Search for pair production of first-generation scalar leptoquarks at s √ = 13 TeV
EEUROPEAN ORGANIZATION FOR NUCLEAR RESEARCH (CERN)
CERN-EP-2018-2652019/03/20
CMS-EXO-17-009
Search for pair production of first-generation scalarleptoquarks at √ s =
13 TeV
The CMS Collaboration ∗ Abstract
A search for the pair production of first-generation scalar leptoquarks is performedusing proton-proton collision data recorded at 13 TeV center-of-mass energy withthe CMS detector at the LHC. The data correspond to an integrated luminosity of35.9 fb − . The leptoquarks are assumed to decay promptly to a quark and either anelectron or a neutrino, with branching fractions β and 1 − β , respectively. The searchtargets the decay final states comprising two electrons, or one electron and large miss-ing transverse momentum, along with two quarks that are detected as hadronic jets.First-generation scalar leptoquarks with masses below 1435 (1270) GeV are excludedfor β = ( ) . These are the most stringent limits on the mass of first-generationscalar leptoquarks to date. The data are also interpreted to set exclusion limits in thecontext of an R -parity violating supersymmetric model, predicting promptly decay-ing top squarks with a similar dielectron final state. Published in Physical Review D as doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.99.052002. c (cid:13) ∗ See Appendix B for the list of collaboration members a r X i v : . [ h e p - e x ] M a r The quark and lepton sectors of the standard model (SM) [1–3] are similar: both have the samenumber of generations composed of electroweak doublets. This could indicate the existence ofan additional fundamental symmetry linking the two sectors, as proposed in many scenarios ofphysics beyond the SM. These include grand unified theories with symmetry groups SU(4) ofthe Pati–Salam model [4, 5], SU(5), SO(10), and SU(15) [6–11]; technicolor [12–14]; superstring-inspired models [15]; and models exhibiting quark and lepton substructures [16]. A commonfeature of these models is the presence of a new class of bosons, called leptoquarks (LQs), thatcarry both lepton ( L ) and baryon numbers ( B ). In general, LQs have fractional electric chargeand are color triplets under SU(3) C . Their other properties, such as spin, weak isospin, andfermion number (3 B + L ), are model dependent.Direct searches for LQs at colliders are usually interpreted in the context of effective theoriesthat impose constraints on their interactions. In order to ensure renormalizability, these inter-actions are required to respect SM group symmetries, restricting the couplings of the LQs toSM leptons and quarks only. A detailed account of LQs and their interactions can be found inRef. [17]. Results from experiments sensitive to lepton number violation, flavor changing neu-tral currents, and proton decay allow the existence of three distinct generations of LQs withnegligible intergenerational mixing for mass scales accessible at the CERN LHC [18, 19]. In-direct searches for new physics in rare B meson decays [20–24] by LHCb and Belle suggest apossible breakdown of lepton universality. These anomalies, if confirmed, could provide addi-tional support for LQ-based models [25]. A comprehensive review of LQ phenomenology andexperimental constraints on their properties is given in Ref. [26].We search for the pair production of first-generation scalar LQs that decay promptly. The fi-nal state arising from each LQ decay comprises a quark that is detected as a hadronic jet, andeither an electron or a large missing transverse momentum attributed to the presence of an un-detected neutrino. For light-quark final states, the quark flavors cannot be determined from theobserved jets. We assume the LQs decay only to e ( ν e ) and up or down quarks. The branchingfractions for the LQ decay are expressed in terms of a free parameter β , where β denotes thebranching fraction to an electron and a quark, and 1 − β the branching fraction to a neutrinoand a quark. For pair production of LQs, we consider two decay modes. The first arises wheneach LQ decays to an electron and a quark, having an overall branching fraction of β . In thesecond mode one LQ decays to an electron and a quark, and the other to a neutrino and aquark. This mode has a branching fraction of 2 β ( − β ) . We, therefore, utilize final states witheither two high transverse momentum ( p T ) electrons and two high- p T jets, denoted as eejj, orone high- p T electron, large missing transverse momentum, and two high- p T jets, denoted ase ν jj.Previous experiments at the LEP [27], HERA [28, 29], and Tevatron [30, 31] colliders havesearched for LQ production and placed lower limits of several hundreds of GeV on allowed LQmasses ( m LQ ) at 95% confidence level (CL). The CMS experiment at the LHC has extended thelimits on pair production of first-generation scalar LQs using proton-proton (pp) collision datarecorded during 2012 at a center-of-mass energy of √ s = − , the lower limit obtained on m LQ was 1010 (850) GeVfor β = ( ) [32]. The CMS Collaboration has also published results on a search for singlyproduced LQs with the final states of either two electrons and one jet, or two muons and onejet [33]. Recently, using a data set of 3.2 fb − collected at √ s =
13 TeV, the ATLAS experimenthas placed a lower limit on m LQ of 1100 GeV [34] for β = √ s =
13 TeV with the CMS detector, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 35.9 fb − . At LHC energies, the pair productionof LQs would mainly proceed via gluon-gluon fusion with a smaller contribution from quark-antiquark annihilation. The corresponding Feynman diagrams are shown in Fig. 1. The pro-duction cross section as a function of m LQ has been calculated at next-to-leading order (NLO)in perturbation theory [35]. At the LHC, the LQ-lepton-quark Yukawa coupling has negligibleeffect on the production rate for promptly decaying LQs, which are the focus of our search. gg LQLQ g gg LQLQ gg LQLQLQ q ¯ q LQLQ g Figure 1: Leading order Feynman diagrams for the scalar LQ pair production channels at theLHC.The paper is organized as follows. Section 2 introduces the CMS detector, and Sec. 3 describesthe data and simulated samples used in the search. The core of the analysis in terms of event re-construction and selection is discussed in Sec. 4, while the background estimation is presentedin Sec. 5. Section 6 deals with the systematic uncertainties affecting this analysis. Sections 7and 8 describe the results of the LQ search and its interpretation in an exotic scenario of super-symmetry, respectively. We conclude with a summary of the main results in Sec. 9.
