Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 88 references

No excess is seen for light boosted di-tau resonances with top pairs; ATLAS sets a 0.19 fb visible-cross-section limit.

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 · grok-4.5

2026-07-31 05:51 UTC pith:WNRAM4TF

load-bearing objection Solid first ATLAS result in the boosted fully-hadronic tt̄a(→ττ) channel; null result and competitive limits rest on a well-validated custom di-τ tagger and standard CR/VR design. the 2 major comments →

arxiv 2607.28484 v1 pith:WNRAM4TF submitted 2026-07-30 hep-ex

Search for Lorentz-boosted di-τ resonances produced in association with top quark pairs in sqrt{s}=13 TeV pp collisions with the ATLAS detector

ATLAS Collaboration This is my paper
classification hep-ex PACS 13.85.Rm14.80.Ec14.60.Fg12.60.Fr
keywords boosted di-taupseudoscalar resonancett associated productionTwo-Higgs-Doublet Modelhadronic tau decaysATLASRun 2visible cross-section limit
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.

ATLAS looked for a light pseudoscalar particle produced together with a top-antitop pair and decaying to two hadronically decaying tau leptons, in the mass window 20–85 GeV where the particle is strongly boosted. Because the two taus are tightly collimated, the search relies on a custom large-radius jet that is reclustered into two sub-jets, then calibrated and identified with a dedicated boosted-decision-tree tagger. Using the full Run-2 dataset of 140 fb^{-1}, the observed event yield in the signal region matches the Standard-Model expectation within uncertainties. The analysis therefore places a model-independent 95 % CL upper limit of 0.19 fb on the visible cross-section and translates the same data into Two-Higgs-Doublet-Model limits that tighten from 0.4 pb at 20 GeV to 0.05 pb at 85 GeV. The result supplies the first ATLAS constraint in this fully hadronic boosted final state and closes a previously unexplored corner of the low-mass associated-production landscape.

Core claim

No significant excess over the Standard Model is observed. Consequently a model-independent 95 % confidence-level upper limit of 0.19 fb is set on the visible cross-section, while the product of production cross-section and branching ratio in a Two-Higgs-Doublet Model is constrained between 0.4 pb (at 20 GeV) and 0.05 pb (at 85 GeV).

What carries the argument

The dedicated boosted di-tau object: a large-radius (R=1.0) jet reclustered into two R=0.2 sub-jets that are required to carry opposite charge, receive a custom energy-scale calibration, and pass a BDT identification score trained to reject quark/gluon fakes. This single object carries both the signal reconstruction and the bulk of the background rejection.

Load-bearing premise

That the combination of a data-driven fake-lepton estimate and Monte-Carlo modelling of fake di-tau jets (with a conservative 50 % uncertainty) correctly predicts the background inside the tight opposite-sign, high-score signal region where almost every background event contains a fake di-tau.

What would settle it

A statistically significant excess of opposite-sign, high-BDT di-tau candidates whose invariant-mass distribution peaks inside one of the three analysis bins (10–20, 20–30 or 30–60 GeV) after the control-region-constrained background fit would overturn the null result.

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

If this is right

  • The 0.19 fb visible-cross-section limit can be recast for any light resonance that shares the same tt-associated, fully-hadronic di-tau topology.
  • Two-Higgs-Doublet-Model parameter space with preferential top couplings and ma between 20 and 85 GeV is now more tightly bounded in the tau channel.
  • Future searches can adopt the same large-R di-tau reconstruction as a standard tool for other low-mass boosted resonances.
  • The null result complements existing ATLAS limits in the dimuon and bb channels for the same production mode.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • Because acceptance falls at the lowest masses, an improved soft-subjet energy calibration or a lower pT threshold would most directly strengthen the 20 GeV edge of the limit.
  • The same boosted di-tau tagger could be ported with minimal change to searches for light scalars produced in association with a Higgs or a vector boson.
  • A modest excess appearing only in the same-sign validation regions would flag residual charge-asymmetric fake modelling rather than new physics.

