Measurement of the inclusive isolated prompt photon cross section in pp collisions at s √ =8 TeV with the ATLAS detector
EEUROPEAN ORGANISATION FOR NUCLEAR RESEARCH (CERN)
JHEP 06 (2016) 005DOI: 10.1007/JHEP08(2016)005 CERN-EP-2016-03513th October 2016
Measurement of the inclusive isolated prompt photon cross sectionin pp collisions at √ s = The ATLAS Collaboration
Abstract
A measurement of the cross section for the inclusive production of isolated prompt photonsin proton–proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of √ s = | η γ | < .
37 and 1 . ≤ | η γ | < .
37 in thetransverse energy range 25 < E γ T < − , recorded by the ATLAS detector at the LHC. Photon candidatesare identified by combining information from the calorimeters and the inner tracker. Thebackground is subtracted using a data-driven technique, based on the observed calorimetershower-shape variables and the deposition of hadronic energy in a narrow cone around thephoton candidate. The measured cross sections are compared with leading-order and next-to-leading order perturbative QCD calculations and are found to be in a good agreement overten orders of magnitude. c (cid:13) a r X i v : . [ h e p - e x ] O c t ontents Appendix 19
A Tables of measured cross sections 19
1. Introduction
Prompt photons, excluding those originating from hadron decays, are produced at the LHC in the hardprocess pp → γ + X . The measurement of this inclusive production provides a probe of perturbativeQuantum Chromodynamics (pQCD) and specifically, through the dominant leading-order (LO) process q g → q γ , can be used to study the gluon parton distribution function (PDF) [1–6] of the proton. In addi-tion, an improved understanding of prompt photon production is potentially important in aiding analysesof processes for which they are an important background (for instance, measurements of the Higgs bosonin the diphoton decay channel).Inclusive prompt photon production is made up of two contributions: direct and fragmentation photons.Direct photons are those associated with the hard sub-process, whereas fragmentation photons are pro-duced from the fragmentation of a coloured parton. An isolation requirement is used to reduce both thepoorly understood non-perturbative fragmentation contribution and the contamination from the dominantbackground of photons originating from hadron decays, mainly light neutral mesons (i.e. π , η ).Inclusive measurements of prompt photons have been made at hadron colliders by ATLAS [7–9], CMS [10,11], CDF [12], D0 [13, 14], UA1 [15] and UA2 [16]. The analysis presented here uses 20.2 fb − of proton–proton collision data recorded by the ATLAS detector and is performed at a higher centre-of-mass energy(8 TeV) than the previous measurements. Similar measurements have also been made previously in deepinelastic scattering and photoproduction experiments at HERA [17–20].2he fiducial region of the measurement presented is defined in terms of the photon kinematic quant-ities: transverse energy E γ T , pseudorapidity η γ and transverse isolation energy E isoT . The di ff erentialcross section is measured as a function of E γ T , for the highest-energy photon in the event, and spans the25 < E γ T < η γ range is split to give four intervals for the cross-section measure-ment: | η γ | < .
6, 0 . ≤ | η γ | < .
37, 1 . ≤ | η γ | < .
81 and 1 . ≤ | η γ | < .
37. The final constraint is thephoton isolation, where E isoT is calculated within a cone of size ∆ R = .
4, centred around the photon, andis chosen to be E isoT < . + . × − × E γ T . This fiducial region is identical in both the the-oretical calculations and the experimental measurement; however, there are di ff erences in the calculationof E isoT : • At detector level it is the sum of energy deposits in the calorimeter, corrected for the deposits relatedto the photon candidate itself. • At particle level it is the sum of energy from all particles, except for muons, neutrinos and thephoton itself. • At parton level it is the sum of energy from all coloured partons.An additional correction to remove energy from the underlying event (UE) or additional proton–protoninteractions is applied at detector and particle level, as detailed in Section 4.2.There are several di ff erences between the measurement presented here and the previous ATLAS inclusivephoton measurements [7–9]. In addition to the change in centre-of-mass energy and E γ T reach, it alsoprobes for the first time the region 25 < E γ T <
45 GeV for 1 . ≤ | η γ | < .
37. The measurement isalso compared to di ff erent theoretical predictions than used previously, as detailed in Section 3. An E γ T -dependent isolation requirement is introduced for the first time, e ff ectively relaxing the maximum E isoT athigh E γ T , as outlined in Section 4 along with the discussion of changing the upper edge of the excluded η γ region from 1.52 to 1.56. Other di ff erences in the background estimation, unfolding and uncertaintycalculations are highlighted in Sections 5, 6 and 7 respectively, and the results are shown in Section 8.
2. ATLAS detector and data
The ATLAS experiment [21] at the LHC is a multi-purpose particle detector with a forward-backwardsymmetric cylindrical geometry and a near 4 π coverage in solid angle. It consists of an inner trackingdetector surrounded by a thin superconducting solenoid providing a 2 T axial magnetic field, electromag-netic and hadronic calorimeters, and a muon spectrometer. The inner tracking detector covers the pseu-dorapidity range | η | < .
5. It consists of silicon pixel, silicon microstrip, and transition radiation trackingdetectors. Within the region | η | < .
2, EM calorimetry is provided by high-granularity lead / liquid-argon(LAr) sampling calorimeters, with an additional thin LAr presampler covering | η | < .
8, to correct forenergy loss in material upstream of the calorimeters. A hadronic (steel / scintillator-tile) calorimeter coversthe central pseudorapidity range ( | η | < . | η | = .
9. The muon spectrometersurrounds the calorimeters and is based on three large air-core toroid superconducting magnets with eight ATLAS uses a right-handed coordinate system with its origin at the nominal interaction point (IP) in the centre of the detectorand the z -axis along the beam pipe. The x -axis points from the IP to the centre of the LHC ring, and the y -axis pointsupwards. Cylindrical coordinates ( r , φ ) are used in the transverse plane, φ being the azimuthal angle around the z -axis.The pseudorapidity is defined in terms of the polar angle θ as η = − ln tan( θ/ ∆ R ≡ (cid:112) ( ∆ η ) + ( ∆ φ ) . √ s = − with an uncertainty of 1.9% [22]. Theevents used in the analysis were recorded by the trigger system using single-photon triggers [23], whichuse identification criteria looser than the selection described in Section 4.1. For the high-level triggers, E γ T thresholds are defined in 20 GeV steps from 20 GeV to 120 GeV. Multiple trigger thresholds arerequired because the triggers are prescaled to reduce their rate, except for the unprescaled 120 GeVthreshold. Each threshold is used in the analysis within an exclusive E γ T range, determined to be wherethe trigger has an e ffi ciency greater than 99.5%, with respect to the full selection detailed in Section 4.Only events taken during periods of good data quality, where the calorimeters and inner tracking detectorsare in nominal operation, are retained in the dataset. To remove any non-collision background, each eventis required to have a reconstructed vertex consistent with the average beam-spot position, where the vertexis required to have at least two associated tracks. This condition is close to 100% e ffi cient for retainingevents with photons within the detector acceptance.
3. Theoretical predictions
The theoretical calculations used in the analysis consist of LO Monte Carlo (MC) event generatorsand calculations at next-to-leading-order (NLO) or higher. Two event generators are used at LO: P y - thia herpa et P hox [28], P e T e R [29,30] and MCFM [31].Event generation with P ythia includes: the description of the PDFs using CTEQ6L1 [32], the simulationof initial- and final-state radiation, the simulation of the UE using the ATLAS AU2 set of tuned parameters(tune) [33] based on the multiple parton interaction model [34], and the modelling of the hadronisationbased on the Lund string model [35]. The LO direct contribution to the prompt photon production is fullyincluded in the main matrix-element calculation. In contrast, the fragmentation contribution is modelledby final-state QED radiation arising from calculations of all 2 → ythia is used to extract the central values of the measurement, while S herpa is used as a second LO gen-erator as it showed excellent agreement with the results in the ATLAS photon plus jet measurement [36].The S herpa predictions are used to cross-check the results and determine uncertainties arising from theuse of MC simulations in parts of the analysis. The S herpa calculations are performed with up to fourparton emissions and the radiation of gluons and photons is done coherently. This means that the frag-mentation contribution is produced di ff erently to the contribution in P ythia and is also indistinguishablefrom the direct contribution, unlike P ythia where the contributions can be separated. The S herpa eventsare produced with: the CT10 [37] PDF, the UE model based on the recommended tune provided by theS herpa authors, and hadronisation modelled using a modified version of the cluster model [38].4he LO simulated events used in the analysis are reweighted in order to match as well as possible theexperimental conditions of the dataset. One of these corrections is to reproduce the pile-up (additionalproton–proton interactions in the same bunch crossing) conditions, where the weights are derived from thedistribution of average interactions per bunch crossing ( µ ) in data and MC simulations with an additionalconstant to improve the agreement of the number of primary vertices. A second weight is used to ensurean accurate η γ measurement by reproducing in the MC simulations the z -vertex position of the hardinteraction measured in data.The final cross sections are compared to these LO generators and also to parton-level calculations. Thekinematic selection used in all of the predictions matches the fiducial region defined in Section 1. Forthe higher order predictions the nominal renormalisation ( µ R ), factorisation ( µ F ) and fragmentation ( µ f )scales were set to the photon transverse energy ( µ R = µ F = µ f = E γ T ).J et P hox , a well-established NLO parton-level generator for the prediction of processes with photons inthe final state, is used as the baseline to compare the results. J et P hox is capable of calculating the double-di ff erential inclusive prompt photon cross section d σ/ (d E γ T d η γ ) at parton level to NLO accuracy forboth the direct and fragmentation photon processes. The calculation can be configured to use an E γ T -dependent isolation requirement and uses the NLO photon fragmentation function of BFG set II [39,40]. To check the e ff ect of the PDF choice on the predictions, they are generated with di ff erent PDFsets (CT10, MSTW2008NLO [41], NNPDF2.3 [42] and HERAPDF1.5 [43]), provided by the LHAPDFpackage [44]. The strong coupling constant ( α S ) is also obtained for each PDF using LHAPDF and thefine-structure constant ( α EM ) is set to the J et P hox default of 1 / et P hox calculationsand are estimated by means of procedures [45] used in the previous measurements: • The uncertainty on the scale choice is evaluated from the envelope of varying the three scales by afactor of two around the nominal value, both simultaneously and independently (keeping two fixedat the nominal value). The impact on the predicted cross section varies between 12% and 20%. • The PDF uncertainty is obtained by repeating the J et P hox calculation for the 52 eigenvector setsof the CT10 PDF and applying a scaling factor in order to produce the uncertainty for the 68%confidence-level (CL) interval. The corresponding uncertainty in the cross section increases with E γ T and varies between 5% at 100 GeV and 15% at 900 GeV. • The uncertainty due to α S is evaluated, following the recommendation of Ref. [37], by repeatingthe calculation with α S varied by ± .
002 around the central value of 0.118 and scaling in orderto obtain the uncertainty for the 68% CL interval. The uncertainty due to α S is smaller than thatfrom the scale or PDF uncertainties for the whole phase space; it slowly decreases from 9% withincreasing E γ T , with the exception of above 900 GeV where it increases to 15%. • To be able to correct from parton level to particle level, additional hadronisation-plus-UE correctionfactors were evaluated using the two alternative hadronisation and UE models in P ythia and S herpa .The study was performed by repeating the calculation with and without the hadronisation and UEcontributions and resulted in a correction close to unity for both MC models with a small deviationof at most 2% at low E γ T . Therefore, as in the previous analyses, no correction factor is appliedto the central value; however, in this measurement an E γ T -dependent uncertainty is assigned to thetheory, based on the largest deviation from unity between the two models. The E isoT requirement selected in this analysis is chosen to not be too restrictive for the NLO calculations, to avoid potentialunphysical values in these predictions [28]. e T e R is used as a second parton-level generator to predict the di ff erential isolated prompt photon crosssection at NLO including the resummation of threshold logarithms at the next-to-next-to-next-to-leading-logarithmic (NNNLL) level. P e T e R is roughly equivalent to a fixed-order calculation at next-next-to-leading-order (NNLO); there is currently no exact calculation available for inclusive photons at this order.To account for the isolation criteria applied in the measurement, the P e T e R result at NLO is normalised tothat from J et P hox . The P e T e R predictions are supplemented with the resummation of large electroweakSudakov logarithms according to Ref. [46, 47]. These electroweak corrections, not included in the pre-dictions from J et P hox , provide estimates of electroweak uncertainties that are important for high E γ T andalso mean that, unlike J et P hox , P e T e R uses a running α EM . The scale uncertainty is calculated similarlyto J et P hox , by varying the scales around the central value, but in P e T e R there are four scales [48]: hardmatching, jet, soft and factorisation. Finally the PDF uncertainty is taken directly from J et P hox .An additional study was made using MCFM, following on from the studies in Ref. [49], with parameters(CT10 PDF, photon isolation, scale choice and α EM ) matching those in J et P hox . MCFM calculates thefragmentation process only to LO and therefore deviations from J et P hox predictions were expected belowapproximately 200 GeV. Surprisingly, however, even at higher E γ T the predictions from MCFM werefound to be consistently below the predictions from J et P hox , although within the theoretical uncertainties.This trend is under investigation by the calculations authors and the predictions are not presented here.
4. Photon selection
The photon selection, in both data and MC simulation, is based on the reconstruction [50] of an EMcluster in the calorimeter as a photon candidate. The absence of an associated track in the inner detectorclassifies the photon candidate as an unconverted photon, whereas it is classified as a converted photonif the cluster is matched to two tracks coming from a conversion vertex or to one track which has no hitsin the innermost layer of the inner tracking detector. Both the converted and unconverted candidates arekept in the analysis. A further track-based classification [51] is used to minimise the number of electronsreconstructed as photons, although this introduces a slight decrease in e ffi ciency for reconstructing con-verted photons. The conversion classification is used both to determine the size of the photon cluster inthe barrel calorimeter and also as an input to the dedicated energy calibration [52], which is applied toaccount for energy loss before the EM calorimeter. This calibration starts by correcting the response fromeach of the layers in the EM calorimeter and then applies a response calibration from MC simulationsto the cluster energies. After accounting for detector response variations not included in the simulation,such as high-voltage inhomogeneities in some sectors, energy scale factors are then applied from thecomparison of the detector response to Z boson decays to electron–positron pair events in data and MCsimulations.Following this calibration, only photon candidates with E γ T >
25 GeV and a cluster barycentre (in thesecond layer of the EM calorimeter) lying within | η γ | < .
37 or 1 . ≤ | η γ | < .
37 are retained forthe analysis. The transition region between the barrel and end-cap calorimeters (1 . ≤ | η γ | < . .
56, comparedto the value of 1 .
52 used previously, to improve the accuracy of the photon energy measurement as itavoids using clusters calibrated by scintillators that are part of the hadronic calorimeter. Finally, photonsreconstructed near regions of the calorimeter a ff ected by read-out or high-voltage failures are not included6n the analysis. The remaining photon candidates are then used in this analysis if they satisfy furtherselection and quality criteria based on their calorimeter shower shapes and isolation energy. In order to reduce the previously mentioned largest background, namely non-prompt photons originatingmainly from decays of energetic π and η mesons, nine shower-shape variables [50] are exploited, sim-ilarly to the previous ATLAS inclusive photon measurements. These shower-shape variables are formedbased on the relative and absolute energy deposition within the calorimeter cells using the full granu-larity of the di ff erent layers of the calorimeter system. The particular selection criteria for each of thenine variables are tuned for converted and unconverted photons separately, as well as being adjusted de-pending on η γ (in intervals matching the four η γ regions of this measurement). In the MC simulationsthe same criteria are applied as in data, but with two corrections. Firstly, the shower-shape variables areshifted [50] to match the measured distributions in data. Secondly, additional correction factors (at mosta few percent from unity) to match the identification e ffi ciency in the MC simulations and that in data areapplied, calculated in each E γ T and η γ interval.To quantify the e ff ect of the identification criteria, the identification e ffi ciency for prompt photons isdefined in MC simulations as: (cid:15) MCid = N MCid , matched N MCparticle . (1)where reconstructed photons have to satisfy the identification criteria and be geometrically matched,with ∆ R < .
