Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 minor 91 references

Search for a resonance in events with four top quarks decaying into two leptons and jets in proton-proton collisions

T0 review · 0 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-14 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Four-top search finds no resonance and sets exclusion limits on a top-philic vector boson.

desk verdict A competent, honest null result that opens the two-lepton channel for four-top resonance searches; the central claim holds, with a disclosed but real caveat on the background normalisation that sets the exact mass reach. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.10148 v1 pith:RBNB5FAN submitted 2026-08-10 hep-ex

CMS Collaboration This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-ex
keywords fourtopquarkstop-philicresonancevectormediatorboostedtaggingvariable-radiusjetsdijetinvariantmass95%confidencelimitsaxion-likeparticle
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

This paper reports a search for a heavy boson that decays to a top-quark pair while being produced together with another top-quark pair, giving events with four top quarks. Using $173\,\text{fb}^{-1}$ of proton-proton collisions at 13 and 13.6 TeV, the CMS Collaboration finds no significant excess over the standard-model background. It sets 95% confidence-level upper limits on the production cross section of vector, scalar, and pseudoscalar mediators with masses between 500 GeV and 4 TeV and relative widths of 4-50%. For the benchmark top-philic vector mediator, resonances with 50% relative width are excluded up to 850 GeV, with an expected exclusion of 1000 GeV. The result is the first dedicated search for these models in the two-lepton channel and the first four-top resonance search to include 13.6 TeV data.

What carries the argument

The mass of the putative resonance is reconstructed as $m_{JJ}$, the invariant mass of the two leading variable-radius jets formed with the HOTVR algorithm, whose distance parameter shrinks as $R_{\text{eff}}=600\,\text{GeV}/p_T$ to follow collimated top-quark decays. A boosted decision tree tags whether each VR jet comes from a hadronically decaying top quark, and the background of misidentified top-tagged jets is estimated from data by transferring events with zero t-tagged VR jets into the two-tagged signal regions using simulation-derived transfer factors, with the overall normalisation corrected in Z-boson control regions. A simultaneous profile-likelihood fit of the $m_{JJ}$ templates in two signal regions and three dilepton channels yields the 95% confidence-level limits via the $CL_s$ criterion.

What would settle it

With the next $100\,\text{fb}^{-1}$ of 13.6 TeV data, count events in SR2b2T near $m_{JJ}\approx500$ GeV: a real 500 GeV resonance would show a growing peak, while a fluctuation would track the transfer-factor background. The transfer assumption itself can be checked by measuring the two-tag correlation in a same-flavour dilepton region outside the Z window and verifying that the control-region correction factor does not change by more than its uncertainty.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper establishes a null result: the dijet invariant mass spectrum in the two-lepton, two-top-tagged signal regions is consistent with the standard-model background, with a background-only $p$-value of 0.21. The largest local deviation is a 2.1 standard deviation excess for a 500 GeV vector mediator with 4% width, with similar deviations of 2.0 and 2.4 standard deviations for scalar and pseudoscalar hypotheses. The paper therefore reports upper limits rather than evidence: for the $\Gamma_{Z'}/m_{Z'}=50\%$ benchmark, $Z'$ bosons are excluded up to 850 GeV, while the observed limits for 10 and 20% widths are weaker than expected and exclude no mediators. Scalar and pseudoscalar mediators are not excluded. These exclusions apply to the resonant $s$-channel contribution only; non-$s$-channel diagrams and interference with standard-model four-top production are not included, as the paper explicitly states.

Load-bearing premise

The background estimate assumes that the residual mismodelling of the correlation between the two top-tagging probabilities, measured in Z-boson control regions and applied as a normalisation correction, is the same in the signal regions; if that correlation differs there, the background yield could shift by about 20% and change the mass reach.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The benchmark top-philic vector mediator with 50% relative width is excluded below 850 GeV, extending the mass reach of earlier four-top searches.
  • Scalar and pseudoscalar mediators are not excluded, so those interpretations remain viable targets for future searches.
  • Variable-radius jets extend sensitivity below 1 TeV mediator mass, a region where fixed-radius top tagging was inefficient.
  • The analysis provides the first four-top resonance limits that include 13.6 TeV data, combining 138 fb${}^{-1}$ at 13 TeV with 35 fb${}^{-1}$ at 13.6 TeV.
  • The ALP reinterpretation sets new upper limits on $c_t/f_A$ in the mass range around 500 GeV to 4 TeV, complementing tt-resonance and missing-transverse-momentum searches.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the mild 2.1σ excess near 500 GeV is real, additional 13.6 TeV data should produce a growing narrow peak in $m_{JJ}$; if it is a fluctuation, the spectrum should continue to follow the transfer-factor background.
  • Because the shown exclusions omit interference with standard-model four-top production, a full top-philic model could be more or less constrained than the benchmark limits suggest, particularly for broad mediators.
  • The same two-lepton plus VR-jet topology could be combined with single-lepton four-top searches, and applied to other resonances such as heavy Higgs bosons, to improve overall coverage of top-philic scenarios.
  • A direct measurement of the correlation between the two top-tagging decisions in a dedicated control region would test the background-transfer assumption and could shrink the roughly 20% normalisation uncertainty that currently dominates the background systematics.
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

