Pith. sign in

REVIEW 1 major objections 4 minor 2 cited by

A combined multi-channel search finds no new heavy W/Z bosons and excludes them below 5.5 TeV.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 09:43 UTC pith:TZCHYIH4

load-bearing objection A solid, well-executed CMS combination that sets the strongest HVT W'/Z' limits to date, with one ambiguous sentence about the asymptotic-CLs correction that should be clarified before the 5.5 TeV headline is quoted. the 1 major comments →

arxiv 2601.12583 v2 pith:TZCHYIH4 submitted 2026-01-18 hep-ex

Combination of searches for heavy vector boson resonances in proton-proton collisions at sqrt{s} = 13 TeV

CMS Collaboration This is my paper
classification hep-ex PACS 12.60.Cn13.85.Qt
keywords heavy vector tripletW' bosonZ' bosonresonance searchCLs limitsdiboson resonancesdilepton resonances13 TeV pp collisions
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper combines the experiment's searches for heavy spin-1 resonances — W′ and Z′ bosons — decaying to boson pairs, quark pairs, and lepton pairs, analysing the full 13 TeV dataset of 138 fb^-1. The authors aim to establish that the Standard Model alone accounts for all these final states and to convert the absence of signals into quantitative exclusions of the heavy vector triplet (HVT) framework. Weakly coupled model A resonances are excluded below 5.5 TeV, strongly coupled model B below 4.8 TeV, and vector-boson-fusion production with strong Higgs coupling up to 2.0 TeV. The combined fit also defuses localized excesses seen in individual channels — none reaches a significant global level. If the result stands, it is the most restrictive placement of this class of heavy bosons to date.

Core claim

The central claim is that no significant deviation from Standard Model expectations appears in a simultaneous fit of the individual search channels, and that this null result constrains the HVT parameter space. The headline exclusions are 95% CL mass limits: below 5.5 TeV in model A, below 4.8 TeV in model B, and up to 2.0 TeV for model C with g_H=6. The paper further excludes regions of the g_F–g_H coupling plane at resonance masses of 3 and 4 TeV and, under non-universal couplings, entire planes of light-quark versus third-generation-quark couplings. The largest individual excesses (2.4 and 2.1 SD in model A, 2.3 and 2.4 SD in model B, 2.8 SD in model C) lose significance in the combinatio

What carries the argument

The heavy vector triplet (HVT) framework, an effective Lagrangian for a nearly mass-degenerate triplet of W′± and Z′ bosons with fermion coupling g_F and boson/Higgs coupling g_H. The analysis carries the argument through a simultaneous maximum-likelihood fit over the mass or transverse-mass spectra of the individual channels, using the modified frequentist CLs method to set limits. The asymptotic approximation is validated with pseudo-experiments, which the paper reports overestimate sensitivity by about 15% in the dilepton and lepton-plus-neutrino channels above 4 TeV; the paper does not state whether the final limits incorporate those corrections. The force of the combination is that over

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the asymptotic CLs approximation yields correct 95% CL limits in the low-yield high-mass tails; the paper itself says it overestimates sensitivity by about 15% in the Z′→ℓ+ℓ− and W′→ℓν channels above 4 TeV, and does not state whether the reported limits were corrected. If not corrected, the model-A 5.5 TeV exclusion and similar boundaries could be somewhat too strong.

