Measurement of the mass of the top quark in decays with a J/psi meson in pp collisions at 8 TeV
EEUROPEAN ORGANIZATION FOR NUCLEAR RESEARCH (CERN)
CERN-EP/2016-2022017/01/02
CMS-TOP-15-014
Measurement of the mass of the top quark in decays with aJ/ ψ meson in pp collisions at 8 TeV The CMS Collaboration ∗ Abstract
A first measurement of the top quark mass in the decay channel t → ( W → (cid:96) ν ) ( b → J/ ψ + X → µ + µ − + X ) is presented. The analysis uses events selected from the proton-proton collisions recorded by the CMS detector at the LHC at a center-of-mass energyof 8 TeV. The data correspond to an integrated luminosity of 19.7 fb − , with 666 tt andsingle top quark candidate events containing a reconstructed J/ ψ candidate decayinginto an oppositely-charged muon pair. The mass of the (J/ ψ + (cid:96) ) system, where (cid:96) isan electron or a muon from W boson decay, is used to extract a top quark mass of173.5 ± ± Published in the Journal of High Energy Physics as doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2016)123. c (cid:13) ∗ See Appendix A for the list of collaboration members a r X i v : . [ h e p - e x ] D ec The top quark is the most massive particle in the standard model (SM), with the largest Yukawacoupling to the Higgs boson. The mass of the top quark ( m t ) is a fundamental parameter of theSM, playing a key role in radiative electroweak corrections [1, 2] and likely in the mechanismof electroweak symmetry breaking [3]. Therefore, a precise determination of m t is essential fora better understanding of the SM.Since the first observation of the top quark [4, 5], measurements of its mass have relied onthe reconstruction of its decay products. These measurements are currently dominated bysystematic uncertainties, related to the b-jet energy scale and the modeling of soft quantumchromodynamics (QCD) effects such as b quark hadronization and the underlying event [6, 7].Currently, the most precise measurement of m t , 172.44 ± ± m t from partial reconstruction of top quarks inleptonic final states that contain a J/ ψ meson from a b hadron decay. Both top quark-antiquarkpair (tt) and single top quark production are considered to be signal in this study. The decaymode of interest is t → ( W → (cid:96) ν ) ( b → J/ ψ + X → µ + µ − + X ) and is shown (for tt production)in Fig. 1. Here and everywhere, the charge conjugation is implicit. As suggested in Ref. [8]and refined in Ref. [9], the value of m t is determined through its correlation with the massof the J/ ψ + (cid:96) system, where (cid:96) is either an electron or muon produced in the decay of theaccompanying W boson (either directly or via a τ lepton) in the same top quark decay. Thebranching fraction is expected to be ( ± ) × − , but the presence of three leptons in thefinal state, two of which originate from the J/ ψ meson decay, provides a nearly background-freesample of events. ¯t¯bW − j /‘ − j / ¯ ν t W + b b hadron ν µ + (e + ) J /ψ µ + µ − Figure 1: Pictorial view of the J/ ψ meson produced in a tt system. The kinematic properties ofthe particles represented with dashed lines are used to infer m t .This measurement is based on data collected in pp collisions at a center-of-mass energy of 8 TeVwith the CMS detector at the CERN LHC. Simulated events generated at different top quarkmasses are used to calibrate the method and evaluate its performance, as well as to estimatesystematic uncertainties. The main advantage of this analysis lies in the determination of m t using only leptons. In this way, the dependence of the measurement on several dominant sys-tematic uncertainties linked to initial- and final-state radiation, jet reconstruction and b taggingtechniques, is considerably reduced. The drawback is the expected sensitivity to the modelingof b quark fragmentation, and the limited number of events in the selected sample on accountof the small branching fraction. The central feature of the CMS apparatus is a superconducting solenoid of 6 m internal diame-ter, providing a magnetic field of 3.8 T. Within the solenoid volume are a silicon pixel and striptracker, a lead tungstate crystal electromagnetic calorimeter (ECAL), and a brass and scintilla-tor hadron calorimeter (HCAL), each composed of a barrel and two endcap sections. Forwardcalorimeters extend the pseudorapidity ( η ) coverage provided by the barrel and endcap detec-tors. Muons are measured in gas-ionization detectors embedded in the steel flux-return yokeoutside the solenoid. The tracker has a track-finding efficiency of more than 99% for muonswith transverse momentum p T > | η | < | η | < | η | of 3.0. The HCAL barrel and endcaps similarly cover the re-gion | η | < | η | < p T resolution for muonswith 20 < p T <
100 GeV of 1–2% in the barrel and better than 6% in the endcaps. The p T resolution in the barrel is better than 10% for muons with p T up to 1 TeV [10]. A more de-tailed description of the CMS detector, together with a definition of the coordinate systems andkinematic variables, can be found in Ref. [11]. This measurement is performed using the data recorded by the CMS detector at √ s = ± − [12]. Events are required to pass asingle-muon (single-electron) trigger with a minimum muon (electron) p T of 24 ( ) GeV. Themethod used to extract m t has been developed and optimized using simulated events, withoutaccessing the final data.We use simulated events to develop the analysis method and estimate its performance. Thett, W + jets, and Z + jets processes are generated with the leading-order (LO) M AD G RAPH [13]generator (v5.1.3.30) matched to LO
PYTHIA τ lepton decays are simulated with the TAUOLA [15] program (v27.121.5). The LOCTEQ6L1 [16] parton distribution function (PDF) set and the Z2* underlying event tune areused in the generation. The most recent
PYTHIA
Z2* tune is derived from the Z1 tune [17],which uses the CTEQ5L parton distribution set, whereas Z2* adopts CTEQ6L. Matrix elementsdescribing up to three partons in addition to the tt pair are included in the M AD G RAPH gen-erator, and the MLM prescription [18] is used for matching of matrix-element jets to partonshowers. The Lund string model [19] is used for the simulation of the hadronization, and todetermine the fraction of the quark energy carried by unstable hadrons. For heavy quarks, theLund symmetric fragmentation function is modified according to the Bowler space-time pic-ture of string evolution [20]. Assuming fragmentation universality [21, 22], the values of theparameters of the fragmentation function obtained from fits to the LEP data [23] are used, with-out assigning a systematic uncertainty associated to the universality assumption. The singletop quark t -channel, s -channel, and tW processes are simulated with the next-to-leading-order(NLO) M AD G RAPH [24, 25] generator (v1.0, r1380) with the CTEQ6M PDF set. Diboson WW,WZ, and ZZ processes are generated with
PYTHIA .3 Event reconstruction and selection (NNLO) [26], while single top quark processes are computed at approximate NNLO [27]. TheW + jets and Z + jets cross sections are computed with FEWZ (v3.1) [28, 29] at NNLO, while thediboson cross sections are computed at NLO with
MCFM (v6.6) [30].For tt → b (cid:96) − ν bqq (cid:48) (lepton+jets), tt → b (cid:96) − ν b (cid:96) + ν (dilepton), tt → bqq (cid:48) bqq (cid:48) (all jets), and singletop quark processes, six samples with m t values between 166.5 and 178.5 GeV are generated.The evaluation of systematic uncertainties related to color reconnection, the modeling of theunderlying event, the factorization ( µ F ) and renormalization ( µ R ) scales, and the matching ofthe parton from the matrix element to parton showers, is based on studies of dedicated samplesof simulated events.A full simulation of the CMS detector based on G EANT
Events are reconstructed using a particle-flow (PF) algorithm [32, 33] that optimally combinesthe information from all CMS subdetectors to identify and reconstruct individual objects pro-duced in pp collisions. The particle candidates include muons, electrons, photons, chargedhadrons, and neutral hadrons. Charged particles are required to originate from the primarycollision vertex, identified as the reconstructed vertex with the largest value of ∑ p for its as-sociated tracks. Once isolated muons [10] and electrons [34] are identified and removed fromthe list of PF particles, charged hadrons are rejected if their tracks do not originate from the pri-mary vertex of the event. Finally, jets are reconstructed from the remaining PF particles usingthe anti- k T algorithm [35] with a distance parameter of 0.5 in the η – φ plane. Jet energy correc-tions are applied to all the jets in data and simulation [36]. The muon p T scale is corrected toaccount for possible geometrical effects, such as deformation of tracker geometry still presentafter implementing the alignment procedure.The selection criteria are optimized for lepton+jets and dilepton tt events with a J/ ψ meson re-sulting in two additional non-isolated muons. Lepton+jets events are required to have exactlyone isolated lepton with p T > ( ) GeV and | η | < ( ) in the case of the muon (electron).A muon (electron) is considered isolated if the scalar p T sum of all reconstructed particle can-didates (not including the lepton itself) within a cone of size ∆ R = √ ( ∆ η ) + ( ∆ φ ) = φ is azimuthal angle in radians) around the lepton direction is less than 12% (10%)of the lepton p T . An event-by-event correction is applied to the scalar sum to take into accountpossible contributions from pileup events [37]. Dilepton events are required to have exactlytwo isolated leptons: at least one isolated lepton defined as above, and either an isolated muonwith p T >
20 GeV and | η | < p T >
20 GeV and | η | < p T >
40 GeVand | η | < ψ meson candidate, with a mass between 3.0 and 3.2 GeV, is required in the event,reconstructed from two muons of opposite sign, with p T > | η | < χ of the vertex is required to be less than 5. The Table 1: Number of selected events from simulation and observed in data. The uncertaintiesare statistical. Process Number of eventsLeading µ Leading ett → b (cid:96) − ν bqq (cid:48) ± ± → b (cid:96) − ν b (cid:96) + ν ± ± → bqq’bqq (cid:48) negligible negligibleSingle top quark 39.4 ± ± → (cid:96) ν + jets 18.3 ± ± γ ∗ → (cid:96) + (cid:96) − + jets 4.5 ± ± ± ± ± ± p T is a muon, labeled “Leading µ ”, and eventsin which the leading isolated lepton is an electron, labeled “Leading e”, but not between lep-ton+jets and dileptonic event candidates. The rates predicted by the default simulation arein fair agreement with those observed in data. The event sample is dominated by contribu-tions from lepton+jets and dilepton tt events, with a lesser contribution from single top quarkprocesses.Figure 2 shows the dimuon invariant mass spectrum (for a wider mass range than the accep-tance window for the J/ ψ meson candidates) and the p T distribution of the J/ ψ meson candi-dates. The simulation used in this figure and the following ones is for m t = ψ meson candidates is roughly the same in data and simulation. Despite the correctionsapplied to the muon p T scale, a worse resolution is observed in data than in simulation. Thisis caused by final-state radiation emitted by the muons originating from the J/ ψ meson decay,which is not included in the simulation [40] and which results in a shift of the reconstructeddimuon invariant mass in the simulation to larger values. This effect is included in the system-atic uncertainties discussed in Sec. 4.1.The invariant mass, m J/ ψ + (cid:96) , is computed from the combination of the J/ ψ meson candidate andthe leading lepton. The distributions are shown in Fig. 3. Since no significant differences are observed between J/ ψ + µ and J/ ψ + e events, no furtherdistinction is made on the flavor of the leading lepton. In associating the leading lepton to a .1 Fitting procedure E v en t s / ( . G e V ) DatattSingle tBackgroundUncertainties (8 TeV) -1 CMS mass (GeV) - m + m D a t a / M C E v en t s / ( G e V ) DatattSingle tBackgroundUncertainties (8 TeV) -1 CMS ) (GeV) ψ (J/ T p D a t a / M C E v en t s / ( G e V ) DatattSingle tBackgroundUncertainties (8 TeV) -1 CMS ) (GeV) ψ (J/ T p D a t a / M C E v en t s / ( G e V ) DatattSingle tBackgroundUncertainties (8 TeV) -1 CMS (GeV) +e ψ J/ m D a t a / M C Leading e Figure 2: Distributions of the dimuon invariant mass between 2.8 and 3.4 GeV (left) and ofthe p T of the J/ ψ meson candidate (right). Processes are normalized to their theoretical crosssections. The simulation assumes a value of m t = y -axis rangeup to 3.5 units. E v en t s / ( G e V ) DatattSingle tBackgroundUncertainties (8 TeV) -1 CMS (GeV) m + y J/ m D a t a / M C m Leading E v en t s / ( G e V ) DatattSingle tBackgroundUncertainties (8 TeV) -1 CMS ) (GeV) ψ (J/ T p D a t a / M C E v en t s / ( G e V ) DatattSingle tBackgroundUncertainties (8 TeV) -1 CMS (GeV) +e ψ J/ m D a t a / M C Leading e E v en t s / ( G e V ) DatattSingle tBackgroundUncertainties (8 TeV) -1 CMS (GeV) +e y J/ m D a t a / M C Leading e E v en t s / ( G e V ) DatattSingle tBackgroundUncertainties (8 TeV) -1 CMS (GeV) +e ψ J/ m D a t a / M C Leading e E v en t s / ( G e V ) DatattSingle tBackgroundUncertainties (8 TeV) -1 CMS (GeV) +e ψ J/ m D a t a / M C Leading e E v en t s / ( G e V ) DatattSingle tBackgroundUncertainties (8 TeV) -1 CMS (GeV) +e ψ J/ m D a t a / M C Leading e Figure 3: Distributions of the invariant mass of the J/ ψ meson candidate and the leading leptoncombination, in the leading µ (left) and leading e (right) combinations. Processes are normal-ized to their theoretical cross sections. The simulation assumes a value of m t = y -axis range up to 5.5 and 18 units, respectively. J/ ψ meson in a tt event, there are configurations where both particles arise from the same topquark decay chain or from different top quarks (referred to as “wrong pairings”). The rightand wrong pairings are considered simultaneously in the analysis. While wrong pairings areless sensitive to m t , they remain weakly correlated with it.The expected m J/ ψ + (cid:96) distributions for tt and single top quark processes are simulated for dif-ferent values of m t . The background contribution is considered to be the same for each m t value. The simulated m J/ ψ + (cid:96) distributions thus obtained are fitted simultaneously, between 0and 250 GeV. The signal and background contributions are modelled by the following analyticprobability density function: P sig+bkg ( m J/ ψ + (cid:96) ) = α σ g √ π exp (cid:32) − ( m J/ ψ + (cid:96) − µ g ) σ g (cid:33) + ( − α ) β − γ γ γ Γ ( γ γ ) ( m J/ ψ + (cid:96) − µ γ ) γ γ − exp (cid:18) − m J/ ψ + (cid:96) − µ γ β γ (cid:19) . (1)This function is the sum of a Gaussian distribution (i.e., the first term of the right-hand sidein Eq. (1)) with the free parameters µ g (mean) and σ g (standard deviation), which describesmostly the peak in the m J/ ψ + (cid:96) distribution, and a gamma distribution (i.e., the whole secondterm of the right-hand side in Eq. (1)), whose definition involves the Gamma function Γ . Thegamma distribution has three free parameters: its shape parameter γ γ , scale parameter β γ , andshift parameter µ γ . The relative contribution of the Gaussian distribution is described by theparameter α . Each of the six parameters is implemented as a linear function of m t , taking theform of c + c m t . The M J/ ψ + (cid:96) distributions for each of the samples with different values of m t are simultaneously fitted to obtain the slope and intercept for each of the six parameters. Then,when the m J/ ψ + (cid:96) distribution obtained from data is fitted, the linear coefficients c and c arefixed and m t becomes the only free parameter of P sig+bkg . Figure 4 shows the six parameters ofEq. (1) with respect to m t . The two parameters showing the strongest dependence on m t are µ g and σ g . Different tests are used to validate the procedure to extract m t . First, the parameters of P sig+bkg are fitted for each of the m t values independently, without any specific assumption about theirdependence on m t . The result, superimposed as the dots in Fig. 4, confirms the assumed lineardependence. Then the m J/ ψ + (cid:96) distribution obtained for m t = P sig+bkg fixingthereby the dependence of µ g , σ g , γ γ , β γ , µ γ , and α on m t , only leaving m t free. The result isstatistically compatible with 172.5 GeV.The performance of this fitting method is evaluated with pseudo-data experiments. From P sig+bkg , described by Eq. (1), with m t fixed at 172.5 GeV, 3 000 pseudo-data experiments of N evt events are drawn, where N evt follows a Poisson distribution around the 666 events observed indata. Each pseudo-data experiment is fitted to P sig+bkg , with m t being once again the only freeparameter. The same procedure is reproduced for different m t values in P sig+bkg . The residualand the pull, respectively defined as the difference between the fit result and the input valueand the difference between the fit result and the input value relative to the fit uncertainty, arecomputed for each pseudo-data event. The mean and width of the pull and residual distribu-tions obtained for each pseudo-data experiment are rescaled to propagate uncertainties due tothe limited numbers of pseudo-data experiments and simulated events. The means and widths .3 Modeling heavy-quark fragmentation (GeV) t m
166 168 170 172 174 176 178 ( G e V ) g m t m (cid:215) + - = g m Alternative fit method
Simulation
CMS (8 TeV) (GeV) t m
166 168 170 172 174 176 178 ( G e V ) g s t m (cid:215) + - = g s Alternative fit method
Simulation
CMS (8 TeV) (GeV) t m
166 168 170 172 174 176 178 a t m (cid:215) + - = a Alternative fit method
Simulation
CMS (8 TeV) (GeV) t m
166 168 170 172 174 176 178 gg t m (cid:215) + = 2.1 g g Alternative fit method
Simulation
CMS (8 TeV) (GeV) t m
166 168 170 172 174 176 178 ( G e V ) gb t m (cid:215) + = 1.96 g b Alternative fit method
Simulation
CMS (8 TeV) (GeV) t m
166 168 170 172 174 176 178 ( G e V ) gm t m (cid:215) + = 8 g m Alternative fit method
Simulation
CMS (8 TeV)
Figure 4: Mean (upper left) and standard deviation (upper middle) of the Gaussian distributiondescribing the peak of the m J/ ψ + (cid:96) distributions, relative contribution of the Gaussian distribu-tion to P sig+bkg (upper right), and shape (lower left), scale (lower middle), and shift (lower right)parameters of the gamma distribution, as a function of input m t . The solid lines are the resultof the simultaneous fit described in Section 3.1, while the dashed lines indicate the 68% con-fidence level of the fit. The superimposed data points are the result of the alternative fittingmethod described in Section 3.2.of the pull distributions are found to be constant in m t and compatible with 0 and 1 within theirrespective statistical uncertainties. The method to extract m t from the m J/ ψ + (cid:96) distribution cantherefore be considered as unbiased. Each of the six mass points results in a mean and widthfrom the residual distribution, which are interpolated to m t = Since this measurement is expected to be particularly sensitive to heavy-quark fragmentation,its corresponding modeling in simulated events is studied in detail.The tt simulated event samples in the measurement are generated using the Z2* tune. The p T distribution of the b hadron at the generator level ( p genT ( B ) ), relative to that of the jet the hadronis matched to ( p genT ( jet ) ), is used to compare the Z2* tune to two alternative tunes and theirvariants:1. An updated version of the Z2* tune, which better describes fragmentation in e + e − data, isdenoted Z2* LEP r b [41]. The r b parameter in the Bowler extension of the fragmentationfunction [20] changes from r b = r b . Values that provide 1standard deviation changes in the r b parameter, respectively of r b = ∗ LEP r + b ) (jet) genT (B)/p genT p A r b i t r a r y un i t s b r Z2* LEP y B decays with J/
Simulation
CMS (8 TeV) (jet) genT (B)/p genT p b r R a t i o t o Z * L EP - b r Z2* LEP + b r Z2* LEP Z2* (jet) genT (B)/p genT p b r R a t i o t o Z * L EP P12FT P12 P12FL
Figure 5: Ratio of the p T of the b hadrons to the p T of the matched generator-level jet forthe Z2* LEP r b tune (upper), the ratio to Z2* LEP r b for the Z2*, Z2*;LEP r − b , and Z2* LEP r + b tunes (middle), and the ratio to Z2* LEP r b for the P12, P12FT, and P12FL tunes (lower). Asneutrinos are not clustered within jets, it happens in very rare cases that p genT ( B ) > p genT ( jet ) .For this effect to be visible, the horizontal axis range is extended beyond 1 unit.and 0.807 (Z2 ∗ LEP r − b ), are also considered;2. The Perugia 12 (P12) tune is used along with two variants [42] for which the fragmen-tation process is altered to be harder in the longitudinal (“FL”) and transverse (“FT”)directions by changing for all quarks the a and b parameters of the Lund fragmentationfunction [19]. The P12 tune is an update of the Perugia 11 tune, used in other analyses,e.g. Ref. [41].Figure 5 shows the ratio of p genT ( B ) / p genT ( jet ) distribution for the Z2* LEP r b tune. For the Z2*,Z2* LEP r − b , Z2 ∗ LEP r + b , P12, P12FT, and P12FL tunes, the ratio to Z2* LEP r b is shown. Sincethis distribution reflects how the p T of the b quark is transferred to the b hadron, it is a goodprobe of fragmentation modeling.A reweighting procedure, based on the p T distribution of the b hadron at generator level rela-tive to that of the jet the hadron belongs to, is applied to the m J/ ψ + (cid:96) distribution generated withthe Z2* tune at m t = m J/ ψ + (cid:96) distribution is then fitted to P sig+bkg , with m t being its only free param-eter. Figure 6 shows the dependence of the fitted m t on the average jet p T fraction carried bythe b hadron in exclusive decays. In Ref. [41], it was found that the default Z2* tune is softerthan the data for tt events, and the Z2* LEP r b tune is a better match to the data. It appearsin Fig. 6 that P12 and Z2* tune families give compatible results within statistical uncertainties.The Z2* LEP r b tune is therefore chosen as the baseline, implying a shift of − m t values obtained for its soft and hard variants is assignedas a systematic uncertainty.A closure test on the reweighting procedure has been done using simulated event samples .4 Results æ (jet) genT (B)/p genT p Æ ( o t he r t une ) ( G e V ) t m - ) b r ( Z * L EP t = m t m D - - - - - æ (jet) genT (B)/p genT p ÆD · = (0.30 GeV/1%) t m D Z2* b r Z2* LEP - b r Z2* LEP + b r Z2* LEP P12FT P12FLP12 y B decays with J/
Simulation
CMS (8 TeV)
Figure 6: Dependence of the extracted m t value on the average fragmentation ratio (cid:104) p genT ( B ) / p genT ( jet ) (cid:105) , fitted to a linear function.generated with the P12 tune family. It validates the strategy of reweighting only the p T transfer p genT ( B ) / p genT ( jet ) . Figure 7 shows the m J/ ψ + (cid:96) data distribution together with the results of a maximum-likelihoodfit to Eq. (1). The fit gives a good description of the data, apart from the low mass region,where the missing radiation correction becomes important (see Sec. 2.3). The inset shows thenegative logarithm of the likelihood function L relative to its maximum L max as a function of m t ,which is the only free parameter in the fit. The value of the fitted mass, after implementing theshift of − The size of each systematic uncertainty is evaluated from its impact on the m J/ ψ + (cid:96) shape andits propagation to the fit to extract m t . For each source of uncertainty, the m J/ ψ + (cid:96) distributionsare generated for the corresponding variations and then fitted to the nominal parametrizationof P sig+bkg obtained without variation. A cross-check is performed using pseudo-data exper-iments. The average shift of m t with respect to the reference is taken as an estimate of themagnitude of the systematic uncertainty. Both methods are always in good agreement withinthe statistical uncertainty.Table 2 summarizes the results obtained for the evaluation of the systematic uncertainties,which are described in detail in Sections 4.1 and 4.2, and considered as uncorrelated. Limited size of the simulation samples
As described in Section 3.2, pseudo-data exper-iments are drawn from P sig+bkg for seven different m t values. The spread of the residual mean (GeV) l +y J/ m E v en t s / ( G e V ) – = (173.5 t m CMS (8 TeV) -1 (GeV) t m
