Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 minor 1 cited by

The paper claims that a 137 fb−1 search for compressed-spectrum Higgsinos sees no beyond-standard-model excess, probing neutralino mass differences down to 1.5 GeV and excluding Higgsino masses up to 115 GeV.

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 21:06 UTC pith:HIR2HNYJ

load-bearing objection Competent, honest CMS search that extends compressed-Higgsino coverage by about 0.5–2 GeV; the single real weak link is the standard simulation-validated background extrapolation.

arxiv 2511.16394 v4 pith:HIR2HNYJ submitted 2025-11-20 hep-ex

Search for Higgsinos in final states with low-momentum lepton-track pairs at 13 TeV

CMS Collaboration This is my paper
classification hep-ex
keywords Higgsinocompressed supersymmetrysoft leptonsmissing transverse momentumboosted decision treeselectroweakinodark matter candidateLHC physics
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.

Pair production of Higgsinos—supersymmetric fermions that are natural dark-matter candidates—is hardest to see when the two neutralino states are almost degenerate: the decay leptons are then extremely soft and usually thrown away by lepton triggers or isolation. This paper targets exactly that corner, using 137 fb−1 of 13 TeV proton-proton collisions from the CMS detector, selecting events with large missing transverse momentum plus either two low-momentum muons or one lepton paired with an isolated, unmatched track. It is the first search to use muons with transverse momentum down to 2 GeV together with a track-recovery category in this final state. The data match the standard-model background across the signal regions; the most notable deviation is a 2.2σ excess in the tightest dimuon bin. Interpreting the null result in a compressed Higgsino model, the paper excludes chargino and neutralino states up to a Higgsino mass of 115 GeV and reaches neutralino mass differences as low as 1.5 GeV at a 100 GeV Higgsino.

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is a null result that maps a previously blank region of the compressed-supersymmetry plane. The signal process is pair production of a heavier neutralino together with either a lighter neutralino or a chargino, followed by the decay of the heavier neutralino to the lighter one plus a virtual Z boson that decays to two same-flavor leptons. By lowering the muon transverse-momentum threshold to 2 GeV, allowing muon pairs with very small angular separation, and adding a lepton-plus-exclusive-track category to recover one lepton missed by identification, the analysis gains sensitivity to neutralino mass splittings down to 1.5 GeV. No significant deviation f

What carries the argument

The central object is the compressed Higgsino simplified model, with four nearly degenerate electroweakino states: two neutralinos separated by a mass difference of 1–10 GeV and a chargino separated from the lightest neutralino by half that amount, with the heavier neutralino decaying through a virtual Z to two same-flavor leptons. The analysis machinery consists of three channels—dimuon, muon+exclusive track, and electron+exclusive track—plus a custom jet-based isolation that preserves leptons down to 2 GeV, a track-picking boosted decision tree (BDT) that selects the track most likely to be the lost lepton, and an event-level BDT whose output defines the signal bins. The dominant jet-relat

Load-bearing premise

The background estimate assumes that the ratio of jet-related background production in the isolation sideband versus the main band, calibrated in the BDT<0 region, stays the same in the high-BDT signal bins where the signal would appear.

What would settle it

A concrete check: using the full simulation, compute the sideband-to-main-band transfer factor separately in each BDT bin above 0.4 and see whether it drifts outside the assigned 8–22% systematic uncertainty. Alternatively, with the roughly 300 fb−1 already available from Run 3, if the tightest dimuon signal region shows an excess over the background prediction of more than 3 standard deviations, the conclusion that the 2.2σ deviation is a fluctuation would be wrong.

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

If this is right

  • If the null result is right, the search closes the sensitivity gap between soft-lepton and disappearing-track searches for compressed Higgsinos, reaching neutralino mass splittings of 1.5 GeV where previous lepton-based searches lost sensitivity below about 3 GeV.
  • Chargino masses up to about 115 GeV—and Higgsino masses near 100 GeV with splittings down to 1.5 GeV—are excluded at 95% confidence level, tightening the allowed parameter space for natural supersymmetry and electroweak-multiplet dark matter.
  • The lepton+exclusive-track category, which recovers up to 50% of leptons that would otherwise be missed, demonstrates a reusable strategy for other searches at the kinematic edge.
  • The observed 2.2σ excess in the tightest dimuon bin means that the highest-BDT bins deserve scrutiny with more data; a real signal would show up as a growing deviation in this bin.
  • The exclusion strength depends on the assumed 5% branching fraction for the heavier neutralino decaying to two muons or two electrons plus the lightest neutralino; a larger branching fraction would widen the excluded region.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The transfer-factor extrapolation is the point I would stress in a follow-up: the background prediction in the signal bins rests on the assumption that the jet-related background's BDT shape is identical in the isolation sideband and the main band, so a direct measurement of the transfer factor in the highest BDT bins, using more simulation or an independent control region, would be the most natur
  • The result mildly tightens the case against very light natural supersymmetry: with Higgsino masses near 100 GeV excluded for splittings of a few GeV, the simplest fine-tuning-motivated corners must move to heavier masses, larger splittings, or different production assumptions.
  • The same low-momentum lepton-plus-track strategy should translate directly to the larger Run 3 dataset; with two to three times the integrated luminosity, a signal just below today's limits would either appear as a more than 3σ excess in the tightest bins or extend the exclusion by tens of GeV.
  • The published limits can be reinterpreted in other models with inelastic dark matter or near-degenerate electroweak doublets, since the final-state signature depends mainly on the mass spectrum and the virtual-Z decay, not on supersymmetry details.