What would settle it

Re-run the combined limit at a fixed mass hypothesis (e.g., 5.5 TeV in model A) using fully frequentist pseudo-experiments rather than the asymptotic formula and check whether the 95% CL upper limit still lies below the predicted signal cross section; if the corrected limit rises above the prediction, the exclusion would shrink.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • If correct, the HVT benchmark models A and B are excluded for all masses below 5.5 and 4.8 TeV, so any new W′/Z′ in that range must be more weakly coupled or lie outside the triplet structure.
  • The full dataset excludes the previously reported 3.6 SD excesses at 2.1 and 2.9 TeV as statistically significant phenomena; they drop below 2 SD in the combination.
  • For non-universal fermion couplings, the g_q3–g_q12 plane is removed at 3 and 4 TeV when the other couplings vanish, a region no individual search can exclude alone.
  • The improvement over the earlier 2016-only combination is a factor of 1.7–3.6 for model B and 4.4–7.7 for model A, concretely extending the excluded mass reach.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The reported 15% asymptotic overestimate in the two high-mass lepton channels is a direct place to probe the headline numbers: unless the final limits were corrected (the paper is silent), the 5.5 TeV model-A boundary could be optimistic by roughly that margin.
  • The channel-assignment logic — each overlapping event goes to the most sensitive analysis — is a reusable statistical template; a natural extension is to feed the full Run 3 dataset through the same fit and watch whether the 2.6 and 3.4 TeV excesses grow or vanish.
  • The defusing of the earlier 3.6 SD excesses suggests those were fluctuations; a targeted check in the all-jets WW/WZ/WH channel around 2–3 TeV with more data would confirm the null.
  • The mass reach above 5.5 TeV is now limited by lepton-channel statistics; the paper's own decomposition points to the dilepton and lepton-plus-neutrino spectra as the bottleneck, so better high-mass lepton reconstruction is the most direct path to stronger limits.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

1 major / 4 minor

Summary. This manuscript presents a combination of CMS searches for heavy vector triplet (HVT) resonances, using 138 fb^-1 of 13 TeV proton-proton collision data. The analysis statistically combines channels with ditboson, dilepton, lepton-plus-neutrino, and quark-pair final states, with explicit handling of overlapping event selections. No significant deviation from the Standard Model is found; a global goodness-of-fit p-value of 34% is reported. The paper sets 95% CL exclusion limits on HVT production and couplings, excluding resonances below 5.5 TeV in model A, below 4.8 TeV in model B, and up to 2.0 TeV in model C with g_H = 6. Limits are also presented in the g_F-g_H plane and in non-universal coupling scenarios.

Significance. If the quoted exclusions are correct, this is the most comprehensive CMS HVT combination to date and an important input to LHC new-physics constraints. The paper has several clear strengths: it includes a large number of final states with well-motivated overlap resolution, reports a global background-only p-value of 34%, treats systematic uncertainties as subdominant, and provides HEPData tables for the numerical results. The interpretation is based on an external model (HVT) with benchmark couplings taken from the theory literature rather than fitted to data, so circularity is not a concern. The main caveat is the use of the asymptotic CLs approximation in channels that drive the headline model-A exclusion; this is discussed below.

major comments (1)
  1. [Sec. 6, paragraph beginning 'In certain channels...'] The paper states that for Z'->l+l- and W'->lnu above 4 TeV, the asymptotic CLs approximation 'overestimate[s] the sensitivity by approximately 15%' compared with MC pseudo-experiments, and that this discrepancy is negligible elsewhere. However, the text does not state whether the final reported limits, including the combined model-A exclusion at 5.5 TeV, incorporate this correction. This is load-bearing because the same section says the model-A exclusion is driven by the leptonic channels in this mass regime. If the quoted limits are the unvalidated asymptotic ones, the 5.5 TeV boundary could be optimistic by the corresponding amount. Please state explicitly whether the final limits were corrected; if they were not, provide the corrected limits or quantify the shift in the mass exclusions.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Sec. 4, first paragraph] The text says the combination 'targets heavy resonances with masses between 1 and 8 TeV', but Table 1 includes channels with lower mass ranges, e.g. Z'->tautau from 0.5 TeV and W'->WZ from 0.6 TeV. Please clarify whether the 1-8 TeV statement refers to the combined mass grid rather than individual input ranges.
  2. [Sec. 6 and Fig. 4] The observed limit curves in Fig. 4 show several downward fluctuations relative to the expected limits. It would be helpful to state explicitly which mass points, if any, are affected by the 15% asymptotic-validation issue, rather than only describing the effect qualitatively.
  3. [Sec. 7] The sensitivity improvement factors compared with the 2016-data combination (1.7-3.6 and 4.4-7.7) are quoted without a definition of how they are computed. A one-sentence explanation, e.g. the ratio of expected limits at a reference mass, would improve reproducibility.
  4. [References] Reference [21] is the HEPData record. Since the paper relies on the reader accessing those tables, please verify that the record includes the combined limit tables for all three models, not only the individual channels.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the combination tests an external HVT model against data; limits are empirical and not derived from the model parameters.