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

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. This ATLAS paper searches for a Lorentz-boosted light pseudoscalar a (20–85 GeV) produced in association with tt̄ and decaying to a fully hadronic ττ pair, using 140 fb⁻¹ of 13 TeV pp data. A custom boosted di-τ object (large-R jet reclustering into R=0.2 sub-jets, Tau Energy Scale, and a dedicated BDT) is employed because the decay products are collimated. The analysis targets the semileptonic tt̄ topology (exactly one e/μ, ≥3 jets with ≥1 b-tag, E_T^miss > 30 GeV, opposite-sign tight BDT di-τ). Backgrounds are dominated by fake di-τ (mainly tt̄); tt̄ is normalized in a same-sign loose-BDT CR (μ_tt̄ = 1.02 ± 0.18), fake leptons are estimated via a likelihood Matrix Method, and modelling is validated in a suite of orthogonal VRs. No significant excess is observed. A model-independent 95% CL upper limit of 0.19 fb is set on the visible cross-section; 2HDM benchmark limits on σ(tt̄a)×BR(a→ττ) range from ~0.4 pb (m_a=20 GeV) to ~0.05 pb (m_a=85 GeV).

Significance. The result is the first ATLAS search in the highly boosted fully-hadronic di-τ + tt̄ final state and fills a previously unexplored low-m_ττ phase space where resolved τ_had reconstruction is inefficient. It complements recent ATLAS tt̄a searches in μμ and bb channels and provides the strongest LHC limits in the hadronic di-τ mode near 20 GeV at the time of writing. The custom boosted di-τ reconstruction, calibration and identification (with tag-and-probe performance from Z→ττ+γ) constitute a reusable technical advance. The analysis is a standard, carefully executed counting experiment with orthogonal CR/VR/SR design, floated tt̄ normalization, data-driven fake-lepton estimate, dedicated non-closure uncertainties, full systematic breakdown, and both model-independent and model-dependent interpretations. The null result and quantitative limits are robust and publishable.

major comments (2)
  1. [§5.3, §6, Table 3] §5.3 and §6 (Table 3): The dominant background is fake di-τ (~99% of the analysis phase space). While the Matrix-Method fake-lepton estimate is validated in VRFℓ and a conservative 50% uncertainty is assigned, and a m_ττ-binned non-closure uncertainty on fake di-τ is derived in an auxiliary same-sign low-jet region, the extrapolation into the tight opposite-sign high-BDT SR remains the weakest modelling step. The post-fit agreement in VRTSS/VRMOS (Fig. 5) and the sub-dominance of fake-related systematics relative to theory/MC-stat (Table 3) support the claim, but the paper should explicitly quantify residual shape differences (e.g., in di-τ p_T or sub-jet track multiplicity) between the auxiliary region and the SR after the background-only fit, or demonstrate that the existing non-closure fully covers them.
  2. [§7, Table 5] §7 and Table 5: The model-independent S_95^obs = 27 (visible cross-section 0.19 fb) is substantially larger than the background uncertainty of ±6 events. The text correctly attributes this to the limited parameterization of the single-bin discovery fit when an unconstrained signal is injected. For clarity and reproducibility, the paper should state the precise asymptotic CLs procedure and any regularization or constraint applied to the extra signal component, so that the numerical factor between background uncertainty and the reported limit can be independently verified.
minor comments (5)
  1. [§4.1, Fig. 2] Figure 2 caption and §4.1: The BDT score cut of 0.5 used in the SR is stated to give 15–19% signal efficiency and 99.96% background rejection, while the looser 0.2 working point used for object definition gives ~77% efficiency / rejection ~55. A short sentence or table summarizing efficiency versus rejection at the three working points (0.2/0.35/0.5) for the three benchmark masses would help the reader.
  2. [Table 2] Table 2: The Δϕ(di-τ, E_T^miss) < 2 requirement appears only in VRTSS and SR. A brief justification (alignment of neutrinos from the boosted a) is given in the text; adding it to the table caption would improve self-containment.
  3. [§3, §7] §3: Signal samples are generated at LO with MadGraph+Pythia; the text notes that scalar resonances would produce softer τ kinematics but that the selection is loose enough for reinterpretation. A quantitative statement of the acceptance difference between scalar and pseudoscalar (or a reference to a public note) would strengthen the claim of model independence.
  4. [Fig. 6] Figure 6(b): Signal histograms are scaled by 10^3; the legend should also state the assumed σ×BR so that the visual comparison with the limit curves in Fig. 7 is immediate.
  5. Minor typographical inconsistencies appear (e.g., “EUROPEAN ORGANISA TION”, occasional missing spaces around units, and “di-𝝉” vs “di-τ”). A final copy-edit pass is recommended.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: standard ATLAS counting/limit analysis with orthogonal CR normalization and data-driven fakes; limits are not forced by construction from inputs.

