency turn-on, a residual difference between the reweighted MC shape and the true shape would bias all C_i and hence all central cross-section values. No closure test is reported that demonstrates the correction procedure recovers a known input spectrum. Please add such a closure test (or an alternative efficiency estimate from a second generator) and/or a shape systematic that covers the within-bin model dependence.
  2. [Abstract and §7, Table 5] The abstract states that the predictions 'are found to be consistent with the measurements in the visible kinematic region within the large theoretical uncertainties,' but Table 5 shows the D_s± 80<pT<100 GeV bin at 8.1±0.9(stat)±0.9(syst)±0.6(BR) compared with GM-VFNS 13.8(+0.8,−1.1), a discrepancy of roughly 3 standard deviations. The conclusion's 'slightly deviation towards high-pT regions' is closer to the data. Please qualify the consistency claim to reflect the high-pT trend, or discuss why this bin should not be interpreted as a tension.
  3. [§5.2 Eq. (3), §6 Non-prompt] The non-prompt fraction f_NP is obtained from a template fit in which all shape parameters of the prompt and non-prompt lifetime templates are fixed to MC values (Eq. (3)), and Section 6 propagates only the statistical uncertainty of f_NP to the acceptance corrections. No systematic is assigned for the template shapes themselves (e.g., the B-meson lifetime component, the resolution smearing, or the turn-on parameters), although a bias in f_NP would alter the prompt/non-prompt mixture used to reweight the MC and thus C_i/C_j. Please include a template-shape systematic or demonstrate quantitatively that the resulting change in the correction factors is negligible.
minor comments (4)
  1. [§5.2 (text after Fig. 3)] The sentence 'The statistical uncertainties for D± mesons are larger than those for D_s± mesons. This is due to the lower yield ...' is inconsistent with the yields in Fig. 1 (D±: 68350, D_s±: 21780); the lower-yield explanation should be corrected or removed.
  2. [§6 Kinematics] The description of the reweighting is ambiguous: it is not stated whether the data spectrum used for reweighting is the reconstructed spectrum or an efficiency-corrected and unfolded spectrum. Please state this explicitly in the text.
  3. [Eq. (5)] The phrasing 'as the uncertainties of the world average branching ratios ... combined are better than the branching ratio of D_s±→φπ±' is awkward and should be reworded for clarity.
  4. [Figure 8 caption] In the ratio panels, the theory uncertainties are shown as hatched bands but it is not stated whether the data points include statistical only or total uncertainties; please clarify in the caption.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the measured cross-sections are data yields corrected by MC efficiencies and compared with external QCD predictions; no prediction reduces to a fitted input or self-citation.

full rationale

The paper measures D± and D_s± differential cross-sections by dividing extracted data yields by MC-derived acceptance-and-efficiency factors C_i and C_j, together with external branching fractions and luminosity (Eq. 4). The only data-derived auxiliary quantity, the non-prompt fraction f_NP, is obtained from a lifetime template fit (Section 5.2) and is used solely to reweight the MC simulation used for the efficiency corrections; the paper explicitly states that no interpretation or comparison with theoretical predictions is made using f_NP. The theory predictions (GM-VFNS, FONLL) are external calculations by other authors (Refs. [1,32-37]), not derived from the data or from ATLAS self-citations. The MC reweighting to the data pT spectrum is a standard efficiency-correction technique and does not make the measured cross-section equal to the MC input: the reweighted MC is used only to compute the correction factors, while yields, luminosity, and branching ratios are independent data or PDG inputs. No equation in the paper reduces the final cross-section, or any theory prediction, to a fitted parameter or to a self-citation. The absence of a reported closure test for the bin-by-bin MC corrections is a systematic-uncertainty concern, not evidence of circularity. Therefore no circular step can be exhibited.