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

0 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper reports a CMS search for compressed-spectrum Higgsino pair production using 137 fb^-1 of 13 TeV pp collisions. It targets final states with large missing transverse momentum and either two low-momentum muons or a lepton plus an isolated track, using BDT discriminants to define signal regions. Backgrounds are estimated with data-driven methods: the dominant Jetty background is extrapolated from an isolation sideband using a transfer factor measured in a BDT<0 region (Eq. 1), the tau-tau background uses simulation corrected in a control region, and the lepton+track category uses a same-charge control region. No significant deviation from the SM background is observed; the largest local excess is 2.2 sigma in the most sensitive dimuon signal region of the Phase 1 sample. The analysis sets 95% CL exclusion limits in the Higgsino mass versus mass-splitting plane, probing neutralino mass differences down to 1.5 GeV for a Higgsino mass of 100 GeV and excluding Higgsino masses up to 115 GeV at a mass difference of 3.5 GeV.

Significance. If the result is correct, the analysis fills a previously unexplored gap in compressed-electroweakino searches between soft-lepton and disappearing-track signatures. The paper is careful and transparent: it reports the 2.2 sigma excess honestly, assigns systematic uncertainties that grow from 8% to 22% toward the high-BDT bins where the excess appears, provides simulation closure tests for the background methods, and makes tabulated results available on HEPData. The statistical framework is standard for LHC searches, and the central null result is stated with appropriate caution. The main weakness is the reliance on the Jetty BDT-shape extrapolation in Eq. (1), but the paper addresses this with a simulation closure test and a shape systematic; a same-charge dilepton control region is also mentioned, though not described in detail.

minor comments (5)
  1. [Section 4.1, Eq. (1)] The notation N^SR_sideband(x) is confusing: the superscript 'SR' appears to label the sideband, not the signal region. Please rename this to something like N_isoSideband(x) to make clear that the BDT template is taken from the isolation sideband and that the transfer factor is measured in the BDT<0 normalization region.
  2. [Section 4.3] The text states that the systematic uncertainty is assessed using discrepancies in a same-charge dilepton control region, but this validation is not described. If this CR is used to test the Jetty BDT-shape extrapolation at high BDT, a brief description and the observed agreement (or limit) would strengthen the paper. If it serves a different purpose, please state what it validates explicitly.
  3. [Section 5] The paper quotes a 2.2 sigma local significance but does not give a global significance or mention the trials factor. Please either provide the global significance or state explicitly that only the local significance is quoted.
  4. [Section 3] The phrase 'No selected muon or electron may lie within Delta R of 0.01 of the track' should read 'within Delta R < 0.01' to avoid ambiguity.
  5. [Table 2 / Section 4.1] The Phase 1 tau-tau transfer factor has a 90% relative uncertainty. The text notes the impact on sensitivity is negligible, but a short explanation of how such a large uncertainty is handled in the likelihood and why it does not affect the final limits would be helpful.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the central exclusion result is derived from a likelihood fit of an external simplified-MSSM signal against backgrounds extrapolated from disjoint control regions, not from a fitted quantity renamed as a prediction.