The key feature of the CMS apparatus is a superconducting solenoid of 6 m diameter, providinga magnetic field of 3.8 T. Within the solenoid volume lie a silicon pixel and microstrip tracker, alead-tungstate crystal electromagnetic calorimeter (ECAL), and a brass-scintillator hadron cal-orimeter (HCAL), each composed of a barrel and two end-cap sections. Forward calorimetersextend the pseudorapidity ( η ) coverage provided by the barrel and end-cap detectors. Muonsare detected in gas-ionization chambers embedded in the steel flux-return yoke outside thesolenoid. The first level of the trigger system [36], composed of custom electronics, uses infor-mation from the calorimeters and muon detectors to select the most interesting events in aninterval of less than 4 µ s. The high-level trigger processor farm further reduces the event ratefrom around 100 kHz to 1 kHz, before data storage. A detailed description of the CMS detector,along with a definition of the coordinate system used and the relevant kinematic variables, canbe found in Ref. [37]. Events are selected using a combination of triggers requiring either a single electron or a sin-gle photon. Electron candidates are required to have a minimum p T of 27 (115) GeV for thelow (high) threshold trigger. Each of these triggers examines clusters of energy deposited in the ECAL that are matched to tracks reconstructed within a range | η | < p T >
175 GeV without anyrequirements on track-cluster matching, cluster shape, or isolation. The latter three criteriaare applied to electron triggers to reduce background rates and are not necessary at high p T .Therefore, the single photon and electron triggers are combined to improve efficiency at highelectron p T . Events selected using other single-photon triggers with lower thresholds are usedfor determining the multijet background.Monte Carlo (MC) simulation samples of scalar LQ signals are generated using PYTHIA ver-sion 8.212 [38] at leading order (LO) with the NNPDF2.3LO parton distribution function (PDF)set [39]. Samples are generated for m LQ ranging from 200 to 2000 GeV in 50 GeV steps. The LQis assumed to have quantum numbers corresponding to the combination of an electron ( L = B = − ν jj channels include Drell–Yan (Z/ γ ∗ ) pro-duction with jets, top quark pair production (tt), single top quark and diboson (VV = WW, WZ,or ZZ) production. Additional background contributions arise from W+jets, γ +jets, and multi-jet production, where jets are misidentified as electrons. The tt background in the eejj channelas well as the multijet background in both channels are estimated from data, while MC sim-ulated events are used to calculate all other backgrounds. The Z/ γ ∗ +jets, W+jets, and VVsamples are generated at next to leading order (NLO) with M AD G RAPH MC @ NLO version2.3.3 using the FxFx merging method [42, 43]. Both tt and single top quark events are gen-erated at NLO using M AD G RAPH MC @ NLO , and
POWHEG v2 complemented with M AD -S PIN [44], except for single top quark production in association with a W boson, where eventsare generated with
POWHEG v1 at NLO [45–50], and s -channel single top quark production,where M AD G RAPH MC @ NLO at NLO is used. The γ +jets events are generated with M AD -G RAPH MC @ NLO at LO with MLM merging [51]. The NNPDF3.0 at NLO [52] PDF set isused, except for γ +jets events that are generated using the LO PDF set.The W+jets and Z/ γ ∗ +jets samples are normalized to next-to-NLO (NNLO) inclusive cross sec-tions calculated with FEWZ versions 3.1 and 3.1.b2, respectively [53]. Single top quark samplesare normalized to NLO inclusive cross sections [54, 55], except for the tW production, where theNNLO calculations of Refs. [56] are used. The calculations from Refs. [57–63] with T OP ++2.0are used to normalize the tt sample at NNLO in quantum chromodynamics (QCD) includingresummation of the next-to-next-to-leading-logarithmic soft gluon terms. PYTHIA
EANT
A particle-flow (PF) algorithm [68] aims to reconstruct and identify each individual particle ina given event, by optimally combining information from the various elements of the CMS de- tector. The energy of photons is directly obtained from the ECAL measurement. On the otherhand, the energy of electrons is determined from a combination of their momentum at the pri-mary interaction vertex as determined by the tracker, the energy of the corresponding ECALclusters, and the energy sum of all bremsstrahlung photons spatially compatible with origi-nating from the associated track. The momentum of muons is obtained from the curvature ofthe corresponding track. The energy of charged hadrons is determined from a combination oftheir momentum measured in the tracker and the matching ECAL and HCAL energy deposits,corrected for zero suppression effects as well as for the response function of the calorimeters tohadronic showers. Finally, the energy of neutral hadrons is obtained from the correspondingcorrected ECAL and HCAL energy.Electrons are identified by spatially matching a reconstructed charged-particle track to a clus-ter of energy deposits in the ECAL. The ECAL cluster is required to have longitudinal andtransverse profiles compatible with those expected from an electromagnetic shower. Electronsused in this analysis are required to have p T >