Assumptions & free parameters 1 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The measurement does not introduce new physics entities. Its central claim rests on a chain of modeling assumptions: the detector simulation, the MC generator kinematics, the branching ratios, and the lifetime template shapes, all of which are either corrected with data or assigned systematic uncertainties. The only explicitly fitted quantity used in the correction chain is the non-prompt fraction f_NP.

free parameters (1)
  • Non-prompt fraction f_NP = Approximately 0.05-0.20 depending on pT bin (Figure 3)
    Fitted from data using MC lifetime templates in three pT bins (Section 5.2); used to reweight MC events for the efficiency correction, so the central cross-section values depend on this fit.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The Geant4-based ATLAS detector simulation correctly models muon and track reconstruction efficiencies, trigger efficiencies, and resolutions.
    Section 3 states simulated events are processed through full detector simulation; Section 6 assigns systematic uncertainties for muon, tracking, trigger, pile-up, but the central correction factors rely on the simulation being accurate.
  • domain assumption Pythia8 with LO matrix elements and NNPDF2.3lo PDFs provides a reliable model for charm and bottom production kinematics after the applied reweighting.
    Section 3: 'simulation was performed using leading-order matrix elements' and 'the relative contributions in simulated events are constrained to match the data.' The efficiency corrections depend on the MC fiducial distributions.
  • domain assumption The world-average branching ratios for the D± to phi pi± and D_s± to phi(K+K-)pi± decay chains are correct.
    Eq. (5) uses branching ratios from Ref. [3] (PDG); the cross-sections scale with these values.
  • domain assumption The pseudo-proper-lifetime templates (convolutions of exponentials, Gaussians, and error functions) describe the true prompt and non-prompt lifetime distributions in data.
    Section 5.2 fits these templates to MC and then to data to extract f_NP; if the functional form is wrong, the non-prompt fraction is biased.
  • standard math Standard maximum-likelihood fitting and the Voigtian convolution are valid statistical tools for the invariant mass fit.
    Section 5.1 uses unbinned maximum likelihood; this is standard statistical inference.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Differential cross-section measurements of $D^{\pm}$ and $D_{s}^{\pm}$ meson production in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV with the ATLAS detector." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/QKVYK4K3

@misc{pith2026241215742,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Differential cross-section measurements of $D^\pm$ and $D_s^\pm$ meson production in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrts = 13$ TeV with the ATLAS detector},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/QKVYK4K3}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2412.15742}
}
abstract

The production of $D^{\pm}$ and $D_{s}^{\pm}$ charmed mesons is measured using the $D^{\pm}/D_{s}^{\pm} \to \phi(\mu\mu)\pi^{\pm}$ decay channel with 137 fb$^{-1}$ of $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV proton-proton collision data collected with the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider during the years 2016-2018. The charmed mesons are reconstructed in the range of transverse momentum $12 < p_\mathrm{T} < 100$ GeV and pseudorapidity $|\eta| < 2.5$. The differential cross-sections are measured as a function of transverse momentum and pseudorapidity, and compared with next-to-leading-order QCD predictions. The predictions are found to be consistent with the measurements in the visible kinematic region within the large theoretical uncertainties.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

54 extracted references · 2 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    B. A. Kniehl, G. Kramer, I. Schienbein and H. Spiesberger, Reconciling open charm production at the Fermilab Tevatron with QCD, Phys. Rev. Lett.96(2006) 012001, arXiv:hep-ph/0508129

    arXiv 2006

  2. [2]

    B. A. Kniehl, G. Kramer, I. Schienbein and H. Spiesberger, Inclusive charmed-meson production at the CERN LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C72(2012) 2082, arXiv: 1202.0439 [hep-ph]

    arXiv 2012

  3. [3]

    Navas et al.,Review of particle physics, Phys

    S. Navas et al.,Review of particle physics, Phys. Rev. D110 (2024) 030001

    work page 2024

  4. [4]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Prospects for lepton flavour violation measurements in𝜏→ 3𝜇 decays with the ATLAS detector at the HL-LHC, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2018-032, 2018, url: https://cds.cern.ch/record/2647956

    work page arXiv 2018

  5. [5]

    Evans and P

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

    2008

  6. [6]

    ALICE Collaboration, Charm production and fragmentation fractions at midrapidity in pp collisions at√s = 13 TeV, JHEP12(2023) 086, arXiv:2308.04877 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2023

  7. [7]

    ALICE Collaboration, Measurement of beauty-quark production in pp collisions at√𝑠 = 13 TeV via non-prompt D mesons, JHEP10(2024) 110, arXiv:2402.16417 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2024

  8. [8]