full rationale

I walked the claimed derivation chain. The signal hypothesis is an external MSSM simplified model (χ̃20 → Z* χ̃10, Z* → ℓℓ) with cross sections and radiative-correction bounds taken from the literature [24,80,81], not constructed from the data or from the background estimate. The 95% CL exclusion contour is obtained with a CLs maximum-likelihood fit (Section 5) using observed SR counts and an external signal model; no parameter fitted to the SR excess is then relabeled as a prediction. The only predictive step is the SR background estimate. In Eq. (1), N_SR^Jetty(x) = cTF^Jetty N_sideband^SR(x), with cTF measured in the BDT<0 normalization region and the BDT shape taken from the isolation sideband; neither input is the BDT>0 signal-region yield, so the predicted SR background is not equal by construction to the observed SR data. The same-charge CR method of Section 4.2 uses a kinematically similar but disjoint charge-flipped region, again a cross-region extrapolation rather than a self-fit. The closure tests in Section 4.3 are simulation-based validation, not a fit to the SR. Self-citations to previous CMS analyses and detector-performance papers are contextual benchmarks, not the logical load-bearing support for the exclusion; the theory inputs and radiative-correction bound are external. The paper explicitly notes a large statistical uncertainty in the Phase-1 tau-tau transfer factor (Section 4.1), but that is a stated modeling uncertainty, not a circular reduction, and the paper says it has negligible impact on sensitivity. The critic's concern about the Jetty BDT-shape extrapolation is a genuine systematic-risk point, but it concerns closure of a data-driven estimate, not a derivation that reduces to its own input. Verdict: no significant circularity.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

6 free parameters · 6 axioms · 0 invented entities

This is an experimental exclusion search: no theoretical parameters are fitted; the listed transfer factors are data-calibrated normalization constants, not predictions derived from the target result. No new particles, forces, or dimensions are introduced. The Higgsino/neutralino/chargino states are pre-existing MSSM constructs, so the invented-entities ledger is empty.

free parameters (6)
  • Jetty background transfer factor (Phase 0) = 0.73 +/- 0.14
    Fitted in Section 4.1/Table 2 from data yields in normalization control regions; used in Eq. (1) to extrapolate isolation-sideband background into the dimuon signal region.
  • Jetty background transfer factor (Phase 1) = 0.62 +/- 0.06
    Same as above for Phase 1 detector configuration; a data-calibrated extrapolation constant affecting the dominant dimuon background.
  • Tau-tau control-region transfer factor (Phase 0) = 1.18 +/- 0.45
    Data/simulation normalization correction for Z/gamma* -> tau+tau- background in Phase 0, derived in the m_tau_tau control region (Table 2).
  • Tau-tau control-region transfer factor (Phase 1) = 0.29 +/- 0.26
    Data/simulation normalization correction for the tau-tau background in Phase 1; large uncertainty reflects Jetty subtraction in the control region.
  • Exclusive-track transfer factors = muon: 1.11/1.07, electron: 1.04/1.05
    Normalization corrections from same-charge control region to opposite-charge signal region, for each flavor and detector phase (Table 2).
  • FastSim efficiency corrections = 1% jet quality; 5-12% b-tagging
    Hand-applied scale factors to signal simulation to match GEANT4 detector response; these corrections directly affect signal yields and therefore the limits.
axioms (6)
  • domain assumption MSSM compressed Higgsino simplified model with nearly degenerate states, Delta m0 = 2 Delta m+ in the natural subspace
    Used to define signal hypotheses and interpret the limits (Section 1). It is a model assumption, not derived in this paper.
  • domain assumption Branching fraction B(chi0_2 -> l+l- chi0_1) = 5% per flavor and 100% hadronic chargino decay
    Stated in Section 1 as an approximate MSSM upper bound and an insensitivity assumption; signal yields scale with these values.
  • domain assumption Standard-model background simulation is accurate after data-driven corrections
    MC generators, tunes, PDFs, GEANT4 and fast simulation (Section 2); if backgrounds are mis-modeled beyond corrections, limits shift.
  • domain assumption Control-region extrapolation holds: isolation sideband and BDT-sideband transfer factors predict SR background (Eq. 1; same-charge CR for track category)
    The background prediction in signal regions relies on this closure; the paper validates via simulation but the extrapolation remains an assumption.
  • standard math CLs asymptotic approximation
    Used to compute 95% CL limits (Refs. [76-78]); a standard statistical framework.
  • domain assumption Collinear approximation for tau-tau mass reconstruction
    Used in the tau-tau control region to reconstruct m_tau_tau; assumes leptons from taus are collinear and neutrinos are the only MET source.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 38201 in / 12615 out tokens · 112434 ms · 2026-08-03T21:06:46.133807+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We present a search for the pair production of Higgsinos in final states with large missing transverse momentum and either two reconstructed muons or a reconstructed lepton (muon or electron) and an isolated track. The analyzed data correspond to proton-proton collisions with an integrated luminosity of 137 fb$^{-1}$, collected by the CMS experiment at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV in 2016, 2017, and 2018. The signal scenario assumes four nearly mass degenerate higgsino mass eigenstates, two neutralino states, $\widetilde{\chi}^0_2$ and $\widetilde{\chi}^0_1$, with a small mass difference in the range 1$-$10 GeV and two chargino states $\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_1$ with an intermediate mass. The analysis focuses on the decay of the heavier neutralino into the lighter one and a virtual Z boson, which decays into two same-flavor leptons. The leptons have small transverse momentum and/or a small opening angle between the identified muons. An isolated track is used to recover events in which only one of the two leptons is identified. Multivariate discriminants are used to enhance the sensitivity by efficiently rejecting backgrounds from SM processes or misreconstructed tracks and/or leptons. The search explores a unique phase space and probes a previously unexplored region of the signal model parameter space. Mass differences between the two neutralinos are probed down to 1.5 GeV, assuming a Higgsino mass of 100 GeV. The maximum excluded Higgsino mass is 115 GeV.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.16394 by CMS Collaboration.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Diagrams illustrating the production and decay of electroweakinos in the Higgsino [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: Unweighted distributions of the event-level BDT scores for events from the signal [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Distributions of the reconstructed ditau invariant mass ( [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Prefit expected and observed distributions of the event BDT output score in the SRs [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Prefit expected and observed distributions of the event BDT output score in the SRs [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The 95% CL upper limits on the fully degenerate Higgsino production cross section, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p014_6.png] view at source ↗