full rationale

This is a conventional LHC search: event selection, background estimation (MC + CR-normalized ttbar + Matrix-Method fake leptons), validation regions, and profile-likelihood CLs limits on visible cross-section and on a 2HDM benchmark. The ttbar scale factor is constrained in an orthogonal same-sign loose-BDT control region and extrapolated; that is a free nuisance, not a definition of the SR yield. Fake-lepton efficiencies are measured in auxiliary regions and assigned a conservative 50% uncertainty; fake-di-τ non-closure is taken from a separate low-jet same-sign auxiliary region. Signal MC enters only as a shape/acceptance template for model-dependent interpretation; a model-independent single-bin discovery limit is also reported. No equation equates a claimed prediction to a fitted input by construction, no uniqueness theorem is imported from overlapping authors to forbid alternatives, and self-citations (detector, boosted di-τ reconstruction [29], luminosity) are methodological performance inputs, not load-bearing circular premises. The null result and limits follow from data versus background in the SR after the fit.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

3 free parameters · 4 axioms · 2 invented entities

Standard collider search. Relies on SM background modelling, Geant4 detector simulation, established PDF/parton-shower uncertainties, and the CL_s asymptotic limit procedure. No new physical entities are postulated as discovered; the 2HDM pseudoscalar is a benchmark signal hypothesis. Free parameters are the usual nuisance parameters and the floated tt̄ normalization.

free parameters (3)
  • μ_tt̄ (tt̄ normalization factor) = 1.02 ± 0.18
    Floated in the likelihood fit using the same-sign loose-BDT control region; post-fit value 1.02±0.18. Directly scales the dominant background in the SR.
  • Fake-lepton misidentification efficiencies (pT, |η|) = parameterized in data; 50% syst.
    Measured in data CRFℓ via Matrix Method; enter the SR fake-lepton yield estimate. A flat 50% uncertainty is assigned.
  • Di-τ BDT score thresholds (0.2 / 0.35 / 0.5) = 0.5 (SR), 0.2–0.35 (CR)
    Working-point choices that define CR/VR/SR orthogonality and signal efficiency (~15–20% at BDT>0.5). Chosen for background rejection, not fitted to signal.
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption SM background processes (tt̄, V+jets, single-top, diboson, tt̄Z/γ*) are adequately modelled by the stated generators after the listed theory and experimental uncertainties.
    Core of any LHC search; validated in CRs/VRs but remains an assumption when extrapolating fake-di-τ rates (§5, §6).
  • standard math Asymptotic CL_s formulae and profile-likelihood test statistic yield correct 95% coverage for the observed event counts.
    Standard Cowan et al. / Read procedure used in §6–7.
  • domain assumption The boosted di-τ reconstruction and identification efficiencies measured in Z(→ττ)+γ tag-and-probe transfer to the tt̄a signal topology after the stated scale-factor uncertainties.
    Calibration from ref. [29] applied to signal MC (§4.1); residual topology dependence is covered by systematic variations.
  • domain assumption Integrated luminosity 140.1±1.2 fb⁻¹ and pile-up reweighting correctly describe the dataset.
    Standard ATLAS luminosity and pile-up treatment (§3, §6).
invented entities (2)
  • Benchmark 2HDM pseudoscalar a (ma = 20–85 GeV) no independent evidence
    purpose: Provide a concrete signal model for generating events and quoting σ×BR limits; not claimed as discovered.
    Standard simplified/2HDM framework used only for interpretation. Independent evidence is precisely what the search tests (and does not find).
  • Custom boosted di-τ object (large-R jet + two R=0.2 sub-jets + BDT) independent evidence
    purpose: Reconstruct collimated hadronic tau pairs that fail resolved tau algorithms.
    Experimental reconstruction object, not a new particle. Performance calibrated in data (Z+γ); the entity is a tool, not a BSM postulate.