    ALICE Collaboration, Measurement of charm production at central rapidity in proton-proton collisions at√𝑠= 2.76TeV, JHEP07(2012) 191, arXiv:1205.4007 [hep-ex]. 23

    arXiv 2012

Show all 54 references
  1. [9]

    ALICE Collaboration, Measurement ofD0 , D+ , D∗+ and D+ s production in pp collisions at√s = 5.02TeV with ALICE, Eur. Phys. J. C79(2019) 388, arXiv:1901.07979 [nucl-ex]

    2019 arXiv

  2. [10]

    ALICE Collaboration, Measurement of D-meson production at mid-rapidity in pp collisions at√𝑠= 7 TeV, Eur. Phys. J. C77(2017) 550, arXiv:1702.00766 [hep-ex]

    2017 arXiv

  3. [11]

    ALICE Collaboration,Measurement of beauty and charm production in pp collisions at√𝑠 = 5.02 TeV via non-prompt and prompt D mesons, JHEP05(2021) 220, arXiv:2102.13601 [nucl-ex]

    2021 arXiv

  4. [12]

    CMS Collaboration, Measurement of prompt open-charm production cross sections in proton–proton collisions at√𝑠= 13TeV, JHEP11(2021) 225, arXiv:2107.01476 [hep-ex]

    2021 arXiv

  5. [13]

    LHCb Collaboration, Measurements of prompt charm production cross-sections in𝑝𝑝 collisions at√𝑠= 13 TeV, JHEP03(2016) 159, arXiv:1510.01707 [hep-ex]

    2016 arXiv

  6. [14]

    LHCb Collaboration, Measurements of prompt charm production cross-sections in pp collisions at√𝑠= 5 TeV, JHEP06(2017) 147, arXiv:1610.02230 [hep-ex]

    2017 arXiv

  7. [15]

    LHCb Collaboration, Prompt charm production in pp collisions at sqrt(s)=7 TeV, Nucl. Phys. B871 (2013) 1, arXiv:1302.2864 [hep-ex]

    2013 arXiv

  8. [16]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Measurement of𝐷∗±,𝐷± and𝐷± 𝑠 meson production cross sections in𝑝𝑝 collisions at√𝑠= 7TeV with the ATLAS detector, Nucl. Phys. B907 (2016) 717, arXiv: 1512.02913 [hep-ex]

    2016 arXiv

  9. [17]

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

    2008

  10. [18]

    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

  11. [19]

    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

  12. [20]

    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

  13. [21]

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

    2017 arXiv

  14. [22]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Software and computing for Run 3 of the ATLAS experiment at the LHC, (2024), arXiv:2404.06335 [hep-ex]

    2024 arXiv

  15. [23]

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

    2020 arXiv

  16. [24]

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

    2023 arXiv

  17. [25]

    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]. 24

    2015 arXiv

  18. [26]

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

    2013 arXiv

  19. [27]

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

    2014

  20. [28]

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

    2010 arXiv

  21. [29]

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

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

    2003

  22. [30]

    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]

    2008 arXiv

  23. [31]

    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

  24. [32]

    B. A. Kniehl, G. Kramer, I. Schienbein and H. Spiesberger, Inclusive𝐷∗± production in𝑝𝑝 collisions with massive charm quarks, Phys. Rev. D71 (2005) 014018, arXiv:hep-ph/0410289

    2005 arXiv

  25. [33]

    B. A. Kniehl, G. Kramer, I. Schienbein and H. Spiesberger, Open charm hadroproduction and the charm content of the proton, Phys. Rev. D79 (2009) 094009, arXiv: 0901.4130 [hep-ph]

    2009 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Benzke et al., Prompt neutrinos from atmospheric charm in the general-mass variable-flavor-number scheme, JHEP12(2017) 021, arXiv:1705.10386 [hep-ph]

    M. Benzke et al., Prompt neutrinos from atmospheric charm in the general-mass variable-flavor-number scheme, JHEP12(2017) 021, arXiv:1705.10386 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  27. [35]

    B. A. Kniehl and G. Kramer,𝐷0,𝐷+,𝐷+ 𝑠, andΛ+ 𝑐 fragmentation functions from CERN LEP1, Phys. Rev. D71 (2005) 094013, arXiv:hep-ph/0504058