Review history (2 revisions) →

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Search for higgsinos in compressed mass spectra using low-momentum tracks in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV with the ATLAS detector

    hep-ex 2025-11 accept novelty 6.0

    No excess over the Standard Model is observed; ATLAS excludes chargino masses below 126 GeV at 95% CL for mass splittings of 0.3–2 GeV in a simplified higgsino model.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

86 extracted references · 1 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    On the masses of nebulae and of clusters of nebulae

    F. Zwicky, “On the masses of nebulae and of clusters of nebulae”,Astrophys. J.86(1937) 217,doi:10.1086/143864

    doi:10.1086/143864 1937

  2. [2]

    Rotation of the Andromeda Nebula from a spectroscopic survey of emission regions

    V . C. Rubin and W. K. Ford, Jr., “Rotation of the Andromeda Nebula from a spectroscopic survey of emission regions”,Astrophys. J.159(1970) 379,doi:10.1086/150317

    doi:10.1086/150317 1970

  3. [3]

    The inert doublet model: an archetype for dark matter

    L. Lopez Honorez, E. Nezri, J. F. Oliver, and M. H. G. Tytgat, “The inert doublet model: an archetype for dark matter”,JCAP02(2007) 028, doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2007/02/028

    doi:10.1088/1475-7516/2007/02/028 2007

  4. [4]

    Inelastic dark matter

    D. Tucker-Smith and N. Weiner, “Inelastic dark matter”,Phys. Rev. D64(2001) 043502, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.64.043502

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.64.043502 2001

  5. [5]

    Discovering inelastic thermal relic dark matter at colliders

    E. Izaguirre, G. Krnjaic, and B. Shuve, “Discovering inelastic thermal relic dark matter at colliders”,Phys. Rev. D93(2016) 063523,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.063523

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.93.063523 2016

  6. [6]

    Dual theory for free fermions

    P . Ramond, “Dual theory for free fermions”,Phys. Rev. D3(1971) 2415, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.3.2415

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.3.2415 1971

  7. [7]

    Extension of the algebra of Poincare group generators and violation ofPinvariance

    Y. A. Gol’fand and E. P . Likhtman, “Extension of the algebra of Poincare group generators and violation ofPinvariance”,JETP Lett.13(1971) 323, doi:10.1142/9789814542340_0001

    doi:10.1142/9789814542340_0001 1971

  8. [8]

    Factorizable dual model of pions

    A. Neveu and J. H. Schwarz, “Factorizable dual model of pions”,Nucl. Phys. B31(1971) 86,doi:10.1016/0550-3213(71)90448-2

    doi:10.1016/0550-3213(71)90448-2 1971

  9. [9]

    Possible universal neutrino interaction

    D. V . Volkov and V . P . Akulov, “Possible universal neutrino interaction”,JETP Lett.16 (1972) 438,doi:10.1007/BFb0105270

    doi:10.1007/bfb0105270 1972

  10. [10]

    A Lagrangian model invariant under supergauge transformations

    J. Wess and B. Zumino, “A Lagrangian model invariant under supergauge transformations”,Phys. Lett. B49(1974) 52,doi:10.1016/0370-2693(74)90578-4

    doi:10.1016/0370-2693(74)90578-4 1974

  11. [11]

    Supergauge transformations in four dimensions

    J. Wess and B. Zumino, “Supergauge transformations in four dimensions”,Nucl. Phys. B 70(1974) 39,doi:10.1016/0550-3213(74)90355-1

    doi:10.1016/0550-3213(74)90355-1 1974

  12. [12]

    Supergauge invariant extension of the Higgs mechanism and a model for the electron and its neutrino

