Search for massive, long-lived particles in events with displaced vertices and displaced muons in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13.6$ TeV with the ATLAS experiment

ATLAS Collaboration

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 77 references

Search for massive, long-lived particles in events with displaced vertices and displaced muons in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13.6$ TeV with the ATLAS experiment

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-02 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This search finds events with a displaced vertex and a displaced muon to be consistent with background, and uses that consistency to set 95% confidence-level exclusions on massive long-lived particles, including higgsinos up to 1600 GeV and

desk verdict Solid Run 3 LLP search: real trigger/reconstruction gains and straightforward limits, with one background-validation non-closure patched conservatively rather than explained — worth refereeing, not worth rejecting. read the letter →

arxiv 2603.01991 v2 pith:RKWVDCGJ submitted 2026-03-02 hep-ex

ATLAS Collaboration This is my paper

classification hep-ex

keywords long-livedparticlesdisplacedvertexmuonR-parityviolationsupersymmetrytransferfactorLHCRun3exclusionlimits

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 analyzes 164 inverse femtobarns of proton-proton collisions at 13.6 TeV collected from 2022 to 2024, looking for long-lived particles that decay inside the inner detector into at least one displaced vertex and one muon with large impact parameter. It establishes that the observed events are fully consistent with Standard Model background, with no significant excess in either of the two signal regions. Based on this null result, it sets model-independent upper limits on the visible cross-section and, for the first time in this Run-3 dataset, excludes higgsino masses up to 1600 GeV and top-squark masses up to 1850 GeV in representative R-parity-violating supersymmetry benchmarks at a proper lifetime of 0.1 ns. A sympathetic reader cares because this closes a gap in long-lived-particle searches, improves on earlier results by roughly two orders of magnitude for the lepton-number-violating higgsino scenario, and demonstrates that a fully data-driven background estimate can be used in a low-background search.

What carries the argument

The analysis is carried by a fully data-driven transfer-factor method. For each of four muon background sources (heavy-flavour decays, cosmic rays, and algorithmic fakes split into barrel and endcap), the number of signal-region events is estimated as the product of the yield in regions where only the muon veto is inverted and a transfer factor derived from regions where the displaced-vertex selection is relaxed, relying on the independence of the muon-veto and displaced-vertex selection probabilities. The discriminating variable used in the final fit is the reduced invariant mass of the displaced vertex, m_red_DV = m_DV / DeltaR_max, where DeltaR_max is the largest angular separation betwee

What would settle it

In the far-vertex validation region with m_DV < 20 GeV, the transfer-factor method predicts 16 +/- 4 events while only 6 are observed; if this deficit persists and grows in significance with a larger dataset, or if an independent simulation-based background estimate disagrees with the transfer-factor prediction in the same region, the core independence assumption would be falsified.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that no new physics appears in events with a displaced vertex and a displaced muon. In the far signal region, three events are observed against 1.8 +/- 1.1 predicted background; in the near signal region, one event is observed against 2.9 +/- 0.8 predicted. A profile likelihood fit to the reduced invariant mass of the displaced vertex yields 95% confidence-level upper limits on the visible cross-section, the most stringent being 0.018 fb when only the highest-mass bin of either signal region is used. Interpreting the result in R-parity-violating supersymmetry, the paper excludes higgsino pair production with lambda'_211 decays up to 1600 GeV and with lambda''_323 decays

Load-bearing premise

The background estimate assumes that, for background events, the probability of passing the muon-veto selections is independent of whether the event contains a displaced vertex that passes the signal selection.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

If the results are correct, R-parity-violating higgsino and top-squark scenarios with masses below the quoted exclusions and lifetimes around 0.1 ns are disfavored as the lightest supersymmetric particle.
The data-driven transfer-factor background estimate, validated in zero-vertex and material-vetoed control regions, provides a template for future low-background displaced-object searches without relying on absolute Monte Carlo background predictions.
The new displaced-muon trigger with a 20 GeV threshold extends sensitivity to lower-mass long-lived particles and short lifetimes compared with Run-2 searches that required higher-momentum or missing-transverse-momentum triggers.
The observed discrepancy in the far-vertex, m_DV < 20 GeV validation region—16 +/- 4 predicted versus 6 observed—is incorporated as an additional 77% systematic uncertainty on the heavy-flavour background in the far signal region, and this uncertainty dominates the total background error in that region.
The model-independent visible cross-section limits, such as 0.018 fb in the highest reduced-mass bin, can be reinterpreted by other models of displaced decays without re-running the full analysis.