pith-pipeline@v1.2.0-daily-grok45 · 59682 in / 3145 out tokens · 57905 ms · 2026-07-31T05:51:27.600197+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

A search for a Lorentz-boosted pseudoscalar resonance $a$ in the mass range between 20 GeV and 85 GeV, produced in association with a top-antitop quark pair and decaying into a $\tau$-lepton pair, is presented. Both $\tau$-leptons are reconstructed in the hadronic decay mode. The boosted production of $a$ results in a small angular separation between its decay products, requiring the use of dedicated boosted di-$\tau$ objects with custom reconstruction, energy calibration, and identification procedures. The analysis uses proton-proton collision data at a centre-of-mass-energy of $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV collected with the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 140 fb$^{-1}$. No significant deviation is observed over the expected Standard Model background, and a model independent upper limit of 0.19 fb is placed at the 95% confidence level on the visible cross-section. Limits on $\sigma(t\bar{t}a) \times BR(a \to \tau\tau)$ are also obtained for a Two-Higgs-Doublet Model signal scenario, ranging from 0.4 pb at $m_a=20$ GeV to 0.05 pb at $m_a=85$ GeV.

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

88 extracted references · 73 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    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, arXiv:1207.7214 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  2. [2]

    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, arXiv:1207.7235 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  3. [3]

    Evans and P

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

    2008

  4. [4]

    T. D. Lee,A Theory of Spontaneous T Violation, Phys. Rev. D8(1973) 1226, ed. by G. Feinberg

    1973

  5. [5]

    B. A. Dobrescu and K. T. Matchev, Light axion within the next-to-minimal supersymmetric standard model, JHEP09(2000) 031, arXiv:hep-ph/0008192

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2000

  6. [6]

    Ellwanger, J

    U. Ellwanger, J. F. Gunion, C. Hugonie and S. Moretti, Towards a No-Lose theorem for NMSSM Higgs Discovery at the LHC, (2003), arXiv:hep-ph/0305109

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  7. [7]

    G. C. Branco et al.,Theory and phenomenology of two-Higgs-doublet models, Phys.Rept.516(2012) 1, arXiv:1106.0034 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  8. [8]

    Wang,A comparative study of dark matter in the MSSM and its singlet extensions: a mini review, Adv

    W. Wang,A comparative study of dark matter in the MSSM and its singlet extensions: a mini review, Adv. High Energy Phys.2012(2012) 216941, arXiv:1205.5081 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  9. [9]

    Silveira and A

    V. Silveira and A. Zee,Scalar Phantoms, Phys.Lett.B161(1985) 136

    1985

  10. [10]

    Pospelov, A

    M. Pospelov, A. Ritz and M. Voloshin,Secluded WIMP dark matter, Phys.Lett.B662(2008) 53, arXiv:0711.4866 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  11. [11]

    Hektor and L

    A. Hektor and L. Marzola,Coy dark matter and the anomalous magnetic moment, Phys. Rev. D90(2014) 053007, arXiv:1403.3401 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  12. [12]