    P . Fayet, “Supergauge invariant extension of the Higgs mechanism and a model for the electron and its neutrino”,Nucl. Phys. B90(1975) 104, doi:10.1016/0550-3213(75)90636-7. References 15

    doi:10.1016/0550-3213(75)90636-7 1975

  13. [13]

    Supersymmetry

    P . Fayet and S. Ferrara, “Supersymmetry”,Phys. Rept.32(1977) 249, doi:10.1016/0370-1573(77)90066-7

    doi:10.1016/0370-1573(77)90066-7 1977

  14. [14]

    Supersymmetry, supergravity and particle physics

    H. Nilles, “Supersymmetry, supergravity and particle physics”,Phys. Rept.110(1984) 1, doi:10.1016/0370-1573(84)90008-5

    doi:10.1016/0370-1573(84)90008-5 1984

  15. [15]

    A supersymmetry primer

    S. P . Martin, “A supersymmetry primer”,Adv. Ser. Direct. High Energy Phys.21(2010) 1, doi:10.1142/9789814307505_0001

    doi:10.1142/9789814307505_0001 2010

  16. [16]

    Upper bounds on supersymmetric particle masses

    R. Barbieri and G. F. Giudice, “Upper bounds on supersymmetric particle masses”,Nucl. Phys. B306(1988) 63,doi:10.1016/0550-3213(88)90171-X

    doi:10.1016/0550-3213(88)90171-x 1988

  17. [17]

    One-loop analysis of the electroweak breaking in supersymmetric models and the fine-tuning problem

    B. de Carlos and J. A. Casas, “One-loop analysis of the electroweak breaking in supersymmetric models and the fine-tuning problem”,Phys. Lett. B309(1993) 320, doi:10.1016/0370-2693(93)90940-J

    doi:10.1016/0370-2693(93)90940-j 1993

  18. [18]

    Statistical combination of ATLAS Run 2 searches for charginos and neutralinos at the LHC

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Statistical combination of ATLAS Run 2 searches for charginos and neutralinos at the LHC”,Phys. Rev. Lett.133(2024) 031802, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.133.031802

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.133.031802 2024

  19. [19]

    Combined search for electroweak production of winos, binos, higgsinos, and sleptons in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Combined search for electroweak production of winos, binos, higgsinos, and sleptons in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV”,Phys. Rev. D109 (2024) 112001,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.112001

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.109.112001 2024

  20. [20]

    A review of the supersymmetry searches at LEP

    S. Ask, “A review of the supersymmetry searches at LEP”, inProc. 38th Rencontres de Moriond on Electroweak Interactions and Unified Theories: Les Arcs, France, March 15–22,

  21. [21]

    First dark matter search results from the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) experiment

    LZ Collaboration, “First dark matter search results from the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) experiment”,Phys. Rev. Lett.131(2023) 041002, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.041002

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.131.041002 2023

  22. [22]

    XENON100 dark matter results from a combination of 477 live days

    XENON100 Collaboration, “XENON100 dark matter results from a combination of 477 live days”,Phys. Rev. D94(2016) 122001,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.94.122001

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.94.122001 2016

  23. [23]

    First dark matter search results from the PandaX-I experiment

    PandaX Collaboration, “First dark matter search results from the PandaX-I experiment”, Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron.57(2014) 2024,doi:10.1007/s11433-014-5598-7

    doi:10.1007/s11433-014-5598-7 2014

  24. [24]

    Higgsino dark matter in high-scale supersymmetry

    N. Nagata and S. Shirai, “Higgsino dark matter in high-scale supersymmetry”,J. High Energy Phys.2015(2015), no. 01, 029,doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2015)029

    doi:10.1007/jhep01(2015)029 2015

  25. [25]

    Search for charginos nearly mass degenerate with the lightest neutralino in e+e− collisions at centre-of-mass energies up to 209 GeV

    ALEPH Collaboration, “Search for charginos nearly mass degenerate with the lightest neutralino in e+e− collisions at centre-of-mass energies up to 209 GeV”,Phys. Lett. B533 (2002) 223,doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(02)01584-8

    doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(02)01584-8 2002

  26. [26]

    Absolute mass lower limit for the lightest neutralino of the MSSM from e+e− data at √sup to 209 GeV

    ALEPH Collaboration, “Absolute mass lower limit for the lightest neutralino of the MSSM from e+e− data at √sup to 209 GeV”,Phys. Lett. B583(2004) 247, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2003.12.066

    doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2003.12.066 2004

  27. [27]

    Searches for supersymmetric particles in e +e− collisions up to 208 GeV and interpretation of the results within the MSSM