Reading between the lines

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

If the independence assumption behind the transfer-factor method has a residual correlation that grows toward lower displaced-vertex mass, the 16-versus-6 discrepancy in the far m_DV < 20 GeV region might be the first sign of a systematic bias rather than a statistical fluctuation; a dedicated closure test with more data would settle which of these it is.
The success of the low-threshold displaced-muon trigger suggests that analogous displaced-electron or displaced-tau triggers could similarly extend long-lived-particle searches without new hardware, changing the expected background composition in signal regions.
The exclusion contours leave a complementary gap at very short lifetimes, where a beam-pipe-optimized displaced-vertex search is stronger; a joint interpretation of such complementary searches could map the full mass-lifetime plane of R-parity-violating scenarios.
The fully data-driven background strategy, if validated further, could reduce reliance on simulation in other rare-signature searches where the signal region is extremely clean, provided the correlation tests are performed in multiple phase-space slices.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Attached is my read on the ATLAS displaced-vertex-plus-displaced-muon search. The short version: it's a well-executed Run 3 result that extends the excluded parameter space substantially, and the only real blemish is a background-validation non-closure that is absorbed with a large ad hoc systematic. I'd send it to referees.

What's actually new: the dedicated displaced-muon trigger (pT>20 GeV, |d0|>2 mm) and the large-impact-parameter tracking. That combination gives roughly two orders of magnitude better cross-section limits for higgsino pair production than the Run-1 bounds, and extends top-squark exclusion to 1850 GeV at 0.1 ns. The data-driven transfer-factor method is clearly laid out, with separate TFs for heavy flavour, cosmic rays, and algorithmic fakes, and multiple validation regions. Agreement is good except for the far-DV m_DV<20 GeV bin.

The soft spot is exactly the one the stress-test flags: in that far-DV validation region the TF method predicts 16±4 events and observes 6, about 2.5σ low. The paper does not identify a physical source for the discrepancy — it says so explicitly — and instead applies a 77% systematic uncertainty to the heavy-flavour background in SRfar only. That is the conservative direction: if the true background is lower than predicted, the null result is even safer and the limits are if anything too strong. So I don't think this breaks the central claim, though I'd want a referee to press on whether the 77% is enough and whether SRnear should carry a similar uncertainty. It's a minor-to-moderate blemish, not a load-bearing flaw.

The statistical treatment is standard profile likelihood with CLs; the reduced-mass discriminant is sensible. The citation pattern is appropriate, referencing the prior ATLAS/CMS searches and the calibration papers. Reproducibility is limited by the lack of public data and code, but that is normal for ATLAS and not a reason to hold the paper to a different standard.

Who gets value from this: anyone active in long-lived-particle searches or RPV SUSY phenomenology, particularly for exclusion limits and the new trigger performance. I'd cite it. It deserves a serious referee — the result is important enough and the analysis careful enough that desk rejection would be wrong. Send it to peer review; likely accept after the usual revisions.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper presents a search for massive long-lived particles decaying into a displaced vertex (DV) and a displaced muon, using 164 fb^-1 of sqrt(s)=13.6 TeV pp collision data recorded by ATLAS during Run 3 (2022–2024). Two signal regions (SRfar and SRnear) are defined by the transverse displacement of the DV. Backgrounds from heavy-flavour decays, cosmic-ray muons, and algorithmic fakes are estimated with a fully data-driven transfer-factor method, which assumes that the probabilities for background events to pass the muon vetoes and the DV selection are independent. No significant excess is observed. Upper limits at 95% CL are set on the visible cross-section and on RPV SUSY benchmark models; in particular, higgsino masses up to 1600 GeV for lambda'_211 decays and top-squark masses up to 1850 GeV for lambda'_233 decays are excluded at tau=0.1 ns.