    2005 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Cacciari, M

    M. Cacciari, M. Greco and P. Nason,The𝑝T spectrum in heavy-flavour hadroproduction, JHEP05(1998) 007, arXiv:hep-ph/9803400

    1998 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Cacciari et al.,Theoretical predictions for charm and bottom production at the LHC, JHEP10(2012) 137, arXiv:1205.6344 [hep-ph]

    M. Cacciari et al.,Theoretical predictions for charm and bottom production at the LHC, JHEP10(2012) 137, arXiv:1205.6344 [hep-ph]

    2012 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Dulat et al., New parton distribution functions from a global analysis of quantum chromodynamics, Phys

    S. Dulat et al., New parton distribution functions from a global analysis of quantum chromodynamics, Phys. Rev. D93(2016) 033006, arXiv:1506.07443 [hep-ph]

    2016 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Kneesch, B

    T. Kneesch, B. A. Kniehl, G. Kramer and I. Schienbein, Charmed-meson fragmentation functions with finite-mass corrections, Nucl. Phys. B799 (2008) 34, arXiv: 0712.0481 [hep-ph]

    2008 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Cacciari, S

    M. Cacciari, S. Frixione and P. Nason,The𝑝T spectrum in heavy-flavour photoproduction, JHEP03(2001) 006, arXiv:hep-ph/0102134

    2001 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Cacciari, M

    M. Cacciari, M. L. Mangano and P. Nason,Gluon PDF constraints from the ratio of forward heavy-quark production at the LHC at √ 𝑆= 7 and 13 TeV, Eur. Phys. J. C75 (2015) 610, arXiv: 1507.06197 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  34. [42]

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

    2015 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Gladilin, Fragmentation fractions of𝑐 and𝑏 quarks into charmed hadrons at LEP, Eur

    L. Gladilin, Fragmentation fractions of𝑐 and𝑏 quarks into charmed hadrons at LEP, Eur. Phys. J. C75(2015) 19, arXiv:1404.3888 [hep-ex]. 25

    2015 arXiv

  36. [44]

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

    2020 arXiv

  37. [45]

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

    2021 arXiv

  38. [46]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Early Inner Detector Tracking Performance in the 2015 Data at√𝑠= 13TeV, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2015-051, 2015,url: https://cds.cern.ch/record/2110140

    2015

  39. [47]

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

    2015

  40. [48]

    Voigt, On the law of intensity distribution within the lines of a gas spectrum, vol

    W. Voigt, On the law of intensity distribution within the lines of a gas spectrum, vol. 1912,25, Meeting reports, Munich, 1912,url: https://publikationen.badw.de/de/003395768

    1912

  41. [49]

    Verkerke and D

    W. Verkerke and D. Kirkby,The RooFit toolkit for data modeling, 2003, arXiv: physics/0306116 [physics.data-an]

    2003 arXiv

  42. [50]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Studies of the muon momentum calibration and performance of the ATLAS detector with𝑝𝑝 collisions at√𝑠= 13TeV, Eur. Phys. J. C83 (2023) 686, arXiv: 2212.07338 [hep-ex]

    2023 arXiv

  43. [51]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Performance of the ATLAS track reconstruction algorithms in dense environments in LHC Run 2, Eur. Phys. J. C77(2017) 673, arXiv:1704.07983 [hep-ex]

    2017 arXiv

  44. [52]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Measurement of upsilon production in7TeV𝑝𝑝 collisions at ATLAS, Phys. Rev. D87 (2013) 052004, arXiv:1211.7255 [hep-ex]

    2013 arXiv

  45. [53]

    A. D. Bukin, Fitting function for asymmetric peaks, (2007), arXiv: 0711.4449 [physics.data-an]

    2007 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Demokritos

    ATLAS Collaboration, ATLAS Computing Acknowledgements, ATL-SOFT-PUB-2025-001, 2025, url: https://cds.cern.ch/record/2922210. 26 The ATLAS Collaboration G. Aad 104, E. Aakvaag 17, B. Abbott 123, S. Abdelhameed 119a, K. Abeling 56, N.J. Abicht 50, S.H. Abidi 30, M. Aboelela 45, ...

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 11, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.