    DELPHI Collaboration, “Searches for supersymmetric particles in e +e− collisions up to 208 GeV and interpretation of the results within the MSSM”,Eur. Phys. J. C31(2003) 421, doi:10.1140/epjc/s2003-01355-5

    doi:10.1140/epjc/s2003-01355-5 2003

  28. [28]

    Search for charginos with a small mass difference with the lightest supersymmetric particle at √s=189 GeV

    L3 Collaboration, “Search for charginos with a small mass difference with the lightest supersymmetric particle at √s=189 GeV”,Phys. Lett. B482(2000) 31, doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(00)00488-3. 16

    doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(00)00488-3 2000

  29. [29]

    Search for anomalous production of di-lepton events with missing transverse momentum in e+e− collisions at √s=183–209 GeV

    OPAL Collaboration, “Search for anomalous production of di-lepton events with missing transverse momentum in e+e− collisions at √s=183–209 GeV”,Eur. Phys. J. C32(2004) 453,doi:10.1140/epjc/s2003-01466-y

    doi:10.1140/epjc/s2003-01466-y 2004

  30. [30]

    Search for nearly mass-degenerate charginos and neutralinos at LEP

    OPAL Collaboration, “Search for nearly mass-degenerate charginos and neutralinos at LEP”,Eur. Phys. J. C29(2003) 479,doi:10.1140/epjc/s2003-01237-x

    doi:10.1140/epjc/s2003-01237-x 2003

  31. [31]

    Searches for electroweak production of supersymmetric particles with compressed mass spectra in √s=13 TeV pp collisions with the ATLAS detector

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Searches for electroweak production of supersymmetric particles with compressed mass spectra in √s=13 TeV pp collisions with the ATLAS detector”, Phys. Rev. D101(2020) 052005,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.101.052005

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.101.052005 2020

  32. [32]

    Search for chargino-neutralino pair production in final states with three leptons and missing transverse momentum in √s=13 TeV pp collisions with the ATLAS detector

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Search for chargino-neutralino pair production in final states with three leptons and missing transverse momentum in √s=13 TeV pp collisions with the ATLAS detector”,Eur. Phys. J. C81(2021) 1118, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09749-7

    doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09749-7 2021

  33. [33]

    Search for supersymmetry in final states with two or three soft leptons and missing transverse momentum in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Search for supersymmetry in final states with two or three soft leptons and missing transverse momentum in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV”, J. High Energy Phys.2022(2022), no. 04, 091,doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2022)091

    doi:10.1007/jhep04(2022)091 2022

  34. [34]

    Search for disappearing tracks in proton-proton collisions at√s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Search for disappearing tracks in proton-proton collisions at√s=13 TeV”,Phys. Lett. B806(2020) 135502, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2020.135502

    arXiv 2020

  35. [35]

    Search for long-lived charginos based on a disappearing-track signature using 136 fb−1 of pp collisions at √s=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Search for long-lived charginos based on a disappearing-track signature using 136 fb−1 of pp collisions at √s=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector”,Eur. Phys. J. C82(2022) 606,doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-022-10489-5

    doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-022-10489-5 2022

  36. [36]

    Search for supersymmetry in final states with disappearing tracks in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Search for supersymmetry in final states with disappearing tracks in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV”,Phys. Rev. D109(2024) 072007, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.109.072007

    doi:10.1103/physrevd.109.072007 2024

  37. [37]

    Search for nearly mass-degenerate Higgsinos using low-momentum mildly displaced tracks in pp collisions at √s=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Search for nearly mass-degenerate Higgsinos using low-momentum mildly displaced tracks in pp collisions at √s=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector”,Phys. Rev. Lett.132(2024) 221801, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.132.221801

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.132.221801 2024

  38. [38]

    HEPData record for this analysis

    “HEPData record for this analysis”, 2025.doi:10.17182/hepdata.166018

    doi:10.17182/hepdata.166018 2025

  39. [39]

    The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC

    CMS Collaboration, “The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC”,J. Instrum.3(2008) S08004,doi:10.1088/1748-0221/3/08/S08004

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

  40. [40]

    Development of the CMS detector for the CERN LHC Run 3

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

    doi:10.1088/1748-0221/19/05/p05064 2024

  41. [41]

    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”,J. Instrum.15(2020) P10017, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/15/10/P10017

    doi:10.1088/1748-0221/15/10/p10017 2020

  42. [42]

    The CMS trigger system

    CMS Collaboration, “The CMS trigger system”,J. Instrum.12(2017) P01020, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/12/01/P01020

    doi:10.1088/1748-0221/12/01/p01020 2017

  43. [43]

    Performance of the CMS high-level trigger during LHC Run 2

    CMS Collaboration, “Performance of the CMS high-level trigger during LHC Run 2”,J. Instrum.19(2024) P11021,doi:10.1088/1748-0221/19/11/P11021. References 17

    doi:10.1088/1748-0221/19/11/p11021 2024

  44. [44]