Significance. If the result holds, it significantly extends LHC sensitivity to long-lived particles with displaced muons, exploiting a new Run-3 displaced-muon trigger and improved large-impact-parameter tracking. The higgsino lambda'_211 limits improve on Run-1 by about two orders of magnitude, and the top-squark lambda'_233 limits extend coverage at short lifetimes. The data-driven transfer-factor method is described in unusual detail, with multiple validation regions and systematic cross-checks. However, the central claim relies on an independence assumption that shows a notable non-closure in one validation region (far DV, m_DV<20 GeV), handled by an ad hoc 77% systematic. This weakens, but does not by itself invalidate, the central conclusion of no excess.

major comments (2)

[Section 6.3] The far-DV validation region with n_track>=4 and m_DV<20 GeV shows a significant non-closure: 16±4 predicted vs 6 observed. This is not a small discrepancy, and it directly probes the same high-track-count, signal-like DV topology as SRfar, except for the m_DV threshold. The response is to assign an ad hoc 77% systematic to the heavy-flavour background in SRfar, but this leaves the central prediction unchanged and does not establish that the transfer factor is unbiased at m_DV>=20 GeV. Since SRfar is the signal region, there is no direct validation of the independence assumption where it matters. Please either correct the central prediction using an m_DV-dependent TF or a data-derived correction factor, or provide a quantitative demonstration that the 77% systematic covers the plausible range of m_DV-dependent biases. At minimum, report the p-value of the non-closure accounting for the n
[Sections 6.2 and 6.3 / Table 1] The 77% non-closure uncertainty is derived from a single validation region and applied only to the heavy-flavour background component in SRfar. The argument that heavy flavour dominates the m_DV<20 region is plausible, but the uncertainty is a one-point estimate with no physical model or closure test behind it. If the true SRfar background is lower than the nominal prediction, the 3 observed events become somewhat more signal-like; if higher, the limits could be anti-conservative. The paper should explicitly discuss the direction of the possible bias and demonstrate that the inflated uncertainty yields conservative limits in either case. A more convincing approach would be to compare TFs in slices of m_DV, n_track, and d_T within the zero-DV and material-map-vetoed control samples to show how the TFs vary with DV properties.

minor comments (5)

[Figure 2] The y-axis of the trigger-efficiency plots extends above 1.0 (up to 1.4). A trigger efficiency cannot exceed 1; please correct the axis range or clarify if the quantity plotted is something else (e.g., acceptance times efficiency).
[General] The manuscript uses inconsistent notation for the vertex mass: 'mDV' and 'm_DV' appear interchangeably. Please unify.
[Section 6 and Figure 3] The region definitions are complex; a small table listing the event counts in each validation region (zero-DV, material-map-vetoed, n_track<4, m_DV<20/40, etc.) would improve readability and allow the reader to assess the non-closure more directly.
[Section 8] Please state explicitly whether the mred_DV bin boundaries (10, 13, 15 GeV) were fixed before examining the data in SRfar/SRnear. If the binning was optimised after unblinding, the coverage of the CLs limits should be discussed.
[Section 3] Minor typo: 'O(10−2 fb)' should be 'O(10^-2 fb)' for clarity.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the data-driven background estimate and the limits are not self-referential; the transfer-factor method extrapolates from disjoint control regions and signal acceptance comes from independent MC.

full rationale

The paper's central claim—no significant excess and resulting 95% CL limits—is derived from observed event counts in two signal regions (SRfar: 3 events; SRnear: 1 event; Table 2) compared with a fully data-driven background prediction built from transfer factors (Section 6): N_A,i = N_B,i · N_C/N_D,i, where the TFs f_i = N_C/N_D,i are measured in zero-DV and material-map-vetoed control regions that, by construction, exclude the signal-region events. No parameter of the background model is fitted to the signal-region counts, so the prediction does not reduce to the observed result. Signal acceptance and efficiency are computed from independent MadGraph/Pythia/Geant4 simulations with standard ATLAS calibrations; no signal-model parameter is taken from the data. The one validation non-closure (Section 6.3: 16±4 predicted vs 6 observed in the far-DV m_DV<20 GeV region) is explicitly acknowledged and handled by adding a 77% systematic uncertainty on the heavy-flavour background in SRfar—this is a treated limitation (a correctness/validation concern) rather than a circular reduction, since the TF independence assumption remains an external-validity assumption, not a self-referential one. Citations to prior ATLAS/CMS searches are contextual comparisons and benchmarks, not load-bearing inputs to the limit extraction. No equation in the paper defines a predicted quantity in terms of the target outcome, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper's central limits rest on three types of ingredients: data-driven transfer factors (which are measured, not free, but are the closest to 'fitted values'), a validated but imperfect independence assumption, and standard signal simulation ingredients. No new particles or ad hoc entities are introduced; the RPV SUSY models are pre-existing benchmarks.