2, to isolated photons generated at particle level. This (cid:15)
MCid is shown in Figure 1 alongwith the e ffi ciencies for converted and unconverted photons. The unconverted photon e ffi ciency is highand approximately constant for more energetic photons, as expected since they should leave a morepronounced shower in the detector. However, a drop in e ffi ciency is observed when combining withconverted photons. The e ffi ciency to reconstruct conversions decreases at high E γ T ( >
150 GeV) whereit becomes more di ffi cult to separate the two tracks from the conversions. These very close-by tracks aremore likely to fail the tighter selections, including a transition radiation requirement, applied to single-track conversion candidates. The photon candidates are required to be isolated to distinguish between prompt photons and hadronicbackground. As stated in Section 1, E isoT is calculated from topological clusters of calorimeter cells in acone of size ∆ R = . E isoT before applying the isolation requirement. These corrections are typicallybetween 1 . E isoT distribution to reproduce the distribution fromdata, it is corrected in each E γ T and η γ interval by the di ff erence between the mean value of E isoT in data At particle level the conversion classification is based on information from the detailed detector simulation of the photon, bysearching for a conversion of the photon into an electron–positron pair within the geometrical region of the inner trackingdetector. [GeV] γ T E30 40 100 200 300 1000 M C i d ∈ γ η | ≤ YTHIA P ATLAS
Simulation candidates: γ unconvertedall Figure 1: The photon identification e ffi ciency (with statistical uncertainty) as a function of E γ T determined in P ythia MC simulations, along with the separated e ffi ciencies for unconverted and converted photons. The e ffi ciency isshown for the region | η γ | < .
6, with similar results found in other | η γ | regions. and MC simulations. These corrections range from a few hundred MeV up to 3–4 GeV and are consistentfor both P ythia and S herpa .The measurement presented here uses an E γ T -dependent isolation requirement: E isoT < . + . × − × E γ T . (2)In contrast to the fixed value (3 or 7 GeV) used in the previous analyses, this requirement has beenoptimised to retain more of the photons satisfying the identification criteria in Section 4.1 whilst alsoobtaining the best signal-to-background ratio throughout the large E γ T range of the measurement. Inaddition, the fraction of photon candidates that have satisfied the identification criteria and subsequentlyalso satisfy the isolation requirement, stays high and constant. This is due to the isolation requirementbeing relaxed at higher E γ T , compared to using a fixed cut.
5. Background subtraction
The number of events with a photon candidate ( N γ, data ) satisfying the kinematic, identification and isola-tion selection criteria, as detailed in Section 4, has contributions from hadronic background and electrons.These contributions are removed statistically by techniques detailed below.The hadronic background (from meson decays and jets) is removed by a data-driven technique, as donein the previous ATLAS analyses. This technique uses a two-dimensional sidebands method based on theisolation and identification criteria. For the identification, photons either satisfy the full criteria of all theshower-shape variables outlined in Section 4.1 or an orthogonal selection which aims to maximise thehadronic background. This orthogonal selection is achieved by inverting four variables related to the firstlayer of the EM calorimeter, which has cells with a very small width in η . For isolation, photons are eitherisolated as defined in Section 4.2 or non-isolated by having E isoT > . + . × − × E γ T . Thefour regions are then defined in data to be: • N A , data : photon candidates satisfying both the isolation and identification criteria, i.e. N γ, data . • N B , data : photon candidates that are non-isolated, but satisfy the identification criteria.8 N C , data : photon candidates that only satisfy the orthogonal identification criteria but are isolated. • N D , data : photon candidates that only satisfy the orthogonal identification criteria and are non-isolated.As defined above, there is a 3 GeV separation between the non-isolated region and the isolated region.This separation is used to limit the number of particle-level signal photons that fall into the backgroundregions. To quantify this e ff ect, signal leakage fractions are calculated in MC simulations: f K , MC = N K , MCsignal N A , MCsignal , (3)with K = B , C , D . These leakage fractions are found to be small and are calculated in P ythia for thecentral value, with S herpa used as a cross-check.The two-dimensional sidebands method assumes that the two chosen variables are independent for thebackground. The isolation and identification criteria are chosen to minimise any such dependence, butany deviation from this assumption can be accounted for by using MC simulations to calculate the ratio: R bkg = N A , MCbkg · N D , MCbkg N B , MCbkg · N C , MCbkg , (4)where N K , MCbkg are the number of background events in each of the regions K = A , B , C , D . For the centralvalue the assumption, confirmed in a control region, that they are independent ( R bkg =
1) is used; however, R bkg is varied in Section 7 to obtain the systematic uncertainty of any potential dependence.The four sideband regions, signal leakage fractions and R bkg are then used to solve for N A , datasignal via: N A , datasignal = N A , data − R bkg · ( N B , data − f B , MC N A , datasignal ) · ( N C , data − f C , MC N A , datasignal )( N D , data − f D , MC N A , datasignal ) . (5)This solution is used in the cross-section measurement via the signal purity, which is defined as: P signal = N A , datasignal N A , data . (6)In all four η γ regions, P signal is found to rise with E γ T from 60% at 25 GeV to 100% at around 300 GeV.In the highest E γ T interval the method is inaccurate due to a lack of events in the background regions sohere the central value of P signal from the previous E γ T interval is used in the cross-section calculation.Finally, after the above subtraction a remaining background of fake photons from electrons is accoun-ted for. As in previous measurements, this is estimated using MC simulations, scaled to the measuredintegrated luminosity in data, of Z and W boson decays to electrons. Reconstructed photons from thesesimulations passing the selection of Section 4 are counted if they are geometrically matched to a particle-level electron. The number of fake photons removed ( N e → γ ) is less than 0.2% of the remaining signalphotons ( N γ, data P signal ) in all four η γ regions and for most of the E γ T range – only reaching a maximum of0.7% in some low E γ T intervals. As this is such a small e ff ect no systematic uncertainty is assigned to thissubtraction. 9 . Cross section The di ff erential isolated prompt photon cross section as a function of E γ T (calculated in four | η γ | regions)includes elements described in the previous sections and takes the form:d σ d E γ T = (cid:82) L d t ( ∆ E γ T ) · ( N γ, data · P signal − N e → γ ) · (cid:15) trig · (cid:15) corr , (7)where E γ T is that of the highest transverse energy photon satisfying the kinematic, identification and isol-ation criteria (Section 4). The trigger e ffi ciency ( (cid:15) trig ) corrects N γ, data for any events that would satisfy theselection criteria but were not recorded in the dataset (Section 2). The number of events ( N γ, data ) with aphoton satisfying the selection criteria is corrected for background using the previously introduced sub-traction factors P signal and N e → γ (Section 5). Further, the overall size of the studied dataset is accountedfor by dividing by the total integrated luminosity ( (cid:82) L d t ) and the cross section is normalised to inverseGeV by dividing each measured E γ T interval by its size ( ∆ E γ T ).The remaining factor, (cid:15) corr , is the unfolding correction factor used to correct the measurement to particlelevel to allow for direct comparisons to theoretical predictions. The unfolding factors are derived usingP ythia , with S herpa used as a cross-check. The unfolding correction factors are extracted by using abin-by-bin unfolding procedure and are defined as: (cid:15) corr = N MCsignal N MCparticle , (8)where N MCsignal and N MCparticle refer to the number of events with an isolated photon at detector level andparticle level respectively.The main contribution to (cid:15) corr is the identification e ffi ciency (Section 4.1), resulting in a very similarshape including the slight decrease at high E γ T . However, (cid:15) corr di ff ers as it also contains the e ff ects fromphoton migrations between di ff erent E γ T intervals and the isolation e ffi ciency (Section 4.2). The overallcorrection lies between 0.8 and 0.9 and therefore indicates that detector e ff ects are rather small.The results of the bin-by-bin unfolding procedure are cross-checked using an iterative unfolding method,which reduces the reliance on the shape of the MC simulation distributions of E γ T at particle or detectorlevel. The method is based on Bayes Theorem [54] and iteratively unfolds the spectrum by changingthe prior of the particle-level distribution to the previously unfolded spectrum for the next iteration. Theresults show that the two unfolding procedures are in very good agreement, considering statistical uncer-tainties only.
7. Uncertainties
To estimate the systematic uncertainties, the cross-section calculation was repeated varying the selectionprocedure, background subtraction techniques or the unfolding correction factor. One di ff erence com-pared to the previous analyses is that this measurement makes use of the Bootstrap technique [55] toevaluate the statistical influence on systematic uncertainties, achieved by producing a large number of In this analysis the result converges after four iterations. E γ T intervals un-til the propagated uncertainty has a su ffi ciently large statistical significance, followed by performing aGaussian kernel smoothing on the original E γ T intervals.The following text describes the included uncertainty sources (quantifying those that are smaller): • The photon energy scale is altered by varying systematic sources up and down, with the resultingshifts being summed in quadrature to provide the total uncertainty. The sources are split to accountfor correlations and range from being related to: detector material and read-out; simulation of thedetector; extrapolations from data-driven measurements; and finally details related to the di ff er-ences between unconverted or converted photon showers in the calorimeter. The uncertainty in thephoton energy scale is around 1%, except for the region 1 . ≤ | η γ | < .
81, but the uncertainty inthe measurement is larger due to the steeply falling cross section. • The admixture of direct and fragmentation photons in a given E γ T interval a ff ects the calculationof both P signal and (cid:15) corr . Instead of using the default MC simulation fraction, a fit of the E γ T distri-bution is performed in P ythia to find the optimal admixture (as done in the recent photon plus jetpaper [36]). The uncertainty is derived by comparing the results from this optimal admixture withthe default P ythia simulation. This replaces the systematic uncertainty obtained previously froman arbitrary removal or doubling of the fragmentation component. • R bkg is set to unity when P signal is calculated. As described in Section 5, this follows the assumptionthat there are no correlations between the isolation and identification criteria for the background.A test of this assumption is performed by subdividing the background-dominated region with anadditional non-isolated criterion and then repeating the two-dimensional sidebands in backgroundonly regions. A 10% di ff erence from unity is found in this test, which is then applied to R bkg tocalculate the uncertainty. • As described in Section 4.1, the photon identification e ffi ciency in the MC simulations uses correc-tion factors and the associated uncertainty in these alters the cross section by 0.5% for most of the E γ T range. In the lowest E γ T intervals it reaches 2% and above 550 GeV it ranges from 1% to 4%(increasing with η γ ). • For the above photon identification correction factors an extra uncertainty is required, obtainedfrom MC simulations, to account for a small di ff erence in the photon isolation requirement appliedin this analysis from that used for the measurement of the photon identification e ffi ciency. Thisimpacts the cross section by 0.5% but rises to 1% for the highest E γ T intervals. • The orthogonal identification selection in Section 5 relies on inverting the selection criteria of fourof the shower-shape variables. The uncertainty in this procedure is estimated by inverting eitheronly two of these variables or by inverting an extra variable. A data-driven technique is used todisentangle this uncertainty from that already included in the R bkg uncertainty above. The resultinguncertainty is 2% for E γ T <
100 GeV but quickly falls to zero for higher E γ T . • The isolation requirement used to define the background region in the P signal calculation was alteredso that the constant part of the requirement (7 . ± ff erence in the MC simulations between particle-level and detector-level isolation). Theresulting uncertainty is less than 0.5%. 11 The photon energy resolution is calculated from several independent sources in a similar manner tothe energy scale, but the resolution is found to be of much less importance than the scale as it onlyproduces an uncertainty of 0.5%, which rises to 1% for the highest E γ T intervals. • The e ff ect of unfolding is investigated by using a smooth function to reweight the MC simulationsto match the data E γ T distribution. Unfolding the data using this reweighted MC prediction gives adi ff erence of less than 0.5% compared to the nominal value. • The uncertainty in the correction factors from the choice of QCD-cascade and hadronisation modelis derived from comparing S herpa with P ythia . To avoid double counting the e ff ects from thefragmentation contribution, the P ythia simulation with the optimal admixture of direct and frag-mentation photons is used again. The resulting uncertainty is 2% at low E γ T but quickly falls to zeroas E γ T increases. • The integrated luminosity has an uncertainty measured to be ± . • Other uncertainties were studied, but are not included in the systematic uncertainty as they werefound to be negligible. Examples of these studies include: investigating the trigger e ffi ciency(statistical uncertainties are < . E γ T interval. However, the sources are treated as correlatedacross di ff erent intervals in E γ T . This combination is shown in Figure 2 along with several of the mainsystematic uncertainties detailed above. The energy scale uncertainty dominates the high- E γ T region,especially in the region 1 . < | η γ | < .
81. At low E γ T the uncertainties from the R bkg variation andadmixture of direct and fragmentation photons are of similar magnitude and dominate the uncertainty. Inthe E γ T range 80–200 GeV the main systematic uncertainties are of similar order and, in all but the region1 . < | η γ | < .
81, this leads to the luminosity uncertainty being larger than this combination of the othersystematic uncertainties.The statistical uncertainty is mainly from the data, but also has a component due to the MC simulation.This component is from the reliance on MC simulations in the calculation of P signal and (cid:15) corr . The resultingtotal statistical uncertainty is 1–2% for most of the measured E γ T range, until it rises steeply in the highest E γ T intervals.
8. Results and discussion
The final cross sections are measured following Eqn. 7 in the fiducial region given in Section 1. The sys-tematic uncertainties, as described in Section 7, are combined with the statistical uncertainty, but do notinclude the luminosity uncertainty. The measured cross sections are compared to theoretical predictions,as detailed in Section 3, along with uncertainties from the combination of the scale, PDF, α S and hadron-isation plus UE uncertainties. Figure 3 shows a summary of the results (with the measured cross sectionsalso being tabulated in Appendix A), where it can be seen that the measurement is well described overallby J et P hox over ten orders of magnitude in cross section. The total cross sections shown in Table 1 are12 TLAS = 8 TeV, 20.2 fbsData 2012Systematic Unc.:CombinedEnergy ScaleAdmixtureLumi Uncert. bkg R [GeV] γ T E30 100 200 1000 S ys t e m a t i c U n c . γ η | ≤ ATLAS [GeV] γ T E30 100 200 1000 S ys t e m a t i c U n c . γ η | ≤ ATLAS [GeV] γ T E30 100 200 1000 S ys t e m a t i c U n c . γ η | ≤ ATLAS [GeV] γ T E30 100 200 1000 S ys t e m a t i c U n c . γ η | ≤ ATLAS
Figure 2: Summary of the relative size of the combined systematic uncertainty (which excludes the luminosity) andits four main contributions, shown as a function of E γ T . integrated over the entire E γ T for each η γ region. As seen in the previous measurement [9] the total crosssections are 20% higher in data than those predicted by J et P hox , but the results are consistent withinthe uncertainties. It can also be seen that the measurement uncertainty, dominated by the systematicuncertainty, is smaller than the theoretical uncertainty. | η γ | range E γ T range [GeV] Measured total σ [nb] J et P hox total σ [nb]0–0.6 25–1500 15 . + . − . (syst) ± . ± . . ± . . + . − . (syst) ± . ± . . ± . . + . − . (syst) ± . ± . . ± . . + . − . (syst) ± . ± . . ± . Table 1: Measured and predicted total cross sections shown for each of the four | η γ | ranges. The J et P hox predictionsare made using the CT10 PDF. The di ff erence between data and J et P hox is explored further in Figure 4 where the cross-section ratiosare shown in each of the four η γ regions as a function E γ T . Each η γ region shows a similar trend at low E γ T ,in that the J et P hox NLO predictions are up to 20% lower than those measured. This di ff erence remainsconstant, especially in the central η γ region, for E γ T <
500 GeV where the fragmentation contributiondecreases with E γ T from being a large contribution to the cross section, showing that J et P hox models thiscontribution well apart from the normalisation. The normalisation di ff erence decreases above this E γ T andin the range 1100 ≤ E γ T < ff erence when comparing the central value to those from MSTW2008, NNPDF2.313 [GeV] γ T E
30 40 100 200 300 1000 [ pb / G e V ] γ T / d E σ d ) | < 0.6 (x 10 γ η | ≤ Data 2012 = 8 TeV, 20.2 fbs ATLAS
CT10
HOX P ET NLO: J ) | < 1.37 (x 10 γ η | ≤ | < 1.81 (x 10 γ η | ≤ | < 2.37 (x 10 γ η | ≤ Figure 3: Di ff erential cross sections from data and J et P hox (using the CT10 PDF), shown as a function of E γ T forthe four | η γ | regions. The distributions are scaled, by specified factors, to separate the distributions visually. and HeraPDF1.5, with any di ff erence at high E γ T being covered by the large theoretical uncertainty.The overall trend in di ff erences between data and theory is similar to that seen in the measurement using2011 data. However, a significant increase in the experimental precision of this measurement compared tothe previous ATLAS measurements reveals new qualitative features in the comparison to J et P hox . Whilethe theoretical uncertainties have not changed, the measurement uncertainties are halved over most ofthe phase space. This makes the uncertainties considerably smaller than the theoretical uncertainties,except in the statistically limited highest E γ T intervals, which leads to disagreement in some E γ T intervalsbetween the measurement and the J et P hox prediction. This improvement in accuracy can help to reducePDF uncertainties once the measurement is included in a global fit.In order for the data to provide a tighter constraint on proton PDF uncertainties, it would be preferableboth to have a better general agreement between data and the predictions and also to reduce the dominanttheoretical scale uncertainties. This can be achieved by using calculations beyond NLO, as done here byusing the predictions from P e T e R. This comparison is shown in Figure 5 where it can be seen that P e T e Rdoes an excellent job of removing the normalisation di ff erence seen between data and J et P hox , especiallyin the region | η γ | < .