170 180 ) m a x l og ( L / L - DataFit resultStatistical uncertaintygamma componentGaussian component – = (173.5 t m Figure 7: Distribution in the invariant mass of the J/ ψ meson candidate and the leading leptoncombination, fitted to P sig+bkg of Eq. (1) through the maximization of a likelihood function. Theinset shows the negative logarithm of the likelihood function L relative to its maximum L max as a function of the only free parameter, which is m t .is interpreted as the uncertainty due to the finite size of the simulated event samples used forthe calibration. No systematic uncertainty stemming from the shape parametrization is added. Leading lepton momentum scale
The average uncertainties in the leading lepton trans-verse momentum scale are below 0.1% in the case of muons [10] and 0.3% in the case of elec-trons [34]. This uncertainty, given as a function of p T and η , is propagated to m J/ ψ + (cid:96) and theeffect on the m t fit is evaluated. Modeling of the J/ ψ meson candidate mass distribution Despite the corrections appliedto the muon p T scale, the shape of the J/ ψ meson candidate mass distribution observed in datais not exactly reproduced in the simulation, in which final-state radiation from soft muons isnot modelled. Conservatively, the full difference is treated as a potential systematic uncertainty.Thus, the m J/ ψ + (cid:96) distribution is recomputed for a reweighted J/ ψ meson candidate mass, suchthat the peak position and the width of the simulated distribution are the same as for the data.The uncertainty associated with this effect is computed as the difference between the top quarkmasses fitted before and after reweighting. Jet energy scale and resolution
In this analysis, the jet energy scale and resolution affectonly the event yield. The effect of the jet energy scale uncertainty is studied by scaling thereconstructed jet energy by a p T - and η -dependent scale factor before the event selection isapplied. Similarly, the effect of the jet energy resolution uncertainty is studied by varying thejet energy resolution of the simulated events according to the estimated uncertainty. Trigger efficiencies
As reported in Section 2.2, the single-lepton trigger efficiencies areapplied to simulated events. A conservative systematic uncertainty of ±
3% is assumed forthe trigger efficiencies. The difference between the top quark masses fitted with upwards anddownwards variations is taken as the uncertainty. .2 Theoretical uncertainties Table 2: Summary of the impact of systematic uncertainties on the top quark mass accordingto the contributions from each source.Source Value (GeV)Experimental uncertaintiesLimited size of the simulation samples ± ± ± ψ meson candidate mass distribution + < < ± ± ± − + − + − + ± ± + + − + − Pileup
Simulated events are reweighted event by event to reproduce the number of pileupevents observed in data. A 5% variation on the minimum-bias cross section [43] used is propa-gated to m J/ ψ + (cid:96) and m t . Background normalization
Processes are normalized to their theoretical cross sections.To evaluate the effect of the uncertainties in these cross sections, obtained from scale varia-tions in the theoretical calculation, the main background contributions, i.e. W/Z + jets andWW/ZZ/WZ, are varied by ±
20% and ± Matrix-element generator
The M AD G RAPH
LO matrix-element predictions used for thecalibration of the measurement are compared with the NLO
POWHEG predictions for m t = Factorization and renormalization scales
In the signal simulation, µ F and µ R are set toa common value Q = m + ∑ ( p partonT ) , where p partonT is the transverse momentum of thepartons. Alternative samples with Q varied by a factor of 0.5 or 2 are used to estimate the effectof the uncertainties in the factorization and renormalization scales. Matrix element/parton shower matching threshold
This matching threshold is a param-eter used in the simulation to define the limit at which the generation of extra jets is made by
PYTHIA instead of the matrix-element generator M AD G RAPH , and therefore controls the hard-est initial- and final-state radiation in the event. The effect of the choice of this threshold is evaluated using dedicated samples in which the parameter is changed from the default valueof 40 GeV down to 30 GeV and up to 60 GeV, as discussed in Ref. [44]. Top quark transverse momentum
Evidence of a mismodeling of the top quark p T byM AD G RAPH has been obtained by the differential cross sections measurements in CMS [45, 46].To quantify the effect of this mismodeling on m t , an event-by-event reweighting is applied tothe simulation to reproduce the top quark p T shape observed in data. The difference betweenthe top quark masses fitted with and without this reweighting is taken as the uncertainty. Fragmentation functions
The tt simulated event samples used for the measurement areproduced with the default Z2* tune, with a correction applied to the fitted result so as to usethe Z2* LEP r b tune as a baseline. These two tunes are based upon data collected at LEP andelsewhere. Porting an MC simulation tune from LEP to LHC implies the assumption of the fac-torization between the perturbative and nonperturbative parts in the shower evolution, whichare typically fitted together, and the noncorrelation of these fits with the color structure of theevent, which is clearly different in e + e − → bb and pp → tt → bW − bW + events. Thesedifferences are considered to be covered by the underlying event and color reconnection mod-eling uncertainty. The uncertainty stemming from the modeling of the b hadron decay inducesvariations of the b hadron relative p T that are much smaller than the uncertainty in r b for theZ2* LEP r b tune [47]. Thus, only the effect of fragmentation parameters constrained by the LEPdata is considered as an additional source of systematic uncertainty, assigning the maximumdifference between the m t values obtained for the Z2* LEP r ± b and Z2* LEP r b tunes, shown inFig. 6, as the systematic uncertainty stemming from the fragmentation modeling. The size ofthe uncertainty is found to be comparable to the one estimated in a different way in Ref. [9]. Hadronization modeling
A generator-level study using
SHERPA (v2.1.0) [48] has been car-ried out in the context of Ref. [41]. The
SHERPA generator allows us to use the same p T -ordered shower model ( CSSHOWER ++ [49]), while interfacing with two alternative hadroni-zation/fragmentation models. The difference between the cluster and the string models onthe m J/ ψ + (cid:96) shape is much smaller than the difference between the Z2* LEP r + b and Z2* LEP r − b tunes. Thus, only the difference between the two fragmentation tunes is considered as a sourceof systematic uncertainty and no extra uncertainty stemming from the hadronization model isassigned. Underlying event and color reconnection modeling
These effects are evaluated usingvariations of the Perugia 12 (P12) underlying event tune [42]. Two variations (“ueHi” and“ueLo”) are compared to the nominal P12 tune to evaluate the effect of the underlying event inthe measurement. The nominal P12 tune is taken here as the reference as it contains not onlya dedicated parametrization of the fragmentation function, but also different parametrizationsfor the hadron multiplicities. The difference between the nominal P12 tune and a separatevariation where color reconnection effects are smaller (“crLo”) is assigned as the systematicuncertainty due to this effect.
Parton distribution functions
As stated in Section 2.2, the default PDF tune is CTEQ6L1for tt simulated events in this analysis. The m t value fitted in this tune is compared to the oneobtained for the CT14 NLO [50], MMHT2014 NCL 68CL [51], and NNPDF30 NLO AS0118 [52]tunes, applying the PDF4LHC recommendations [53, 54]. Diagonalized uncertainty sourcesof each PDF set are used to derive event-by-event weights, which are then applied to obtaina variation of the M J/ ψ + (cid:96) shape. The maximal difference with respect to the nominal M J/ ψ + (cid:96) shape is quoted as the systematic uncertainty. The first measurement of the mass of the top quark is presented in the decay channel t → ( W → (cid:96) ν ) ( b → J/ ψ + X → µ + µ − + X ) . An event selection is implemented in proton-protoncollisions recorded with the CMS detector at √ s = ψ meson candidate that decays into an oppositely-charged muon pair. The data correspondto an integrated luminosity of 19.7 fb − . There are 355 events observed with a muon and 311with an electron as leading isolated lepton, in agreement with expectations from simulation.The top quark mass is extracted from an unbinned maximum-likelihood fit to the invariantmass of the leading lepton and J/ ψ meson candidate. The resulting m t measurement is 173.5 GeV,with a statistical uncertainty of 3.0 GeV and a systematic uncertainty of 0.9 GeV. This is the firsttime that this method has been applied to a physics analysis and the systematic uncertainty isof the same order of magnitude as that estimated in Ref. [9]. Even though the results are statisti-cally limited, the dominant systematic uncertainties are different from those of the most precisedirect reconstruction methods. As the sensitivity to jet-related uncertainties is negligible, thisallows the possibility to contribute significantly in combination with other m t measurements.Furthermore, with the larger data set expected in the next runs of the LHC, the method de-scribed in this paper will provide a result which will be more competitive with those obtainedfrom the conventional reconstruction techniques. Acknowledgments
We congratulate our colleagues in the CERN accelerator departments for the excellent perfor-mance of the LHC and thank the technical and administrative staffs at CERN and at other CMSinstitutes for their contributions to the success of the CMS effort. In addition, we gratefullyacknowledge the computing centers and personnel of the Worldwide LHC Computing Gridfor delivering so effectively the computing infrastructure essential to our analyses. Finally,we acknowledge the enduring support for the construction and operation of the LHC and theCMS detector provided by the following funding agencies: BMWFW and FWF (Austria); FNRSand FWO (Belgium); CNPq, CAPES, FAPERJ, and FAPESP (Brazil); MES (Bulgaria); CERN;CAS, MoST, and NSFC (China); COLCIENCIAS (Colombia); MSES and CSF (Croatia); RPF(Cyprus); SENESCYT (Ecuador); MoER, ERC IUT and ERDF (Estonia); Academy of Finland,MEC, and HIP (Finland); CEA and CNRS/IN2P3 (France); BMBF, DFG, and HGF (Germany);GSRT (Greece); OTKA and NIH (Hungary); DAE and DST (India); IPM (Iran); SFI (Ireland);INFN (Italy); MSIP and NRF (Republic of Korea); LAS (Lithuania); MOE and UM (Malaysia);BUAP, CINVESTAV, CONACYT, LNS, SEP, and UASLP-FAI (Mexico); MBIE (New Zealand);PAEC (Pakistan); MSHE and NSC (Poland); FCT (Portugal); JINR (Dubna); MON, RosAtom,RAS and RFBR (Russia); MESTD (Serbia); SEIDI and CPAN (Spain); Swiss Funding Agencies(Switzerland); MST (Taipei); ThEPCenter, IPST, STAR and NSTDA (Thailand); TUBITAK andTAEK (Turkey); NASU and SFFR (Ukraine); STFC (United Kingdom); DOE and NSF (USA).Individuals have received support from the Marie-Curie program and the European ResearchCouncil and EPLANET (European Union); the Leventis Foundation; the A. P. Sloan Founda-tion; the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation; the Belgian Federal Science Policy Office; theFonds pour la Formation `a la Recherche dans l’Industrie et dans l’Agriculture (FRIA-Belgium);the Agentschap voor Innovatie door Wetenschap en Technologie (IWT-Belgium); the Ministryof Education, Youth and Sports (MEYS) of the Czech Republic; the Council of Science and In-dustrial Research, India; the HOMING PLUS program of the Foundation for Polish Science, References cofinanced from European Union, Regional Development Fund, the Mobility Plus program ofthe Ministry of Science and Higher Education, the National Science Center (Poland), contractsHarmonia 2014/14/M/ST2/00428, Opus 2013/11/B/ST2/04202, 2014/13/B/ST2/02543 and2014/15/B/ST2/03998, Sonata-bis 2012/07/E/ST2/01406; the Thalis and Aristeia programscofinanced by EU-ESF and the Greek NSRF; the National Priorities Research Program by QatarNational Research Fund; the Programa Clar´ın-COFUND del Principado de Asturias; the Rachada-pisek Sompot Fund for Postdoctoral Fellowship, Chulalongkorn University and the Chula-longkorn Academic into Its 2nd Century Project Advancement Project (Thailand); and theWelch Foundation, contract C-1845.