    C. Bœhm, M. J. Dolan, C. McCabe, M. Spannowsky and C. J. Wallace, Extended gamma-ray emission from Coy Dark Matter, JCAP05(2014) 009, arXiv:1401.6458 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  13. [13]

    S. Ipek, D. McKeen and A. E. Nelson, Renormalizable model for the Galactic Center gamma-ray excess from dark matter annihilation, Phys. Rev. D90(2014) 055021, arXiv:1404.3716 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  14. [14]

    Arina, E

    C. Arina, E. Del Nobile and P. Panci,Dark Matter with Pseudoscalar-Mediated Interactions Explains the DAMA Signal and the Galactic Center Excess, Phys. Rev. Lett.114(2015) 011301, arXiv:1406.5542 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  15. [15]

    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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  16. [16]

    Burdman, Z

    G. Burdman, Z. Chacko, R. Harnik, L. de Lima and C. B. Verhaaren, Colorless top partners, a 125 GeV Higgs boson, and the limits on naturalness, Phys. Rev. D91(2015) 055007, arXiv:1411.3310 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  17. [17]

    Craig, A

    N. Craig, A. Katz, M. Strassler and R. Sundrum,Naturalness in the dark at the LHC, JHEP07(2015) 105, arXiv:1501.05310 [hep-ph]. 22

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  18. [18]

    Profumo, M

    S. Profumo, M. J. Ramsey-Musolf and G. Shaughnessy, Singlet Higgs phenomenology and the electroweak phase transition, JHEP08(2007) 010, arXiv:0705.2425 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  19. [19]

    Blinov, J

    N. Blinov, J. Kozaczuk, D. E. Morrissey and C. Tamarit, Electroweak baryogenesis from exotic electroweak symmetry breaking, Phys. Rev. D92(2015) 035012, arXiv:1504.05195 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  20. [20]

    Ghorbani and P

    K. Ghorbani and P. H. Ghorbani, Strongly first-order phase transition in real singlet scalar dark matter model, J.Phys.G47(2019) 015201, arXiv:1804.05798 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  21. [21]

    Cacciapaglia, G

    G. Cacciapaglia, G. Ferretti, T. Flacke and H. Serôdio,Light scalars in composite Higgs models, Front. in Phys.7(2021) 22, arXiv:1902.06890 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  22. [22]

    Ahmed, A

    A. Ahmed, A. Mariotti and S. Najjari,A light dilaton at the LHC, JHEP05(2020) 093, arXiv:1912.06645 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  23. [23]

    Mimasu and V

    K. Mimasu and V. Sanz,ALPs at colliders, JHEP06(2015) 173, arXiv:1409.4792 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  24. [24]

    Bauer, M

    M. Bauer, M. Neubert and A. Thamm,Collider probes of axion-like particles, JHEP12(2017) 044, arXiv:1708.00443 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  25. [25]

    Brivio et al.,ALPs effective field theory and collider signatures, Eur.Phys.J.C77(2017) 572, arXiv:1701.05379 [hep-ph]

    I. Brivio et al.,ALPs effective field theory and collider signatures, Eur.Phys.J.C77(2017) 572, arXiv:1701.05379 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  26. [26]

    Casolino, T

    M. Casolino, T. Farooque, A. Juste, T. Liu and M. Spannowsky, Probing a light CP-odd scalar in di-top-associated production at the LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C75(2015) 498, arXiv:1507.07004 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  27. [27]

    Cacciapaglia, G

    G. Cacciapaglia, G. Ferretti, T. Flacke and H. Serôdio, Revealing timid pseudo-scalars with taus at the LHC, Eur.Phys.J.C78(2018) 724, arXiv:1710.11142 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  28. [28]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Search for a new pseudoscalar decaying into a pair of bottom and antibottom quarks in top-associated production in√𝑠=13TeV proton–proton collisions with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C85(2025) 886, arXiv:2503.17254 [hep-ex]

    arXiv 2025

  29. [29]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Reconstruction and identification of pairs of collimated𝜏-leptons decaying hadronically using√𝑠=13TeV𝑝𝑝collision data with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C85(2025) 561, arXiv:2411.09357 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  30. [30]