free parameters (3)

Transfer factors f_i for heavy-flavour, cosmic-ray, algorithmic fake barrel/endcap = O(10^-2), values not tabulated
The background prediction in SR is N_A,i = f_i * N_B,i, where f_i = N_C/N_Di derived from control regions in data. These are effective measured parameters that directly set the central background estimate.
Non-closure uncertainty on heavy-flavour background in SRfar = ~77%
Derived from observed discrepancy between predicted (16±4) and observed (6) events in the far DV m_DV<20 GeV validation region. Applied to heavy-flavour yield in SRfar to cover the mismatch.
Signal region bin boundaries of mred_DV = SRfar: 10 GeV, 13 GeV; SRnear: 15 GeV
Chosen to maximize expected sensitivity across benchmark models. These hand-picked boundaries influence the limit extraction but are part of the analysis optimization.

assumptions (4)

domain assumption The probability for background events to satisfy the muon veto selections is uncorrelated with satisfying the displaced-vertex selection.
Used in Section 6 to justify the transfer-factor method N_A,i = N_B,i * N_C/N_Di. The paper validates this with data but finds a partial non-closure in one region, indicating the assumption is not perfect.
domain assumption The only significant background sources are muons from heavy-flavour decays, cosmic rays, and algorithmic fakes.
Assumed in Section 6; the transfer-factor regions are constructed to be enriched in these sources and other sources (e.g., W/Z decays with prompt muons) are considered negligible after the displaced-muon selection.
domain assumption Signal simulation with MadGraph+Pythia+Geant4 accurately models the LLP production and decay kinematics, including the contact-interaction approximation for higgsino decays and the hadronisation of top squarks into R-hadrons.
Used in Section 3 to compute acceptance. The paper states that interactions of R-hadrons with detector material are not simulated, which could affect the reconstruction efficiency for stop signal at long lifetimes.
domain assumption The production cross-sections from approximate NNLO+NNLL calculations (Resummino) are correct for setting exclusion limits in model parameter space.
The cross-section curves in Figures 7-8 rely on these theory calculations. The limits on mass and lifetime would shift if the theory cross-sections have large uncertainties, though the observed visible-cross-section limits are model-independent.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Search for massive, long-lived particles in events with displaced vertices and displaced muons in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13.6$ TeV with the ATLAS experiment." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/RKWVDCGJ

@misc{pith2026260301991,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Search for massive, long-lived particles in events with displaced vertices and displaced muons in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrts=13.6$ TeV with the ATLAS experiment},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/RKWVDCGJ}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2603.01991}
}

abstract

A search is presented for massive long-lived particles in events featuring at least one displaced vertex and at least one displaced muon, using proton-proton collision data collected by the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider from 2022 to 2024 at a centre-of-mass energy of 13.6 TeV. The data sample corresponds to an integrated luminosity of 164 fb$^{-1}$. The analysis targets scenarios in which long-lived particles decay inside the ATLAS inner detector, resulting in a topology of at least one massive, displaced vertex (DV) with multiple associated tracks, and at least one muon with a large transverse impact parameter relative to the primary interaction point. The muon is not required to be associated with the DV. Two signal regions are defined by the transverse distance of the reconstructed DV from the interaction point. Background contributions are estimated by using fully data-driven techniques. No significant excess above the expected background is observed. Upper limits at 95% confidence level are set on the visible cross-section and on the production cross-sections of several benchmark models of $R$-parity-violating supersymmetry.

Discussion (0). Sign in to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

77 extracted references · 1 canonical work pages

[1]

Evans and P

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

2008
[2]

Alimena et al., Searching for long-lived particles beyond the Standard Model at the Large Hadron Collider, J

J. Alimena et al., Searching for long-lived particles beyond the Standard Model at the Large Hadron Collider, J. Phys. G47(2020) 090501, arXiv:1903.04497 [hep-ex]

arXiv 2020
[3]

Arvanitaki, N

A. Arvanitaki, N. Craig, S. Dimopoulos and G. Villadoro,Mini-Split, JHEP02(2013) 126, arXiv:1210.0555 [hep-ph]

arXiv 2013
[4]