References [1] M. Baak et al., “The global electroweak fit at NNLO and prospects for the LHC and ILC”,
Eur. Phys. J. C (2014) 3046, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-014-3046-5 , arXiv:1407.3792 .[2] A. J. Buras, J. Girrbach, D. Guadagnoli, and G. Isidori, “On the Standard Modelprediction for BR(B s, d → µ + µ − )”, Eur. Phys. J. C (2012) 2172, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-2172-1 , arXiv:1208.0934 .[3] G. Degrassi et al., “Higgs mass and vacuum stability in the Standard Model at NNLO”, JHEP (2012) 098, doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2012)098 , arXiv:1205.6497 .[4] CDF Collaboration, “Observation of Top Quark Production in ¯ pp Collisions with theCollider Detector at Fermilab”,
Phys. Rev. Lett. (1995) 2626, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.74.2626 , arXiv:hep-ex/9503002 .[5] D0 Collaboration, “Observation of the Top Quark”, Phys. Rev. Lett. (1995) 2632, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.74.2632 , arXiv:hep-ex/9503003 .[6] ATLAS Collaboration, “Measurement of the top quark mass in the t¯t → lepton+jets andt¯t → dilepton channels using √ s = Eur. Phys. J. C (2015) 330, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-015-3544-0 , arXiv:1503.05427 .[7] CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of the top quark mass using proton-proton data at √ s = Phys. Rev. D (2016) 072004, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.072004 , arXiv:1509.04044 .[8] CMS Collaboration, “Letter of intent: by the CMS Collaboration for a general purposedetector at LHC”, CERN-LHCC 92-003, 1992.[9] A. Kharchilava, “Top mass determination in leptonic final states with J/ ψ ”, Phys. Lett. B (2000) 73, doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(00)00120-9 , arXiv:hep-ph/9912320 .[10] CMS Collaboration, “Performance of CMS muon reconstruction in pp collision events at √ s = JINST (2012) P10002, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/7/10/P10002 , arXiv:1206.4071 .[11] CMS Collaboration, “The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC”, JINST (2008) S08004, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/3/08/S08004 .[12] CMS Collaboration, “CMS Luminosity Based on Pixel Cluster Counting – Summer 2013Update”, CMS Physics Analysis Summary CMS-PAS-LUM-13-001, 2013. eferences [13] J. Alwall et al., “The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading orderdifferential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations”, JHEP (2014) 079, doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2014)079 , arXiv:1405.0301 .[14] T. Sj ¨ostrand, S. Mrenna, and P. Z. Skands, “PYTHIA 6.4 physics and manual”, JHEP (2006) 026, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2006/05/026 , arXiv:hep-ph/0603175 .[15] N. Davidson et al., “Universal interface of TAUOLA : Technical and physicsdocumentation”,
Comput. Phys. Commun. (2012) 821, doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2011.12.009 , arXiv:1002.0543 .[16] J. Pumplin et al., “New Generation of Parton Distributions with Uncertainties fromGlobal QCD Analysis”, JHEP (2002) 012, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2002/07/012 , arXiv:hep-ph/0201195 .[17] R. Field, “Early LHC Underlying Event Data - Findings and Surprises”, (2010). arXiv:1010.3558 . Hadron collider physics. Proceedings, 22nd Conference, HCP 2010,Toronto, Canada, August 23-27, 2010.[18] M. L. Mangano, M. Moretti, F. Piccinini, and M. Treccani, “Matching matrix elements andshower evolution for top-quark production in hadronic collisions”, JHEP (2007) 013, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2007/01/013 , arXiv:hep-ph/0611129 .[19] B. Andersson, G. Gustafson, G. Ingelman, and T. Sj ¨ostrand, “Parton fragmentation andstring dynamics”, Phys. Rep. (1983) 31, doi:10.1016/0370-1573(83)90080-7 .[20] M. G. Bowler, “e + e − Production of heavy quarks in the string model”,
Z. Phys. C (1981) 169, doi:10.1007/BF01574001 .[21] T. Kinoshita, “Mass Singularities of Feynman Amplitudes”, J. Math. Phys. (1962) 650, doi:10.1063/1.1724268 .[22] T. D. Lee and M. Nauenberg, “Degenerate Systems and Mass Singularities”, Phys. Rev. B (1964) 1549, doi:10.1103/PhysRev.133.B1549 .[23] “Z physics at LEP 1, vol. 3: Event generators and software”, CERN Yellow ReportCERN-YELLOW-89-08-V-3, 1989. doi:10.5170/CERN-1989-008-V-3 .[24] S. Alioli, P. Nason, C. Oleari, and E. Re, “NLO single-top production matched withshower in POWHEG: s - and t -channel contributions”, JHEP (2009) 111, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2009/09/111 , arXiv:0907.4076 . [Erratum: doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2010)011 ].[25] E. Re, “Single-top Wt-channel production matched with parton showers using thePOWHEG method”, Eur. Phys. J. C (2011) 1547, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1547-z , arXiv:1009.2450 .[26] M. Czakon, P. Fiedler, and A. Mitov, “Total Top-Quark Pair-Production Cross Section atHadron Colliders Through O ( α S ) ”, Phys. Rev. Lett. (2013) 252004, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.252004 , arXiv:1303.6254 .[27] N. Kidonakis, “NNLL threshold resummation for top-pair and single-top production”, Phys. Part. Nucl. (2014) 714, doi:10.1134/S1063779614040091 , arXiv:1210.7813 . References [28] R. Gavin, Y. Li, F. Petriello, and S. Quackenbush, “FEWZ 2.0: A code for hadronic Zproduction at next-to-next-to-leading order”,
Comput. Phys. Commun. (2011) 2388, doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2011.06.008 , arXiv:1011.3540 .[29] R. Gavin, Y. Li, F. Petriello, and S. Quackenbush, “W Physics at the LHC with FEWZ 2.1”, Comput. Phys. Commun. (2013) 208, doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2012.09.005 , arXiv:1201.5896 .[30] J. M. Campbell, R. K. Ellis, and C. Williams, “Vector boson pair production at the LHC”, JHEP (2011) 018, doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2011)018 , arXiv:1105.0020 .[31] GEANT4 Collaboration, “GEANT4—a simulation toolkit”, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A (2003) 250, doi:10.1016/S0168-9002(03)01368-8 .[32] CMS Collaboration, “Particle-Flow Event Reconstruction in CMS and Performance forJets, Taus, and E missT ”, CMS Physics Analysis Summary CMS-PAS-PFT-09-001, 2009.[33] CMS Collaboration, “Commissioning of the Particle-flow Event Reconstruction with thefirst LHC collisions recorded in the CMS detector”, CMS Physics Analysis SummaryCMS-PAS-PFT-10-001, 2010.[34] CMS Collaboration, “Performance of electron reconstruction and selection with the CMSdetector in proton-proton collisions at √ s = JINST (2015) P06005, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/10/06/P06005 , arXiv:1502.02701 .[35] M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez, “The anti- k t jet clustering algorithm”, JHEP (2008) 063, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2008/04/063 , arXiv:0802.1189 .[36] CMS Collaboration, “Determination of jet energy calibration and transverse momentumresolution in CMS”, JINST (2011) P11002, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/6/11/P11002 , arXiv:1107.4277 .[37] CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of the t¯t production cross section in the e- µ channel inproton-proton collisions at √ s = arXiv:1603.02303 . Submittedto JHEP.[38] R. Fr ¨uhwirth, “Application of Kalman filtering to track and vertex fitting”, Nucl. Instrum.Meth. A (1987) 444, doi:10.1016/0168-9002(87)90887-4 .[39] R. Fr ¨uhwirth, W. Waltenberger, and P. Vanlaer, “Adaptive vertex fitting”,
J. Phys. G (2007) N343, doi:10.1088/0954-3899/34/12/N01 .[40] CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of J/ ψ and ψ (2S) Prompt Double-Differential CrossSections in pp Collisions at √ s = Phys. Rev. Lett. (2015) 191802, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.191802 , arXiv:1502.04155 .[41] CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of the top quark mass using charged particles in ppcollisions at √ s = Phys. Rev. D (2016) 2006, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.092006 , arXiv:1603.06536 .[42] P. Z. Skands, “Tuning Monte Carlo generators: The Perugia tunes”, Phys. Rev. D (2010) 074018, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.82.074018 , arXiv:1005.3457 .[43] CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of the inelastic proton-proton cross section at √ s = Phys. Lett. B (2013) 5, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2013.03.024 , arXiv:1210.6718 . eferences [44] CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of t¯t production with additional jet activity, includingb quark jets, in the dilepton decay channel using pp collisions at √ s = Eur. Phys.J. C (2016) 379, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-4105-x , arXiv:1510.03072 .[45] CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of the differential cross section for top quark pairproduction in pp collisions at √ s = Eur. Phys. J. C (2015) 542, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-015-3709-x , arXiv:1505.04480 .[46] CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of the t¯t Production Cross Section in the All-Jets FinalState in pp Collisions at √ s = Eur. Phys. J. C (2016) 128, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-3956-5 , arXiv:1509.06076 .[47] BaBar Collaboration, “Study of inclusive production of charmonium mesons in B decay”, Phys. Rev. D (2003) 032002, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.67.032002 , arXiv:hep-ex/0207097 .[48] T. Gleisberg et al., “Event generation with SHERPA 1.1”, JHEP (2009) 007, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2009/02/007 , arXiv:0811.4622 .[49] S. Schumann and F. Krauss, “A parton shower algorithm based on Catani-Seymourdipole factorisation”, JHEP (2008) 038, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2008/03/038 , arXiv:0709.1027 .[50] S. Dulat et al., “New parton distribution functions from a global analysis of quantumchromodynamics”, Phys. Rev. D (2016) 033006, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.033006 , arXiv:1506.07443 .[51] L. A. Harland-Lang, A. D. Martin, P. Motylinski, and R. S. Thorne, “Parton distributionsin the LHC era: MMHT 2014 PDFs”, Eur. Phys. J. C (2015) 204, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-015-3397-6 , arXiv:1412.3989 .[52] NNPDF Collaboration, “Parton distributions for the LHC Run II”, JHEP (2015) 040, doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2015)040 , arXiv:1410.8849 .[53] S. Alekhin et al., “The PDF4LHC Working Group Interim Report”, (2011). arXiv:1101.0536 .[54] M. Botje et al., “The PDF4LHC Working Group Interim Recommendations”, (2011). arXiv:1101.0538 . References A The CMS Collaboration