    CMS Collaboration,Search for a low-mass𝜏+𝜏− resonance in association with a bottom quark in proton–proton collisions at√𝑠=13TeV, JHEP05(2019) 210, arXiv:1903.10228 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  31. [31]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Search for decays of the Higgs boson into a pair of pseudoscalar particles decaying into𝑏 ¯𝑏𝜏+𝜏− using𝑝𝑝collisions at √𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 052013, arXiv:2407.01335 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  32. [32]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Search for Higgs boson exotic decays into Lorentz-boosted light bosons in the four-𝜏final state at√𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Lett. B870(2025) 139843, arXiv:2503.05463 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  33. [33]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Search for Higgs boson decays into a pair of pseudoscalar particles in the 𝛾𝛾𝜏had𝜏had final state using𝑝𝑝collisions at√𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP03(2025) 190, arXiv:2412.14046 [hep-ex]. 23

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  34. [34]

    CMS Collaboration, Search for a scalar or pseudoscalar dilepton resonance produced in association with a massive vector boson or top quark–antiquark pair in multilepton events at√𝑠=13TeV, Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 012013, arXiv:2402.11098 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  35. [35]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Search for a new pseudoscalar decaying into a pair of muons in events with a top-quark pair at√𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D108(2023) 092007, arXiv:2304.14247 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  36. [36]

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

    2008

  37. [37]

    ATLAS Collaboration,ATLAS Insertable B-Layer: Technical Design Report, ATLAS-TDR-19; CERN-LHCC-2010-013, 2010, url:https://cds.cern.ch/record/1291633, Addendum: ATLAS-TDR-19-ADD-1; CERN-LHCC-2012-009, 2012,url:https://cds.cern.ch/record/1451888

    arXiv 2010

  38. [38]

    Abbott et al.,Production and integration of the ATLAS Insertable B-Layer, JINST13(2018) T05008, arXiv:1803.00844 [physics.ins-det]

    B. Abbott et al.,Production and integration of the ATLAS Insertable B-Layer, JINST13(2018) T05008, arXiv:1803.00844 [physics.ins-det]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2018

  39. [39]

    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

  40. [40]

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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  41. [41]

    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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025

  42. [42]

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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  43. [43]

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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  44. [44]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Performance of electron and photon triggers in ATLAS during LHC Run 2, Eur. Phys. J. C80(2020) 47, arXiv:1909.00761 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  45. [45]

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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  46. [46]

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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  47. [47]

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

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

    2003

  48. [48]

    Sjöstrand, S

    T. Sjöstrand, S. Mrenna and P. Skands,A brief introduction to PYTHIA 8.1, Comput. Phys. Commun.178(2008) 852, arXiv:0710.3820 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  49. [49]

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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  50. [50]

    ATLAS Collaboration,The Pythia 8 A3 tune description of ATLAS minimum bias and inelastic measurements incorporating the Donnachie–Landshoff diffractive model, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2016-017, 2016,url:https://cds.cern.ch/record/2206965. 24

    arXiv 2016

  51. [51]

    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]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  52. [52]

    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]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  53. [53]

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

    arXiv 2014

  54. [54]

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

    2001

  55. [55]

    Frixione, G

    S. Frixione, G. Ridolfi and P. Nason, A positive-weight next-to-leading-order Monte Carlo for heavy flavour hadroproduction, JHEP09(2007) 126, arXiv:0707.3088 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  56. [56]

    Nason,A new method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms, JHEP11(2004) 040, arXiv:hep-ph/0409146

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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  57. [57]

    Frixione, P

    S. Frixione, P. Nason and C. Oleari, Matching NLO QCD computations with parton shower simulations: the POWHEG method, JHEP11(2007) 070, arXiv:0709.2092 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2007

  58. [58]