37. The uncertainties shown, from combining the scale, PDF and electroweakuncertainties, are about 20% lower than those from J et P hox . The P e T e R predictions match the data well,within the combined measured and theoretical uncertainties, in all of the measured phase space. The Only in the region 1 . ≤ | η γ | < .
81 is the 2011 uncertainty comparable, as it is measured in a larger η γ region. TLAS = 8 TeV, 20.2 fbsData 2012Lumi Uncert.NLO: CT10 HOX P ET J | < 0.6 γ η | ≤
0 | < 1.37 γ η | ≤ γ η | ≤ γ η | ≤ [GeV] γ T E30 100 200 1000 T heo r y / D a t a γ η | ≤ ATLAS [GeV] γ T E30 100 200 1000 T heo r y / D a t a γ η | ≤ ATLAS [GeV] γ T E30 100 200 1000 T heo r y / D a t a γ η | ≤ ATLAS [GeV] γ T E30 100 200 1000 T heo r y / D a t a γ η | ≤ ATLAS
Figure 4: Ratio of theory (J et P hox using the CT10 PDF) to data for the di ff erential cross sections as a function of E γ T for the four | η γ | regions. The statistical component of the uncertainty in the data is indicated by the horizontal tickmarks whereas the whole error bar corresponds to the combined statistical and systematic uncertainty (the additionalsystematic uncertainty arising from the uncertainty in the integrated luminosity is displayed separately as a dottedline). The NLO total uncertainty from J et P hox is displayed as a band, which corresponds to the combination ofthe scale, α S , PDF and hadronisation-plus-UE uncertainties. In the highest E γ T interval of the | η γ | < . improved normalisation and smaller uncertainties are also seen in the total cross sections as shown inTable 2. | η γ | range E γ T range [GeV] P e T e R total σ [nb]0–0.6 25–1500 14 . ± . . ± . . ± . . ± . Table 2: Predicted total cross sections from P e T e R shown for each of the four | η γ | ranges, made using the CT10PDF. Finally, the measured cross sections are also compared to the LO parton shower MC calculations inFigure 6. Here it can be seen that generally S herpa , without any normalisation scaling, matches the datain the range 100 ≤ E γ T <
500 GeV in all four η γ regions. At low E γ T , where a larger fragmentationcontribution is expected, S herpa matches the predictions from J et P hox and thus is in disagreement withthe measurement. At high E γ T the S herpa prediction tends to be above the measured value. P ythia onthe other hand is similar to J et P hox for E γ T >
100 GeV and hence is below the measured cross sectionin all η γ regions except 1 . ≤ | η γ | < .
37. At low E γ T , the P ythia prediction has a very di ff erent shape15 TLAS = 8 TeV, 20.2 fbsData 2012Lumi Uncert.NLO: R CT10 E T E P CT10
HOX P ET J | < 0.6 γ η | ≤
0 | < 1.37 γ η | ≤ γ η | ≤ γ η | ≤ [GeV] γ T E30 100 200 1000 T heo r y / D a t a γ η | ≤ ATLAS [GeV] γ T E30 100 200 1000 T heo r y / D a t a γ η | ≤ ATLAS [GeV] γ T E30 100 200 1000 T heo r y / D a t a γ η | ≤ ATLAS [GeV] γ T E30 100 200 1000 T heo r y / D a t a γ η | ≤ ATLAS
Figure 5: Ratio of theory (P e T e R and J et P hox both using the CT10 PDF) to data for the di ff erential cross sectionsas a function of E γ T for the four | η γ | regions. The statistical component of the uncertainty in the data is indicated bythe horizontal tick marks whereas the whole error bar corresponds to the combined statistical and systematic uncer-tainty (the additional systematic uncertainty arising from the uncertainty in the integrated luminosity is displayedseparately as a dotted line). The NLO total uncertainty from P e T e R is displayed as a band, which corresponds tothe combination of the scale, PDF and electroweak uncertainties. In the highest E γ T interval of the | η γ | < . than both the measurement and the other predictions, tending to overestimate the measured cross section,which suggests that the fragmentation contribution is not well modelled by the parton shower.16 TLAS = 8 TeV, 20.2 fbsData 2012Lumi Uncert.NLO: CT10 HOX P ET JLO:
YTHIA P HERPA
S | < 0.6 γ η | ≤
0 | < 1.37 γ η | ≤ γ η | ≤ γ η | ≤ [GeV] γ T E30 100 200 1000 T heo r y / D a t a γ η | ≤ ATLAS [GeV] γ T E30 100 200 1000 T heo r y / D a t a γ η | ≤ ATLAS [GeV] γ T E30 100 200 1000 T heo r y / D a t a γ η | ≤ ATLAS [GeV] γ T E30 100 200 1000 T heo r y / D a t a γ η | ≤ ATLAS
Figure 6: Ratio of theory (P ythia , S herpa and J et P hox ) to data for the di ff erential cross sections as a function of E γ T for the four | η γ | regions. The statistical component of the uncertainty in the data is indicated by the horizontal tickmarks whereas the whole error bar corresponds to the combined statistical and systematic uncertainty (the additionalsystematic uncertainty arising from the uncertainty in the integrated luminosity is displayed separately as a dottedline). The NLO total uncertainty from J et P hox is displayed as a band, which corresponds to the combination ofthe scale, α S , PDF and hadronisation-plus-UE uncertainties. In the highest E γ T interval of the | η γ | < .
9. Conclusion
In conclusion, a measurement of the inclusive isolated photon cross section has been presented, using20.2 fb − of √ s = < E γ T < η γ regions ( | η γ | < .
6, 0 . ≤ | η γ | < .
37, 1 . ≤ | η γ | < .
81 and 1 . ≤ | η γ | < .
37) and with the isolationrequirement E isoT < . + . × − × E γ T calculated within a cone of size ∆ R = .
4. Theresults presented cover ten orders of magnitude in cross section, extending the measurement above 1 TeVwhilst also revisiting lower- E γ T data points. The results show a significant improvement in experimentaluncertainties over the previous measurements. The results are compared to J et P hox predictions, which,for most of the E γ T range, have a similar shape but lie below the data. The predictions from P e T e R agreemuch better in normalisation and, unlike J et P hox , are within the uncertainties of the measured crosssection for the entire phase space measured, showing the need for higher-order calculations to betterunderstand this process theoretically. Comparing the results to LO parton shower MC calculations showsdi ff erent trends, with the largest di ff erences being at low E γ T in the region dominated by the fragmentationcontribution. Finally, halving the measured uncertainties compared to previous measurements will makethis a useful constraint on proton PDF uncertainties once the result is included in a global fit.17 cknowledgements We thank CERN for the very successful operation of the LHC, as well as the support sta ff from ourinstitutions without whom ATLAS could not be operated e ffi ciently.We acknowledge the support of ANPCyT, Argentina; YerPhI, Armenia; ARC, Australia; BMWFW andFWF, Austria; ANAS, Azerbaijan; SSTC, Belarus; CNPq and FAPESP, Brazil; NSERC, NRC and CFI,Canada; CERN; CONICYT, Chile; CAS, MOST and NSFC, China; COLCIENCIAS, Colombia; MSMTCR, MPO CR and VSC CR, Czech Republic; DNRF and DNSRC, Denmark; IN2P3-CNRS, CEA-DSM / IRFU, France; GNSF, Georgia; BMBF, HGF, and MPG, Germany; GSRT, Greece; RGC, HongKong SAR, China; ISF, I-CORE and Benoziyo Center, Israel; INFN, Italy; MEXT and JSPS, Japan;CNRST, Morocco; FOM and NWO, Netherlands; RCN, Norway; MNiSW and NCN, Poland; FCT, Por-tugal; MNE / IFA, Romania; MES of Russia and NRC KI, Russian Federation; JINR; MESTD, Serbia;MSSR, Slovakia; ARRS and MIZŠ, Slovenia; DST / NRF, South Africa; MINECO, Spain; SRC andWallenberg Foundation, Sweden; SERI, SNSF and Cantons of Bern and Geneva, Switzerland; MOST,Taiwan; TAEK, Turkey; STFC, United Kingdom; DOE and NSF, United States of America. In addition,individual groups and members have received support from BCKDF, the Canada Council, CANARIE,CRC, Compute Canada, FQRNT, and the Ontario Innovation Trust, Canada; EPLANET, ERC, FP7, Ho-rizon 2020 and Marie Skłodowska-Curie Actions, European Union; Investissements d’Avenir Labex andIdex, ANR, Région Auvergne and Fondation Partager le Savoir, France; DFG and AvH Foundation, Ger-many; Herakleitos, Thales and Aristeia programmes co-financed by EU-ESF and the Greek NSRF; BSF,GIF and Minerva, Israel; BRF, Norway; Generalitat de Catalunya, Generalitat Valenciana, Spain; theRoyal Society and Leverhulme Trust, United Kingdom.The crucial computing support from all WLCG partners is acknowledged gratefully, in particular fromCERN and the ATLAS Tier-1 facilities at TRIUMF (Canada), NDGF (Denmark, Norway, Sweden),CC-IN2P3 (France), KIT / GridKA (Germany), INFN-CNAF (Italy), NL-T1 (Netherlands), PIC (Spain),ASGC (Taiwan), RAL (UK) and BNL (USA) and in the Tier-2 facilities worldwide.18 ppendix
A. Tables of measured cross sections
The measured E γ T -di ff erential cross sections are listed in Tables 3, 4, 5 and 6. E γ T range [GeV] d σ γ / d E γ T Stat. Unc. Sys. Unc. Lumi. Unc. [pb / GeV]25–35 1 . ± . ± . . ± . · . ± . ± . . ± . · . ± . ± . . ± . · . ± . ± . . ± . · . ± . ± . . ± . · . ± . ± . . ± . · . ± . ± . . ± . . ± . ± . . ± . . ± . ± . . ± . . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − Table 3: The inclusive prompt photon cross section with systematic and statistical uncertainties for the region | η γ | < . γ T range [GeV] d σ γ / d E γ T Stat. Unc. Sys. Unc. Lumi. Unc. [pb / GeV]25–35 1 . ± . ± . . ± . · . ± . ± . . ± . · . ± . ± . . ± . · . ± . ± . . ± . · . ± . ± . . ± . · . ± . ± . . ± . · . ± . ± . . ± . . ± . ± . . ± . . ± . ± . . ± . . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − Table 4: The inclusive prompt photon cross section with systematic and statistical uncertainties for the region0 . ≤ | η γ | < . γ T range [GeV] d σ γ / d E γ T Stat. Unc. Sys. Unc. Lumi. Unc. [pb / GeV]25–35 4 . ± . ± . . ± . · . ± . ± . . ± . · . ± . ± . . ± . · . ± . ± . . ± . · . ± . ± . . ± . · . ± . ± . . ± . . ± . ± . . ± . . ± . ± . . ± . . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − Table 5: The inclusive prompt photon cross section with systematic and statistical uncertainties for the region1 . ≤ | η γ | < . γ T range [GeV] d σ γ / d E γ T Stat. Unc. Sys. Unc. Lumi. Unc. [pb / GeV]25–35 9 . ± . ± . . ± . · . ± . ± . . ± . · . ± . ± . . ± . · . ± . ± . . ± . · . ± . ± . . ± . · . ± . ± . . ± . · . ± . ± . . ± . . ± . ± . . ± . . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − . ± . ± . . ± . · − Table 6: The inclusive prompt photon cross section with systematic and statistical uncertainties for the region1 . ≤ | η γ | < . eferences [1] P. Aurenche et al., The gluon contents of the nucleon probed with real and virtual photons ,Phys. Rev. D (1989) 3275.[2] H. Lai et al., Global QCD analysis and the CTEQ parton distributions ,Phys. Rev. D (1995) 4763, arXiv: hep-ph/9410404 .[3] A. D. Martin et al., Parton distributions: A New global analysis , Eur. Phys. J. C (1998) 463,arXiv: hep-ph/9803445 .[4] A. D. Martin et al., Parton distributions and the LHC: W and Z production ,Eur. Phys. J. C (2000) 133, arXiv: hep-ph/9907231 .[5] P. Aurenche et al., A New critical study of photon production in hadronic collisions ,Phys. Rev. D (2006) 094007, arXiv: hep-ph/0602133 .[6] D. d’Enterria and J. Rojo, Quantitative constraints on the gluon distribution function in the protonfrom collider isolated-photon data , Nucl. Phys. B (2012) 311, arXiv: .[7] ATLAS Collaboration,
Measurement of the inclusive isolated prompt photon cross section in ppcollisions at √ s = with the ATLAS detector , Phys. Rev. D (2011) 052005,arXiv: .[8] ATLAS Collaboration, Measurement of the inclusive isolated prompt photon cross-section in ppcollisions at √ s = using pb − of ATLAS data , Phys. Lett. B (2011) 150,arXiv: .[9] ATLAS Collaboration, Measurement of the inclusive isolated prompt photons cross section in ppcollisions at √ s = with the ATLAS detector using . fb − ,Phys. Rev. D (2014) 052004, arXiv: .[10] CMS Collaboration, Measurement of the Isolated Prompt Photon Production Cross Section in ppCollisions at √ s = TeV , Phys. Rev. Lett. (2011) 082001, arXiv: .[11] CMS Collaboration,
Measurement of the Di ff erential Cross Section for Isolated Prompt PhotonProduction in pp Collisions at 7 TeV , Phys. Rev. D (2011) 052011,arXiv: .[12] CDF Collaboration, D. Acosta et al., Measurement of the inclusive isolated prompt photon crosssection in p ¯ p collisions at √ s = . TeV using the CDF detector ,Phys. Rev. D (2009) 111106, arXiv: .[13] D0 Collaboration, V. M. Abazov et al., Measurement of the di ff erential cross sections for isolateddirect photon pair production in p ¯ p collisions at √ s = . TeV , Phys. Lett. B (2013) 6,arXiv: .[14] D0 Collaboration, V. M. Abazov et al.,
Measurement of the isolated photon cross section in p ¯ p collisions at √ s = ,Phys. Lett. B (2006) 151, arXiv: hep-ex/0511054 .[15] UA1 Collaboration, C. Albajar et al., Direct Photon Production at the CERN Proton - anti-Proton Collider ,Phys. Lett. B (1988) 385. 2316] UA2 Collaboration, J. Alitti et al.,
A Measurement of the direct photon production cross-section at the CERN anti-p p collider ,Phys. Lett. B (1991) 544.[17] H1 Collaboration, F. D. Aaron et al.,
Measurement of isolated photon production in deep-inelastic scattering at HERA ,Eur. Phys. J. C (2008) 371–387, arXiv: .[18] ZEUS Collaboration, S. Chekanov et al., Measurement of isolated photon production in deep inelastic ep scattering ,Phys. Lett. B (2010) 16, arXiv: .[19] H1 Collaboration, F. D. Aaron et al.,
Prompt Photons in Photoproduction at HERA ,Eur. Phys. J. C (2010) 17–33, arXiv: .[20] ZEUS Collaboration, H. Abramowicz et al., Photoproduction of isolated photons, inclusively and with a jet, at HERA ,Phys. Lett. B (2014) 293, arXiv: .[21] ATLAS Collaboration,