0 major / 4 minor

Summary. This paper reports a search for a heavy resonance produced in association with a top-quark pair and decaying to a top-quark pair, in final states with two opposite-sign leptons and jets, using 138 fb^-1 of 13 TeV and 35 fb^-1 of 13.6 TeV CMS data. The resonance mass is reconstructed from the two leading variable-radius jets, and a boosted decision tree is used to identify hadronically decaying top quarks. The dominant background from misidentified top-tagged jets is estimated from data by transferring zero-tagged events in transfer regions to two-tagged signal regions using simulation-derived transfer factors, with normalisation corrections obtained from Z-boson control regions. A simultaneous profile-likelihood fit to the dijet invariant mass finds no significant excess (background-only p-value 0.21), and 95% CL upper limits are set on ttZ', ttphi, and tta production cross sections for mediator masses from 500 GeV to 4 TeV and relative widths from 4% to 50%. For the vector benchmark with 50% relative width, observed exclusion reaches 850 GeV, compared with 1000 GeV expected. Local significances of 2.1-2.4 standard deviations are observed for the 500 GeV signal hypotheses and are attributed to statistical fluctuations.

Significance. If the result holds, this is the first dedicated two-lepton four-top-resonance search and it extends sensitivity below 1 TeV using variable-radius jets; it also provides a new reinterpretation of the results in terms of axion-like particles. The paper's strengths include a data-driven background estimate with dedicated transfer and control regions, a profile-likelihood fitting procedure with CLs limits, a documented treatment of systematic uncertainties including a dedicated 20% flavour-composition uncertainty, and a public HEPData record. The central null result is robust. The main caveat, explicitly acknowledged in Section 5, is that the normalisation corrections measured in the Z+jets-dominated CR2J region are transferred to the b-enriched signal regions under an assumption about the similarity of top-tagging correlation mismodelling; the paper states this assumption and assigns a dedicated 20% uncertainty, so I do not regard this as undermining the central claim that no significant excess is observed. The exact mass reach of the exclusions is conditional on this modelling assumption, but that is a standard feature of searches of this type.

minor comments (4)
  1. [Section 4.4 / Table 1] The region names SR1b2T and SR2b2T are initially easy to misread; although Table 1 defines n_b and n_t, a one-line clarification in the text that 'b2T' denotes the b-jet multiplicity plus the requirement of at least two t-tagged VR jets would improve readability.
  2. [Section 5] The correction factors for the e±mu∓ channel are set to the geometric mean of the e+e- and mu+mu- factors, but no validation of this approximation is shown; a sentence describing the systematic uncertainty assigned to this choice, or a closure check in the e±mu∓ control region, would make the procedure more complete.
  3. [Section 5 / Figure 4] The goodness-of-fit of the constant functions in Figure 4 is reported only as chi2/ndf ≲ 1; quoting the individual chi2/ndf values would be more quantitative and would help readers assess the quality of the normalisation corrections.
  4. [Figure 6] The legend entry 'Theory 95% CL upper limits' in Figure 6 appears to conflate the theoretical cross-section curve with the 95% CL limit curves; please relabel the theory line and the limit curves separately to avoid confusion.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the signal-region background is estimated from orthogonal transfer and Z-boson control regions, not from a fit to the signal region, so the null result and limits are not self-referential.

full rationale

The central claim (no significant excess; 95% CL limits on ttZ', ttphi, and tta cross sections) is derived from a simultaneous maximum-likelihood fit to the SR m_JJ templates. The dominant background is not obtained by fitting the SR itself: Section 5 estimates it from zero-tagged TR data using simulation-derived transfer factors, with genuine-hadronic-top events subtracted and a normalisation correction measured in the Z-mass-window CR2J regions. CR2J and the SRs are disjoint (CR2J selects 80 < m_ll < 101 GeV and does not require b-tagged AK4 jets, while the SRs veto that window and require at least one or two b-tagged jets), so the correction factors are not fit to the same data they are used to predict. The paper's explicit caveat that the correction-factor transfer 'assumes that the residual mismodelling of the correlation between the two t-tagging probabilities is sufficiently similar in the CRs and SRs' is a modelling assumption, not a circular reduction; Section 6 assigns a dedicated about 20% normalisation uncertainty for the b-quark-composition difference. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, no uniqueness claim is imported from author self-citation, and the signal samples and transfer factors use standard external generators and calibrations. The observed excess (84 events vs 61.5 expected pre-fit) is reported and the limits are weakened accordingly, indicating that the analysis does not force agreement by construction.