Arkani-Hamed, A

N. Arkani-Hamed, A. Gupta, D. E. Kaplan, N. Weiner and T. Zorawski, Simply Unnatural Supersymmetry, arXiv:1212.6971 [hep-ph]. 20

arXiv
[5]

G. F. Giudice and R. Rattazzi,Theories with gauge-mediated supersymmetry breaking, Phys. Rept.322(1999) 419, arXiv:hep-ph/9801271 [hep-ph]

arXiv 1999
[6]

G. R. Farrar and P. Fayet,Phenomenology of the production, decay, and detection of new hadronic states associated with supersymmetry, Phys. Lett. B76(1978) 575

1978
[7]

Yu. A. Gol’fand and E. P. Likhtman, Extension of the Algebra of Poincare Group Generators and Violation of P Invariance, JETP Lett.13(1971) 20, [Pisma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz.13(1971) 452]

1971
[8]

D. V. Volkov and V. P. Akulov,Is the neutrino a goldstone particle?, Phys. Lett. B46(1973) 109

1973

Show all 77 references

[9]

Wess and B

J. Wess and B. Zumino,Supergauge transformations in four dimensions, Nucl. Phys. B70(1974) 39

1974
[10]

Wess and B

J. Wess and B. Zumino,Supergauge invariant extension of quantum electrodynamics, Nucl. Phys. B78(1974) 1

1974
[11]

Ferrara and B

S. Ferrara and B. Zumino,Supergauge invariant Yang-Mills theories, Nucl. Phys. B79(1974) 413

1974
[12]

Salam and J

A. Salam and J. Strathdee,Super-symmetry and non-Abelian gauges, Phys. Lett. B51(1974) 353

1974
[13]

Barbier et al.,R-Parity-violating supersymmetry, Phys

R. Barbier et al.,R-Parity-violating supersymmetry, Phys. Rept.420(2005) 1, arXiv:hep-ph/0406039 [hep-ph]

2005 arXiv
[14]

B. C. Allanach, M. A. Bernhardt, H. K. Dreiner, C. H. Kom and P. Richardson, Mass spectrum in R-parity violating minimal supergravity and benchmark points, Phys. Rev. D75(2007)

2007
[15]

J. Fan, M. Reece and J. T. Ruderman,Stealth supersymmetry, JHEP11(2011) 012, arXiv:1105.5135 [hep-ph]

2011 arXiv
[16]

J. Fan, M. Reece and J. T. Ruderman,A stealth supersymmetry sampler, JHEP07(2012) 196, arXiv:1201.4875 [hep-ph]

2012 arXiv
[17]

Chacko, D

Z. Chacko, D. Curtin and C. B. Verhaaren,A quirky probe of neutral naturalness, Phys. Rev. D94(2016) 011504, arXiv:1512.05782 [hep-ph]

2016 arXiv
[18]

Burdman, Z

G. Burdman, Z. Chacko, H.-S. Goh and R. Harnik,Folded supersymmetry and the LEP paradox, JHEP0702(2007) 009, arXiv:hep-ph/0609152 [hep-ph]

2007 arXiv
[19]

Cai, H.-C

H. Cai, H.-C. Cheng and J. Terning,A quirky little Higgs model, JHEP05(2009) 045, arXiv:0812.0843 [hep-ph]

2009 arXiv
[20]

Chacko, H.-S

Z. Chacko, H.-S. Goh and R. Harnik,Natural Electroweak Breaking from a Mirror Symmetry, Phys. Rev. Lett.96(2006) 231802, arXiv:hep-ph/0506256 [hep-ph]

2006 arXiv
[21]

M. J. Strassler and K. M. Zurek,Echoes of a hidden valley at hadron colliders, Phys. Lett. B651(2007) 374, arXiv:hep-ph/0604261 [hep-ph]

2007 arXiv
[22]

M. J. Strassler and K. M. Zurek,Discovering the Higgs through highly-displaced vertices, Phys. Lett. B661(2008) 263, arXiv:hep-ph/0605193 [hep-ph]

2008 arXiv
[23]

Baumgart, C

M. Baumgart, C. Cheung, J. T. Ruderman, L.-T. Wang and I. Yavin, Non-abelian dark sectors and their collider signatures, JHEP04(2009) 014, arXiv:0901.0283 [hep-ph]

2009 arXiv
[24]

D. E. Kaplan, M. A. Luty and K. M. Zurek,Asymmetric dark matter, Phys. Rev. D79(2009) 115016, arXiv:0901.4117 [hep-ph]. 21