The ATLAS Experiment at the CERN Large Hadron Collider ,JINST (2008) S08003.[22] ATLAS Collaboration, Improved luminosity determination in pp collisions at √ s = usingthe ATLAS detector at the LHC , Eur. Phys. J. C (2013) 2518, arXiv: .[23] ATLAS Collaboration, Performance of the ATLAS Electron and Photon Trigger in p-p Collisions at √ s = in 2011 ,ATLAS-CONF-2012-048, 2012, url : http://cds.cern.ch/record/1450089 .[24] T. Sjöstrand, S. Mrenna and P. Z. Skands, A Brief Introduction to PYTHIA 8.1 ,Comp. Phys. Comm. (2008) 852, arXiv: .[25] T. Gleisberg et al.,
Event generation with SHERPA 1.1 , JHEP (2009) 007,arXiv: .[26] ATLAS Collaboration,
The ATLAS Simulation Infrastructure , Eur. Phys. J. C (2010) 823–874,arXiv: .[27] S. Agostinelli et al., GEANT4: A Simulation Toolkit , Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A (2003) 250.[28] S. Catani et al.,
Cross-section of isolated prompt photons in hadron-hadron collisions ,JHEP (2002) 028, arXiv: hep-ph/0204023 .[29] T. Becher, C. Lorentzen and M. D. Schwartz,
Precision Direct Photon and W-Boson Spectra at High p T and Comparison to LHC Data ,Phys. Rev. D (2012) 054026, and we thank Matthew Schwartz for providing theoreticalpredictions for the inclusive photon cross section using the P e T e R calculation,arXiv: , url : http://peter.hepforge.org .[30] M. D. Schwartz, Precision direct photon spectra at high energy and comparison to the 8 TeV ATLAS data , (2016),arXiv: .[31] J. M. Campbell and R. K. Ellis,
MCFM for the Tevatron and the LHC , Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. (2010) 10, and we thank Ciaran Williams and John Campbell for their help in theongoing investigation of the unexpected di ff erences seen in the MCFM predictions,arXiv: . 2432] J. Pumplin et al., New Generation of Parton Distributions with Uncertainties from Global QCD Analysis ,JHEP (2002) 012, arXiv: hep-ph/0201195 .[33] ATLAS Collaboration,
Summary of ATLAS Pythia 8 tunes , ATL-PHYS-PUB-2012-003, 2012, url : http://cds.cern.ch/record/1474107 .[34] P. Bartalini et al., Multi-Parton Interactions at the LHC , (2011), arXiv: .[35] B. Andersson et al.,
Parton Fragmentation and String Dynamics , Phys. Rep. (1983) 31.[36] ATLAS Collaboration, Dynamics of isolated-photon plus jet production in pp collisions at √ s = with the ATLAS detector , Nucl. Phys. B (2013) 483,arXiv: .[37] H.-L. Lai et al., New parton distributions for collider physics , Phys. Rev. D (2010) 074024,arXiv: .[38] J.-C. Winter, F. Krauss and G. So ff , A modified cluster-hadronisation model ,Eur. Phys. J. C (2004) 381, arXiv: hep-ph/0311085 .[39] L. Bourhis, M. Fontannaz and J. Guillet, Quark and gluon fragmentation functions into photons ,Eur. Phys. J. C (1998) 529, arXiv: hep-ph/9704447 .[40] L. Bourhis et al., Next-to-leading order determination of fragmentation functions ,Eur. Phys. J. C (2001) 89, arXiv: hep-ph/0009101 .[41] A. Martin et al., Parton distributions for the LHC , Eur. Phys. J. C (2009) 189,arXiv: .[42] R. D. Ball et al., Parton distributions with LHC data , Nucl. Phys. B (2013) 244,arXiv: .[43] H1 and ZEUS Collaborations,‘HERAPDF1.5: (Preliminary) H1prelim-10-142, ZEUS-prel-10-018’, url : .[44] W. Giele et al., The QCD / SM working group: Summary report , (2002) 275,arXiv: hep-ph/0204316 .[45] R. Blair et al.,‘NLO Theoretical Predictions for Photon Measurements Using the PHOX Generators’,CERN-OPEN-2011-041, Geneva, 2011, url : http://cds.cern.ch/record/1379880 .[46] T. Becher and X. Garcia i Tormo, Electroweak Sudakov e ff ects in W , Z and γ production at large transverse momentum ,Phys. Rev. D (2013) 013009, arXiv: .[47] T. Becher and X. Garcia i Tormo, Addendum: Electroweak Sudakov e ff ects in W, Z and gammaproduction at large transverse momentum , Phys. Rev. D (2015) 073011,arXiv: .[48] T. Becher and M. D. Schwartz, Direct photon production with e ff ective field theory ,JHEP (2010) 040, arXiv: .[49] ATLAS Collaboration, A study of the sensitivity to the proton parton distributions of the inclusive photon productioncross section in pp collisions at measured by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC ,ATL-PHYS-PUB-2013-018, 2013, url : http://cds.cern.ch/record/1636863 .2550] ATLAS Collaboration, Measurement of the photon identification e ffi ciencies with the ATLASdetector using LHC Run-1 data , (2016), arXiv: .[51] ATLAS Collaboration, Expected photon performance in the ATLAS experiment ,ATL-PHYS-PUB-2011-007, 2011, url : http://cdsweb.cern.ch/record/1345329 .[52] ATLAS Collaboration, Electron and photon energy calibration with the ATLAS detector using LHC Run 1 data ,Eur. Phys. J. C (2014) 3071, arXiv: .[53] M. Cacciari, G. Salam and S. Sapeta, On the characterisation of the underlying event ,JHEP (2010) 065, arXiv: .[54] T. Bayes,
An essay toward solving a problem in the doctrine of chances ,Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. Lond. (1764) 370.[55] G. Bohm, Introduction to statistics and data analysis for physicists ,Hamburg: Verl. Dt. Elektronen-Synchrotron, 2010 336, isbn : 978-3-935702-41-6.26 he ATLAS Collaboration
G. Aad , B. Abbott , J. Abdallah , O. Abdinov , B. Abeloos , R. Aben , M. Abolins ,O.S. AbouZeid , N.L. Abraham , H. Abramowicz , H. Abreu , R. Abreu , Y. Abulaiti ,B.S. Acharya , a , L. Adamczyk , D.L. Adams , J. Adelman , S. Adomeit , T. Adye ,A.A. A ff older , T. Agatonovic-Jovin , J. Agricola , J.A. Aguilar-Saavedra , S.P. Ahlen ,F. Ahmadov , b , G. Aielli , H. Akerstedt , T.P.A. Åkesson , A.V. Akimov ,G.L. Alberghi , J. Albert , S. Albrand , M.J. Alconada Verzini , M. Aleksa ,I.N. Aleksandrov , C. Alexa , G. Alexander , T. Alexopoulos , M. Alhroob , M. Aliev ,G. Alimonti , J. Alison , S.P. Alkire , B.M.M. Allbrooke , B.W. Allen , P.P. Allport ,A. Aloisio , A. Alonso , F. Alonso , C. Alpigiani , B. Alvarez Gonzalez ,D. Álvarez Piqueras , M.G. Alviggi , B.T. Amadio , K. Amako , Y. Amaral Coutinho ,C. Amelung , D. Amidei , S.P. Amor Dos Santos , A. Amorim , S. Amoroso ,N. Amram , G. Amundsen , C. Anastopoulos , L.S. Ancu , N. Andari , T. Andeen ,C.F. Anders , G. Anders , J.K. Anders , K.J. Anderson , A. Andreazza , V. Andrei ,S. Angelidakis , I. Angelozzi , P. Anger , A. Angerami , F. Anghinolfi , A.V. Anisenkov , c ,N. Anjos , A. Annovi , M. Antonelli , A. Antonov , J. Antos , F. Anulli , M. Aoki ,L. Aperio Bella , G. Arabidze , Y. Arai , J.P. Araque , A.T.H. Arce , F.A. Arduh , J-F. Arguin ,S. Argyropoulos , M. Arik , A.J. Armbruster , L.J. Armitage , O. Arnaez , H. Arnold ,M. Arratia , O. Arslan , A. Artamonov , G. Artoni , S. Artz , S. Asai , N. Asbah ,A. Ashkenazi , B. Åsman , L. Asquith , K. Assamagan , R. Astalos , M. Atkinson ,N.B. Atlay , K. Augsten , G. Avolio , B. Axen , M.K. Ayoub , G. Azuelos , d , M.A. Baak ,A.E. Baas , M.J. Baca , H. Bachacou , K. Bachas , M. Backes , M. Backhaus ,P. Bagiacchi , P. Bagnaia , Y. Bai , J.T. Baines , O.K. Baker , E.M. Baldin , c ,P. Balek , T. Balestri , F. Balli , W.K. Balunas , E. Banas , Sw. Banerjee , e ,A.A.E. Bannoura , L. Barak , E.L. Barberio , D. Barberis , M. Barbero , T. Barillari ,T. Barklow , N. Barlow , S.L. Barnes , B.M. Barnett , R.M. Barnett , Z. Barnovska ,A. Baroncelli , G. Barone , A.J. Barr , L. Barranco Navarro , F. Barreiro ,J. Barreiro Guimarães da Costa , R. Bartoldus , A.E. Barton , P. Bartos , A. Basalaev ,A. Bassalat , A. Basye , R.L. Bates , S.J. Batista , J.R. Batley , M. Battaglia ,M. Bauce , F. Bauer , H.S. Bawa , f , J.B. Beacham , M.D. Beattie , T. Beau ,P.H. Beauchemin , P. Bechtle , H.P. Beck ,g , K. Becker , M. Becker , M. Beckingham ,C. Becot , A.J. Beddall , A. Beddall , V.A. Bednyakov , M. Bedognetti , C.P. Bee ,L.J. Beemster , T.A. Beermann , M. Begel , J.K. Behr , C. Belanger-Champagne , A.S. Bell ,G. Bella , L. Bellagamba , A. Bellerive , M. Bellomo , K. Belotskiy , O. Beltramello ,N.L. Belyaev , O. Benary , D. Benchekroun , M. Bender , K. Bendtz , N. Benekos ,Y. Benhammou , E. Benhar Noccioli , J. Benitez , J.A. Benitez Garcia , D.P. Benjamin ,J.R. Bensinger , S. Bentvelsen , L. Beresford , M. Beretta , D. Berge ,E. Bergeaas Kuutmann , N. Berger , F. Berghaus , J. Beringer , S. Berlendis , N.R. Bernard ,C. Bernius , F.U. Bernlochner , T. Berry , P. Berta , C. Bertella , G. Bertoli ,F. Bertolucci , I.A. Bertram , C. Bertsche , D. Bertsche , G.J. Besjes ,O. Bessidskaia Bylund , M. Bessner , N. Besson , C. Betancourt , S. Bethke ,A.J. Bevan , W. Bhimji , R.M. Bianchi , L. Bianchini , M. Bianco , O. Biebel ,D. Biedermann , R. Bielski , N.V. Biesuz , M. Biglietti , J. Bilbao De Mendizabal ,H. Bilokon , M. Bindi , S. Binet , A. Bingul , C. Bini , S. Biondi , D.M. Bjergaard ,C.W. Black , J.E. Black , K.M. Black , D. Blackburn , R.E. Blair , J.-B. Blanchard ,27.E. Blanco , T. Blazek , I. Bloch , C. Blocker , W. Blum , ∗ , U. Blumenschein , S. Blunier ,G.J. Bobbink , V.S. Bobrovnikov , c , S.S. Bocchetta , A. Bocci , C. Bock , M. Boehler ,D. Boerner , J.A. Bogaerts , D. Bogavac , A.G. Bogdanchikov , C. Bohm , V. Boisvert ,T. Bold , V. Boldea , A.S. Boldyrev , M. Bomben , M. Bona , M. Boonekamp ,A. Borisov , G. Borissov , J. Bortfeldt , D. Bortoletto , V. Bortolotto , K. Bos ,D. Boscherini , M. Bosman , J.D. Bossio Sola , J. Boudreau , J. Bou ff ard ,E.V. Bouhova-Thacker , D. Boumediene , C. Bourdarios , S.K. Boutle , A. Boveia , J. Boyd ,I.R. Boyko , J. Bracinik , A. Brandt , G. Brandt , O. Brandt , U. Bratzler , B. Brau ,J.E. Brau , H.M. Braun , ∗ , W.D. Breaden Madden , K. Brendlinger , A.J. Brennan ,L. Brenner , R. Brenner , S. Bressler , T.M. Bristow , D. Britton , D. Britzger , F.M. Brochu ,I. Brock , R. Brock , G. Brooijmans , T. Brooks , W.K. Brooks , J. Brosamer , E. Brost ,J.H Broughton , P.A. Bruckman de Renstrom , D. Bruncko , R. Bruneliere , A. Bruni ,G. Bruni , BH Brunt , M. Bruschi , N. Bruscino , P. Bryant , L. Bryngemark , T. Buanes ,Q. Buat , P. Buchholz , A.G. Buckley , I.A. Budagov , F. Buehrer , M.K. Bugge ,O. Bulekov , D. Bullock , H. Burckhart , S. Burdin , C.D. Burgard , B. Burghgrave , K. Burka ,S. Burke , I. Burmeister , E. Busato , D. Büscher , V. Büscher , P. Bussey , J.M. Butler ,A.I. Butt , C.M. Buttar , J.M. Butterworth , P. Butti , W. Buttinger , A. Buzatu ,A.R. Buzykaev , c , S. Cabrera Urbán , D. Caforio , V.M. Cairo , O. Cakir , N. Calace ,P. Calafiura , A. Calandri , G. Calderini , P. Calfayan , L.P. Caloba , D. Calvet , S. Calvet ,T.P. Calvet , R. Camacho Toro , S. Camarda , P. Camarri , D. Cameron ,R. Caminal Armadans , C. Camincher , S. Campana , M. Campanelli , A. Campoverde ,V. Canale , A. Canepa , M. Cano Bret , J. Cantero , R. Cantrill , T. Cao ,M.D.M. Capeans Garrido , I. Caprini , M. Caprini , M. Capua , R. Caputo , R.M. Carbone ,R. Cardarelli , F. Cardillo , I. Carli , T. Carli , G. Carlino , L. Carminati , S. Caron ,E. Carquin , G.D. Carrillo-Montoya , J.R. Carter , J. Carvalho , D. Casadei ,M.P. Casado , h , M. Casolino , D.W. Casper , E. Castaneda-Miranda , A. Castelli ,V. Castillo Gimenez , N.F. Castro , i , A. Catinaccio , J.R. Catmore , A. Cattai , J. Caudron ,V. Cavaliere , E. Cavallaro , D. Cavalli , M. Cavalli-Sforza , V. Cavasinni ,F. Ceradini , L. Cerda Alberich , B.C. Cerio , A.S. Cerqueira , A. Cerri , L. Cerrito ,F. Cerutti , M. Cerv , A. Cervelli , S.A. Cetin , A. Chafaq , D. Chakraborty , S.K. Chan ,Y.L. Chan , P. Chang , J.D. Chapman , D.G. Charlton , A. Chatterjee , C.C. Chau ,C.A. Chavez Barajas , S. Che , S. Cheatham , A. Chegwidden , S. Chekanov ,S.V. Chekulaev , G.A. Chelkov , j , M.A. Chelstowska , C. Chen , H. Chen , K. Chen ,S. Chen , S. Chen , X. Chen , Y. Chen , H.C. Cheng , H.J Cheng , Y. Cheng ,A. Cheplakov , E. Cheremushkina , R. Cherkaoui El Moursli , V. Chernyatin , ∗ , E. Cheu ,L. Chevalier , V. Chiarella , G. Chiarelli , G. Chiodini , A.S. Chisholm , A. Chitan ,M.V. Chizhov , K. Choi , A.R. Chomont , S. Chouridou , B.K.B. Chow , V. Christodoulou ,D. Chromek-Burckhart , J. Chudoba , A.J. Chuinard , J.J. Chwastowski , L. Chytka ,G. Ciapetti , A.K. Ciftci , D. Cinca , V. Cindro , I.A. Cioara , A. Ciocio , F. Cirotto ,Z.H. Citron , M. Ciubancan , A. Clark , B.L. Clark , M.R. Clark , P.J. Clark , R.N. Clarke ,C. Clement , Y. Coadou , M. Cobal , A. Coccaro , J. Cochran , L. Co ff ey ,L. Colasurdo , B. Cole , S. Cole , A.P. Colijn , J. Collot , T. Colombo , G. Compostella ,P. Conde Muiño , E. Coniavitis , S.H. Connell , I.A. Connelly , V. Consorti ,S. Constantinescu , C. Conta , G. Conti , F. Conventi , k , M. Cooke , B.D. Cooper ,A.M. Cooper-Sarkar , T. Cornelissen , M. Corradi , F. Corriveau , l , A. Corso-Radu ,A. Cortes-Gonzalez , G. Cortiana , G. Costa , M.J. Costa , D. Costanzo , G. Cottin ,G. Cowan , B.E. Cox , K. Cranmer , S.J. Crawley , G. Cree , S. Crépé-Renaudin , F. Crescioli ,28.A. Cribbs , M. Crispin Ortuzar , M. Cristinziani , V. Croft , G. Crosetti ,T. Cuhadar Donszelmann , J. Cummings , M. Curatolo , J. Cúth , C. Cuthbert , H. Czirr ,P. Czodrowski , S. D’Auria , M. D’Onofrio , M.J. Da Cunha Sargedas De Sousa , C. Da Via ,W. Dabrowski , T. Dai , O. Dale , F. Dallaire , C. Dallapiccola , M. Dam , J.R. Dandoy ,N.P. Dang , A.C. Daniells , N.S. Dann , M. Danninger , M. Dano Ho ff mann , V. Dao ,G. Darbo , S. Darmora , J. Dassoulas , A. Dattagupta , W. Davey , C. David , T. Davidek ,M. Davies , P. Davison , Y. Davygora , E. Dawe , I. Dawson , R.K. Daya-Ishmukhametova ,K. De , R. de Asmundis , A. De Benedetti , S. De Castro , S. De Cecco , N. De Groot ,P. de Jong , H. De la Torre , F. De