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

No ad hoc free parameters or new entities are introduced. The Z', scalar, pseudoscalar, and ALP mediators are existing model benchmarks from the cited literature. The analysis depends on standard collider assumptions about simulation, transfer-factor background estimation, and asymptotic statistics; the most fragile is the control-region to signal-region transfer of t-tagging correlation corrections.

assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption Transfer factors computed in simulation can map events with zero t-tagged VR jets to events with two t-tagged VR jets.
    Section 5; the data-driven background estimate is built from this mapping, and the paper finds a residual normalisation mismatch that it corrects with control-region factors.
  • domain assumption The residual mismodelling of the correlation between the two t-tagging probabilities is sufficiently similar in the control regions and the signal regions.
    Section 5; the control-region normalisation corrections are applied to signal regions. The paper assigns a 20% normalisation uncertainty for differences in flavour composition.
  • domain assumption Signal simulation restricted to s-channel tt+X production with no interference with SM four-top production is adequate for the benchmark interpretation.
    Section 3; authors state non-s-channel diagrams and interference are neglected, can be substantial, and limits apply only to this benchmark.
  • standard math Asymptotic formulae for the profile-likelihood test statistic are valid for the CLs limits.
    Section 7; standard LHC practice, but with low event counts per mJJ bin the asymptotic approximation is an approximation rather than an exact coverage guarantee.
  • domain assumption Simulated samples describe the detector response and jet substructure after data-derived scale factors.
    Sections 3 and 4.5; top-tagging BDT scale factors are derived from a tt-enriched region and applied to simulation.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Search for a resonance in events with four top quarks decaying into two leptons and jets in proton-proton collisions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RBNB5FAN

@misc{pith2026260810148,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Search for a resonance in events with four top quarks decaying into two leptons and jets in proton-proton collisions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RBNB5FAN}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.10148}
}
abstract

A search for a heavy resonance in events containing four top quarks is presented and interpreted in models featuring a new vector, scalar, or pseudoscalar boson that interacts exclusively with top quarks. Proton-proton collision data collected by the CMS experiment at the CERN LHC at centre-of-mass energies of 13 and 13.6 TeV are analysed, corresponding to integrated luminosities of 138 and 35 fb$^{-1}$, respectively. Events with two leptons (electrons or muons) and jets are selected. The mass of the heavy resonance is reconstructed from a pair of jets that are formed using a variable-radius jet clustering algorithm. A machine-learning approach is used to identify whether these jets originate from top quarks that decay fully hadronically. The dominant background from misidentified jets is estimated from data as a function of the dijet invariant mass. No significant excess is observed in data. Upper limits at 95% confidence level are set on the resonance production cross section for resonance masses between 500 GeV and 4 TeV, and relative widths ranging from 4 to 50%. In the vector-mediator benchmark, resonances with 50% relative width are excluded up to masses of 850 GeV, with an expected exclusion limit of 1000 GeV. This is the first dedicated search for these models in the two lepton channel.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.10148 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The ttϕ and tta processes yield the same topology, with the Z′ boson replaced with a mediator ϕ or a, respectively. We analyse pp collision data at √ s = 13 TeV (2016–2018) and 13.6 TeV (2022), corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 138 fb−1 and 35 fb−1 , respectively. A novelty is the reconstruction of mZ′ from a pair of jets formed using a variable-radius jet clustering algorithm (VR jets) [27, 28], which ex… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Data-to-simulation scale factors for the BDT classifier to identify t jets in bins of VR [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Distributions of the BDT classifier score in regions enriched in Z/ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (7 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Observed and estimated mJJ distributions in CR2J2T for e+e − (left) and µ +µ − (right) events for the 2016–2018 data-taking periods (upper row) and the 2022 data-taking period (lower row). The points for the background prediction (red) include the contribution from had…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The background-only post-fit distribution of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Expected and observed upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the t [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_6.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Also shown are the exclusions from tt resonance searches, taken from the CMS search for pseudoscalar resonances in √ s = 13 TeV data collected in 2016–2018 [22], and a limit on ALPs below tt threshold, taken from the CMS search for tt and single top quark production in…
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Expected and observed upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the t [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_7.png]
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Expected and observed upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the t [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p020_8.png]
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: Expected (dashed lines) and observed (solid lines, shaded areas) upper limits at [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_9.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