Yerevan Physics Institute, Yerevan, Armenia
V. Khachatryan, A.M. Sirunyan, A. Tumasyan
Institut f ¨ur Hochenergiephysik der OeAW, Wien, Austria
W. Adam, E. Asilar, T. Bergauer, J. Brandstetter, E. Brondolin, M. Dragicevic, J. Er ¨o, M. Flechl,M. Friedl, R. Fr ¨uhwirth , V.M. Ghete, C. Hartl, N. H ¨ormann, J. Hrubec, M. Jeitler , A. K ¨onig,I. Kr¨atschmer, D. Liko, T. Matsushita, I. Mikulec, D. Rabady, N. Rad, B. Rahbaran, H. Rohringer,J. Schieck , J. Strauss, W. Treberer-Treberspurg, W. Waltenberger, C.-E. Wulz National Centre for Particle and High Energy Physics, Minsk, Belarus
V. Mossolov, N. Shumeiko, J. Suarez Gonzalez
Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, Belgium
S. Alderweireldt, E.A. De Wolf, X. Janssen, J. Lauwers, M. Van De Klundert, H. VanHaevermaet, P. Van Mechelen, N. Van Remortel, A. Van Spilbeeck
Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussel, Belgium
S. Abu Zeid, F. Blekman, J. D’Hondt, N. Daci, I. De Bruyn, K. Deroover, N. Heracleous,S. Lowette, S. Moortgat, L. Moreels, A. Olbrechts, Q. Python, S. Tavernier, W. Van Doninck,P. Van Mulders, I. Van Parijs
Universit´e Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium
H. Brun, C. Caillol, B. Clerbaux, G. De Lentdecker, H. Delannoy, G. Fasanella, L. Favart,R. Goldouzian, A. Grebenyuk, G. Karapostoli, T. Lenzi, A. L´eonard, J. Luetic, T. Maerschalk,A. Marinov, A. Randle-conde, T. Seva, C. Vander Velde, P. Vanlaer, R. Yonamine, F. Zenoni,F. Zhang Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
A. Cimmino, T. Cornelis, D. Dobur, A. Fagot, G. Garcia, M. Gul, D. Poyraz, S. Salva,R. Sch ¨ofbeck, M. Tytgat, W. Van Driessche, E. Yazgan, N. Zaganidis
Universit´e Catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
H. Bakhshiansohi, C. Beluffi , O. Bondu, S. Brochet, G. Bruno, A. Caudron, S. De Visscher,C. Delaere, M. Delcourt, B. Francois, A. Giammanco, A. Jafari, P. Jez, M. Komm, V. Lemaitre,A. Magitteri, A. Mertens, M. Musich, C. Nuttens, K. Piotrzkowski, L. Quertenmont,M. Selvaggi, M. Vidal Marono, S. Wertz Universit´e de Mons, Mons, Belgium
N. Beliy
Centro Brasileiro de Pesquisas Fisicas, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
W.L. Ald´a J ´unior, F.L. Alves, G.A. Alves, L. Brito, C. Hensel, A. Moraes, M.E. Pol, P. RebelloTeles
Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
E. Belchior Batista Das Chagas, W. Carvalho, J. Chinellato , A. Cust ´odio, E.M. Da Costa,G.G. Da Silveira , D. De Jesus Damiao, C. De Oliveira Martins, S. Fonseca De Souza,L.M. Huertas Guativa, H. Malbouisson, D. Matos Figueiredo, C. Mora Herrera, L. Mundim,H. Nogima, W.L. Prado Da Silva, A. Santoro, A. Sznajder, E.J. Tonelli Manganote , A. VilelaPereira Universidade Estadual Paulista a , Universidade Federal do ABC b , S˜ao Paulo, Brazil S. Ahuja a , C.A. Bernardes b , S. Dogra a , T.R. Fernandez Perez Tomei a , E.M. Gregores b , A The CMS Collaboration
P.G. Mercadante b , C.S. Moon a , S.F. Novaes a , Sandra S. Padula a , D. Romero Abad b , J.C. RuizVargas Institute for Nuclear Research and Nuclear Energy, Sofia, Bulgaria
A. Aleksandrov, R. Hadjiiska, P. Iaydjiev, M. Rodozov, S. Stoykova, G. Sultanov, M. Vutova
University of Sofia, Sofia, Bulgaria
A. Dimitrov, I. Glushkov, L. Litov, B. Pavlov, P. Petkov
Beihang University, Beijing, China
W. Fang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing, China
M. Ahmad, J.G. Bian, G.M. Chen, H.S. Chen, M. Chen, Y. Chen , T. Cheng, C.H. Jiang,D. Leggat, Z. Liu, F. Romeo, S.M. Shaheen, A. Spiezia, J. Tao, C. Wang, Z. Wang, H. Zhang,J. Zhao State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China
Y. Ban, G. Chen, Q. Li, S. Liu, Y. Mao, S.J. Qian, D. Wang, Z. Xu
Universidad de Los Andes, Bogota, Colombia
C. Avila, A. Cabrera, L.F. Chaparro Sierra, C. Florez, J.P. Gomez, C.F. Gonz´alez Hern´andez,J.D. Ruiz Alvarez, J.C. Sanabria
University of Split, Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering and NavalArchitecture, Split, Croatia
N. Godinovic, D. Lelas, I. Puljak, P.M. Ribeiro Cipriano, T. Sculac
University of Split, Faculty of Science, Split, Croatia
Z. Antunovic, M. Kovac
Institute Rudjer Boskovic, Zagreb, Croatia
V. Brigljevic, D. Ferencek, K. Kadija, S. Micanovic, L. Sudic, T. Susa
University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus
A. Attikis, G. Mavromanolakis, J. Mousa, C. Nicolaou, F. Ptochos, P.A. Razis, H. Rykaczewski
Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
M. Finger , M. Finger Jr. Universidad San Francisco de Quito, Quito, Ecuador
E. Carrera Jarrin
Academy of Scientific Research and Technology of the Arab Republic of Egypt, EgyptianNetwork of High Energy Physics, Cairo, Egypt
E. El-khateeb , S. Elgammal , A. Mohamed National Institute of Chemical Physics and Biophysics, Tallinn, Estonia
B. Calpas, M. Kadastik, M. Murumaa, L. Perrini, M. Raidal, A. Tiko, C. Veelken
Department of Physics, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
P. Eerola, J. Pekkanen, M. Voutilainen
Helsinki Institute of Physics, Helsinki, Finland
J. H¨ark ¨onen, V. Karim¨aki, R. Kinnunen, T. Lamp´en, K. Lassila-Perini, S. Lehti, T. Lind´en,P. Luukka, T. Peltola, J. Tuominiemi, E. Tuovinen, L. Wendland Lappeenranta University of Technology, Lappeenranta, Finland
J. Talvitie, T. Tuuva
IRFU, CEA, Universit´e Paris-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France
M. Besancon, F. Couderc, M. Dejardin, D. Denegri, B. Fabbro, J.L. Faure, C. Favaro, F. Ferri,S. Ganjour, S. Ghosh, A. Givernaud, P. Gras, G. Hamel de Monchenault, P. Jarry, I. Kucher,E. Locci, M. Machet, J. Malcles, J. Rander, A. Rosowsky, M. Titov, A. Zghiche
Laboratoire Leprince-Ringuet, Ecole Polytechnique, IN2P3-CNRS, Palaiseau, France
A. Abdulsalam, I. Antropov, S. Baffioni, F. Beaudette, P. Busson, L. Cadamuro, E. Chapon,C. Charlot, O. Davignon, R. Granier de Cassagnac, M. Jo, S. Lisniak, P. Min´e, M. Nguyen,C. Ochando, G. Ortona, P. Paganini, P. Pigard, S. Regnard, R. Salerno, Y. Sirois, T. Strebler,Y. Yilmaz, A. Zabi
Institut Pluridisciplinaire Hubert Curien, Universit´e de Strasbourg, Universit´e de HauteAlsace Mulhouse, CNRS/IN2P3, Strasbourg, France
J.-L. Agram , J. Andrea, A. Aubin, D. Bloch, J.-M. Brom, M. Buttignol, E.C. Chabert,N. Chanon, C. Collard, E. Conte , X. Coubez, J.-C. Fontaine , D. Gel´e, U. Goerlach, A.-C. LeBihan, J.A. Merlin , K. Skovpen, P. Van Hove Centre de Calcul de l’Institut National de Physique Nucleaire et de Physique des Particules,CNRS/IN2P3, Villeurbanne, France
S. Gadrat
Universit´e de Lyon, Universit´e Claude Bernard Lyon 1, CNRS-IN2P3, Institut de PhysiqueNucl´eaire de Lyon, Villeurbanne, France
S. Beauceron, C. Bernet, G. Boudoul, E. Bouvier, C.A. Carrillo Montoya, R. Chierici,D. Contardo, B. Courbon, P. Depasse, H. El Mamouni, J. Fan, J. Fay, S. Gascon, M. Gouzevitch,G. Grenier, B. Ille, F. Lagarde, I.B. Laktineh, M. Lethuillier, L. Mirabito, A.L. Pequegnot,S. Perries, A. Popov , D. Sabes, V. Sordini, M. Vander Donckt, P. Verdier, S. Viret Georgian Technical University, Tbilisi, Georgia
T. Toriashvili Tbilisi State University, Tbilisi, Georgia
D. Lomidze
RWTH Aachen University, I. Physikalisches Institut, Aachen, Germany
C. Autermann, S. Beranek, L. Feld, A. Heister, M.K. Kiesel, K. Klein, M. Lipinski, A. Ostapchuk,M. Preuten, F. Raupach, S. Schael, C. Schomakers, J.F. Schulte, J. Schulz, T. Verlage, H. Weber,V. Zhukov RWTH Aachen University, III. Physikalisches Institut A, Aachen, Germany
M. Brodski, E. Dietz-Laursonn, D. Duchardt, M. Endres, M. Erdmann, S. Erdweg, T. Esch,R. Fischer, A. G ¨uth, M. Hamer, T. Hebbeker, C. Heidemann, K. Hoepfner, S. Knutzen,M. Merschmeyer, A. Meyer, P. Millet, S. Mukherjee, M. Olschewski, K. Padeken, T. Pook,M. Radziej, H. Reithler, M. Rieger, F. Scheuch, L. Sonnenschein, D. Teyssier, S. Th ¨uer
RWTH Aachen University, III. Physikalisches Institut B, Aachen, Germany
V. Cherepanov, G. Fl ¨ugge, W. Haj Ahmad, F. Hoehle, B. Kargoll, T. Kress, A. K ¨unsken,J. Lingemann, T. M ¨uller, A. Nehrkorn, A. Nowack, I.M. Nugent, C. Pistone, O. Pooth, A. Stahl Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron, Hamburg, Germany
M. Aldaya Martin, C. Asawatangtrakuldee, K. Beernaert, O. Behnke, U. Behrens, A.A. BinAnuar, K. Borras , A. Campbell, P. Connor, C. Contreras-Campana, F. Costanza, C. Diez A The CMS Collaboration
Pardos, G. Dolinska, G. Eckerlin, D. Eckstein, E. Eren, E. Gallo , J. Garay Garcia, A. Geiser,A. Gizhko, J.M. Grados Luyando, P. Gunnellini, A. Harb, J. Hauk, M. Hempel , H. Jung,A. Kalogeropoulos, O. Karacheban , M. Kasemann, J. Keaveney, J. Kieseler, C. Kleinwort,I. Korol, D. Kr ¨ucker, W. Lange, A. Lelek, J. Leonard, K. Lipka, A. Lobanov, W. Lohmann ,R. Mankel, I.-A. Melzer-Pellmann, A.B. Meyer, G. Mittag, J. Mnich, A. Mussgiller, E. Ntomari,D. Pitzl, R. Placakyte, A. Raspereza, B. Roland, M. ¨O. Sahin, P. Saxena, T. Schoerner-Sadenius,C. Seitz, S. Spannagel, N. Stefaniuk, K.D. Trippkewitz, G.P. Van Onsem, R. Walsh, C. Wissing University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
V. Blobel, M. Centis Vignali, A.R. Draeger, T. Dreyer, E. Garutti, D. Gonzalez, J. Haller,M. Hoffmann, A. Junkes, R. Klanner, R. Kogler, N. Kovalchuk, T. Lapsien, T. Lenz,I. Marchesini, D. Marconi, M. Meyer, M. Niedziela, D. Nowatschin, F. Pantaleo , T. Peiffer,A. Perieanu, J. Poehlsen, C. Sander, C. Scharf, P. Schleper, A. Schmidt, S. Schumann,J. Schwandt, H. Stadie, G. Steinbr ¨uck, F.M. Stober, M. St ¨over, H. Tholen, D. Troendle, E. Usai,L. Vanelderen, A. Vanhoefer, B. Vormwald Institut f ¨ur Experimentelle Kernphysik, Karlsruhe, Germany