Lorenzi , D. De Pedis , A. De Salvo , U. De Sanctis ,A. De Santo , J.B. De Vivie De Regie , W.J. Dearnaley , R. Debbe , C. Debenedetti ,D.V. Dedovich , I. Deigaard , J. Del Peso , T. Del Prete , D. Delgove , F. Deliot ,C.M. Delitzsch , M. Deliyergiyev , A. Dell’Acqua , L. Dell’Asta , M. Dell’Orso ,M. Della Pietra , k , D. della Volpe , M. Delmastro , P.A. Delsart , C. Deluca , D.A. DeMarco ,S. Demers , M. Demichev , A. Demilly , S.P. Denisov , D. Denysiuk , D. Derendarz ,J.E. Derkaoui , F. Derue , P. Dervan , K. Desch , C. Deterre , K. Dette , P.O. Deviveiros ,A. Dewhurst , S. Dhaliwal , A. Di Ciaccio , L. Di Ciaccio , W.K. Di Clemente ,C. Di Donato , A. Di Girolamo , B. Di Girolamo , B. Di Micco , R. Di Nardo ,A. Di Simone , R. Di Sipio , D. Di Valentino , C. Diaconu , M. Diamond , F.A. Dias ,M.A. Diaz , E.B. Diehl , J. Dietrich , S. Diglio , A. Dimitrievska , J. Dingfelder , P. Dita ,S. Dita , F. Dittus , F. Djama , T. Djobava , J.I. Djuvsland , M.A.B. do Vale , D. Dobos ,M. Dobre , C. Doglioni , T. Dohmae , J. Dolejsi , Z. Dolezal , B.A. Dolgoshein , ∗ ,M. Donadelli , S. Donati , P. Dondero , J. Donini , J. Dopke , A. Doria ,M.T. Dova , A.T. Doyle , E. Drechsler , M. Dris , Y. Du , J. Duarte-Campderros ,E. Duchovni , G. Duckeck , O.A. Ducu , D. Duda , A. Dudarev , L. Duflot , L. Duguid ,M. Dührssen , M. Dunford , H. Duran Yildiz , M. Düren , A. Durglishvili , D. Duschinger ,B. Dutta , M. Dyndal , C. Eckardt , K.M. Ecker , R.C. Edgar , W. Edson , N.C. Edwards ,T. Eifert , G. Eigen , K. Einsweiler , T. Ekelof , M. El Kacimi , V. Ellajosyula , M. Ellert ,S. Elles , F. Ellinghaus , A.A. Elliot , N. Ellis , J. Elmsheuser , M. Elsing , D. Emeliyanov ,Y. Enari , O.C. Endner , M. Endo , J.S. Ennis , J. Erdmann , A. Ereditato , G. Ernis ,J. Ernst , M. Ernst , S. Errede , E. Ertel , M. Escalier , H. Esch , C. Escobar , B. Esposito ,A.I. Etienvre , E. Etzion , H. Evans , A. Ezhilov , F. Fabbri , L. Fabbri , G. Facini ,R.M. Fakhrutdinov , S. Falciano , R.J. Falla , J. Faltova , Y. Fang , M. Fanti , A. Farbin ,A. Farilla , C. Farina , T. Farooque , S. Farrell , S.M. Farrington , P. Farthouat , F. Fassi ,P. Fassnacht , D. Fassouliotis , M. Faucci Giannelli , A. Favareto , W.J. Fawcett , L. Fayard ,O.L. Fedin , m , W. Fedorko , S. Feigl , L. Feligioni , C. Feng , E.J. Feng , H. Feng ,A.B. Fenyuk , L. Feremenga , P. Fernandez Martinez , S. Fernandez Perez , J. Ferrando ,A. Ferrari , P. Ferrari , R. Ferrari , D.E. Ferreira de Lima , A. Ferrer , D. Ferrere ,C. Ferretti , A. Ferretto Parodi , F. Fiedler , A. Filipˇciˇc , M. Filipuzzi , F. Filthaut ,M. Fincke-Keeler , K.D. Finelli , M.C.N. Fiolhais , L. Fiorini , A. Firan , A. Fischer ,C. Fischer , J. Fischer , W.C. Fisher , N. Flaschel , I. Fleck , P. Fleischmann , G.T. Fletcher ,G. Fletcher , R.R.M. Fletcher , T. Flick , A. Floderus , L.R. Flores Castillo ,M.J. Flowerdew , G.T. Forcolin , A. Formica , A. Forti , A.G. Foster , D. Fournier , H. Fox ,S. Fracchia , P. Francavilla , M. Franchini , D. Francis , L. Franconi , M. Franklin ,M. Frate , M. Fraternali , D. Freeborn , S.M. Fressard-Batraneanu , F. Friedrich ,D. Froidevaux , J.A. Frost , C. Fukunaga , E. Fullana Torregrosa , T. Fusayasu , J. Fuster ,C. Gabaldon , O. Gabizon , A. Gabrielli , A. Gabrielli , G.P. Gach , S. Gadatsch ,S. Gadomski , G. Gagliardi , L.G. Gagnon , P. Gagnon , C. Galea , B. Galhardo ,29.J. Gallas , B.J. Gallop , P. Gallus , G. Galster , K.K. Gan , J. Gao , Y. Gao ,Y.S. Gao , f , F.M. Garay Walls , C. García , J.E. García Navarro , M. Garcia-Sciveres ,R.W. Gardner , N. Garelli , V. Garonne , A. Gascon Bravo , C. Gatti , A. Gaudiello ,G. Gaudio , B. Gaur , L. Gauthier , I.L. Gavrilenko , C. Gay , G. Gaycken , E.N. Gazis ,Z. Gecse , C.N.P. Gee , Ch. Geich-Gimbel , M.P. Geisler , C. Gemme , M.H. Genest ,C. Geng , n , S. Gentile , S. George , D. Gerbaudo , A. Gershon , S. Ghasemi ,H. Ghazlane , M. Ghneimat , B. Giacobbe , S. Giagu , P. Giannetti , B. Gibbard ,S.M. Gibson , M. Gignac , M. Gilchriese , T.P.S. Gillam , D. Gillberg , G. Gilles ,D.M. Gingrich , d , N. Giokaris , M.P. Giordani , F.M. Giorgi , F.M. Giorgi , P.F. Giraud ,P. Giromini , D. Giugni , F. Giuli , C. Giuliani , M. Giulini , B.K. Gjelsten , S. Gkaitatzis ,I. Gkialas , E.L. Gkougkousis , L.K. Gladilin , C. Glasman , J. Glatzer , P.C.F. Glaysher ,A. Glazov , M. Goblirsch-Kolb , J. Godlewski , S. Goldfarb , T. Golling , D. Golubkov ,A. Gomes , R. Gonçalo , J. Goncalves Pinto Firmino Da Costa , L. Gonella ,A. Gongadze , S. González de la Hoz , G. Gonzalez Parra , S. Gonzalez-Sevilla , L. Goossens ,P.A. Gorbounov , H.A. Gordon , I. Gorelov , B. Gorini , E. Gorini , A. Gorišek ,E. Gornicki , A.T. Goshaw , C. Gössling , M.I. Gostkin , C.R. Goudet , D. Goujdami ,A.G. Goussiou , N. Govender , o , E. Gozani , L. Graber , I. Grabowska-Bold , P.O.J. Gradin ,P. Grafström , J. Gramling , E. Gramstad , S. Grancagnolo , V. Gratchev , H.M. Gray ,E. Graziani , Z.D. Greenwood , p , C. Grefe , K. Gregersen , I.M. Gregor , P. Grenier ,K. Grevtsov , J. Gri ffi ths , A.A. Grillo , K. Grimm , S. Grinstein , q , Ph. Gris , J.-F. Grivaz ,S. Groh , J.P. Grohs , E. Gross , J. Grosse-Knetter , G.C. Grossi , Z.J. Grout , L. Guan ,W. Guan , J. Guenther , F. Guescini , D. Guest , O. Gueta , E. Guido , T. Guillemin ,S. Guindon , U. Gul , C. Gumpert , J. Guo , Y. Guo , n , S. Gupta , G. Gustavino ,P. Gutierrez , N.G. Gutierrez Ortiz , C. Gutschow , C. Guyot , C. Gwenlan , C.B. Gwilliam ,A. Haas , C. Haber , H.K. Hadavand , N. Haddad , A. Hadef , P. Haefner , S. Hageböck ,Z. Hajduk , H. Hakobyan , ∗ , M. Haleem , J. Haley , D. Hall , G. Halladjian , G.D. Hallewell ,K. Hamacher , P. Hamal , K. Hamano , A. Hamilton , G.N. Hamity , P.G. Hamnett ,L. Han , K. Hanagaki , r , K. Hanawa , M. Hance , B. Haney , P. Hanke , R. Hanna ,J.B. Hansen , J.D. Hansen , M.C. Hansen , P.H. Hansen , K. Hara , A.S. Hard ,T. Harenberg , F. Hariri , S. Harkusha , R.D. Harrington , P.F. Harrison , F. Hartjes ,M. Hasegawa , Y. Hasegawa , A. Hasib , S. Hassani , S. Haug , R. Hauser , L. Hauswald ,M. Havranek , C.M. Hawkes , R.J. Hawkings , A.D. Hawkins , D. Hayden , C.P. Hays ,J.M. Hays , H.S. Hayward , S.J. Haywood , S.J. Head , T. Heck , V. Hedberg , L. Heelan ,S. Heim , T. Heim , B. Heinemann , J.J. Heinrich , L. Heinrich , C. Heinz , J. Hejbal ,L. Helary , S. Hellman , C. Helsens , J. Henderson , R.C.W. Henderson , Y. Heng ,S. Henkelmann , A.M. Henriques Correia , S. Henrot-Versille , G.H. Herbert ,Y. Hernández Jiménez , G. Herten , R. Hertenberger , L. Hervas , G.G. Hesketh , N.P. Hessey ,J.W. Hetherly , R. Hickling , E. Higón-Rodriguez , E. Hill , J.C. Hill , K.H. Hiller ,S.J. Hillier , I. Hinchli ff e , E. Hines , R.R. Hinman , M. Hirose , D. Hirschbuehl , J. Hobbs ,N. Hod , M.C. Hodgkinson , P. Hodgson , A. Hoecker , M.R. Hoeferkamp , F. Hoenig ,M. Hohlfeld , D. Hohn , T.R. Holmes , M. Homann , T.M. Hong , B.H. Hooberman ,W.H. Hopkins , Y. Horii , A.J. Horton , J-Y. Hostachy , S. Hou , A. Hoummada ,J. Howard , J. Howarth , M. Hrabovsky , I. Hristova , J. Hrivnac , T. Hryn’ova ,A. Hrynevich , C. Hsu , P.J. Hsu , s , S.-C. Hsu , D. Hu , Q. Hu , Y. Huang , Z. Hubacek ,F. Hubaut , F. Huegging , T.B. Hu ff man , E.W. Hughes , G. Hughes , M. Huhtinen ,T.A. Hülsing , P. Huo , N. Huseynov , b , J. Huston , J. Huth , G. Iacobucci , G. Iakovidis ,I. Ibragimov , L. Iconomidou-Fayard , E. Ideal , Z. Idrissi , P. Iengo , O. Igonkina , t ,30. Iizawa , Y. Ikegami , M. Ikeno , Y. Ilchenko , u , D. Iliadis , N. Ilic , T. Ince ,G. Introzzi , P. Ioannou , ∗ , M. Iodice , K. Iordanidou , V. Ippolito , A. Irles Quiles ,C. Isaksson , M. Ishino , M. Ishitsuka , R. Ishmukhametov , C. Issever , S. Istin , F. Ito ,J.M. Iturbe Ponce , R. Iuppa , J. Ivarsson , W. Iwanski , H. Iwasaki , J.M. Izen , V. Izzo ,S. Jabbar , B. Jackson , M. Jackson , P. Jackson , V. Jain , K.B. Jakobi , K. Jakobs , S. Jakobsen ,T. Jakoubek , D.O. Jamin , D.K. Jana , E. Jansen , R. Jansky , J. Janssen , M. Janus ,G. Jarlskog , N. Javadov , b , T. Jav˚urek , F. Jeanneau , L. Jeanty , J. Jejelava ,v , G.-Y. Jeng ,D. Jennens , P. Jenni ,w , J. Jentzsch , C. Jeske , S. Jézéquel , H. Ji , J. Jia , H. Jiang ,Y. Jiang , S. Jiggins , J. Jimenez Pena , S. Jin , A. Jinaru , O. Jinnouchi , P. Johansson ,K.A. Johns , W.J. Johnson , K. Jon-And , G. Jones , R.W.L. Jones , S. Jones , T.J. Jones ,J. Jongmanns , P.M. Jorge , J. Jovicevic , X. Ju , A. Juste Rozas , q , M.K. Köhler ,A. Kaczmarska , M. Kado , H. Kagan , M. Kagan , S.J. Kahn , E. Kajomovitz ,C.W. Kalderon , A. Kaluza , S. Kama , A. Kamenshchikov , N. Kanaya , S. Kaneti ,L. Kanjir , V.A. Kantserov , J. Kanzaki , B. Kaplan , L.S. Kaplan , A. Kapliy , D. Kar ,K. Karakostas , A. Karamaoun , N. Karastathis , M.J. Kareem , E. Karentzos , M. Karnevskiy ,S.N. Karpov , Z.M. Karpova , K. Karthik , V. Kartvelishvili , A.N. Karyukhin , K. Kasahara ,L. Kashif , R.D. Kass , A. Kastanas , Y. Kataoka , C. Kato , A. Katre , J. Katzy ,K. Kawagoe , T. Kawamoto , G. Kawamura , S. Kazama , V.F. Kazanin , c , R. Keeler ,R. Kehoe , J.S. Keller , J.J. Kempster , K Kentaro , H. Keoshkerian , O. Kepka ,B.P. Kerševan , S. Kersten , R.A. Keyes , F. Khalil-zada , H. Khandanyan , A. Khanov ,A.G. Kharlamov , c , T.J. Khoo , V. Khovanskiy , E. Khramov , J. Khubua , x , S. Kido ,H.Y. Kim , S.H. Kim , Y.K. Kim , N. Kimura , O.M. Kind , B.T. King , M. King ,S.B. King , J. Kirk , A.E. Kiryunin , T. Kishimoto , D. Kisielewska , F. Kiss , K. Kiuchi ,O. Kivernyk , E. Kladiva , M.H. Klein , M. Klein , U. Klein , K. Kleinknecht ,P. Klimek , A. Klimentov , R. Klingenberg , J.A. Klinger , T. Klioutchnikova ,E.-E. Kluge , P. Kluit , S. Kluth , J. Knapik , E. Kneringer , E.B.F.G. Knoops , A. Knue ,A. Kobayashi , D. Kobayashi , T. Kobayashi , M. Kobel , M. Kocian , P. Kodys , T. Ko ff as ,E. Ko ff eman , L.A. Kogan , T. Koi , H. Kolanoski , M. Kolb , I. Koletsou , A.A. Komar , ∗ ,Y. Komori , T. Kondo , N. Kondrashova , K. Köneke , A.C. König , T. Kono ,y ,R. Konoplich , z , N. Konstantinidis , R. Kopeliansky , S. Koperny , L. Köpke , A.K. Kopp ,K. Korcyl , K. Kordas , A. Korn , A.A. Korol , c , I. Korolkov , E.V. Korolkova , O. Kortner ,S. Kortner , T. Kosek , V.V. Kostyukhin , A. Kotwal , A. Kourkoumeli-Charalampidi ,C. Kourkoumelis , V. Kouskoura , A. Koutsman , A.B. Kowalewska , R. Kowalewski ,T.Z. Kowalski , W. Kozanecki , A.S. Kozhin , V.A. Kramarenko , G. Kramberger ,D. Krasnopevtsev , M.W. Krasny , A. Krasznahorkay , J.K. Kraus , A. Kravchenko , M. Kretz ,J. Kretzschmar , K. Kreutzfeldt , P. Krieger , K. Krizka , K. Kroeninger , H. Kroha ,J. Kroll , J. Kroseberg , J. Krstic , U. Kruchonak , H. Krüger , N. Krumnack , A. Kruse ,M.C. Kruse , M. Kruskal , T. Kubota , H. Kucuk , S. Kuday , J.T. Kuechler , S. Kuehn ,A. Kugel , F. Kuger , A. Kuhl , T. Kuhl , V. Kukhtin , R. Kukla , Y. Kulchitsky ,S. Kuleshov , M. Kuna , T. Kunigo , A. Kupco , H. Kurashige , Y.A. Kurochkin ,V. Kus , E.S. Kuwertz , M. Kuze , J. Kvita , T. Kwan , D. Kyriazopoulos , A. La Rosa ,J.L. La Rosa Navarro , L. La Rotonda , C. Lacasta , F. Lacava , J. Lacey , H. Lacker ,D. Lacour , V.R. Lacuesta , E. Ladygin , R. Lafaye , B. Laforge , T. Lagouri , S. Lai ,S. Lammers , W. Lampl , E. Lançon , U. Landgraf , M.P.J. Landon , V.S. Lang , J.C. Lange ,A.J. Lankford , F. Lanni , K. Lantzsch , A. Lanza , S. Laplace , C. Lapoire , J.F. Laporte ,T. Lari , F. Lasagni Manghi , M. Lassnig , P. Laurelli , W. Lavrijsen , A.T. Law ,P. Laycock , T. Lazovich , M. Lazzaroni , O. Le Dortz , E. Le Guirriec , E. Le Menedeu ,31.P. Le Quilleuc , M. LeBlanc , T. LeCompte , F. Ledroit-Guillon , C.A. Lee , S.C. Lee ,L. Lee , G. Lefebvre , M. Lefebvre , F. Legger , C. Leggett , A. Lehan , G. Lehmann Miotto ,X. Lei , W.A. Leight , A. Leisos , aa , A.G. Leister , M.A.L. Leite , R. Leitner , D. Lellouch ,B. Lemmer , K.J.C. Leney , T. Lenz , B. Lenzi , R. Leone , S. Leone , C. Leonidopoulos ,S. Leontsinis , G. Lerner , C. Leroy , A.A.J. Lesage , C.G. Lester , M. Levchenko ,J. Levêque , D. Levin , L.J. Levinson , M. Levy , A.M. Leyko , M. Leyton , B. Li , n , H. Li ,H.L. Li , L. Li , L. Li , Q. Li , S. Li , X. Li , Y. Li , Z. Liang , H. Liao , B. Liberti ,A. Liblong , P. Lichard , K. Lie , J. Liebal , W. Liebig , C. Limbach , A. Limosani ,S.C. Lin , ab , T.H. Lin , B.E. Lindquist , E. Lipeles , A. Lipniacka , M. Lisovyi , T.M. Liss ,D. Lissauer , A. Lister , A.M. Litke , B. Liu , ac , D. Liu , H. Liu , H. Liu , J. Liu ,J.B. Liu , K. Liu , L. Liu , M. Liu , M. Liu , Y.L. Liu , Y. Liu , M. Livan ,A. Lleres , J. Llorente Merino , S.L. Lloyd , F. Lo Sterzo , E. Lobodzinska , P. Loch ,W.S. Lockman , F.K. Loebinger , A.E. Loevschall-Jensen , K.M. Loew , A. Loginov ,T. Lohse , K. Lohwasser , M. Lokajicek , B.A. Long , J.D. Long , R.E. Long , L. Longo ,K.A. Looper , L. Lopes , D. Lopez Mateos , B. Lopez Paredes , I. Lopez Paz ,A. Lopez Solis , J. Lorenz , N. Lorenzo Martinez , M. Losada , P.J. Lösel , X. Lou ,A. Lounis , J. Love , P.A. Love , H. Lu , N. Lu , H.J. Lubatti , C. Luci , A. Lucotte ,C. Luedtke , F. Luehring , W. Lukas , L. Luminari , O. Lundberg , B. Lund-Jensen ,D. Lynn , R. Lysak , E. Lytken , V. Lyubushkin , H. Ma , L.L. Ma , Y. Ma , G. Maccarrone ,A. Macchiolo , C.M. Macdonald , B. Maˇcek , J. Machado Miguens , D. Mada ff ari ,R. Madar , H.J. Maddocks , W.F. Mader , A. Madsen , J. Maeda , S. Maeland , T. Maeno ,A. Maevskiy , E. Magradze , J. Mahlstedt , C. Maiani , C. Maidantchik , A.A. Maier ,T. Maier , A. Maio , S. Majewski , Y. Makida , N. Makovec , B. Malaescu ,Pa. Malecki , V.P. Maleev , F. Malek , U. Mallik , D. Malon , C. Malone , S. Maltezos ,S. Malyukov , J. Mamuzic , G. Mancini , B. Mandelli , L. Mandelli , I. Mandi´c ,J. Maneira , L. Manhaes de Andrade Filho , J. Manjarres Ramos , A. Mann ,B. Mansoulie , R. Mantifel , M. Mantoani , S. Manzoni , L. Mapelli , G. Marceca ,L. March , G. Marchiori , M. Marcisovsky , M. Marjanovic , D.E. Marley , F. Marroquim ,S.P. Marsden , Z. Marshall , L.F. Marti , S. Marti-Garcia , B. Martin , T.A. Martin ,V.J. Martin , B. Martin dit Latour , M. Martinez , q , S. Martin-Haugh , V.S. Martoiu ,A.C. Martyniuk , M. Marx , F. Marzano , A. Marzin , L. Masetti , T. Mashimo ,R. Mashinistov , J. Masik , A.L. Maslennikov , c , I. Massa , L. Massa , P. Mastrandrea ,A. Mastroberardino , T. Masubuchi , P. Mättig , J. Mattmann , J. Maurer , S.J. Maxfield ,D.A. Maximov , c , R. Mazini , S.M. Mazza , N.C. Mc Fadden , G. Mc Goldrick ,S.P. Mc Kee , A. McCarn , R.L. McCarthy , T.G. McCarthy , L.I. McClymont ,K.W. McFarlane , ∗ , J.A. Mcfayden , G. Mchedlidze , S.J. McMahon , R.A. McPherson , l ,M. Medinnis , S. Meehan , S. Mehlhase , A. Mehta , K. Meier , C. Meineck , B. Meirose ,B.R. Mellado Garcia , F. Meloni , A. Mengarelli , S. Menke , E. Meoni , K.M. Mercurio ,S. Mergelmeyer , P. Mermod , L. Merola , C. Meroni , F.S. Merritt , A. Messina ,J. Metcalfe , A.S. Mete , C. Meyer , C. Meyer , J-P. Meyer , J. Meyer ,H. Meyer Zu Theenhausen , R.P. Middleton , S. Miglioranzi , L. Mijovi´c , G. Mikenberg ,M. Mikestikova , M. Mikuž , M. Milesi , A. Milic , D.W. Miller , C. Mills , A. Milov ,D.A. Milstead , A.A. Minaenko , Y. Minami , I.A. Minashvili , A.I. Mincer ,B. Mindur , M. Mineev , Y. Ming , L.M. Mir , K.P. Mistry , T. Mitani , J. Mitrevski ,V.A. Mitsou , A. Miucci , P.S. Miyagawa , J.U. Mjörnmark , T. Moa , K. Mochizuki ,S. Mohapatra , W. Mohr , S. Molander , R. Moles-Valls , R. Monden , M.C. Mondragon ,K. Mönig , J. Monk , E. Monnier , A. Montalbano , J. Montejo Berlingen , F. Monticelli ,32. Monzani , R.W. Moore , N. Morange , D. Moreno , M. Moreno Llácer , P. Morettini ,D. Mori , T. Mori , M. Morii , M. Morinaga , V. Morisbak , S. Moritz , A.K. Morley ,G. Mornacchi , J.D. Morris , S.S. Mortensen , L. Morvaj , M. Mosidze , J. Moss ,K. Motohashi , R. Mount , E. Mountricha , S.V. Mouraviev , ∗ , E.J.W. Moyse , S. Muanza ,R.D. Mudd , F. Mueller , J. Mueller , R.S.P. Mueller , T. Mueller , D. Muenstermann ,P. Mullen , G.A. Mullier , F.J. Munoz Sanchez , J.A. Murillo Quijada , W.J. Murray ,H. Musheghyan , M. Muškinja , A.G. Myagkov , ad , M. Myska , B.P. Nachman ,O. Nackenhorst , J. Nadal , K. Nagai , R. Nagai ,y , K. Nagano , Y. Nagasaka , K. Nagata ,M. Nagel , E. Nagy , A.M. Nairz , Y. Nakahama , K. Nakamura , T. Nakamura , I. Nakano ,H. Namasivayam , R.F. Naranjo Garcia , R. Narayan , D.I. Narrias Villar , I. Naryshkin ,T. Naumann , G. Navarro , R. Nayyar , H.A. Neal , P.Yu. Nechaeva , T.J. Neep , P.D. Nef ,A. Negri , M. Negrini , S. Nektarijevic , C. Nellist , A. Nelson , S. Nemecek ,P. Nemethy , A.A. Nepomuceno , M. Nessi , ae , M.S. Neubauer , M. Neumann , R.M. Neves ,P. Nevski , P.R. Newman , D.H. Nguyen , R.B. Nickerson , R. Nicolaidou , B. Nicquevert ,J. Nielsen , A. Nikiforov , V. Nikolaenko , ad , I. Nikolic-Audit , K. Nikolopoulos , J.K. Nilsen ,P. Nilsson , Y. Ninomiya , A. Nisati , R. Nisius , T. Nobe , L. Nodulman , M. Nomachi ,I. Nomidis , T. Nooney , S. Norberg , M. Nordberg , N. Norjoharuddeen , O. Novgorodova ,S. Nowak , M. Nozaki , L. Nozka , K. Ntekas , E. Nurse , F. Nuti , F. O’grady ,D.C. O’Neil , A.A. O’Rourke , V. O’Shea , F.G. Oakham , d , H. Oberlack , T. Obermann ,J. Ocariz , A. Ochi , I. Ochoa , J.P. Ochoa-Ricoux , S. Oda , S. Odaka , H. Ogren , A. Oh ,S.H. Oh , C.C. Ohm , H. Ohman , H. Oide , H. Okawa , Y. Okumura , T. Okuyama ,A. Olariu , L.F. Oleiro Seabra , S.A. Olivares Pino , D. Oliveira Damazio , A. Olszewski ,J. Olszowska , A. Onofre , K. Onogi , P.U.E. Onyisi , u , C.J. Oram , M.J. Oreglia ,Y. Oren , D. Orestano , N. Orlando , R.S. Orr , B. Osculati , R. Ospanov ,G. Otero y Garzon , H. Otono , M. Ouchrif , F. Ould-Saada , A. Ouraou , K.P. Oussoren ,Q. Ouyang , M. Owen , R.E. Owen , V.E. Ozcan , N. Ozturk , K. Pachal , A. Pacheco Pages ,C. Padilla Aranda , M. Pagáˇcová , S. Pagan Griso , F. Paige , P. Pais , K. Pajchel ,G. Palacino , S. Palestini , M. Palka , D. Pallin , A. Palma , E.St. Panagiotopoulou ,C.E. Pandini , J.G. Panduro Vazquez , P. Pani , S. Panitkin , D. Pantea , L. Paolozzi ,Th.D. Papadopoulou , K. Papageorgiou , A. Paramonov , D. Paredes Hernandez , A.J. Parker ,M.A. Parker , K.A. Parker , F. Parodi , J.A. Parsons , U. Parzefall , V.R. Pascuzzi ,E. Pasqualucci , S. Passaggio , F. Pastore , ∗ , Fr. Pastore , G. Pásztor , a f , S. Pataraia ,N.D. Patel , J.R. Pater , T. Pauly , J. Pearce , B. Pearson , L.E. Pedersen , M. Pedersen ,S. Pedraza Lopez , R. Pedro , S.V. Peleganchuk , c , D. Pelikan , O. Penc , C. Peng ,H. Peng , J. Penwell , B.S. Peralva , M.M. Perego , D.V. Perepelitsa , E. Perez Codina ,L. Perini , H. Pernegger , S. Perrella , R. Peschke , V.D. Peshekhonov , K. Peters ,R.F.Y. Peters , B.A. Petersen , T.C. Petersen , E. Petit , A. Petridis , C. Petridou , P. Petro ff ,E. Petrolo , M. Petrov , F. Petrucci , N.E. Pettersson , A. Peyaud , R. Pezoa ,P.W. Phillips , G. Piacquadio , E. Pianori , A. Picazio , E. Piccaro , M. Piccinini ,M.A. Pickering , R. Piegaia , J.E. Pilcher , A.D. Pilkington , A.W.J. Pin , J. Pina ,M. Pinamonti , a g , J.L. Pinfold , A. Pingel , S. Pires , H. Pirumov , M. Pitt , L. Plazak ,M.-A. Pleier , V. Pleskot , E. Plotnikova , P. Plucinski , D. Pluth , R. Poettgen ,L. Poggioli , D. Pohl , G. Polesello , A. Poley , A. Policicchio , R. Polifka , A. Polini ,C.S. Pollard , V. Polychronakos , K. Pommès , L. Pontecorvo , B.G. Pope , G.A. Popeneciu ,D.S. Popovic , A. Poppleton , S. Pospisil , K. Potamianos , I.N. Potrap , C.J. Potter ,C.T. Potter , G. Poulard , J. Poveda , V. Pozdnyakov , M.E. Pozo Astigarraga , P. Pralavorio ,A. Pranko , S. Prell , D. Price , L.E. Price , M. Primavera , S. Prince , M. Proissl ,33. Prokofiev , F. Prokoshin , S. Protopopescu , J. Proudfoot , M. Przybycien , D. Puddu ,D. Puldon , M. Purohit , ah , P. Puzo , J. Qian , G. Qin , Y. Qin , A. Quadt ,W.B. Quayle , M. Queitsch-Maitland , D. Quilty , S. Raddum , V. Radeka , V. Radescu ,S.K. Radhakrishnan , P. Radlo ff , P. Rados , F. Ragusa , G. Rahal , J.A. Raine ,S. Rajagopalan , M. Rammensee , C. Rangel-Smith , M.G. Ratti , F. Rauscher , S. Rave ,T. Ravenscroft , M. Raymond , A.L. Read , N.P. Readio ff , D.M. Rebuzzi ,A. Redelbach , G. Redlinger , R. Reece , K. Reeves , L. Rehnisch , J. Reichert , H. Reisin ,C. Rembser , H. Ren , M. Rescigno , S. Resconi , O.L. Rezanova , c , P. Reznicek ,R. Rezvani , R. Richter , S. Richter , E. Richter-Was , O. Ricken , M. Ridel , P. Rieck ,C.J. Riegel , J. Rieger , O. Rifki , M. Rijssenbeek , A. Rimoldi , L. Rinaldi , B. Risti´c ,E. Ritsch , I. Riu , F. Rizatdinova , E. Rizvi , C. Rizzi , S.H. Robertson , l ,A. Robichaud-Veronneau , D. Robinson , J.E.M. Robinson , A. Robson , C. Roda ,Y. Rodina , A. Rodriguez Perez , D. Rodriguez Rodriguez , S. Roe , C.S. Rogan , O. Røhne ,A. Romaniouk , M. Romano , S.M. Romano Saez , E. Romero Adam , N. Rompotis ,M. Ronzani , L. Roos , E. Ros , S. Rosati , K. Rosbach , P. Rose , O. Rosenthal ,V. Rossetti , E. Rossi , L.P. Rossi , J.H.N. Rosten , R. Rosten , M. Rotaru ,I. Roth , J. Rothberg , D. Rousseau , C.R. Royon , A. Rozanov , Y. Rozen , X. Ruan ,F. Rubbo , I. Rubinskiy , V.I. Rud , M.S. Rudolph , F. Rühr , A. Ruiz-Martinez ,Z. Rurikova , N.A. Rusakovich , A. Ruschke , H.L. Russell , J.P. Rutherfoord , N. Ruthmann ,Y.F. Ryabov , M. Rybar , G. Rybkin , S. Ryu , A. Ryzhov , A.F. Saavedra , G. Sabato ,S. Sacerdoti , H.F-W. Sadrozinski , R. Sadykov , F. Safai Tehrani , P. Saha , M. Sahinsoy ,M. Saimpert , T. Saito , H. Sakamoto , Y. Sakurai , G. Salamanna , A. Salamon ,J.E. Salazar Loyola , D. Salek , P.H. Sales De Bruin , D. Salihagic , A. Salnikov , J. Salt ,D. Salvatore , F. Salvatore , A. Salvucci , A. Salzburger , D. Sammel , D. Sampsonidis ,A. Sanchez , J. Sánchez , V. Sanchez Martinez , H. Sandaker , R.L. Sandbach ,H.G. Sander , M.P. Sanders , M. Sandho ff , C. Sandoval , R. Sandstroem , D.P.C. Sankey ,M. Sannino , A. Sansoni , C. Santoni , R. Santonico , H. Santos ,I. Santoyo Castillo , K. Sapp , A. Sapronov , J.G. Saraiva , B. Sarrazin , O. Sasaki ,Y. Sasaki , K. Sato , G. Sauvage , ∗ , E. Sauvan , G. Savage , P. Savard , d , C. Sawyer ,L. Sawyer , p , J. Saxon , C. Sbarra , A. Sbrizzi , T. Scanlon , D.A. Scannicchio ,M. Scarcella , V. Scarfone , J. Schaarschmidt , P. Schacht , D. Schaefer , R. Schaefer ,J. Schae ff er , S. Schaepe , S. Schaetzel , U. Schäfer , A.C. Scha ff er , D. Schaile ,R.D. Schamberger , V. Scharf , V.A. Schegelsky , D. Scheirich , M. Schernau ,C. Schiavi , C. Schillo , M. Schioppa , S. Schlenker , K. Schmieden , C. Schmitt ,S. Schmitt , S. Schmitz , B. Schneider , Y.J. Schnellbach , U. Schnoor , L. Schoe ff el ,A. Schoening , B.D. Schoenrock , E. Schopf , A.L.S. Schorlemmer , M. Schott , J. Schovancova ,S. Schramm , M. Schreyer , N. Schuh , M.J. Schultens , H.-C. Schultz-Coulon , H. Schulz ,M. Schumacher , B.A. Schumm , Ph. Schune , C. Schwanenberger , A. Schwartzman ,T.A. Schwarz , Ph. Schwegler , H. Schweiger , Ph. Schwemling , R. Schwienhorst ,J. Schwindling , T. Schwindt , G. Sciolla , F. Scuri , F. Scutti , J. Searcy , P. Seema ,S.C. Seidel , A. Seiden , F. Seifert , J.M. Seixas , G. Sekhniaidze , K. Sekhon ,S.J. Sekula , D.M. Seliverstov , ∗ , N. Semprini-Cesari , C. Serfon , L. Serin ,L. Serkin , M. Sessa , R. Seuster , H. Severini , T. Sfiligoj , F. Sforza , A. Sfyrla ,E. Shabalina , N.W. Shaikh , L.Y. Shan , R. Shang , J.T. Shank , M. Shapiro ,P.B. Shatalov , K. Shaw , S.M. Shaw , A. Shcherbakova , C.Y. Shehu , P. Sherwood ,L. Shi , ai , S. Shimizu , C.O. Shimmin , M. Shimojima , M. Shiyakova , a j , A. Shmeleva ,D. Shoaleh Saadi , M.J. Shochet , S. Shojaii , S. Shrestha , E. Shulga , M.A. Shupe ,34. Sicho , P.E. Sidebo , O. Sidiropoulou , D. Sidorov , A. Sidoti , F. Siegert , Dj. Sijacki ,J. Silva , S.B. Silverstein , V. Simak , O. Simard , Lj. Simic , S. Simion , E. Simioni ,B. Simmons , D. Simon , M. Simon , P. Sinervo , N.B. Sinev , M. Sioli , G. Siragusa ,S.Yu. Sivoklokov , J. Sjölin , T.B. Sjursen , M.B. Skinner , H.P. Skottowe , P. Skubic ,M. Slater , T. Slavicek , M. Slawinska , K. Sliwa , R. Slovak , V. Smakhtin , B.H. Smart ,L. Smestad , S.Yu. Smirnov , Y. Smirnov , L.N. Smirnova , ak , O. Smirnova , M.N.K. Smith ,R.W. Smith , M. Smizanska , K. Smolek , A.A. Snesarev , G. Snidero , S. Snyder , R. Sobie , l ,F. Socher , A. So ff er , D.A. Soh , ai , G. Sokhrannyi , C.A. Solans Sanchez , M. Solar ,E.Yu. Soldatov , U. Soldevila , A.A. Solodkov , A. Soloshenko , O.V. Solovyanov ,V. Solovyev , P. Sommer , H. Son , H.Y. Song , al , A. Sood , A. Sopczak , V. Sopko ,V. Sorin , D. Sosa , C.L. Sotiropoulou , R. Soualah , A.M. Soukharev , c , D. South ,B.C. Sowden , S. Spagnolo , M. Spalla , M. Spangenberg , F. Spanò , D. Sperlich ,F. Spettel , R. Spighi , G. Spigo , L.A. Spiller , M. Spousta , R.D. St. Denis , ∗ , A. Stabile ,J. Stahlman , R. Stamen , S. Stamm , E. Stanecka , R.W. Stanek , C. Stanescu ,M. Stanescu-Bellu , M.M. Stanitzki , S. Stapnes , E.A. Starchenko , G.H. Stark , J. Stark ,P. Staroba , P. Starovoitov , S. Stärz , R. Staszewski , P. Steinberg , B. Stelzer , H.J. Stelzer ,O. Stelzer-Chilton , H. Stenzel , G.A. Stewart , J.A. Stillings , M.C. Stockton , M. Stoebe ,G. Stoicea , P. Stolte , S. Stonjek , A.R. Stradling , A. Straessner , M.E. Stramaglia ,J. Strandberg , S. Strandberg , A. Strandlie , M. Strauss , P. Strizenec , R. Ströhmer ,D.M. Strom , R. Stroynowski , A. Strubig , S.A. Stucci , B. Stugu , N.A. Styles , D. Su ,J. Su , R. Subramaniam , S. Suchek , Y. Sugaya , M. Suk , V.V. Sulin , S. Sultansoy ,T. Sumida , S. Sun , X. Sun , J.E. Sundermann , K. Suruliz , G. Susinno , M.R. Sutton ,S. Suzuki , M. Svatos , M. Swiatlowski , I. Sykora , T. Sykora , D. Ta , C. Taccini ,K. Tackmann , J. Taenzer , A. Ta ff ard , R. Tafirout , N. Taiblum , H. Takai , R. Takashima ,H. Takeda , T. Takeshita , Y. Takubo , M. Talby , A.A. Talyshev , c , J.Y.C. Tam , K.G. Tan ,J. Tanaka , R. Tanaka , S. Tanaka , B.B. Tannenwald , S. Tapia Araya , S. Tapprogge ,S. Tarem , G.F. Tartarelli , P. Tas , M. Tasevsky , T. Tashiro , E. Tassi ,A. Tavares Delgado , Y. Tayalati , A.C. Taylor , G.N. Taylor , P.T.E. Taylor ,W. Taylor , F.A. Teischinger , P. Teixeira-Dias , K.K. Temming , D. Temple , H. Ten Kate ,P.K. Teng , J.J. Teoh , F. Tepel , S. Terada , K. Terashi , J. Terron , S. Terzo , M. Testa ,R.J. Teuscher , l , T. Theveneaux-Pelzer , J.P. Thomas , J. Thomas-Wilsker , E.N. Thompson ,P.D. Thompson , R.J. Thompson , A.S. Thompson , L.A. Thomsen , E. Thomson ,M. Thomson , M.J. Tibbetts , R.E. Ticse Torres , V.O. Tikhomirov , am , Yu.A. Tikhonov , c ,S. Timoshenko , P. Tipton , S. Tisserant , K. Todome , T. Todorov , ∗ , S. Todorova-Nova ,J. Tojo , S. Tokár , K. Tokushuku , E. Tolley , L. Tomlinson , M. Tomoto , L. Tompkins , an ,K. Toms , B. Tong , E. Torrence , H. Torres , E. Torró Pastor , J. Toth , ao , F. Touchard ,D.R. Tovey , T. Trefzger , A. Tricoli , I.M. Trigger , S. Trincaz-Duvoid , M.F. Tripiana ,W. Trischuk , B. Trocmé , A. Trofymov , C. Troncon , M. Trottier-McDonald , M. Trovatelli ,L. Truong , M. Trzebinski , A. Trzupek , J.C-L. Tseng , P.V. Tsiareshka , G. Tsipolitis ,N. Tsirintanis , S. Tsiskaridze , V. Tsiskaridze , E.G. Tskhadadze , K.M. Tsui , I.I. Tsukerman ,V. Tsulaia , S. Tsuno , D. Tsybychev , A. Tudorache , V. Tudorache , A.N. Tuna ,S.A. Tupputi , S. Turchikhin , ak , D. Turecek , D. Turgeman , R. Turra , A.J. Turvey ,P.M. Tuts , M. Tyndel , G. Ucchielli , I. Ueda , R. Ueno , M. Ughetto ,F. Ukegawa , G. Unal , A. Undrus , G. Unel , F.C. Ungaro , Y. Unno , C. Unverdorben ,J. Urban , P. Urquijo , P. Urrejola , G. Usai , A. Usanova , L. Vacavant , V. Vacek ,B. Vachon , C. Valderanis , E. Valdes Santurio , N. Valencic , S. Valentinetti ,A. Valero , L. Valery , S. Valkar , S. Vallecorsa , J.A. Valls Ferrer , W. Van Den Wollenberg ,35.C. Van Der Deijl , R. van der Geer , H. van der Graaf , N. van Eldik , P. van Gemmeren ,J. Van Nieuwkoop , I. van Vulpen , M.C. van Woerden , M. Vanadia , W. Vandelli ,R. Vanguri , A. Vaniachine , P. Vankov , G. Vardanyan , R. Vari , E.W. Varnes , T. Varol ,D. Varouchas , A. Vartapetian , K.E. Varvell , J.G. Vasquez , F. Vazeille ,T. Vazquez Schroeder , J. Veatch , L.M. Veloce , F. Veloso , S. Veneziano ,A. Ventura , M. Venturi , N. Venturi , A. Venturini , V. Vercesi , M. Verducci ,W. Verkerke , J.C. Vermeulen , A. Vest , ap , M.C. Vetterli , d , O. Viazlo , I. Vichou ,T. Vickey , O.E. Vickey Boeriu , G.H.A. Viehhauser , S. Viel , L. Vigani , R. Vigne ,M. Villa , M. Villaplana Perez , E. Vilucchi , M.G. Vincter , V.B. Vinogradov ,C. Vittori , I. Vivarelli , S. Vlachos , M. Vlasak , M. Vogel , P. Vokac , G. Volpi ,M. Volpi , H. von der Schmitt , E. von Toerne , V. Vorobel , K. Vorobev , M. Vos , R. Voss ,J.H. Vossebeld , N. Vranjes , M. Vranjes Milosavljevic , V. Vrba , M. Vreeswijk ,R. Vuillermet , I. Vukotic , Z. Vykydal , P. Wagner , W. Wagner , H. Wahlberg ,S. Wahrmund , J. Wakabayashi , J. Walder , R. Walker , W. Walkowiak , V. Wallangen ,C. Wang , C. Wang , F. Wang , H. Wang , H. Wang , J. Wang , J. Wang , K. Wang ,R. Wang , S.M. Wang , T. Wang , T. Wang , X. Wang , C. Wanotayaroj , A. Warburton ,C.P. Ward , D.R. Wardrope , A. Washbrook , P.M. Watkins , A.T. Watson , I.J. Watson ,M.F. Watson , G. Watts , S. Watts , B.M. Waugh , S. Webb , M.S. Weber , S.W. Weber ,J.S. Webster , A.R. Weidberg , B. Weinert , J. Weingarten , C. Weiser , H. Weits , P.S. Wells ,T. Wenaus , T. Wengler , S. Wenig , N. Wermes , M. Werner , P. Werner , M. Wessels ,J. Wetter , K. Whalen , N.L. Whallon , A.M. Wharton , A. White , M.J. White , R. White ,S. White , D. Whiteson , F.J. Wickens , W. Wiedenmann , M. Wielers , P. Wienemann ,C. Wiglesworth , L.A.M. Wiik-Fuchs , A. Wildauer , F. Wilk , H.G. Wilkens , H.H. Williams ,S. Williams , C. Willis , S. Willocq , J.A. Wilson , I. Wingerter-Seez , F. Winklmeier ,O.J. Winston , B.T. Winter , M. Wittgen , J. Wittkowski , S.J. Wollstadt , M.W. Wolter ,H. Wolters , B.K. Wosiek , J. Wotschack , M.J. Woudstra , K.W. Wozniak , M. Wu ,M. Wu , S.L. Wu , X. Wu , Y. Wu , T.R. Wyatt , B.M. Wynne , S. Xella , D. Xu , L. Xu ,B. Yabsley , S. Yacoob , R. Yakabe , D. Yamaguchi , Y. Yamaguchi , A. Yamamoto ,S. Yamamoto , T. Yamanaka , K. Yamauchi , Y. Yamazaki , Z. Yan , H. Yang , H. Yang ,Y. Yang , Z. Yang , W-M. Yao , Y.C. Yap , Y. Yasu , E. Yatsenko , K.H. Yau Wong , J. Ye ,S. Ye , I. Yeletskikh , A.L. Yen , E. Yildirim , K. Yorita , R. Yoshida , K. Yoshihara ,C. Young , C.J.S. Young , S. Youssef , D.R. Yu , J. Yu , J.M. Yu , J. Yu , L. Yuan ,S.P.Y. Yuen , I. Yusu ff , aq , B. Zabinski , R. Zaidan , A.M. Zaitsev , ad , N. Zakharchuk ,J. Zalieckas , A. Zaman , S. Zambito , L. Zanello , D. Zanzi , C. Zeitnitz , M. Zeman ,A. Zemla , J.C. Zeng , Q. Zeng , K. Zengel , O. Zenin , T. Ženiš , D. Zerwas ,D. Zhang , F. Zhang , G. Zhang , al , H. Zhang , J. Zhang , L. Zhang , R. Zhang ,R. Zhang , ar , X. Zhang , Z. Zhang , X. Zhao , Y. Zhao , Z. Zhao , A. Zhemchugov ,J. Zhong , B. Zhou , C. Zhou , L. Zhou , L. Zhou , M. Zhou , N. Zhou , C.G. Zhu ,H. Zhu , J. Zhu , Y. Zhu , X. Zhuang , K. Zhukov , A. Zibell , D. Zieminska , N.I. Zimine ,C. Zimmermann , S. Zimmermann , Z. Zinonos , M. Zinser , M. Ziolkowski , L. Živkovi´c ,G. Zobernig , A. Zoccoli , M. zur Nedden , G. Zurzolo , L. Zwalinski . Department of Physics, University of Adelaide, Adelaide, Australia Physics Department, SUNY Albany, Albany NY, United States of America Department of Physics, University of Alberta, Edmonton AB, Canada a ) Department of Physics, Ankara University, Ankara; ( b ) Istanbul Aydin University, Istanbul; ( c ) Division of Physics, TOBB University of Economics and Technology, Ankara, Turkey36
LAPP, CNRS / IN2P3 and Université Savoie Mont Blanc, Annecy-le-Vieux, France High Energy Physics Division, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne IL, United States of America Department of Physics, University of Arizona, Tucson AZ, United States of America Department of Physics, The University of Texas at Arlington, Arlington TX, United States of America Physics Department, University of Athens, Athens, Greece Physics Department, National Technical University of Athens, Zografou, Greece Department of Physics, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX, United States of America Institute of Physics, Azerbaijan Academy of Sciences, Baku, Azerbaijan Institut de Física d’Altes Energies (IFAE), The Barcelona Institute of Science and Technology,Barcelona, Spain, Spain Institute of Physics, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia Department for Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway Physics Division, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory and University of California, Berkeley CA,United States of America Department of Physics, Humboldt University, Berlin, Germany Albert Einstein Center for Fundamental Physics and Laboratory for High Energy Physics, Universityof Bern, Bern, Switzerland School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
20 ( a ) Department of Physics, Bogazici University, Istanbul; ( b ) Department of Physics Engineering,Gaziantep University, Gaziantep; ( d ) Istanbul Bilgi University, Faculty of Engineering and NaturalSciences, Istanbul,Turkey; ( e ) Bahcesehir University, Faculty of Engineering and Natural Sciences,Istanbul, Turkey, Turkey Centro de Investigaciones, Universidad Antonio Narino, Bogota, Colombia
22 ( a ) INFN Sezione di Bologna; ( b ) Dipartimento di Fisica e Astronomia, Università di Bologna,Bologna, Italy Physikalisches Institut, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany Department of Physics, Boston University, Boston MA, United States of America Department of Physics, Brandeis University, Waltham MA, United States of America
26 ( a ) Universidade Federal do Rio De Janeiro COPPE / EE / IF, Rio de Janeiro; ( b ) Electrical CircuitsDepartment, Federal University of Juiz de Fora (UFJF), Juiz de Fora; ( c ) Federal University of Sao Joaodel Rei (UFSJ), Sao Joao del Rei; ( d ) Instituto de Fisica, Universidade de Sao Paulo, Sao Paulo, Brazil Physics Department, Brookhaven National Laboratory, Upton NY, United States of America
28 ( a ) Transilvania University of Brasov, Brasov, Romania; ( b ) National Institute of Physics and NuclearEngineering, Bucharest; ( c ) National Institute for Research and Development of Isotopic and MolecularTechnologies, Physics Department, Cluj Napoca; ( d ) University Politehnica Bucharest, Bucharest; ( e ) West University in Timisoara, Timisoara, Romania Departamento de Física, Universidad de Buenos Aires, Buenos Aires, Argentina Cavendish Laboratory, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, United Kingdom Department of Physics, Carleton University, Ottawa ON, Canada CERN, Geneva, Switzerland Enrico Fermi Institute, University of Chicago, Chicago IL, United States of America
34 ( a ) Departamento de Física, Pontificia Universidad Católica de Chile, Santiago; ( b ) Departamento deFísica, Universidad Técnica Federico Santa María, Valparaíso, Chile
35 ( a ) Institute of High Energy Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing; ( b ) Department ofModern Physics, University of Science and Technology of China, Anhui; ( c ) Department of Physics,Nanjing University, Jiangsu; ( d ) School of Physics, Shandong University, Shandong; ( e ) Department ofPhysics and Astronomy, Shanghai Key Laboratory for Particle Physics and Cosmology, Shanghai Jiao37ong University, Shanghai; (also a ffi liated with PKU-CHEP); ( f ) Physics Department, TsinghuaUniversity, Beijing 100084, China Laboratoire de Physique Corpusculaire, Clermont Université and Université Blaise Pascal andCNRS / IN2P3, Clermont-Ferrand, France Nevis Laboratory, Columbia University, Irvington NY, United States of America Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, Kobenhavn, Denmark
39 ( a ) INFN Gruppo Collegato di Cosenza, Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati; ( b ) Dipartimento di Fisica,Università della Calabria, Rende, Italy
40 ( a ) AGH University of Science and Technology, Faculty of Physics and Applied Computer Science,Krakow; ( b ) Marian Smoluchowski Institute of Physics, Jagiellonian University, Krakow, Poland Institute of Nuclear Physics Polish Academy of Sciences, Krakow, Poland Physics Department, Southern Methodist University, Dallas TX, United States of America Physics Department, University of Texas at Dallas, Richardson TX, United States of America DESY, Hamburg and Zeuthen, Germany Institut für Experimentelle Physik IV, Technische Universität Dortmund, Dortmund, Germany Institut für Kern- und Teilchenphysik, Technische Universität Dresden, Dresden, Germany Department of Physics, Duke University, Durham NC, United States of America SUPA - School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Edinburgh, Edinburgh, United Kingdom INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy Fakultät für Mathematik und Physik, Albert-Ludwigs-Universität, Freiburg, Germany Section de Physique, Université de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland
52 ( a ) INFN Sezione di Genova; ( b ) Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Genova, Genova, Italy
53 ( a ) E. Andronikashvili Institute of Physics, Iv. Javakhishvili Tbilisi State University, Tbilisi; ( b ) HighEnergy Physics Institute, Tbilisi State University, Tbilisi, Georgia II Physikalisches Institut, Justus-Liebig-Universität Giessen, Giessen, Germany SUPA - School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Glasgow, Glasgow, United Kingdom II Physikalisches Institut, Georg-August-Universität, Göttingen, Germany Laboratoire de Physique Subatomique et de Cosmologie, Université Grenoble-Alpes, CNRS / IN2P3,Grenoble, France Department of Physics, Hampton University, Hampton VA, United States of America Laboratory for Particle Physics and Cosmology, Harvard University, Cambridge MA, United States ofAmerica
60 ( a ) Kirchho ff -Institut für Physik, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg; ( b ) Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg; ( c ) ZITI Institut fürtechnische Informatik, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Mannheim, Germany Faculty of Applied Information Science, Hiroshima Institute of Technology, Hiroshima, Japan
62 ( a ) Department of Physics, The Chinese University of Hong Kong, Shatin, N.T., Hong Kong; ( b ) Department of Physics, The University of Hong Kong, Hong Kong; ( c ) Department of Physics, TheHong Kong University of Science and Technology, Clear Water Bay, Kowloon, Hong Kong, China Department of Physics, Indiana University, Bloomington IN, United States of America Institut für Astro- und Teilchenphysik, Leopold-Franzens-Universität, Innsbruck, Austria University of Iowa, Iowa City IA, United States of America Department of Physics and Astronomy, Iowa State University, Ames IA, United States of America Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, JINR Dubna, Dubna, Russia KEK, High Energy Accelerator Research Organization, Tsukuba, Japan Graduate School of Science, Kobe University, Kobe, Japan Faculty of Science, Kyoto University, Kyoto, Japan38 Kyoto University of Education, Kyoto, Japan Department of Physics, Kyushu University, Fukuoka, Japan Instituto de Física La Plata, Universidad Nacional de La Plata and CONICET, La Plata, Argentina Physics Department, Lancaster University, Lancaster, United Kingdom
75 ( a ) INFN Sezione di Lecce; ( b ) Dipartimento di Matematica e Fisica, Università del Salento, Lecce,Italy Oliver Lodge Laboratory, University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom Department of Physics, Jožef Stefan Institute and University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia School of Physics and Astronomy, Queen Mary University of London, London, United Kingdom Department of Physics, Royal Holloway University of London, Surrey, United Kingdom Department of Physics and Astronomy, University College London, London, United Kingdom Louisiana Tech University, Ruston LA, United States of America Laboratoire de Physique Nucléaire et de Hautes Energies, UPMC and Université Paris-Diderot andCNRS / IN2P3, Paris, France Fysiska institutionen, Lunds universitet, Lund, Sweden Departamento de Fisica Teorica C-15, Universidad Autonoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain Institut für Physik, Universität Mainz, Mainz, Germany School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Manchester, Manchester, United Kingdom CPPM, Aix-Marseille Université and CNRS / IN2P3, Marseille, France Department of Physics, University of Massachusetts, Amherst MA, United States of America Department of Physics, McGill University, Montreal QC, Canada School of Physics, University of Melbourne, Victoria, Australia Department of Physics, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor MI, United States of America Department of Physics and Astronomy, Michigan State University, East Lansing MI, United States ofAmerica