91 extracted references · 7 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Observation of four-top-quark production in the multilepton final state with the ATLAS detector

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Observation of four-top-quark production in the multilepton final state with the ATLAS detector”,Eur. Phys. J. C83(2023) 496, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-023-11573-0,arXiv:2303.15061. [Erratum: doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-12458-6]

    arXiv 2023

  2. [2]

    Observation of four top quark production in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Observation of four top quark production in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV”,Phys. Lett. B847(2023) 138290, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2023.138290,arXiv:2305.13439

    arXiv 2023

  3. [3]

    Dark matter

    M. Cirelli, A. Strumia, and J. Zupan, “Dark matter”, 2024.arXiv:2406.01705

    arXiv 2024

  4. [4]

    Particle dark matter: Evidence, candidates and constraints

    G. Bertone, D. Hooper, and J. Silk, “Particle dark matter: Evidence, candidates and constraints”,Phys. Rept.405(2005) 279,doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2004.08.031, arXiv:hep-ph/0404175

    arXiv 2005

  5. [5]

    A direct empirical proof of the existence of dark matter

    D. Clowe et al., “A direct empirical proof of the existence of dark matter”,Astrophys. J. Lett.648(2006) L109,doi:10.1086/508162,arXiv:astro-ph/0608407

    arXiv 2006

  6. [6]

    Dynamics of spontaneous symmetry breaking in the Weinberg-Salam theory

    L. Susskind, “Dynamics of spontaneous symmetry breaking in the Weinberg-Salam theory”,Phys. Rev. D20(1979) 2619,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.20.2619

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.20.2619 1979

  7. [7]

    Evidence for four-top quark production in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Evidence for four-top quark production in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV”,Phys. Lett. B844(2023) 138076, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2023.138076,arXiv:2303.03864

    work page arXiv 2023

  8. [8]

    Measurement of the t tt t production cross section in pp collisions at √s=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Measurement of the t tt t production cross section in pp collisions at √s=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector”,JHEP11(2021) 118, doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2021)118,arXiv:2106.11683. 22

    arXiv 2021

Show all 91 references
  1. [9]

    Model-independent production of a top-philic resonance at the LHC

    N. Greiner et al., “Model-independent production of a top-philic resonance at the LHC”, JHEP04(2015) 029,doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2015)029,arXiv:1410.6099

    2015 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Probing TeV scale top-philic resonances with boosted top-tagging at the high luminosity LHC

    J. H. Kim, K. Kong, S. J. Lee, and G. Mohlabeng, “Probing TeV scale top-philic resonances with boosted top-tagging at the high luminosity LHC”,Phys. Rev. D94(2016) 035023, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.035023,arXiv:1604.07421

    2016 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Theory and phenomenology of two-Higgs-doublet models

    G. C. Branco et al., “Theory and phenomenology of two-Higgs-doublet models”,Phys. Rept.516(2012) 1,doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2012.02.002,arXiv:1106.0034

    2012 arXiv

  4. [12]

    A theory of spontaneousTviolation

    T. D. Lee, “A theory of spontaneousTviolation”,Phys. Rev. D8(1973) 1226, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.8.1226

    1973 doi

  5. [13]

    CP conservation in the presence of pseudoparticles

    R. D. Peccei and H. R. Quinn, “CP conservation in the presence of pseudoparticles”, Phys. Rev. Lett.38(1977) 1440,doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.38.1440

    1977 doi

  6. [14]

    Constraints imposed by CP conservation in the presence of pseudoparticles

    R. D. Peccei and H. R. Quinn, “Constraints imposed by CP conservation in the presence of pseudoparticles”,Phys. Rev. D16(1977) 1791,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.16.1791

    1977 doi

  7. [15]

    Problem of strongPandTinvariance in the presence of instantons

    F. Wilczek, “Problem of strongPandTinvariance in the presence of instantons”,Phys. Rev. Lett.40(1978) 279,doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.40.279

    1978 doi

  8. [16]

    Top-philic ALP phenomenology at the LHC: The elusive mass-window

    S. Blasi et al., “Top-philic ALP phenomenology at the LHC: The elusive mass-window”, JHEP06(2024) 077,doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2024)077,arXiv:2311.16048

    2024 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Novel collider and dark matter phenomenology of a top-philic Z′

    P . Cox, A. D. Medina, T. S. Ray, and A. Spray, “Novel collider and dark matter phenomenology of a top-philic Z′”,JHEP06(2016) 110, doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2016)110,arXiv:1512.00471

    2016 arXiv

  10. [18]