C. Barth, C. Baus, J. Berger, E. Butz, T. Chwalek, F. Colombo, W. De Boer, A. Dierlamm,S. Fink, R. Friese, M. Giffels, A. Gilbert, P. Goldenzweig, D. Haitz, F. Hartmann , S.M. Heindl,U. Husemann, I. Katkov , P. Lobelle Pardo, B. Maier, H. Mildner, M.U. Mozer, Th. M ¨uller,M. Plagge, G. Quast, K. Rabbertz, S. R ¨ocker, F. Roscher, M. Schr ¨oder, I. Shvetsov, G. Sieber,H.J. Simonis, R. Ulrich, J. Wagner-Kuhr, S. Wayand, M. Weber, T. Weiler, S. Williamson,C. W ¨ohrmann, R. Wolf Institute of Nuclear and Particle Physics (INPP), NCSR Demokritos, Aghia Paraskevi,Greece
G. Anagnostou, G. Daskalakis, T. Geralis, V.A. Giakoumopoulou, A. Kyriakis, D. Loukas,I. Topsis-Giotis
National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
A. Agapitos, S. Kesisoglou, A. Panagiotou, N. Saoulidou, E. Tziaferi
University of Io´annina, Io´annina, Greece
I. Evangelou, G. Flouris, C. Foudas, P. Kokkas, N. Loukas, N. Manthos, I. Papadopoulos,E. Paradas
MTA-ELTE Lend ¨ulet CMS Particle and Nuclear Physics Group, E ¨otv ¨os Lor´and University,Budapest, Hungary
N. Filipovic
Wigner Research Centre for Physics, Budapest, Hungary
G. Bencze, C. Hajdu, P. Hidas, D. Horvath , F. Sikler, V. Veszpremi, G. Vesztergombi ,A.J. Zsigmond Institute of Nuclear Research ATOMKI, Debrecen, Hungary
N. Beni, S. Czellar, J. Karancsi , A. Makovec, J. Molnar, Z. Szillasi University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary
M. Bart ´ok , P. Raics, Z.L. Trocsanyi, B. Ujvari National Institute of Science Education and Research, Bhubaneswar, India
S. Bahinipati, S. Choudhury , P. Mal, K. Mandal, A. Nayak , D.K. Sahoo, N. Sahoo, S.K. Swain Panjab University, Chandigarh, India
S. Bansal, S.B. Beri, V. Bhatnagar, R. Chawla, U.Bhawandeep, A.K. Kalsi, A. Kaur, M. Kaur,R. Kumar, A. Mehta, M. Mittal, J.B. Singh, G. Walia
University of Delhi, Delhi, India
Ashok Kumar, A. Bhardwaj, B.C. Choudhary, R.B. Garg, S. Keshri, S. Malhotra, M. Naimuddin,N. Nishu, K. Ranjan, R. Sharma, V. Sharma
Saha Institute of Nuclear Physics, Kolkata, India
R. Bhattacharya, S. Bhattacharya, K. Chatterjee, S. Dey, S. Dutt, S. Dutta, S. Ghosh,N. Majumdar, A. Modak, K. Mondal, S. Mukhopadhyay, S. Nandan, A. Purohit, A. Roy, D. Roy,S. Roy Chowdhury, S. Sarkar, M. Sharan, S. Thakur
Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Madras, India
P.K. Behera
Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai, India
R. Chudasama, D. Dutta, V. Jha, V. Kumar, A.K. Mohanty , P.K. Netrakanti, L.M. Pant,P. Shukla, A. Topkar Tata Institute of Fundamental Research-A, Mumbai, India
T. Aziz, S. Dugad, G. Kole, B. Mahakud, S. Mitra, G.B. Mohanty, B. Parida, N. Sur, B. Sutar
Tata Institute of Fundamental Research-B, Mumbai, India
S. Banerjee, S. Bhowmik , R.K. Dewanjee, S. Ganguly, M. Guchait, Sa. Jain, S. Kumar,M. Maity , G. Majumder, K. Mazumdar, T. Sarkar , N. Wickramage Indian Institute of Science Education and Research (IISER), Pune, India
S. Chauhan, S. Dube, V. Hegde, A. Kapoor, K. Kothekar, A. Rane, S. Sharma
Institute for Research in Fundamental Sciences (IPM), Tehran, Iran
H. Behnamian, S. Chenarani , E. Eskandari Tadavani, S.M. Etesami , A. Fahim , M. Khakzad,M. Mohammadi Najafabadi, M. Naseri, S. Paktinat Mehdiabadi , F. Rezaei Hosseinabadi,B. Safarzadeh , M. Zeinali University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
M. Felcini, M. Grunewald
INFN Sezione di Bari a , Universit`a di Bari b , Politecnico di Bari c , Bari, Italy M. Abbrescia a , b , C. Calabria a , b , C. Caputo a , b , A. Colaleo a , D. Creanza a , c , L. Cristella a , b , N. DeFilippis a , c , M. De Palma a , b , L. Fiore a , G. Iaselli a , c , G. Maggi a , c , M. Maggi a , G. Miniello a , b ,S. My a , b , S. Nuzzo a , b , A. Pompili a , b , G. Pugliese a , c , R. Radogna a , b , A. Ranieri a , G. Selvaggi a , b ,L. Silvestris a ,13 , R. Venditti a , b , P. Verwilligen a INFN Sezione di Bologna a , Universit`a di Bologna b , Bologna, Italy G. Abbiendi a , C. Battilana, D. Bonacorsi a , b , S. Braibant-Giacomelli a , b , L. Brigliadori a , b ,R. Campanini a , b , P. Capiluppi a , b , A. Castro a , b , F.R. Cavallo a , S.S. Chhibra a , b , G. Codispoti a , b ,M. Cuffiani a , b , G.M. Dallavalle a , F. Fabbri a , A. Fanfani a , b , D. Fasanella a , b , P. Giacomelli a ,C. Grandi a , L. Guiducci a , b , S. Marcellini a , G. Masetti a , A. Montanari a , F.L. Navarria a , b ,A. Perrotta a , A.M. Rossi a , b , T. Rovelli a , b , G.P. Siroli a , b , N. Tosi a , b ,13 INFN Sezione di Catania a , Universit`a di Catania b , Catania, Italy S. Albergo a , b , M. Chiorboli a , b , S. Costa a , b , A. Di Mattia a , F. Giordano a , b , R. Potenza a , b ,A. Tricomi a , b , C. Tuve a , b A The CMS Collaboration
INFN Sezione di Firenze a , Universit`a di Firenze b , Firenze, Italy G. Barbagli a , V. Ciulli a , b , C. Civinini a , R. D’Alessandro a , b , E. Focardi a , b , V. Gori a , b , P. Lenzi a , b ,M. Meschini a , S. Paoletti a , G. Sguazzoni a , L. Viliani a , b ,13 INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy
L. Benussi, S. Bianco, F. Fabbri, D. Piccolo, F. Primavera INFN Sezione di Genova a , Universit`a di Genova b , Genova, Italy V. Calvelli a , b , F. Ferro a , M. Lo Vetere a , b , M.R. Monge a , b , E. Robutti a , S. Tosi a , b INFN Sezione di Milano-Bicocca a , Universit`a di Milano-Bicocca b , Milano, Italy L. Brianza , M.E. Dinardo a , b , S. Fiorendi a , b , S. Gennai a , A. Ghezzi a , b , P. Govoni a , b , M. Malberti,S. Malvezzi a , R.A. Manzoni a , b ,13 , B. Marzocchi a , b , D. Menasce a , L. Moroni a , M. Paganoni a , b ,D. Pedrini a , S. Pigazzini, S. Ragazzi a , b , T. Tabarelli de Fatis a , b INFN Sezione di Napoli a , Universit`a di Napoli ’Federico II’ b , Napoli, Italy, Universit`a dellaBasilicata c , Potenza, Italy, Universit`a G. Marconi d , Roma, Italy S. Buontempo a , N. Cavallo a , c , G. De Nardo, S. Di Guida a , d ,13 , M. Esposito a , b , F. Fabozzi a , c ,A.O.M. Iorio a , b , G. Lanza a , L. Lista a , S. Meola a , d ,13 , P. Paolucci a ,13 , C. Sciacca a , b , F. Thyssen INFN Sezione di Padova a , Universit`a di Padova b , Padova, Italy, Universit`a di Trento c ,Trento, Italy P. Azzi a ,13 , N. Bacchetta a , L. Benato a , b , M. Biasotto a ,30 , D. Bisello a , b , A. Boletti a , b , A. CarvalhoAntunes De Oliveira a , b , P. Checchia a , M. Dall’Osso a , b , P. De Castro Manzano a , T. Dorigo a ,F. Fanzago a , U. Gasparini a , b , A. Gozzelino a , S. Lacaprara a , M. Margoni a , b , A.T. Meneguzzo a , b ,J. Pazzini a , b ,13 , N. Pozzobon a , b , P. Ronchese a , b , F. Simonetto a , b , E. Torassa a , S. Ventura a ,M. Zanetti, P. Zotto a , b , A. Zucchetta a , b , G. Zumerle a , b INFN Sezione di Pavia a , Universit`a di Pavia b , Pavia, Italy A. Braghieri a , A. Magnani a , b , P. Montagna a , b , S.P. Ratti a , b , V. Re a , C. Riccardi a , b , P. Salvini a ,I. Vai a , b , P. Vitulo a , b INFN Sezione di Perugia a , Universit`a di Perugia b , Perugia, Italy L. Alunni Solestizi a , b , G.M. Bilei a , D. Ciangottini a , b , L. Fan `o a , b , P. Lariccia a , b , R. Leonardi a , b ,G. Mantovani a , b , M. Menichelli a , A. Saha a , A. Santocchia a , b INFN Sezione di Pisa a , Universit`a di Pisa b , Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa c , Pisa, Italy K. Androsov a ,31 , P. Azzurri a ,13 , G. Bagliesi a , J. Bernardini a , T. Boccali a , R. Castaldi a ,M.A. Ciocci a ,31 , R. Dell’Orso a , S. Donato a , c , G. Fedi, A. Giassi a , M.T. Grippo a ,31 , F. Ligabue a , c ,T. Lomtadze a , L. Martini a , b , A. Messineo a , b , F. Palla a , A. Rizzi a , b , A. Savoy-Navarro a ,32 ,P. Spagnolo a , R. Tenchini a , G. Tonelli a , b , A. Venturi a , P.G. Verdini a INFN Sezione di Roma a , Universit`a di Roma b , Roma, Italy L. Barone a , b , F. Cavallari a , M. Cipriani a , b , G. D’imperio a , b ,13 , D. Del Re a , b ,13 , M. Diemoz a ,S. Gelli a , b , E. Longo a , b , F. Margaroli a , b , P. Meridiani a , G. Organtini a , b , R. Paramatti a , F. Preiato a , b ,S. Rahatlou a , b , C. Rovelli a , F. Santanastasio a , b INFN Sezione di Torino a , Universit`a di Torino b , Torino, Italy, Universit`a del PiemonteOrientale c , Novara, Italy N. Amapane a , b , R. Arcidiacono a , c ,13 , S. Argiro a , b , M. Arneodo a , c , N. Bartosik a , R. Bellan a , b ,C. Biino a , N. Cartiglia a , F. Cenna a , b , M. Costa a , b , R. Covarelli a , b , A. Degano a , b , N. Demaria a ,L. Finco a , b , B. Kiani a , b , C. Mariotti a , S. Maselli a , E. Migliore a , b , V. Monaco a , b , E. Monteil a , b ,M.M. Obertino a , b , L. Pacher a , b , N. Pastrone a , M. Pelliccioni a , G.L. Pinna Angioni a , b , F. Ravera a , b , A. Romero a , b , M. Ruspa a , c , R. Sacchi a , b , K. Shchelina a , b , V. Sola a , A. Solano a , b , A. Staiano a ,P. Traczyk a , b INFN Sezione di Trieste a , Universit`a di Trieste b , Trieste, Italy S. Belforte a , M. Casarsa a , F. Cossutti a , G. Della Ricca a , b , C. La Licata a , b , A. Schizzi a , b , A. Zanetti a Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Korea
D.H. Kim, G.N. Kim, M.S. Kim, S. Lee, S.W. Lee, Y.D. Oh, S. Sekmen, D.C. Son, Y.C. Yang
Chonbuk National University, Jeonju, Korea
A. Lee
Hanyang University, Seoul, Korea
J.A. Brochero Cifuentes, T.J. Kim
Korea University, Seoul, Korea
S. Cho, S. Choi, Y. Go, D. Gyun, S. Ha, B. Hong, Y. Jo, Y. Kim, B. Lee, K. Lee, K.S. Lee, S. Lee,J. Lim, S.K. Park, Y. Roh
Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea
J. Almond, J. Kim, H. Lee, S.B. Oh, B.C. Radburn-Smith, S.h. Seo, U.K. Yang, H.D. Yoo, G.B. Yu
University of Seoul, Seoul, Korea
M. Choi, H. Kim, H. Kim, J.H. Kim, J.S.H. Lee, I.C. Park, G. Ryu, M.S. Ryu
Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon, Korea
Y. Choi, J. Goh, C. Hwang, J. Lee, I. Yu
Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania
V. Dudenas, A. Juodagalvis, J. Vaitkus
National Centre for Particle Physics, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
I. Ahmed, Z.A. Ibrahim, J.R. Komaragiri, M.A.B. Md Ali , F. Mohamad Idris , W.A.T. WanAbdullah, M.N. Yusli, Z. Zolkapli Centro de Investigacion y de Estudios Avanzados del IPN, Mexico City, Mexico
H. Castilla-Valdez, E. De La Cruz-Burelo, I. Heredia-De La Cruz , A. Hernandez-Almada,R. Lopez-Fernandez, R. Maga ˜na Villalba, J. Mejia Guisao, A. Sanchez-Hernandez Universidad Iberoamericana, Mexico City, Mexico