93 ( a ) INFN Sezione di Milano; ( b ) Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Milano, Milano, Italy B.I. Stepanov Institute of Physics, National Academy of Sciences of Belarus, Minsk, Republic ofBelarus National Scientific and Educational Centre for Particle and High Energy Physics, Minsk, Republic ofBelarus Group of Particle Physics, University of Montreal, Montreal QC, Canada P.N. Lebedev Physical Institute of the Russian Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics (ITEP), Moscow, Russia National Research Nuclear University MEPhI, Moscow, Russia
D.V. Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics, M.V. Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow,Russia
Fakultät für Physik, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, München, Germany
Max-Planck-Institut für Physik (Werner-Heisenberg-Institut), München, Germany
Nagasaki Institute of Applied Science, Nagasaki, Japan
Graduate School of Science and Kobayashi-Maskawa Institute, Nagoya University, Nagoya, Japan
105 ( a ) INFN Sezione di Napoli; ( b ) Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Napoli, Napoli, Italy
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque NM, United Statesof America
Institute for Mathematics, Astrophysics and Particle Physics, Radboud University Nijmegen / Nikhef,Nijmegen, Netherlands
Nikhef National Institute for Subatomic Physics and University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam,Netherlands 39 Department of Physics, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb IL, United States of America
Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics, SB RAS, Novosibirsk, Russia
Department of Physics, New York University, New York NY, United States of America
Ohio State University, Columbus OH, United States of America
Faculty of Science, Okayama University, Okayama, Japan
Homer L. Dodge Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Oklahoma, Norman OK,United States of America
Department of Physics, Oklahoma State University, Stillwater OK, United States of America
Palacký University, RCPTM, Olomouc, Czech Republic
Center for High Energy Physics, University of Oregon, Eugene OR, United States of America
LAL, Univ. Paris-Sud, CNRS / IN2P3, Université Paris-Saclay, Orsay, France
Graduate School of Science, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan
Department of Physics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway
Department of Physics, Oxford University, Oxford, United Kingdom
122 ( a ) INFN Sezione di Pavia; ( b ) Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Pavia, Pavia, Italy
Department of Physics, University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia PA, United States of America
National Research Centre "Kurchatov Institute" B.P.Konstantinov Petersburg Nuclear PhysicsInstitute, St. Petersburg, Russia
125 ( a ) INFN Sezione di Pisa; ( b ) Dipartimento di Fisica E. Fermi, Università di Pisa, Pisa, Italy
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh PA, United States ofAmerica
127 ( a ) Laboratório de Instrumentação e Física Experimental de Partículas - LIP, Lisboa; ( b ) Faculdade deCiências, Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa; ( c ) Department of Physics, University of Coimbra, Coimbra; ( d ) Centro de Física Nuclear da Universidade de Lisboa, Lisboa; ( e ) Departamento de Fisica,Universidade do Minho, Braga; ( f ) Departamento de Fisica Teorica y del Cosmos and CAFPE,Universidad de Granada, Granada (Spain); ( g ) Dep Fisica and CEFITEC of Faculdade de Ciencias eTecnologia, Universidade Nova de Lisboa, Caparica, Portugal
Institute of Physics, Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, Praha, Czech Republic
Czech Technical University in Prague, Praha, Czech Republic
Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, Charles University in Prague, Praha, Czech Republic
State Research Center Institute for High Energy Physics (Protvino), NRC KI, Russia
Particle Physics Department, Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom
133 ( a ) INFN Sezione di Roma; ( b ) Dipartimento di Fisica, Sapienza Università di Roma, Roma, Italy
134 ( a ) INFN Sezione di Roma Tor Vergata; ( b ) Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Roma Tor Vergata,Roma, Italy
135 ( a ) INFN Sezione di Roma Tre; ( b ) Dipartimento di Matematica e Fisica, Università Roma Tre, Roma,Italy
136 ( a ) Faculté des Sciences Ain Chock, Réseau Universitaire de Physique des Hautes Energies -Université Hassan II, Casablanca; ( b ) Centre National de l’Energie des Sciences Techniques Nucleaires,Rabat; ( c ) Faculté des Sciences Semlalia, Université Cadi Ayyad, LPHEA-Marrakech; ( d ) Faculté desSciences, Université Mohamed Premier and LPTPM, Oujda; ( e ) Faculté des sciences, UniversitéMohammed V, Rabat, Morocco
DSM / IRFU (Institut de Recherches sur les Lois Fondamentales de l’Univers), CEA Saclay(Commissariat à l’Energie Atomique et aux Energies Alternatives), Gif-sur-Yvette, France
Santa Cruz Institute for Particle Physics, University of California Santa Cruz, Santa Cruz CA, UnitedStates of America
Department of Physics, University of Washington, Seattle WA, United States of America40 Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of She ffi eld, She ffi eld, United Kingdom Department of Physics, Shinshu University, Nagano, Japan
Fachbereich Physik, Universität Siegen, Siegen, Germany
Department of Physics, Simon Fraser University, Burnaby BC, Canada
SLAC National Accelerator Laboratory, Stanford CA, United States of America
145 ( a ) Faculty of Mathematics, Physics & Informatics, Comenius University, Bratislava; ( b ) Departmentof Subnuclear Physics, Institute of Experimental Physics of the Slovak Academy of Sciences, Kosice,Slovak Republic
146 ( a ) Department of Physics, University of Cape Town, Cape Town; ( b ) Department of Physics,University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg; ( c ) School of Physics, University of the Witwatersrand,Johannesburg, South Africa
147 ( a ) Department of Physics, Stockholm University; ( b ) The Oskar Klein Centre, Stockholm, Sweden
Physics Department, Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden
Departments of Physics & Astronomy and Chemistry, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook NY,United States of America
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Sussex, Brighton, United Kingdom
School of Physics, University of Sydney, Sydney, Australia
Institute of Physics, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan
Department of Physics, Technion: Israel Institute of Technology, Haifa, Israel
Raymond and Beverly Sackler School of Physics and Astronomy, Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv,Israel
Department of Physics, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Thessaloniki, Greece
International Center for Elementary Particle Physics and Department of Physics, The University ofTokyo, Tokyo, Japan
Graduate School of Science and Technology, Tokyo Metropolitan University, Tokyo, Japan
Department of Physics, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Tokyo, Japan
Department of Physics, University of Toronto, Toronto ON, Canada
160 ( a ) TRIUMF, Vancouver BC; ( b ) Department of Physics and Astronomy, York University, TorontoON, Canada
Faculty of Pure and Applied Sciences, and Center for Integrated Research in Fundamental Scienceand Engineering, University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan
Department of Physics and Astronomy, Tufts University, Medford MA, United States of America
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of California Irvine, Irvine CA, United States ofAmerica
164 ( a ) INFN Gruppo Collegato di Udine, Sezione di Trieste, Udine; ( b ) ICTP, Trieste; ( c ) Dipartimento diChimica, Fisica e Ambiente, Università di Udine, Udine, Italy
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Uppsala, Uppsala, Sweden
Department of Physics, University of Illinois, Urbana IL, United States of America
Instituto de Fisica Corpuscular (IFIC) and Departamento de Fisica Atomica, Molecular y Nuclearand Departamento de Ingeniería Electrónica and Instituto de Microelectrónica de Barcelona(IMB-CNM), University of Valencia and CSIC, Valencia, Spain
Department of Physics, University of British Columbia, Vancouver BC, Canada
Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of Victoria, Victoria BC, Canada
Department of Physics, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
Waseda University, Tokyo, Japan
Department of Particle Physics, The Weizmann Institute of Science, Rehovot, Israel
Department of Physics, University of Wisconsin, Madison WI, United States of America41 Fakultät für Physik und Astronomie, Julius-Maximilians-Universität, Würzburg, Germany
Fakultät für Mathematik und Naturwissenschaften, Fachgruppe Physik, Bergische UniversitätWuppertal, Wuppertal, Germany
Department of Physics, Yale University, New Haven CT, United States of America
Yerevan Physics Institute, Yerevan, Armenia
Centre de Calcul de l’Institut National de Physique Nucléaire et de Physique des Particules (IN2P3),Villeurbanne, France a Also at Department of Physics, King’s College London, London, United Kingdom b Also at Institute of Physics, Azerbaijan Academy of Sciences, Baku, Azerbaijan c Also at Novosibirsk State University, Novosibirsk, Russia d Also at TRIUMF, Vancouver BC, Canada e Also at Department of Physics & Astronomy, University of Louisville, Louisville, KY, United States ofAmerica f Also at Department of Physics, California State University, Fresno CA, United States of America g Also at Department of Physics, University of Fribourg, Fribourg, Switzerland h Also at Departament de Fisica de la Universitat Autonoma de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain i Also at Departamento de Fisica e Astronomia, Faculdade de Ciencias, Universidade do Porto, Portugal j Also at Tomsk State University, Tomsk, Russia k Also at Universita di Napoli Parthenope, Napoli, Italy l Also at Institute of Particle Physics (IPP), Canada m Also at Department of Physics, St. Petersburg State Polytechnical University, St. Petersburg, Russia n Also at Department of Physics, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor MI, United States of America o Also at Centre for High Performance Computing, CSIR Campus, Rosebank, Cape Town, South Africa p Also at Louisiana Tech University, Ruston LA, United States of America q Also at Institucio Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avancats, ICREA, Barcelona, Spain r Also at Graduate School of Science, Osaka University, Osaka, Japan s Also at Department of Physics, National Tsing Hua University, Taiwan t Also at Institute for Mathematics, Astrophysics and Particle Physics, Radboud UniversityNijmegen / Nikhef, Nijmegen, Netherlands u Also at Department of Physics, The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX, United States ofAmerica v Also at Institute of Theoretical Physics, Ilia State University, Tbilisi, Georgia w Also at CERN, Geneva, Switzerland x Also at Georgian Technical University (GTU),Tbilisi, Georgia y Also at Ochadai Academic Production, Ochanomizu University, Tokyo, Japan z Also at Manhattan College, New York NY, United States of America aa Also at Hellenic Open University, Patras, Greece ab Also at Academia Sinica Grid Computing, Institute of Physics, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan ac Also at School of Physics, Shandong University, Shandong, China ad Also at Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology State University, Dolgoprudny, Russia ae Also at Section de Physique, Université de Genève, Geneva, Switzerland a f
Also at Eotvos Lorand University, Budapest, Hungary a g Also at International School for Advanced Studies (SISSA), Trieste, Italy ah Also at Department of Physics and Astronomy, University of South Carolina, Columbia SC, UnitedStates of America ai Also at School of Physics and Engineering, Sun Yat-sen University, Guangzhou, China a j
Also at Institute for Nuclear Research and Nuclear Energy (INRNE) of the Bulgarian Academy of42ciences, Sofia, Bulgaria ak Also at Faculty of Physics, M.V.Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow, Russia al Also at Institute of Physics, Academia Sinica, Taipei, Taiwan am Also at National Research Nuclear University MEPhI, Moscow, Russia an Also at Department of Physics, Stanford University, Stanford CA, United States of America ao Also at Institute for Particle and Nuclear Physics, Wigner Research Centre for Physics, Budapest,Hungary ap Also at Flensburg University of Applied Sciences, Flensburg, Germany aq Also at University of Malaya, Department of Physics, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia ar Also at CPPM, Aix-Marseille Université and CNRS / IN2P3, Marseille, France ∗∗