2009 arXiv
[25]

Y. F. Chan, M. Low, D. E. Morrissey and A. P. Spray, LHC signatures of a minimal supersymmetric hidden valley, JHEP05(2012) 155, arXiv:1112.2705 [hep-ph]

2012 arXiv
[26]

K. R. Dienes and B. Thomas,Dynamical dark matter. I. Theoretical overview, Phys. Rev. D85(2012) 083523, arXiv:1106.4546 [hep-ph]

2012 arXiv
[27]

K. R. Dienes, S. Su and B. Thomas,Distinguishing dynamical dark matter at the LHC, Phys. Rev. D86(2012) 054008, arXiv:1204.4183 [hep-ph]

2012 arXiv
[28]

Cui and R

Y. Cui and R. Sundrum,Baryogenesis for weakly interacting massive particles, Phys. Rev. D87(2013) 116013, arXiv:1212.2973 [hep-ph]

2013 arXiv
[29]

Cui,Natural baryogenesis from unnatural supersymmetry, JHEP12(2013) 067, arXiv:1309.2952 [hep-ph]

Y. Cui,Natural baryogenesis from unnatural supersymmetry, JHEP12(2013) 067, arXiv:1309.2952 [hep-ph]

2013 arXiv
[30]

Cui and B

Y. Cui and B. Shuve,Probing baryogenesis with displaced vertices at the LHC, JHEP02(2015) 049, arXiv:1409.6729 [hep-ph]

2015 arXiv
[31]

ATLAS Collaboration,Search for displaced vertices arising from decays of new heavy particles in 7TeV𝑝𝑝collisions at ATLAS, Phys. Lett. B707(2012) 478, arXiv:1109.2242 [hep-ex]

2012 arXiv
[32]

ATLAS Collaboration,Search for long-lived, heavy particles in final states with a muon and multi-track displaced vertex in proton–proton collisions at√𝑠=7TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Lett. B719(2013) 280, arXiv:1210.7451 [hep-ex]

2013 arXiv
[33]

CMS Collaboration,Search for Displaced Supersymmetry in Events with an Electron and a Muon with Large Impact Parameters, Phys. Rev. Lett.114(2015) 061801, arXiv:1409.4789 [hep-ex]

2015 arXiv
[34]

CMS Collaboration,Search for new long-lived particles at√𝑠=13TeV, Phys. Lett. B780(2018) 432, arXiv:1711.09120 [hep-ex]

2018 arXiv
[35]

ATLAS Collaboration,Search for long-lived, massive particles in events with a displaced vertex and a muon with large impact parameter in𝑝𝑝collisions at√𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D102(2020) 032006, arXiv:2003.11956 [hep-ex]

2020 arXiv
[36]

CMS Collaboration,Search for long-lived particles decaying to jets with displaced vertices in proton–proton collisions at√𝑠=13TeV, Phys. Rev. D104(2021) 052011, arXiv:2104.13474 [hep-ex]

2021 arXiv
[37]

CMS Collaboration,Search for long-lived particles decaying to leptons with large impact parameter in proton–proton collisions at√𝑠=13TeV, Eur. Phys. J. C82(2022) 153, arXiv:2110.04809 [hep-ex]

2022 arXiv
[38]

ATLAS Collaboration,Preliminary luminosity calibration of the ATLAS13.6TeV data recorded in 2024 and combination with the 2022 and 2023 measurements, ATL-DAPR-PUB-2025-001, 2025, url:https://cds.cern.ch/record/2948582

2024
[39]

ATLAS Collaboration,The ATLAS trigger system for LHC Run 3 and trigger performance in 2022, JINST19(2024) P06029, arXiv:2401.06630 [hep-ex]

2022 arXiv
[40]

ATLAS Collaboration, Performance of the reconstruction of large impact parameter tracks in the inner detector of ATLAS, Eur. Phys. J. C83(2023) 1081, arXiv:2304.12867 [hep-ex]

2023 arXiv
[41]

ATLAS Collaboration,The ATLAS Experiment at the CERN Large Hadron Collider, JINST3(2008) S08003. 22

2008
[42]

ATLAS Collaboration,The ATLAS experiment at the CERN Large Hadron Collider: a description of the detector configuration for Run 3, JINST19(2024) P05063, arXiv:2305.16623 [physics.ins-det]