    LHC Dark Matter Working Group: Next-generation spin-0 dark matter models

    LHC Dark Matter Working Group Collaboration, “LHC Dark Matter Working Group: Next-generation spin-0 dark matter models”,Phys. Dark Univ.27(2020) 100351, doi:10.1016/j.dark.2019.100351,arXiv:1810.09420

    2020

  11. [19]

    Axion-like particles as mediators for dark matter: Beyond freeze-out

    A. Bharucha, F. Br ¨ummer, N. Desai, and S. Mutzel, “Axion-like particles as mediators for dark matter: Beyond freeze-out”,JHEP02(2023) 141, doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2023)141,arXiv:2209.03932

    2023 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Search for t t resonances in fully hadronic final states in pp collisions at √s=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Search for t t resonances in fully hadronic final states in pp collisions at √s=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector”,JHEP10(2020) 061, doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2020)061,arXiv:2005.05138

    2020 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Search for heavy neutral Higgs bosons decaying into a top quark pair in 140 fb−1 of proton-proton collision data at √s=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Search for heavy neutral Higgs bosons decaying into a top quark pair in 140 fb−1 of proton-proton collision data at √s=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector”, JHEP08(2024) 013,doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2024)013,arXiv:2404.18986

    2024 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Search for heavy pseudoscalar and scalar bosons decaying to a top quark pair in proton–proton collisions at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Search for heavy pseudoscalar and scalar bosons decaying to a top quark pair in proton–proton collisions at √s=13 TeV”,Rept. Prog. Phys.88(2025) 127801,doi:10.1088/1361-6633/ae2207,arXiv:2507.05119

    2025

  15. [23]

    Search for new particles decaying into top quark-antiquark pairs in proton-proton collisions at √s= 13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Search for new particles decaying into top quark-antiquark pairs in proton-proton collisions at √s= 13 TeV”, 2026.arXiv:2603.23454. Submitted to JHEP

    2026

  16. [24]

    Search for dark matter produced in association with one or two top quarks in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Search for dark matter produced in association with one or two top quarks in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV”,JHEP08(2025) 085, doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2025)085,arXiv:2505.05300. References 23

    2025 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Search for top-philic heavy resonances in pp collisions at√s=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Search for top-philic heavy resonances in pp collisions at√s=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector”,Eur. Phys. J. C84(2024) 157, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-023-12318-9,arXiv:2304.01678

    2024 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Search for a top-philic Z ′ boson decaying into a tt pair in a final state with jets and an electron or muon in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Search for a top-philic Z ′ boson decaying into a tt pair in a final state with jets and an electron or muon in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV”, 2026. arXiv:2608.01251. Submitted to JHEP

    2026 arXiv

  19. [27]

    A new tagger for hadronically decaying heavy particles at the LHC

    T. Lapsien, R. Kogler, and J. Haller, “A new tagger for hadronically decaying heavy particles at the LHC”,Eur. Phys. J. C76(2016) 600, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-4443-8,arXiv:1606.04961

    2016 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Identification of heavy, energetic, hadronically decaying particles using machine-learning techniques

    CMS Collaboration, “Identification of heavy, energetic, hadronically decaying particles using machine-learning techniques”,JINST15(2020) P06005, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/15/06/P06005,arXiv:2004.08262

    2020 arXiv

  21. [29]

    HEPData record for this analysis, 2026.doi:10.17182/hepdata.170073

    2026 doi

  22. [30]

    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

  23. [31]

    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

    2024 doi

  24. [32]

    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

  25. [33]

    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

  26. [34]

    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

  27. [35]

    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

  28. [36]

    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

  29. [37]

    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

  30. [38]

    Particle-flow reconstruction and global event description with the CMS detector

    CMS Collaboration, “Particle-flow reconstruction and global event description with the CMS detector”,JINST12(2017) P10003,doi:10.1088/1748-0221/12/10/P10003, arXiv:1706.04965

    2017 arXiv

  31. [39]

    The anti-kT jet clustering algorithm

    M. Cacciari, G. P . Salam, and G. Soyez, “The anti-kT jet clustering algorithm”,JHEP04 (2008) 063,doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2008/04/063,arXiv:0802.1189. 24

    2008 arXiv

  32. [40]

    FastJet user manual

    M. Cacciari, G. P . Salam, and G. Soyez, “FastJet user manual”,Eur. Phys. J. C72(2012) 1896,doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1896-2,arXiv:1111.6097

    2012 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Jet energy scale and resolution in the CMS experiment in pp collisions at 8 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Jet energy scale and resolution in the CMS experiment in pp collisions at 8 TeV”,JINST12(2017) P02014, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/12/02/P02014,arXiv:1607.03663