full rationale

The paper is a statistical combination of existing CMS search channels interpreted in the external HVT framework. The benchmark models A, B, and C are taken from the theory paper (Ref. [19]) with fixed parameter values (g_H, g_F, g_V), not fitted from the data. Cross sections scale with the square of these couplings (Eq. 2), and the observed limits are obtained by a modified frequentist CLs method applied to the combined likelihood. No quantity that is claimed as a prediction is defined in terms of the data-derived result, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction. The input channels are previous CMS analyses; citing them as inputs is standard and does not make the no-signal conclusion circular, because each input analysis is an independent data-versus-background comparison and the combination performs a new simultaneous fit. The only flagged limitation is the asymptotic CLs approximation overestimating sensitivity by ~15% in the high-mass leptonic channels, with pseudo-experiments used for validation; this is a statistical accuracy caveat, not a circularity. The central claim—no significant SM deviation—is an empirical outcome of the fit, and the HVT exclusion boundaries follow from comparing the observed limit to the externally provided theory cross section. Thus no derivation step reduces to its own input.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 5 axioms · 1 invented entities

The paper itself fits no free parameters to the theory; the HVT benchmark couplings are externally prescribed. The central claim rests on the statistical validity of the combination and the unbiasedness of the input background predictions.

free parameters (3)
  • Model A benchmark couplings (g_H, g_F, g_V) = (-0.56, -0.55, 1)
    Chosen by hand from HVT Ref. [19], not fitted; defines the weakly coupled scenario and the 5.5 TeV exclusion claim.
  • Model B benchmark couplings (g_H, g_F, g_V) = (-2.93, 0.15, 3)
    Chosen by hand from HVT Ref. [19], not fitted; defines the strongly coupled scenario and the 4.8 TeV exclusion claim.
  • Model C couplings (g_H values; g_F=0, g_V=1) = g_H=1, 3, or 6; g_F=0
    VBF-only benchmark from HVT Ref. [19]; the 2.0 TeV exclusion is quoted for g_H=6.
axioms (5)
  • domain assumption HVT effective Lagrangian (Eq. 1) describes W′, Z′ couplings to fermions, Higgs, and longitudinal vector bosons
    The exclusion limits are only meaningful within this external model, imported from Ref. [19] in Section 3.
  • standard math CLs asymptotic approximation gives valid 95% CL limits
    Used in Section 6; paper notes ~15% overestimate above 4 TeV in two channels and uses MC pseudo-experiments to validate.
  • domain assumption Input analyses are statistically independent after overlap removal
    Section 4 describes overlap handling; if residual correlations remain, combined limits would be biased.
  • domain assumption Background estimates in each input channel are unbiased
    The no-signal conclusion and limit extraction rest on accurate background predictions; systematics are treated as subdominant in Section 5.
  • domain assumption NNPDF3.0/3.1 PDFs and scale variations cover signal/background theory uncertainty
    Section 5 uses these PDF sets and treats scale variations as correlated across analyses.
invented entities (1)
  • Heavy vector triplet bosons W′±, Z′ no independent evidence
    purpose: Signal hypothesis being searched for and excluded
    Introduced by the external HVT framework [19], not by this paper; there is no direct evidence and the paper only sets limits on their predicted couplings and decay modes.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 19756 in / 13536 out tokens · 137097 ms · 2026-08-03T09:43:23.472209+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