    Electron and photon reconstruction and identification with the CMS experiment at the CERN LHC

    CMS Collaboration, “Electron and photon reconstruction and identification with the CMS experiment at the CERN LHC”,J. Instrum.16(2021) P05014, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/16/05/P05014

    doi:10.1088/1748-0221/16/05/p05014 2021

  45. [45]

    Performance of the CMS muon detector and muon reconstruction with proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Performance of the CMS muon detector and muon reconstruction with proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV”,J. Instrum.13(2018) P06015, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/13/06/P06015

    doi:10.1088/1748-0221/13/06/p06015 2018

  46. [46]

    Description and performance of track and primary-vertex reconstruction with the CMS tracker

    CMS Collaboration, “Description and performance of track and primary-vertex reconstruction with the CMS tracker”,J. Instrum.9(2014) P10009, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/9/10/P10009

    doi:10.1088/1748-0221/9/10/p10009 2014

  47. [47]

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

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

    doi:10.1088/1748-0221/12/10/p10003 2017

  48. [48]

    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”,J. Instrum.12(2017) P02014, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/12/02/P02014

    doi:10.1088/1748-0221/12/02/p02014 2017

  49. [49]

    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”,J. Instrum.14(2019) P07004,doi:10.1088/1748-0221/14/07/P07004

    doi:10.1088/1748-0221/14/07/p07004 2019

  50. [50]

    The CMS Phase-1 pixel detector upgrade

    CMS Tracker Group Collaboration, “The CMS Phase-1 pixel detector upgrade”,J. Instrum.16(2021) P02027,doi:10.1088/1748-0221/16/02/P02027

    doi:10.1088/1748-0221/16/02/p02027 2021

  51. [51]

    Reconstruction of electrons with the gaussian-sum filter in the CMS tracker at the LHC

    W. Adam, R. Fr ¨uhwirth, A. Strandlie, and T. Todorov, “Reconstruction of electrons with the gaussian-sum filter in the CMS tracker at the LHC”,J. Phys. G31(2005) N9, doi:10.1088/0954-3899/31/9/N01

    doi:10.1088/0954-3899/31/9/n01 2005

  52. [52]

    Performance of electron reconstruction and selection with the CMS detector in proton-proton collisions at √s=8 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Performance of electron reconstruction and selection with the CMS detector in proton-proton collisions at √s=8 TeV”,J. Instrum.10(2015) P06005, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/10/06/P06005

    doi:10.1088/1748-0221/10/06/p06005 2015

  53. [53]

    The anti-kT jet clustering algorithm

    M. Cacciari, G. P . Salam, and G. Soyez, “The anti-kT jet clustering algorithm”,J. High Energy Phys.2008(2008), no. 04, 063,doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2008/04/063

    doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2008/04/063 2008

  54. [54]

    FASTJETuser manual

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

    doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1896-2 2012

  55. [55]

    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”,J. Instrum.13(2018) P05011, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/13/05/P05011

    doi:10.1088/1748-0221/13/05/p05011 2018

  56. [56]

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

    J. Alwall et al., “The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations”,J. High Energy Phys.2014(2014), no. 07, 079,doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2014)079

    doi:10.1007/jhep07(2014)079 2014

  57. [57]

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

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

    doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-007-0490-5 2008

  58. [58]

    Merging meets matching inMC@NLO

    R. Frederix and S. Frixione, “Merging meets matching inMC@NLO”,J. High Energy Phys. 2012(2012), no. 12, 061,doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2012)061. 18

    doi:10.1007/jhep12(2012)061 2012

  59. [59]

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

    P . Nason, “A new method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms”,J. High Energy Phys.2004(2004), no. 11, 040, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2004/11/040

    doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2004/11/040 2004

  60. [60]

    Matching NLO QCD computations with parton shower simulations: thePOWHEGmethod

    S. Frixione, P . Nason, and C. Oleari, “Matching NLO QCD computations with parton shower simulations: thePOWHEGmethod”,J. High Energy Phys.2007(2007), no. 11, 070, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2007/11/070

    doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2007/11/070 2007

  61. [61]

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

    S. Alioli, P . Nason, C. Oleari, and E. Re, “A general framework for implementing NLO calculations in shower Monte Carlo programs: thePOWHEG BOX”,J. High Energy Phys. 2010(2010), no. 06, 043,doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2010)043

    doi:10.1007/jhep06(2010)043 2010

  62. [62]

    NLO single-top production matched with shower inPOWHEG:s- andt-channel contributions