2024 arXiv
[43]

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
[44]

ATLAS Collaboration,Software and computing for Run 3 of the ATLAS experiment at the LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C85(2025) 234, arXiv:2404.06335 [hep-ex], Erratum: Eur. Phys. J. C85(2025) 907

2025 arXiv
[45]

ATLAS Collaboration,Emulating the impact of additional proton–proton interactions in the ATLAS simulation by presampling sets of inelastic Monte Carlo events, Comput. Softw. Big Sci.6(2022) 3, arXiv:2102.09495 [hep-ex]

2022 arXiv
[46]

Werner, F.-M

K. Werner, F.-M. Liu and T. Pierog, Parton ladder splitting and the rapidity dependence of transverse momentum spectra in deuteron–gold collisions at the BNL Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider, Phys. Rev. C74(2006) 044902, arXiv:hep-ph/0506232

2006 arXiv
[47]

Sjöstrand et al.,An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2, Comput

T. Sjöstrand et al.,An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2, Comput. Phys. Commun.191(2015) 159, arXiv:1410.3012 [hep-ph]

2015 arXiv
[48]

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

C. Bierlich et al.,A comprehensive guide to the physics and usage of PYTHIA 8.3, SciPost Phys. Codebases (2022) 8, arXiv:2203.11601 [hep-ph]

2022 arXiv
[49]

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

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

2003
[50]

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

2021 arXiv
[51]

M. Ibe, S. Matsumoto and R. Sato, Mass Splitting between Charged and Neutral Winos at Two-Loop Level, Phys. Lett. B721(2013) 252, arXiv:1212.5989 [hep-ph]

2013 arXiv
[52]

Nagata and S

N. Nagata and S. Shirai,Higgsino Dark Matter in High-Scale Supersymmetry, JHEP01(2015) 029, arXiv:1410.4549 [hep-ph]

2015 arXiv
[53]

J. Alwall et al.,The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations, JHEP07(2014) 079, arXiv:1405.0301 [hep-ph]

2014 arXiv
[54]

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

2015 arXiv
[55]

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

2014
[56]

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

2013 arXiv
[57]

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

2001
[58]

Fiaschi and M

J. Fiaschi and M. Klasen, Higgsino and gaugino pair production at the LHC with aNNLO+NNLL precision, Phys. Rev. D102(2020) 095021, arXiv:2006.02294 [hep-ph]. 23

2020 arXiv
[59]

B. Fuks, M. Klasen, D. R. Lamprea and M. Rothering, Precision predictions for electroweak superpartner production at hadron colliders withresummino, Eur. Phys. J. C73(2013) 2480, arXiv:1304.0790 [hep-ph]

2013 arXiv
[60]

Fiaschi, B

J. Fiaschi, B. Fuks, M. Klasen and A. Neuwirth, Electroweak superpartner production at 13.6 Tev with Resummino, Eur. Phys. J. C83(2023) 707, arXiv:2304.11915 [hep-ph]

2023 arXiv
[61]

ATLAS Collaboration,Software Performance of the ATLAS Track Reconstruction for LHC Run 3, Comput. Softw. Big Sci.8(2024) 9, arXiv:2308.09471 [hep-ex]

2024 arXiv
[62]

ATLAS Collaboration,Performance of vertex reconstruction algorithms for detection of new long-lived particle decays within the ATLAS inner detector, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2019-013, 2019, url:https://cds.cern.ch/record/2669425

2019
[63]

ATLAS Collaboration, Search for displaced leptons in√𝑠=13TeV and13.6TeV𝑝𝑝collisions with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D112(2025) 012016, arXiv:2410.16835 [hep-ex]

2025 arXiv
[64]

ATLAS Collaboration,Search for long-lived, massive particles in events with displaced vertices and multiple jets in𝑝𝑝collisions at√𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP06(2023) 200, arXiv:2301.13866 [hep-ex]

2023 arXiv
[65]

Butterworth et al.,PDF4LHC recommendations for LHC Run II, J

J. Butterworth et al.,PDF4LHC recommendations for LHC Run II, J. Phys. G43(2016) 023001, arXiv:1510.03865 [hep-ph]

2016 arXiv
[66]

ATLAS Collaboration,Search for exotic decays of the Higgs boson into long-lived particles in𝑝𝑝 collisions at√𝑠=13TeV using displaced vertices in the ATLAS inner detector, JHEP11(2021) 229, arXiv:2107.06092 [hep-ex]