A combined statistical analysis of searches for heavy vector boson resonances decaying into pairs of W, Z, or Higgs bosons, as well as into quark pairs ($\mathrm{q\bar{q}}$, $\mathrm{b\bar{b}}$, $\mathrm{t\bar{t}}$, $\mathrm{t\bar{b}}$) or lepton pairs ($\ell^+\ell^-$, $\ell\bar{\nu}$), with $\ell =$ e, $\mu$, $\tau$, is presented. The results are based on proton-proton collision data at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 138 fb$^{-1}$, collected by the CMS experiment from 2016 to 2018. No significant deviation from the expectations of the standard model is observed. The results are interpreted in the simplified heavy vector triplet (HVT) framework, setting 95% confidence level upper limits on the production cross sections and coupling strengths of the HVT bosons to standard model particles. The results exclude HVT resonances with masses below 5.5 TeV in a weakly coupled scenario, below 4.8 TeV in a strongly coupled scenario, and up to 2.0 TeV in the case of production via vector boson fusion. The combination provides the most stringent constraints to date on new phenomena predicted by the HVT model.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2601.12583 by CMS Collaboration.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Representative Feynman diagrams for the production and decay of W [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Expected and observed 95% CL upper limits on the V [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p011_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Expected and observed 95% CL upper limits on the V [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Expected and observed 95% CL upper limits on the V [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Expected and observed 95% CL upper limits on the V [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Expected and observed 95% CL upper limits on the coupling parameter [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Expected and observed 95% CL upper limits on the coupling parameter [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Expected and observed 95% CL upper limits on the coupling parameter [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_8.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Searches for New Physics at High Object Masses with CMS

    hep-ex 2026-04 unverdicted novelty 2.0

    CMS finds no significant deviations from the Standard Model in high-mass searches and extends sensitivity to multi-TeV scales in benchmark scenarios.

  2. High-mass new scalars at the LHC, with H in the final state

    hep-ex 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 1.0

    Review summarizing ATLAS and CMS searches for high-mass scalars decaying to a Higgs plus another scalar or vector boson, based on LHC Run-2 and partial Run-3 datasets.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

73 extracted references · 3 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Experimental observation of isolated large transverse energy electrons with associated missing energy at √s=540 GeV

    UA1 Collaboration, “Experimental observation of isolated large transverse energy electrons with associated missing energy at √s=540 GeV”,Phys. Lett. B122(1983) 103, doi:10.1016/0370-2693(83)91177-2. 16

    doi:10.1016/0370-2693(83)91177-2 1983

  2. [2]

    Observation of single isolated electrons of high transverse momentum in events with missing transverse energy at the CERN ¯pp collider

    UA2 Collaboration, “Observation of single isolated electrons of high transverse momentum in events with missing transverse energy at the CERN ¯pp collider”,Phys. Lett. B122(1983) 476,doi:10.1016/0370-2693(83)91605-2

    doi:10.1016/0370-2693(83)91605-2 1983

  3. [3]

    Experimental observation of lepton pairs of invariant mass around 95 GeV/c2 at the CERN SPS collider

    UA1 Collaboration, “Experimental observation of lepton pairs of invariant mass around 95 GeV/c2 at the CERN SPS collider”,Phys. Lett. B126(1983) 398, doi:10.1016/0370-2693(83)90188-0

    doi:10.1016/0370-2693(83)90188-0 1983

  4. [4]

    Evidence forZ 0 →e +e− at the CERN ¯pp collider

    UA2 Collaboration, “Evidence forZ 0 →e +e− at the CERN ¯pp collider”,Phys. Lett. B129 (1983) 130,doi:10.1016/0370-2693(83)90744-X

    work page doi:10.1016/0370-2693(83)90744-x 1983

  5. [5]

    Observation of a new particle in the search for the standard model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Observation of a new particle in the search for the standard model Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC”,Phys. Lett. B716(2012) 1, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2012.08.020,arXiv:1207.7214

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  6. [6]

    Observation of a new boson at a mass of 125 GeV with the CMS experiment at the LHC

    CMS Collaboration, “Observation of a new boson at a mass of 125 GeV with the CMS experiment at the LHC”,Phys. Lett. B716(2012) 30, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2012.08.021,arXiv:1207.7235

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  7. [7]

    Observation of a new boson with mass near 125 GeV in pp collisions at √s= 7 and 8 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Observation of a new boson with mass near 125 GeV in pp collisions at √s= 7 and 8 TeV”,JHEP06(2013) 081, doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2013)081,arXiv:1303.4571

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  8. [8]

    Electroweak limits on general new vector bosons

    F. del Aguila, J. de Blas, and M. Perez-Victoria, “Electroweak limits on general new vector bosons”,JHEP09(2010) 033,doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2010)033,arXiv:1005.3998

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  9. [9]