    S. Alioli, P . Nason, C. Oleari, and E. Re, “NLO single-top production matched with shower inPOWHEG:s- andt-channel contributions”,J. High Energy Phys.2009(2009), no. 09, 111,doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2009/09/111. [Erratum: doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2010)011]

    doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2009/09/111 2009

  63. [63]

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

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

    doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1547-z 2011

  64. [64]

    Event generator tunes obtained from underlying event and multiparton scattering measurements

    CMS Collaboration, “Event generator tunes obtained from underlying event and multiparton scattering measurements”,Eur. Phys. J. C76(2016) 155, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-3988-x

    doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-3988-x 2016

  65. [65]

    Extraction and validation of a new set of CMSPYTHIA8 tunes from underlying-event measurements

    CMS Collaboration, “Extraction and validation of a new set of CMSPYTHIA8 tunes from underlying-event measurements”,Eur. Phys. J. C80(2020) 4, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-7499-4

    doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-7499-4 2020

  66. [66]

    An introduction toPYTHIA8.2

    T. Sj ¨ostrand et al., “An introduction toPYTHIA8.2”,Comput. Phys. Commun.191(2015) 159,doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2015.01.024

    doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2015.01.024 2015

  67. [67]

    GEANT4—a simulation toolkit

    GEANT4 Collaboration, “GEANT4—a simulation toolkit”,Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A506 (2003) 250,doi:10.1016/S0168-9002(03)01368-8

    doi:10.1016/s0168-9002(03)01368-8 2003

  68. [68]

    Parton distributions with QED corrections

    NNPDF Collaboration, “Parton distributions with QED corrections”,Nucl. Phys. B877 (2013) 290,doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2013.10.010

    doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2013.10.010 2013

  69. [69]

    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

    doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-5199-5 2017

  70. [70]

    The fast simulation of the CMS detector at LHC

    CMS Collaboration, S. Abdullin et al., “The fast simulation of the CMS detector at LHC”, inProc. 18th International Conference on Computing in High Energy and Nuclear Physics (CHEP 2010): Taipei, Taiwan, October 18–22, 2010. 2011. [J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 331 (2011) 032049].doi:10.1088/1742-6596/331/3/032049

    doi:10.1088/1742-6596/331/3/032049 2010

  71. [71]

    The fast simulation of the CMS experiment

    A. Giammanco, “The fast simulation of the CMS experiment”, inProc. 20th International Conference on Computing in High Energy and Nuclear Physics (CHEP 2013): Amsterdam, The Netherlands, October 14–18, 2013. 2014. [J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 513 (2014) 022012]. doi:10.1088/1742-6596/513/2/022012

    doi:10.1088/1742-6596/513/2/022012 2013

  72. [72]

    TMVA: Toolkit for multivariate data analysis inROOT

    J. Therhaag, “TMVA: Toolkit for multivariate data analysis inROOT”, inProc. 35th International Conference on High Energy Physics (ICHEP 2010): Paris, France, July 21–28,

    2010

  73. [73]

    Higgs decay toτ +τ −: A possible signature of intermediate mass Higgs bosons at high energy hadron colliders

    R. K. Ellis, I. Hinchliffe, M. Soldate, and J. J. van der Bij, “Higgs decay toτ +τ −: A possible signature of intermediate mass Higgs bosons at high energy hadron colliders”, Nucl. Phys. B297(1988) 221,doi:10.1016/0550-3213(88)90019-3

    doi:10.1016/0550-3213(88)90019-3 1988

  74. [74]

    Expected performance of the ATLAS experiment: detector, trigger and physics

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Expected performance of the ATLAS experiment: detector, trigger and physics”, 2009.doi:10.17181/CERN.1ME0.GHHY

    doi:10.17181/cern.1me0.ghhy 2009

  75. [75]

    CMS physics technical design report, volume II: Physics performance

    CMS Collaboration, “CMS physics technical design report, volume II: Physics performance”,J. Phys. G34(2007) 995,doi:10.1088/0954-3899/34/6/S01

    doi:10.1088/0954-3899/34/6/s01 2007

  76. [76]

    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. [Erratum: doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-013-2501-z]

    doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1554-0 2011

  77. [77]

    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

    doi:10.1016/s0168-9002(99)00498-2 1999

  78. [78]

    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

  79. [79]

    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

    doi:10.1007/s41781-024-00121-4 2024

  80. [80]

    Gaugino production in proton-proton collisions at a center-of-mass energy of 8 TeV

    B. Fuks, M. Klasen, D. R. Lamprea, and M. Rothering, “Gaugino production in proton-proton collisions at a center-of-mass energy of 8 TeV”,J. High Energy Phys.2012 (2012), no. 10, 081,doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2012)081

    doi:10.1007/jhep10(2012)081 2012

Showing first 80 references.