2021 arXiv
[67]

ATLAS Collaboration,Measurement of the Inelastic Proton–Proton Cross Section at√𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS Detector at the LHC, Phys. Rev. Lett.117(2016) 182002, arXiv:1606.02625 [hep-ex]

2016 arXiv
[68]

W. A. Rolke, A. M. López and J. Conrad, Limits and confidence intervals in the presence of nuisance parameters, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A551(2005) 493, ed. by L. Lyons and M. Karagoz, arXiv:physics/0403059

2005 arXiv
[69]

Verkerke and D

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

2003 arXiv
[70]

ROOT Collaboration, HistFactory: A tool for creating statistical models for use with RooFit and RooStats, CERN-OPEN-2012-016, 2012,url:https://cds.cern.ch/record/1456844

2012
[71]

Aly et al.,TRExFitter, version 1.4.0, 2025, url:https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16684099

M. Aly et al.,TRExFitter, version 1.4.0, 2025, url:https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.16684099

2025 doi
[72]

A. L. Read,Presentation of search results: the𝐶𝐿𝑠 technique, J. Phys. G28(2002) 2693

2002
[73]

Junk,Confidence level computation for combining searches with small statistics, Nucl

T. Junk,Confidence level computation for combining searches with small statistics, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A434(1999) 435, arXiv:hep-ex/9902006

1999 arXiv
[74]

Cowan, K

G. Cowan, K. Cranmer, E. Gross and O. Vitells, Asymptotic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics, Eur. Phys. J. C71(2011) 1554, arXiv:1007.1727 [physics.data-an], Erratum: Eur. Phys. J. C73(2013) 2501. 24

2011 arXiv
[75]

T. Kon, T. Kobayashi and S. Kitamura, Signatures of scalar top with R-parity breaking coupling at HERA, Phys. Lett. B333(1994) 263, arXiv:hep-ph/9403288

1994 arXiv
[76]

H. K. Dreiner and G. G. Ross,R-parity violation at hadron colliders, Nucl. Phys. B365(1991) 597

1991
[77]

Demokritos

ATLAS Collaboration,ATLAS Computing Acknowledgements, ATL-SOFT-PUB-2026-001, 2026, url:https://cds.cern.ch/record/2952666. 25 The ATLAS Collaboration G. Aad 102, E. Aakvaag 17, B. Abbott 122, S. Abdelhameed 118a, K. Abeling 54, N.J. Abicht 48, S.H. Abidi 30, M. Aboelela 44, A....

2026

Pith tools

Reviewed August 2, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Evans and P

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

2008

[2] [2]

Alimena et al., Searching for long-lived particles beyond the Standard Model at the Large Hadron Collider, J

J. Alimena et al., Searching for long-lived particles beyond the Standard Model at the Large Hadron Collider, J. Phys. G47(2020) 090501, arXiv:1903.04497 [hep-ex]

arXiv 2020

[3] [3]

Arvanitaki, N

A. Arvanitaki, N. Craig, S. Dimopoulos and G. Villadoro,Mini-Split, JHEP02(2013) 126, arXiv:1210.0555 [hep-ph]

arXiv 2013

[4] [4]

Arkani-Hamed, A

N. Arkani-Hamed, A. Gupta, D. E. Kaplan, N. Weiner and T. Zorawski, Simply Unnatural Supersymmetry, arXiv:1212.6971 [hep-ph]. 20

arXiv

[5] [5]

G. F. Giudice and R. Rattazzi,Theories with gauge-mediated supersymmetry breaking, Phys. Rept.322(1999) 419, arXiv:hep-ph/9801271 [hep-ph]

arXiv 1999

[6] [6]

G. R. Farrar and P. Fayet,Phenomenology of the production, decay, and detection of new hadronic states associated with supersymmetry, Phys. Lett. B76(1978) 575

1978

[7] [7]

Yu. A. Gol’fand and E. P. Likhtman, Extension of the Algebra of Poincare Group Generators and Violation of P Invariance, JETP Lett.13(1971) 20, [Pisma Zh. Eksp. Teor. Fiz.13(1971) 452]

1971

[8] [8]

D. V. Volkov and V. P. Akulov,Is the neutrino a goldstone particle?, Phys. Lett. B46(1973) 109

1973