    Combining searches of Z’ and W’ bosons

    J. de Blas, J. M. Lizana, and M. Perez-Victoria, “Combining searches of Z’ and W’ bosons”,JHEP01(2013) 166,doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2013)166,arXiv:1211.2229

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  10. [10]

    Combination of CMS searches for heavy resonances decaying to pairs of bosons or leptons

    CMS Collaboration, “Combination of CMS searches for heavy resonances decaying to pairs of bosons or leptons”,Phys. Lett. B798(2019) 134952, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2019.134952,arXiv:1906.00057

    arXiv 2019

  11. [11]

    Combination of searches for heavy spin-1 resonances using 139 fb−1 of proton-proton collision data at √s=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Combination of searches for heavy spin-1 resonances using 139 fb−1 of proton-proton collision data at √s=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector”,JHEP04 (2024) 118,doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2024)118,arXiv:2402.10607

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  12. [12]

    Searches for Higgs boson production through decays of heavy resonances

    CMS Collaboration, “Searches for Higgs boson production through decays of heavy resonances”,Phys. Rept.1115(2025) 368,doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2024.09.004, arXiv:2403.16926

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  13. [13]

    Minimal Z’ models: Present bounds and early LHC reach

    E. Salvioni, G. Villadoro, and F. Zwirner, “Minimal Z’ models: Present bounds and early LHC reach”,JHEP11(2009) 068,doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2009/11/068, arXiv:0909.1320

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  14. [14]

    Two simple W’ models for the early LHC

    M. Schmaltz and C. Spethmann, “Two simple W’ models for the early LHC”,JHEP07 (2011) 046,doi:10.1007/jhep07(2011)046,arXiv:1011.5918

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  15. [15]

    Little Higgs review

    M. Schmaltz and D. Tucker-Smith, “Little Higgs review”,Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.55 (2005) 229,doi:10.1146/annurev.nucl.55.090704.151502, arXiv:hep-ph/0502182

    arXiv 2005

  16. [16]

    Little Higgs models and their phenomenology

    M. Perelstein, “Little Higgs models and their phenomenology”,Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.58 (2007) 247,doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2006.04.001,arXiv:hep-ph/0512128. References 17

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  17. [17]

    On the effect of resonances in composite Higgs phenomenology

    R. Contino, D. Marzocca, D. Pappadopulo, and R. Rattazzi, “On the effect of resonances in composite Higgs phenomenology”,JHEP10(2011) 081, doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2011)081,arXiv:1109.1570

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  18. [18]

    Dark matter benchmark models for early LHC Run 2 searches: Report of the ATLAS/CMS dark matter forum

    D. Abercrombie et al., “Dark matter benchmark models for early LHC Run 2 searches: Report of the ATLAS/CMS dark matter forum”,Phys. Dark Univ.27(2020) 100371, doi:10.1016/j.dark.2019.100371,arXiv:1507.00966

    arXiv 2020

  19. [19]

    Heavy vector triplets: Bridging theory and data

    D. Pappadopulo, A. Thamm, R. Torre, and A. Wulzer, “Heavy vector triplets: Bridging theory and data”,JHEP09(2014) 060,doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2014)060, arXiv:1402.4431

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  20. [20]

    Search for new heavy resonances decaying to WW, WZ, ZZ, WH, or ZH boson pairs in the all-jets final state in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Search for new heavy resonances decaying to WW, WZ, ZZ, WH, or ZH boson pairs in the all-jets final state in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV”, Phys. Lett. B844(2023) 137813,doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2023.137813, arXiv:2210.00043

    arXiv 2023

  21. [21]

    HEPData record for this analysis

    “HEPData record for this analysis”, 2025.doi:10.17182/hepdata.166217

    work page doi:10.17182/hepdata.166217 2025

  22. [22]

    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

    doi:10.1088/1748-0221/3/08/s08004 2008

  23. [23]

    Development of the CMS detector for the CERN LHC Run 3

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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  24. [24]

    The CMS trigger system

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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  25. [25]

    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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  26. [26]

    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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  27. [27]

    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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  28. [28]

    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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  29. [29]

    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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  30. [30]

    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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  31. [31]

    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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  32. [32]

    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. 18

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  33. [33]

    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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  34. [34]

    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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  35. [35]