    2017 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Pileup mitigation at CMS in 13 TeV data

    CMS Collaboration, “Pileup mitigation at CMS in 13 TeV data”,JINST15(2020) P09018, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/15/09/p09018,arXiv:2003.00503

    2020 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Pileup per particle identification

    D. Bertolini, P . Harris, M. Low, and N. Tran, “Pileup per particle identification”,JHEP10 (2014) 059,doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2014)059,arXiv:1407.6013

    2014 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Jet algorithms performance in 13 TeV data

    CMS Collaboration, “Jet algorithms performance in 13 TeV data”, Physics Analysis Summary CMS-PAS-JME-16-003, 2017

    2017

  37. [45]

    Performance of missing transverse momentum reconstruction in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV using the CMS detector

    CMS Collaboration, “Performance of missing transverse momentum reconstruction in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV using the CMS detector”,JINST14(2019) P07004,doi:10.1088/1748-0221/14/07/P07004,arXiv:1903.06078

    2019 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Technical proposal for the Phase-II upgrade of the Compact Muon Solenoid

    CMS Collaboration, “Technical proposal for the Phase-II upgrade of the Compact Muon Solenoid”, CMS Technical Proposal CERN-LHCC-2015-010, CMS-TDR-15-02, 2015

    2015

  39. [47]

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

    J. Alwall et al., “The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations”,JHEP07 (2014) 079,doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2014)079,arXiv:1405.0301

    2014 arXiv

  40. [48]

    A framework for Higgs characterisation

    P . Artoisenet et al., “A framework for Higgs characterisation”,JHEP11(2013) 043, doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2013)043,arXiv:1306.6464

    2013 arXiv

  41. [49]

    A new method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms

    P . Nason, “A new method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms”,JHEP11(2004) 040,doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2004/11/040, arXiv:hep-ph/0409146

    2004 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Matching NLO QCD computations with parton shower simulations: The POWHEG method

    S. Frixione, P . Nason, and C. Oleari, “Matching NLO QCD computations with parton shower simulations: The POWHEG method”,JHEP11(2007) 070, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2007/11/070,arXiv:0709.2092

    2007 arXiv

  43. [51]

    A general framework for implementing NLO calculations in shower Monte Carlo programs: The POWHEG BOX

    S. Alioli, P . Nason, C. Oleari, and E. Re, “A general framework for implementing NLO calculations in shower Monte Carlo programs: The POWHEG BOX”,JHEP06(2010) 043,doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2010)043,arXiv:1002.2581

    2010 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Single-top Wt-channel production matched with parton showers using the POWHEG method

    E. Re, “Single-top Wt-channel production matched with parton showers using the POWHEG method”,Eur. Phys. J. C71(2011) 1547, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1547-z,arXiv:1009.2450

    2011 arXiv

  45. [53]

    A positive-weight next-to-leading-order Monte Carlo for heavy flavour hadroproduction

    S. Frixione, P . Nason, and G. Ridolfi, “A positive-weight next-to-leading-order Monte Carlo for heavy flavour hadroproduction”,JHEP09(2007) 126, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2007/09/126,arXiv:0707.3088

    2007 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Higgs boson production in association with top quarks in the POWHEG BOX

    H. B. Hartanto, B. Jager, L. Reina, and D. Wackeroth, “Higgs boson production in association with top quarks in the POWHEG BOX”,Phys. Rev. D91(2015) 094003, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.91.094003,arXiv:1501.04498. References 25

    2015 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Comparative study of various algorithms for the merging of parton showers and matrix elements in hadronic collisions

    J. Alwall et al., “Comparative study of various algorithms for the merging of parton showers and matrix elements in hadronic collisions”,Eur. Phys. J. C53(2008) 473, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-007-0490-5,arXiv:0706.2569

    2008 arXiv

  48. [56]

    QCD radiation in the production of heavy colored particles at the LHC

    J. Alwall, S. de Visscher, and F. Maltoni, “QCD radiation in the production of heavy colored particles at the LHC”,JHEP02(2009) 017, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2009/02/017,arXiv:0810.5350

    2009 arXiv

  49. [57]

    Top++: A program for the calculation of the top-pair cross-section at hadron colliders

    M. Czakon and A. Mitov, “Top++: A program for the calculation of the top-pair cross-section at hadron colliders”,Comput. Phys. Commun.185(2014) 2930, doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2014.06.021,arXiv:1112.5675

    2014 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Single-top-quark production in thet-channel at NNLO

    J. Campbell, T. Neumann, and Z. Sullivan, “Single-top-quark production in thet-channel at NNLO”,JHEP02(2021) 040,doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2021)040, arXiv:2012.01574