S. Carrillo Moreno, C. Oropeza Barrera, F. Vazquez Valencia
Benemerita Universidad Autonoma de Puebla, Puebla, Mexico
S. Carpinteyro, I. Pedraza, H.A. Salazar Ibarguen, C. Uribe Estrada
Universidad Aut ´onoma de San Luis Potos´ı, San Luis Potos´ı, Mexico
A. Morelos Pineda
University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
D. Krofcheck
University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
P.H. Butler
National Centre for Physics, Quaid-I-Azam University, Islamabad, Pakistan
A. Ahmad, M. Ahmad, Q. Hassan, H.R. Hoorani, W.A. Khan, M.A. Shah, M. Shoaib, M. Waqas A The CMS Collaboration
National Centre for Nuclear Research, Swierk, Poland
H. Bialkowska, M. Bluj, B. Boimska, T. Frueboes, M. G ´orski, M. Kazana, K. Nawrocki,K. Romanowska-Rybinska, M. Szleper, P. Zalewski
Institute of Experimental Physics, Faculty of Physics, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
K. Bunkowski, A. Byszuk , K. Doroba, A. Kalinowski, M. Konecki, J. Krolikowski, M. Misiura,M. Olszewski, M. Walczak Laborat ´orio de Instrumenta¸c˜ao e F´ısica Experimental de Part´ıculas, Lisboa, Portugal
P. Bargassa, C. Beir˜ao Da Cruz E Silva, A. Di Francesco, P. Faccioli, P.G. Ferreira Parracho,M. Gallinaro, J. Hollar, N. Leonardo, L. Lloret Iglesias, M.V. Nemallapudi, J. RodriguesAntunes, J. Seixas, O. Toldaiev, D. Vadruccio, J. Varela, P. Vischia
Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia
M. Gavrilenko, A. Golunov, I. Golutvin, N. Gorbounov, A. Kamenev, V. Karjavin, V. Korenkov,A. Lanev, A. Malakhov, V. Matveev , V.V. Mitsyn, P. Moisenz, V. Palichik, V. Perelygin,S. Shmatov, N. Skatchkov, V. Smirnov, E. Tikhonenko, A. Zarubin
Petersburg Nuclear Physics Institute, Gatchina (St. Petersburg), Russia
L. Chtchipounov, V. Golovtsov, Y. Ivanov, V. Kim , E. Kuznetsova , V. Murzin, V. Oreshkin,V. Sulimov, A. Vorobyev Institute for Nuclear Research, Moscow, Russia
Yu. Andreev, A. Dermenev, S. Gninenko, N. Golubev, A. Karneyeu, M. Kirsanov, N. Krasnikov,A. Pashenkov, D. Tlisov, A. Toropin
Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia
V. Epshteyn, V. Gavrilov, N. Lychkovskaya, V. Popov, I. Pozdnyakov, G. Safronov,A. Spiridonov, M. Toms, E. Vlasov, A. Zhokin
Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology
A. Bylinkin National Research Nuclear University ’Moscow Engineering Physics Institute’ (MEPhI),Moscow, Russia
M. Chadeeva , O. Markin, E. Tarkovskii P.N. Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia
V. Andreev, M. Azarkin , I. Dremin , M. Kirakosyan, A. Leonidov , S.V. Rusakov,A. Terkulov Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow,Russia
A. Baskakov, A. Belyaev, E. Boos, V. Bunichev, M. Dubinin , L. Dudko, A. Ershov, A. Gribushin,V. Klyukhin, N. Korneeva, I. Lokhtin, I. Miagkov, S. Obraztsov, M. Perfilov, V. Savrin Novosibirsk State University (NSU), Novosibirsk, Russia
V. Blinov , Y.Skovpen State Research Center of Russian Federation, Institute for High Energy Physics, Protvino,Russia
I. Azhgirey, I. Bayshev, S. Bitioukov, D. Elumakhov, V. Kachanov, A. Kalinin, D. Konstantinov,V. Krychkine, V. Petrov, R. Ryutin, A. Sobol, S. Troshin, N. Tyurin, A. Uzunian, A. Volkov University of Belgrade, Faculty of Physics and Vinca Institute of Nuclear Sciences, Belgrade,Serbia
P. Adzic , P. Cirkovic, D. Devetak, M. Dordevic, J. Milosevic, V. Rekovic Centro de Investigaciones Energ´eticas Medioambientales y Tecnol ´ogicas (CIEMAT),Madrid, Spain
J. Alcaraz Maestre, M. Barrio Luna, E. Calvo, M. Cerrada, M. Chamizo Llatas, N. Colino, B. DeLa Cruz, A. Delgado Peris, A. Escalante Del Valle, C. Fernandez Bedoya, J.P. Fern´andez Ramos,J. Flix, M.C. Fouz, P. Garcia-Abia, O. Gonzalez Lopez, S. Goy Lopez, J.M. Hernandez, M.I. Josa,E. Navarro De Martino, A. P´erez-Calero Yzquierdo, J. Puerta Pelayo, A. Quintario Olmeda,I. Redondo, L. Romero, M.S. Soares
Universidad Aut ´onoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
J.F. de Troc ´oniz, M. Missiroli, D. Moran
Universidad de Oviedo, Oviedo, Spain
J. Cuevas, J. Fernandez Menendez, I. Gonzalez Caballero, J.R. Gonz´alez Fern´andez, E. PalenciaCortezon, S. Sanchez Cruz, I. Su´arez Andr´es, J.M. Vizan Garcia
Instituto de F´ısica de Cantabria (IFCA), CSIC-Universidad de Cantabria, Santander, Spain
I.J. Cabrillo, A. Calderon, J.R. Casti ˜neiras De Saa, E. Curras, M. Fernandez, J. Garcia-Ferrero,G. Gomez, A. Lopez Virto, J. Marco, C. Martinez Rivero, F. Matorras, J. Piedra Gomez,T. Rodrigo, A. Ruiz-Jimeno, L. Scodellaro, N. Trevisani, I. Vila, R. Vilar Cortabitarte
CERN, European Organization for Nuclear Research, Geneva, Switzerland
D. Abbaneo, E. Auffray, G. Auzinger, M. Bachtis, P. Baillon, A.H. Ball, D. Barney, P. Bloch,A. Bocci, A. Bonato, C. Botta, T. Camporesi, R. Castello, M. Cepeda, G. Cerminara,M. D’Alfonso, D. d’Enterria, A. Dabrowski, V. Daponte, A. David, M. De Gruttola, A. De Roeck,E. Di Marco , M. Dobson, B. Dorney, T. du Pree, D. Duggan, M. D ¨unser, N. Dupont, A. Elliott-Peisert, S. Fartoukh, G. Franzoni, J. Fulcher, W. Funk, D. Gigi, K. Gill, M. Girone, F. Glege,D. Gulhan, S. Gundacker, M. Guthoff, J. Hammer, P. Harris, J. Hegeman, V. Innocente, P. Janot,H. Kirschenmann, V. Kn ¨unz, A. Kornmayer , M.J. Kortelainen, K. Kousouris, M. Krammer ,P. Lecoq, C. Lourenc¸o, M.T. Lucchini, L. Malgeri, M. Mannelli, A. Martelli, F. Meijers, S. Mersi,E. Meschi, F. Moortgat, S. Morovic, M. Mulders, H. Neugebauer, S. Orfanelli, L. Orsini, L. Pape,E. Perez, M. Peruzzi, A. Petrilli, G. Petrucciani, A. Pfeiffer, M. Pierini, A. Racz, T. Reis,G. Rolandi , M. Rovere, M. Ruan, H. Sakulin, J.B. Sauvan, C. Sch¨afer, C. Schwick, M. Seidel,A. Sharma, P. Silva, P. Sphicas , J. Steggemann, M. Stoye, Y. Takahashi, M. Tosi, D. Treille,A. Triossi, A. Tsirou, V. Veckalns , G.I. Veres , N. Wardle, A. Zagozdzinska , W.D. Zeuner Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen, Switzerland
W. Bertl, K. Deiters, W. Erdmann, R. Horisberger, Q. Ingram, H.C. Kaestli, D. Kotlinski,U. Langenegger, T. Rohe
Institute for Particle Physics, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
F. Bachmair, L. B¨ani, L. Bianchini, B. Casal, G. Dissertori, M. Dittmar, M. Doneg`a, P. Eller,C. Grab, C. Heidegger, D. Hits, J. Hoss, G. Kasieczka, P. Lecomte † , W. Lustermann, B. Mangano,M. Marionneau, P. Martinez Ruiz del Arbol, M. Masciovecchio, M.T. Meinhard, D. Meister,F. Micheli, P. Musella, F. Nessi-Tedaldi, F. Pandolfi, J. Pata, F. Pauss, G. Perrin, L. Perrozzi,M. Quittnat, M. Rossini, M. Sch ¨onenberger, A. Starodumov , V.R. Tavolaro, K. Theofilatos,R. Wallny Universit¨at Z ¨urich, Zurich, Switzerland
T.K. Aarrestad, C. Amsler , L. Caminada, M.F. Canelli, A. De Cosa, C. Galloni, A. Hinzmann, A The CMS Collaboration
T. Hreus, B. Kilminster, C. Lange, J. Ngadiuba, D. Pinna, G. Rauco, P. Robmann, D. Salerno,Y. Yang
National Central University, Chung-Li, Taiwan
V. Candelise, T.H. Doan, Sh. Jain, R. Khurana, M. Konyushikhin, C.M. Kuo, W. Lin, Y.J. Lu,A. Pozdnyakov, S.S. Yu
National Taiwan University (NTU), Taipei, Taiwan
Arun Kumar, P. Chang, Y.H. Chang, Y.W. Chang, Y. Chao, K.F. Chen, P.H. Chen, C. Dietz,F. Fiori, W.-S. Hou, Y. Hsiung, Y.F. Liu, R.-S. Lu, M. Mi ˜nano Moya, E. Paganis, A. Psallidas,J.f. Tsai, Y.M. Tzeng
Chulalongkorn University, Faculty of Science, Department of Physics, Bangkok, Thailand
B. Asavapibhop, G. Singh, N. Srimanobhas, N. Suwonjandee
Cukurova University, Adana, Turkey
A. Adiguzel, S. Damarseckin, Z.S. Demiroglu, C. Dozen, E. Eskut, S. Girgis, G. Gokbulut,Y. Guler, E. Gurpinar, I. Hos, E.E. Kangal , O. Kara, A. Kayis Topaksu, U. Kiminsu, M. Oglakci,G. Onengut , K. Ozdemir , S. Ozturk , A. Polatoz, B. Tali , S. Turkcapar, I.S. Zorbakir,C. Zorbilmez Middle East Technical University, Physics Department, Ankara, Turkey
B. Bilin, S. Bilmis, B. Isildak , G. Karapinar , M. Yalvac, M. Zeyrek Bogazici University, Istanbul, Turkey
E. G ¨ulmez, M. Kaya , O. Kaya , E.A. Yetkin , T. Yetkin Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey
A. Cakir, K. Cankocak, S. Sen Institute for Scintillation Materials of National Academy of Science of Ukraine, Kharkov,Ukraine
B. Grynyov
National Scientific Center, Kharkov Institute of Physics and Technology, Kharkov, Ukraine
L. Levchuk, P. Sorokin
University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
R. Aggleton, F. Ball, L. Beck, J.J. Brooke, D. Burns, E. Clement, D. Cussans, H. Flacher,J. Goldstein, M. Grimes, G.P. Heath, H.F. Heath, J. Jacob, L. Kreczko, C. Lucas, D.M. Newbold ,S. Paramesvaran, A. Poll, T. Sakuma, S. Seif El Nasr-storey, D. Smith, V.J. Smith Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom
K.W. Bell, A. Belyaev , C. Brew, R.M. Brown, L. Calligaris, D. Cieri, D.J.A. Cockerill,J.A. Coughlan, K. Harder, S. Harper, E. Olaiya, D. Petyt, C.H. Shepherd-Themistocleous,A. Thea, I.R. Tomalin, T. Williams Imperial College, London, United Kingdom
M. Baber, R. Bainbridge, O. Buchmuller, A. Bundock, D. Burton, S. Casasso, M. Citron,D. Colling, L. Corpe, P. Dauncey, G. Davies, A. De Wit, M. Della Negra, R. Di Maria, P. Dunne,A. Elwood, D. Futyan, Y. Haddad, G. Hall, G. Iles, T. James, R. Lane, C. Laner, R. Lucas ,L. Lyons, A.-M. Magnan, S. Malik, L. Mastrolorenzo, J. Nash, A. Nikitenko , J. Pela, B. Penning,M. Pesaresi, D.M. Raymond, A. Richards, A. Rose, C. Seez, S. Summers, A. Tapper, K. Uchida,M. Vazquez Acosta , T. Virdee , J. Wright, S.C. Zenz Brunel University, Uxbridge, United Kingdom
J.E. Cole, P.R. Hobson, A. Khan, P. Kyberd, D. Leslie, I.D. Reid, P. Symonds, L. Teodorescu,M. Turner
Baylor University, Waco, USA
A. Borzou, K. Call, J. Dittmann, K. Hatakeyama, H. Liu, N. Pastika
The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, USA
O. Charaf, S.I. Cooper, C. Henderson, P. Rumerio, C. West
Boston University, Boston, USA
D. Arcaro, A. Avetisyan, T. Bose, D. Gastler, D. Rankin, C. Richardson, J. Rohlf, L. Sulak, D. Zou
Brown University, Providence, USA
G. Benelli, E. Berry, D. Cutts, A. Garabedian, J. Hakala, U. Heintz, J.M. Hogan, O. Jesus, E. Laird,G. Landsberg, Z. Mao, M. Narain, S. Piperov, S. Sagir, E. Spencer, R. Syarif
University of California, Davis, Davis, USA