    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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  36. [36]

    Performance of heavy-flavour jet identification in Lorentz-boosted topologies in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Performance of heavy-flavour jet identification in Lorentz-boosted topologies in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV”,JINST20(2025) P11006, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/20/11/P11006,arXiv:2510.10228

    arXiv 2025

  37. [37]

    Soft drop

    A. J. Larkoski, S. Marzani, G. Soyez, and J. Thaler, “Soft drop”,JHEP05(2014) 146, doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2014)146,arXiv:1402.2657

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  38. [38]

    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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1997

  39. [39]

    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”, inProc. of the Workshop on Monte Carlo Generators for HERA Physics, Hamburg, Germany. 1998.arXiv:hep-ph/9907280

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  40. [40]

    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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  41. [41]

    ParticleNet: Jet tagging via particle clouds

    H. Qu and L. Gouskos, “ParticleNet: Jet tagging via particle clouds”,Phys. Rev. D101 (2020) 056019,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.101.056019,arXiv:1902.08570

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  42. [42]

    Charged di-boson production at the LHC in a 4-site model with a composite Higgs boson

    E. Accomando et al., “Charged di-boson production at the LHC in a 4-site model with a composite Higgs boson”,Phys. Rev. D86(2012) 115006, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.86.115006,arXiv:1208.0268

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  43. [43]

    Composite Higgses

    B. Bellazzini, C. Cs ´aki, and J. Serra, “Composite Higgses”,Eur. Phys. J. C74(2014) 2766, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-014-2766-x,arXiv:1401.2457

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  44. [44]

    A gauge model with light W and Z bosons

    V . D. Barger, W.-Y. Keung, and E. Ma, “A gauge model with light W and Z bosons”,Phys. Rev. D22(1980) 727,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.22.727

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.22.727 1980

  45. [45]

    A weakly constrained W’ at the early LHC

    C. Grojean, E. Salvioni, and R. Torre, “A weakly constrained W’ at the early LHC”,JHEP 07(2011) 002,doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2011)002,arXiv:1103.2761

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  46. [46]

    Review of particle physics

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

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.110.030001 2024

  47. [47]

    Search for heavy neutral resonances decaying to tau lepton pairs in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Search for heavy neutral resonances decaying to tau lepton pairs in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV”,Phys. Rev. D111(2025) 112004, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.111.112004,arXiv:2412.04357

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  48. [48]

    Search for resonant and nonresonant new phenomena in high-mass dilepton final states at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Search for resonant and nonresonant new phenomena in high-mass dilepton final states at √s=13 TeV”,JHEP07(2021) 208, doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2021)208,arXiv:2103.02708. References 19

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  49. [49]

    Search for new physics in the lepton plus missing transverse momentum final state in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Search for new physics in the lepton plus missing transverse momentum final state in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV”,JHEP07(2022) 067, doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2022)067,arXiv:2202.06075

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  50. [50]

    Search for new physics in theτlepton plus missing transverse momentum final state in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Search for new physics in theτlepton plus missing transverse momentum final state in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV”,JHEP09(2023) 051, doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2023)051,arXiv:2212.12604

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  51. [51]

    Search for high mass dijet resonances with a new background prediction method in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Search for high mass dijet resonances with a new background prediction method in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV”,JHEP05(2020) 033, doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2020)033,arXiv:1911.03947

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  52. [52]

    Search for W ′ bosons decaying to a top and a bottom quark at√s=13 TeV in the hadronic final state

    CMS Collaboration, “Search for W ′ bosons decaying to a top and a bottom quark at√s=13 TeV in the hadronic final state”,Phys. Lett. B820(2021) 136535, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2021.136535,arXiv:2104.04831

    arXiv 2021

  53. [53]

    Search for W’ bosons decaying to a top and a bottom quark in leptonic final states in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Search for W’ bosons decaying to a top and a bottom quark in leptonic final states in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV”,JHEP05(2024) 046, doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2024)046,arXiv:2310.19893

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  54. [54]

    Search for new particles decaying into top quark-antiquark pairs in events with one lepton and jets in proton-proton collisions at 13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Search for new particles decaying into top quark-antiquark pairs in events with one lepton and jets in proton-proton collisions at 13 TeV”, CMS Physics Analysis Summary CMS-PAS-B2G-22-006, 2025