    2021 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Large NLO corrections in t tW ± and ttt t hadroproduction from supposedly subleading EW contributions

    R. Frederix, D. Pagani, and M. Zaro, “Large NLO corrections in t tW ± and ttt t hadroproduction from supposedly subleading EW contributions”,JHEP02(2018) 031, doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2018)031,arXiv:1711.02116

    2018 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Threshold resummation for the production of four top quarks at the LHC

    M. van Beekveld, A. Kulesza, and L. M. Valero, “Threshold resummation for the production of four top quarks at the LHC”,Phys. Rev. Lett.131(2023) 211901, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.211901,arXiv:2212.03259

    2023 arXiv

  53. [61]

    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

  54. [62]

    An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2

    T. Sj ¨ostrand et al., “An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2”,Comput. Phys. Commun.191(2015) 159,doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2015.01.024,arXiv:1410.3012

    2015 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Extraction and validation of a new set of CMS PYTHIA8 tunes from underlying-event measurements

    CMS Collaboration, “Extraction and validation of a new set of CMS PYTHIA8 tunes from underlying-event measurements”,Eur. Phys. J. C80(2020) 4, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-7499-4,arXiv:1903.12179

    2020 arXiv

  56. [64]

    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

  57. [65]

    Performance of the pile up jet identification in CMS for Run 2

    CMS Collaboration, “Performance of the pile up jet identification in CMS for Run 2”, CMS Performance Note CMS-DP-2020-020, 2020

    2020

  58. [66]

    Jet flavour classification using DeepJet

    E. Bols et al., “Jet flavour classification using DeepJet”,JINST15(2020) P12012, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/15/12/P12012,arXiv:2008.10519

    2020 arXiv

  59. [67]

    Identification of heavy-flavour jets with the CMS detector in pp collisions at 13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Identification of heavy-flavour jets with the CMS detector in pp collisions at 13 TeV”,JINST13(2018) P05011, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/13/05/P05011,arXiv:1712.07158

    2018 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Boosted top quarks and jet structure

    S. Sch ¨atzel, “Boosted top quarks and jet structure”,Eur. Phys. J. C75(2015) 415, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-015-3636-x,arXiv:1403.5176

    2015 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Jet substructure at the Large Hadron Collider: A review of recent advances in theory and machine learning

    A. J. Larkoski, I. Moult, and B. Nachman, “Jet substructure at the Large Hadron Collider: A review of recent advances in theory and machine learning”,Phys. Rep.841(2020) 1, doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2019.11.001,arXiv:1709.04464. 26

    2020 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Jet substructure at the Large Hadron Collider: Experimental review

    R. Kogler et al., “Jet substructure at the Large Hadron Collider: Experimental review”, Rev. Mod. Phys.91(2019) 045003,doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.91.045003, arXiv:1803.06991

    2019 arXiv

  63. [71]

    Advances in jet substructure at the LHC: Algorithms, measurements and searches for new physical phenomena

    R. Kogler, “Advances in jet substructure at the LHC: Algorithms, measurements and searches for new physical phenomena”, volume 284 ofSpringer T racts Mod. Phys. Springer, 2021.doi:10.1007/978-3-030-72858-8, ISBN 978-3-030-72857-1, 978-3-030-72858-8

    2021 doi

  64. [72]

    Better jet clustering algorithms

    Y. L. Dokshitzer, G. D. Leder, S. Moretti, and B. R. Webber, “Better jet clustering algorithms”,JHEP08(1997) 001,doi:10.1088/1126-6708/1997/08/001, arXiv:hep-ph/9707323

    1997 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Hadronization corrections to jet cross-sections in deep inelastic scattering

    M. Wobisch and T. Wengler, “Hadronization corrections to jet cross-sections in deep inelastic scattering”, inWorkshop on Monte Carlo Generators for HERA Physics, p. 270. 1998.arXiv:hep-ph/9907280

    1998 arXiv

  66. [74]

    Vetoed jet clustering: The mass-jump algorithm

    M. Stoll, “Vetoed jet clustering: The mass-jump algorithm”,JHEP04(2015) 111, doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2015)111,arXiv:1410.4637

    2015 arXiv

  67. [75]

    Identifying boosted objects with N-subjettiness

    J. Thaler and K. Van Tilburg, “Identifying boosted objects with N-subjettiness”,JHEP03 (2011) 015,doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2011)015,arXiv:1011.2268

    2011 arXiv

  68. [76]

    Measurement of the inelastic proton-proton cross section at√s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of the inelastic proton-proton cross section at√s=13 TeV”,JHEP07(2018) 161,doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2018)161, arXiv:1802.02613

    2018 arXiv

  69. [77]