    Alioli, P

    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, arXiv:1002.2581 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  59. [59]

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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  60. [60]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Studies on top-quark Monte Carlo modelling for Top2016, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2016-020, 2016,url:https://cds.cern.ch/record/2216168

    arXiv 2016

  61. [61]

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

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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  62. [62]

    L. A. Harland-Lang, A. D. Martin, P. Motylinski and R. S. Thorne, Parton distributions in the LHC era: MMHT 2014 PDFs, Eur. Phys. J. C75(2015) 204, arXiv:1412.3989 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  63. [63]

    Bähr et al.,Herwig++ physics and manual, Eur

    M. Bähr et al.,Herwig++ physics and manual, Eur. Phys. J. C58(2008) 639, arXiv:0803.0883 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  64. [64]

    Bellm et al.,Herwig 7.0/Herwig++ 3.0 release note, Eur

    J. Bellm et al.,Herwig 7.0/Herwig++ 3.0 release note, Eur. Phys. J. C76(2016) 196, arXiv:1512.01178 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  65. [65]

    Bellm et al.,Herwig 7.1 Release Note, (2017), arXiv:1705.06919 [hep-ph]

    J. Bellm et al.,Herwig 7.1 Release Note, (2017), arXiv:1705.06919 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  66. [66]

    Bothmann et al.,Event generation with Sherpa 2.2, SciPost Phys.7(2019) 034, arXiv:1905.09127 [hep-ph]

    E. Bothmann et al.,Event generation with Sherpa 2.2, SciPost Phys.7(2019) 034, arXiv:1905.09127 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  67. [67]

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

    arXiv 2015

  68. [68]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Electron and photon performance measurements with the ATLAS detector using the 2015–2017 LHC proton–proton collision data, JINST14(2019) P12006, arXiv:1908.00005 [hep-ex]. 25

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  69. [69]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Electron reconstruction and identification in the ATLAS experiment using the 2015 and 2016 LHC proton–proton collision data at√𝑠=13TeV , Eur. Phys. J. C79(2019) 639, arXiv:1902.04655 [physics.ins-det]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  70. [70]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Electron and photon energy calibration with the ATLAS detector using LHC Run 2 data, JINST19(2024) P02009, arXiv:2309.05471 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  71. [71]

    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]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  72. [72]

    Cacciari, G

    M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam and G. Soyez,The anti-𝑘𝑡 jet clustering algorithm, JHEP04(2008) 063, arXiv:0802.1189 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  73. [73]

    Cacciari, G

    M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam and G. Soyez,FastJet user manual, Eur. Phys. J. C72(2012) 1896, arXiv:1111.6097 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  74. [74]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Jet reconstruction and performance using particle flow with the ATLAS Detector, Eur. Phys. J. C77(2017) 466, arXiv:1703.10485 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  75. [75]

    ATLAS Collaboration, Topological cell clustering in the ATLAS calorimeters and its performance in LHC Run 1, Eur. Phys. J. C77(2017) 490, arXiv:1603.02934 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  76. [76]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Performance of pile-up mitigation techniques for jets in𝑝𝑝collisions at√𝑠=8TeV using the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C76(2016) 581, arXiv:1510.03823 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  77. [77]

    ATLAS Collaboration,ATLAS flavour-tagging algorithms for the LHC Run 2𝑝𝑝 collision dataset, Eur. Phys. J. C83(2023) 681, arXiv:2211.16345 [physics.data-an]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  78. [78]

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

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  79. [79]

    ATLAS Collaboration,Jet energy scale and resolution measured in proton–proton collisions at√𝑠=13TeV with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C81(2021) 689, arXiv:2007.02645 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  80. [80]

    ATLAS Collaboration,ATLAS𝑏-jet identification performance and efficiency measurement with𝑡¯𝑡 events in𝑝𝑝collisions at√𝑠=13TeV, Eur. Phys. J. C79(2019) 970, arXiv:1907.05120 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

Showing first 80 references.