    2025

  55. [55]

    Search for a heavy vector resonance decaying to a Z boson and a Higgs boson in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Search for a heavy vector resonance decaying to a Z boson and a Higgs boson in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV”,Eur. Phys. J. C81(2021) 688, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09348-6,arXiv:2102.08198

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  56. [56]

    CMS Collaboration, “Search for a heavy resonance decaying into a Z and a Higgs boson in events with an energetic jet and two electrons, two muons, or missing transverse momentum in proton-proton collisions at √s= 13 TeV”,JHEP02(2025) 089, doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2025)089,arXiv:2411.00202

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  57. [57]

    Search for heavy resonances decaying to ZZ or ZW and axion-like particles mediating nonresonant ZZ or ZH production at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Search for heavy resonances decaying to ZZ or ZW and axion-like particles mediating nonresonant ZZ or ZH production at √s=13 TeV”,JHEP04(2022) 087,doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2022)087,arXiv:2111.13669

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  58. [58]

    Search for heavy resonances decaying to Z(ν ν)V(q q ′)in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Search for heavy resonances decaying to Z(ν ν)V(q q ′)in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV”,Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 012004, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.106.012004,arXiv:2109.08268

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  59. [59]

    Search for heavy resonances decaying to WW, WZ, or WH boson pairs in the lepton plus merged jet final state in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Search for heavy resonances decaying to WW, WZ, or WH boson pairs in the lepton plus merged jet final state in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV”, Phys. Rev. D105(2022) 032008,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.105.032008, arXiv:2109.06055

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  60. [60]

    Search for narrow resonances in the b-tagged dijet mass spectrum in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Search for narrow resonances in the b-tagged dijet mass spectrum in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV”,Phys. Rev. D108(2023) 012009, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.108.012009,arXiv:2205.01835

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  61. [61]

    Search for t t resonances in the fully hadronic final state

    CMS Collaboration, “Search for t t resonances in the fully hadronic final state”, CMS Physics Analysis Summary CMS-PAS-B2G-24-003, 2025

    2025

  62. [62]

    Parton distributions for the LHC Run II

    NNPDF Collaboration, “Parton distributions for the LHC Run II”,JHEP04(2015) 040, doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2015)040,arXiv:1410.8849. 20

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  63. [63]

    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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  64. [64]

    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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  65. [65]

    CMS luminosity measurement for the 2017 data-taking period at√s= 13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “CMS luminosity measurement for the 2017 data-taking period at√s= 13 TeV”, CMS Physics Analysis Summary CMS-PAS-LUM-17-004, 2018

    2017

  66. [66]

    CMS luminosity measurement for the 2018 data-taking period at√s= 13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “CMS luminosity measurement for the 2018 data-taking period at√s= 13 TeV”, CMS Physics Analysis Summary CMS-PAS-LUM-18-002, 2019

    2018

  67. [67]

    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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  68. [68]

    The ROOFITtoolkit for data modeling

    W. Verkerke and D. Kirkby, “The ROOFITtoolkit for data modeling”, inProc. 13th Int. Conf. on Computing in High Energy and Nuclear Physics (CHEP 2003): La Jolla CA, United States, March 24–28. 2003.arXiv:physics/0306116

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  69. [69]

    The ROOSTATSproject

    L. Moneta et al., “The ROOSTATSproject”, inProc. 13th Int. Workshop on Advanced Computing and Analysis T echniques in Physics Research (ACAT 2010): Jaipur, India, February 22–27. 2010.arXiv:1009.1003.doi:10.22323/1.093.0057

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  70. [70]

    Lectures on statistics in theory: Prelude to statistics in practice

    R. D. Cousins, “Lectures on statistics in theory: Prelude to statistics in practice”, 2018. arXiv:1807.05996

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  71. [71]

    Confidence level computation for combining searches with small statistics

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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1999

  72. [72]

    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

    doi:10.1088/0954-3899/28/10/313 2002

  73. [73]

    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]. A Additional figures A breakdown of the exclusion limits by W ′ and Z ′ combinations under the three HVT bench- mark...

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011