R. Breedon, G. Breto, D. Burns, M. Calderon De La Barca Sanchez, S. Chauhan, M. Chertok,J. Conway, R. Conway, P.T. Cox, R. Erbacher, C. Flores, G. Funk, M. Gardner, W. Ko, R. Lander,C. Mclean, M. Mulhearn, D. Pellett, J. Pilot, F. Ricci-Tam, S. Shalhout, J. Smith, M. Squires,D. Stolp, M. Tripathi, S. Wilbur, R. Yohay
University of California, Los Angeles, USA
R. Cousins, P. Everaerts, A. Florent, J. Hauser, M. Ignatenko, D. Saltzberg, E. Takasugi,V. Valuev, M. Weber
University of California, Riverside, Riverside, USA
K. Burt, R. Clare, J. Ellison, J.W. Gary, G. Hanson, J. Heilman, P. Jandir, E. Kennedy, F. Lacroix,O.R. Long, M. Olmedo Negrete, M.I. Paneva, A. Shrinivas, H. Wei, S. Wimpenny, B. R. Yates
University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, USA
J.G. Branson, G.B. Cerati, S. Cittolin, M. Derdzinski, R. Gerosa, A. Holzner, D. Klein,V. Krutelyov, J. Letts, I. Macneill, D. Olivito, S. Padhi, M. Pieri, M. Sani, V. Sharma, S. Simon,M. Tadel, A. Vartak, S. Wasserbaech , C. Welke, J. Wood, F. W ¨urthwein, A. Yagil, G. Zevi DellaPorta University of California, Santa Barbara, Santa Barbara, USA
R. Bhandari, J. Bradmiller-Feld, C. Campagnari, A. Dishaw, V. Dutta, K. Flowers, M. FrancoSevilla, P. Geffert, C. George, F. Golf, L. Gouskos, J. Gran, R. Heller, J. Incandela, N. Mccoll,S.D. Mullin, A. Ovcharova, J. Richman, D. Stuart, I. Suarez, J. Yoo
California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, USA
D. Anderson, A. Apresyan, J. Bendavid, A. Bornheim, J. Bunn, Y. Chen, J. Duarte, J.M. Lawhorn,A. Mott, H.B. Newman, C. Pena, M. Spiropulu, J.R. Vlimant, S. Xie, R.Y. Zhu
Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, USA
M.B. Andrews, V. Azzolini, T. Ferguson, M. Paulini, J. Russ, M. Sun, H. Vogel, I. Vorobiev
University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, USA
J.P. Cumalat, W.T. Ford, F. Jensen, A. Johnson, M. Krohn, T. Mulholland, K. Stenson,S.R. Wagner
Cornell University, Ithaca, USA
J. Alexander, J. Chaves, J. Chu, S. Dittmer, K. Mcdermott, N. Mirman, G. Nicolas Kaufman, A The CMS Collaboration
J.R. Patterson, A. Rinkevicius, A. Ryd, L. Skinnari, L. Soffi, S.M. Tan, Z. Tao, J. Thom, J. Tucker,P. Wittich, M. Zientek
Fairfield University, Fairfield, USA
D. Winn
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, USA
S. Abdullin, M. Albrow, G. Apollinari, S. Banerjee, L.A.T. Bauerdick, A. Beretvas, J. Berryhill,P.C. Bhat, G. Bolla, K. Burkett, J.N. Butler, H.W.K. Cheung, F. Chlebana, S. Cihangir † ,M. Cremonesi, V.D. Elvira, I. Fisk, J. Freeman, E. Gottschalk, L. Gray, D. Green, S. Gr ¨unendahl,O. Gutsche, D. Hare, R.M. Harris, S. Hasegawa, J. Hirschauer, Z. Hu, B. Jayatilaka, S. Jindariani,M. Johnson, U. Joshi, B. Klima, B. Kreis, S. Lammel, J. Linacre, D. Lincoln, R. Lipton,T. Liu, R. Lopes De S´a, J. Lykken, K. Maeshima, N. Magini, J.M. Marraffino, S. Maruyama,D. Mason, P. McBride, P. Merkel, S. Mrenna, S. Nahn, C. Newman-Holmes † , V. O’Dell, K. Pedro,O. Prokofyev, G. Rakness, L. Ristori, E. Sexton-Kennedy, A. Soha, W.J. Spalding, L. Spiegel,S. Stoynev, N. Strobbe, L. Taylor, S. Tkaczyk, N.V. Tran, L. Uplegger, E.W. Vaandering,C. Vernieri, M. Verzocchi, R. Vidal, M. Wang, H.A. Weber, A. Whitbeck University of Florida, Gainesville, USA
D. Acosta, P. Avery, P. Bortignon, D. Bourilkov, A. Brinkerhoff, A. Carnes, M. Carver,D. Curry, S. Das, R.D. Field, I.K. Furic, J. Konigsberg, A. Korytov, P. Ma, K. Matchev, H. Mei,P. Milenovic , G. Mitselmakher, D. Rank, L. Shchutska, D. Sperka, L. Thomas, J. Wang,S. Wang, J. Yelton Florida International University, Miami, USA
S. Linn, P. Markowitz, G. Martinez, J.L. Rodriguez
Florida State University, Tallahassee, USA
A. Ackert, J.R. Adams, T. Adams, A. Askew, S. Bein, B. Diamond, S. Hagopian, V. Hagopian,K.F. Johnson, A. Khatiwada, H. Prosper, A. Santra, M. Weinberg
Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne, USA
M.M. Baarmand, V. Bhopatkar, S. Colafranceschi , M. Hohlmann, D. Noonan, T. Roy,F. Yumiceva University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC), Chicago, USA
M.R. Adams, L. Apanasevich, D. Berry, R.R. Betts, I. Bucinskaite, R. Cavanaugh, O. Evdokimov,L. Gauthier, C.E. Gerber, D.J. Hofman, P. Kurt, C. O’Brien, I.D. Sandoval Gonzalez, P. Turner,N. Varelas, H. Wang, Z. Wu, M. Zakaria, J. Zhang
The University of Iowa, Iowa City, USA
B. Bilki , W. Clarida, K. Dilsiz, S. Durgut, R.P. Gandrajula, M. Haytmyradov, V. Khristenko,J.-P. Merlo, H. Mermerkaya , A. Mestvirishvili, A. Moeller, J. Nachtman, H. Ogul, Y. Onel,F. Ozok , A. Penzo, C. Snyder, E. Tiras, J. Wetzel, K. Yi Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA
I. Anderson, B. Blumenfeld, A. Cocoros, N. Eminizer, D. Fehling, L. Feng, A.V. Gritsan,P. Maksimovic, M. Osherson, J. Roskes, U. Sarica, M. Swartz, M. Xiao, Y. Xin, C. You
The University of Kansas, Lawrence, USA
A. Al-bataineh, P. Baringer, A. Bean, S. Boren, J. Bowen, C. Bruner, J. Castle, L. Forthomme,R.P. Kenny III, A. Kropivnitskaya, D. Majumder, W. Mcbrayer, M. Murray, S. Sanders,R. Stringer, J.D. Tapia Takaki, Q. Wang Kansas State University, Manhattan, USA
A. Ivanov, K. Kaadze, S. Khalil, M. Makouski, Y. Maravin, A. Mohammadi, L.K. Saini,N. Skhirtladze, S. Toda
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, USA
F. Rebassoo, D. Wright
University of Maryland, College Park, USA
C. Anelli, A. Baden, O. Baron, A. Belloni, B. Calvert, S.C. Eno, C. Ferraioli, J.A. Gomez,N.J. Hadley, S. Jabeen, R.G. Kellogg, T. Kolberg, J. Kunkle, Y. Lu, A.C. Mignerey, Y.H. Shin,A. Skuja, M.B. Tonjes, S.C. Tonwar
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, USA
D. Abercrombie, B. Allen, A. Apyan, R. Barbieri, A. Baty, R. Bi, K. Bierwagen, S. Brandt,W. Busza, I.A. Cali, Z. Demiragli, L. Di Matteo, G. Gomez Ceballos, M. Goncharov, D. Hsu,Y. Iiyama, G.M. Innocenti, M. Klute, D. Kovalskyi, K. Krajczar, Y.S. Lai, Y.-J. Lee, A. Levin,P.D. Luckey, A.C. Marini, C. Mcginn, C. Mironov, S. Narayanan, X. Niu, C. Paus, C. Roland,G. Roland, J. Salfeld-Nebgen, G.S.F. Stephans, K. Sumorok, K. Tatar, M. Varma, D. Velicanu,J. Veverka, J. Wang, T.W. Wang, B. Wyslouch, M. Yang, V. Zhukova
University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA
A.C. Benvenuti, R.M. Chatterjee, A. Evans, A. Finkel, A. Gude, P. Hansen, S. Kalafut, S.C. Kao,Y. Kubota, Z. Lesko, J. Mans, S. Nourbakhsh, N. Ruckstuhl, R. Rusack, N. Tambe, J. Turkewitz
University of Mississippi, Oxford, USA
J.G. Acosta, S. Oliveros
University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, USA
E. Avdeeva, R. Bartek, K. Bloom, D.R. Claes, A. Dominguez, C. Fangmeier, R. Gonzalez Suarez,R. Kamalieddin, I. Kravchenko, A. Malta Rodrigues, F. Meier, J. Monroy, J.E. Siado, G.R. Snow,B. Stieger
State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, USA
M. Alyari, J. Dolen, J. George, A. Godshalk, C. Harrington, I. Iashvili, J. Kaisen, A. Kharchilava,A. Kumar, A. Parker, S. Rappoccio, B. Roozbahani
Northeastern University, Boston, USA
G. Alverson, E. Barberis, D. Baumgartel, A. Hortiangtham, A. Massironi, D.M. Morse, D. Nash,T. Orimoto, R. Teixeira De Lima, D. Trocino, R.-J. Wang, D. Wood
Northwestern University, Evanston, USA
S. Bhattacharya, K.A. Hahn, A. Kubik, A. Kumar, J.F. Low, N. Mucia, N. Odell, B. Pollack,M.H. Schmitt, K. Sung, M. Trovato, M. Velasco
University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, USA
N. Dev, M. Hildreth, K. Hurtado Anampa, C. Jessop, D.J. Karmgard, N. Kellams, K. Lannon,N. Marinelli, F. Meng, C. Mueller, Y. Musienko , M. Planer, A. Reinsvold, R. Ruchti, G. Smith,S. Taroni, M. Wayne, M. Wolf, A. Woodard The Ohio State University, Columbus, USA
J. Alimena, L. Antonelli, J. Brinson, B. Bylsma, L.S. Durkin, S. Flowers, B. Francis, A. Hart,C. Hill, R. Hughes, W. Ji, B. Liu, W. Luo, D. Puigh, B.L. Winer, H.W. Wulsin
Princeton University, Princeton, USA
S. Cooperstein, O. Driga, P. Elmer, J. Hardenbrook, P. Hebda, D. Lange, J. Luo, D. Marlow, A The CMS Collaboration
T. Medvedeva, K. Mei, M. Mooney, J. Olsen, C. Palmer, P. Pirou´e, D. Stickland, C. Tully,A. Zuranski
University of Puerto Rico, Mayaguez, USA
S. Malik
Purdue University, West Lafayette, USA
A. Barker, V.E. Barnes, S. Folgueras, L. Gutay, M.K. Jha, M. Jones, A.W. Jung, K. Jung,D.H. Miller, N. Neumeister, X. Shi, J. Sun, A. Svyatkovskiy, F. Wang, W. Xie, L. Xu
Purdue University Calumet, Hammond, USA
N. Parashar, J. Stupak
Rice University, Houston, USA
A. Adair, B. Akgun, Z. Chen, K.M. Ecklund, F.J.M. Geurts, M. Guilbaud, W. Li, B. Michlin,M. Northup, B.P. Padley, R. Redjimi, J. Roberts, J. Rorie, Z. Tu, J. Zabel
University of Rochester, Rochester, USA
B. Betchart, A. Bodek, P. de Barbaro, R. Demina, Y.t. Duh, T. Ferbel, M. Galanti, A. Garcia-Bellido, J. Han, O. Hindrichs, A. Khukhunaishvili, K.H. Lo, P. Tan, M. Verzetti
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Piscataway, USA
J.P. Chou, E. Contreras-Campana, Y. Gershtein, T.A. G ´omez Espinosa, E. Halkiadakis,M. Heindl, D. Hidas, E. Hughes, S. Kaplan, R. Kunnawalkam Elayavalli, S. Kyriacou, A. Lath,K. Nash, H. Saka, S. Salur, S. Schnetzer, D. Sheffield, S. Somalwar, R. Stone, S. Thomas,P. Thomassen, M. Walker
University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA
M. Foerster, J. Heideman, G. Riley, K. Rose, S. Spanier, K. Thapa
Texas A&M University, College Station, USA
O. Bouhali , A. Celik, M. Dalchenko, M. De Mattia, A. Delgado, S. Dildick, R. Eusebi,J. Gilmore, T. Huang, E. Juska, T. Kamon , R. Mueller, Y. Pakhotin, R. Patel, A. Perloff,L. Perni`e, D. Rathjens, A. Rose, A. Safonov, A. Tatarinov, K.A. Ulmer Texas Tech University, Lubbock, USA
N. Akchurin, C. Cowden, J. Damgov, F. De Guio, C. Dragoiu, P.R. Dudero, J. Faulkner,S. Kunori, K. Lamichhane, S.W. Lee, T. Libeiro, S. Undleeb, I. Volobouev, Z. Wang
Vanderbilt University, Nashville, USA
A.G. Delannoy, S. Greene, A. Gurrola, R. Janjam, W. Johns, C. Maguire, A. Melo, H. Ni,P. Sheldon, S. Tuo, J. Velkovska, Q. Xu
University of Virginia, Charlottesville, USA
M.W. Arenton, P. Barria, B. Cox, J. Goodell, R. Hirosky, A. Ledovskoy, H. Li, C. Neu,T. Sinthuprasith, Y. Wang, E. Wolfe, F. Xia
Wayne State University, Detroit, USA
C. Clarke, R. Harr, P.E. Karchin, P. Lamichhane, J. Sturdy
University of Wisconsin - Madison, Madison, WI, USA