    Precision luminosity measurement in proton-proton collisions at√s=13 TeV in 2015 and 2016 at CMS

    CMS Collaboration, “Precision luminosity measurement in proton-proton collisions at√s=13 TeV in 2015 and 2016 at CMS”,Eur. Phys. J. C81(2021) 800, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09538-2,arXiv:2104.01927

    2021 arXiv

  70. [78]

    Precision luminosity measurement in proton-proton collisions at√s=13 TeV with the CMS detector

    CMS Collaboration, “Precision luminosity measurement in proton-proton collisions at√s=13 TeV with the CMS detector”, Physics Analysis Summary CMS-PAS-LUM-20-001, 2025

    2025

  71. [79]

    Luminosity measurement in proton-proton collisions at 13.6 TeV in 2022 at CMS

    CMS Collaboration, “Luminosity measurement in proton-proton collisions at 13.6 TeV in 2022 at CMS”, Physics Analysis Summary CMS-PAS-LUM-22-001, 2024

    2022

  72. [80]

    The SysCalc code: A tool to derive theoretical systematic uncertainties

    A. Kalogeropoulos and J. Alwall, “The SysCalc code: A tool to derive theoretical systematic uncertainties”, 2018.arXiv:1801.08401

    2018 arXiv

  73. [81]

    PDF4LHC recommendations for LHC Run II

    J. Butterworth et al., “PDF4LHC recommendations for LHC Run II”,J. Phys. G43(2016) 023001,doi:10.1088/0954-3899/43/2/023001,arXiv:1510.03865

    2016 arXiv

  74. [82]

    Fitting using finite Monte Carlo samples

    R. J. Barlow and C. Beeston, “Fitting using finite Monte Carlo samples”,Comput. Phys. Commun.77(1993) 219,doi:10.1016/0010-4655(93)90005-W

    1993 doi

  75. [83]

    Procedure for the LHC Higgs boson search combination in summer 2011

    ATLAS and CMS Collaborations, and LHC Higgs Combination Group, “Procedure for the LHC Higgs boson search combination in summer 2011”, Technical Report CMS-NOTE-2011-005, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2011-11, 2011

    2011

  76. [84]

    Confidence level computation for combining searches with small statistics

    T. Junk, “Confidence level computation for combining searches with small statistics”, Nucl. Instr. Meth. A434(1999) 435,doi:10.1016/S0168-9002(99)00498-2, arXiv:hep-ex/9902006. References 27

    1999 arXiv

  77. [85]

    Presentation of search results: The CL s technique

    A. L. Read, “Presentation of search results: The CL s technique”,J. Phys. G28(2002) 2693, doi:10.1088/0954-3899/28/10/313

    2002 doi

  78. [86]

    Asymptotic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics

    G. Cowan, K. Cranmer, E. Gross, and O. Vitells, “Asymptotic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics”,Eur. Phys. J. C71(2011) 1554, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1554-0,arXiv:1007.1727. [Erratum: doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-013-2501-z]

    2011 arXiv

  79. [87]

    The CMS statistical analysis and combination tool: COMBINE

    CMS Collaboration, “The CMS statistical analysis and combination tool: COMBINE”, Comput. Softw. Big Sci.8(2024) 19,doi:10.1007/s41781-024-00121-4, arXiv:2404.06614

    2024 arXiv

  80. [88]

    On the coupling of axion-like particles to the top quark

    F. Esser, M. Madigan, V . Sanz, and M. Ubiali, “On the coupling of axion-like particles to the top quark”,JHEP09(2023) 063,doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2023)063, arXiv:2303.17634

    2023 arXiv

  81. [89]

    Top-quark pair production near threshold at LHC

    Y. Kiyo et al., “Top-quark pair production near threshold at LHC”,Eur. Phys. J. C60 (2009) 375,doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-009-0892-7,arXiv:0812.0919

    2009 arXiv

  82. [90]

    Signatures of toponium formation in LHC Run 2 data

    B. Fuks, K. Hagiwara, K. Ma, and Y.-J. Zheng, “Signatures of toponium formation in LHC Run 2 data”,Phys. Rev. D104(2021) 034023,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.104.034023, arXiv:2102.11281

    2021 arXiv

  83. [91]

    ALP-ine quests at the LHC: Hunting axion-like particles via peaks and dips in tt production

    A. Anuar et al., “ALP-ine quests at the LHC: Hunting axion-like particles via peaks and dips in tt production”,JHEP12(2024) 197,doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2024)197, arXiv:2404.19014. 28 29 A The CMS Collaboration Yerevan Physics Institute, Yerevan, Armenia A. Gevorgyan , A. Hayrapetya...

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 14, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.