50 GeV and | η | < < | η | < p T [69]. The absolute difference in η betweenthe ECAL cluster seed and the matched track is required to be less than 0.004 (0.006) in thebarrel (end cap), and the corresponding quantity in the azimuthal angle, φ , must be less than0.06 rad. Leptons resulting from the decay of LQs are expected to be isolated from hadronic ac-tivity in the event. Requirements are, therefore, applied based on calorimeter energy depositsand tracks in the vicinity of electron candidates. The scalar sum of p T associated with calorime-ter clusters in a cone of radius ∆ R = √ ( ∆ η ) + ( ∆ φ ) = p T . Acorrection to the isolation sum accounts for contributions from pileup interactions. The track-based isolation, calculated as the scalar p T sum of all tracks in the cone defined above, must beless than 5 GeV to reduce misidentification of jets as electrons. At most one layer of the pixeldetector may have missing hits along the trajectory of the matched track. The track must alsobe compatible with originating from the primary pp interaction vertex, which is taken to bethe reconstructed vertex with the largest value of summed physics-object p . Here the physicsobjects are the jets, reconstructed using the algorithm [70, 71] with the tracks assigned to thevertex as inputs, and the negative vector sum of the p T of those jets. To correct for the pos-sible difference of electron reconstruction and identification efficiencies between collision andsimulated data, appropriate corrections or scale factors are applied to the simulated samples.Muons are used in defining a control region to estimate the tt background contribution. Theyare identified as tracks in the central tracker consistent with either a track or several hits inthe muon system [72]. These muon candidates must have p T >
35 GeV and | η | < p T muons as follows.Segments in at least two muon stations must be geometrically matched to a track in the centraltracker, with at least one hit from a muon chamber included in the muon track fit. In orderto reject muons from decays in flight and increase momentum measurement precision, at leastfive tracker layers must have hits associated with the muon, and there must be at least one hit inthe pixel detector. Isolation is imposed by requiring the p T sum of tracks in a cone of ∆ R = p T to be less than 0.1. For rejection of cosmicray muons, the transverse impact parameter of the muon track with respect to the primaryvertex must be less than 2 mm and the longitudinal distance of the track formed from trackersystem only to the primary vertex must be less than 5 mm. Finally, the relative uncertainty onthe p T measurement from the muon track must be less than 30%. .1 The ee jj channel Jets are reconstructed using the anti- k T algorithm [70, 71] with a distance parameter of 0.4.Their momentum is determined as the vectorial sum of all particle momenta in the jet, and isfound in simulation to be within 5–10% of the true momentum [73] over the entire p T spectrumand detector acceptance. Pileup interactions can contribute spurious tracks and calorimeterenergy deposits to the jet momentum. To mitigate this effect, tracks identified to be originat-ing from pileup vertices are discarded, while a correction [74] is applied to compensate for theremaining contributions. Jet energy corrections are extracted from simulation to compensatefor differences between the true and reconstructed momenta of jets. In situ measurements ofthe momentum balance in dijet, γ +jets, Z/ γ ∗ +jets, and multijet events are used to estimate andcorrect for any residual differences in jet energy scale between data and simulation [74]. Addi-tional selection criteria are applied to all jets to remove those potentially affected by spuriousenergy deposits originating from instrumental effects or reconstruction failures [75]. Jets musthave p T >
50 GeV and | η | < ∆ R > (cid:126) p missT ) is given by the negative vector sum of p T of all PFcandidates in the event. The magnitude of (cid:126) p missT is referred to as p missT .To identify b jets arising from top quark decays in the determination of the e ν jj backgroundcontrol regions, the combined secondary vertex algorithm is used with the loose working pointof Ref. [76]. Based on simulation, the corresponding b-jet identification efficiency is above 80%with a probability of 10% of misidentifying a light-flavor jet. ee jj channel For the eejj analysis, we select events with at least two electrons and at least two jets passingthe criteria described above. No charge requirements are imposed on the electrons. When ad-ditional objects satisfy these requirements, the two highest p T electrons and jets are considered.Further, there should not be any muon fulfilling the requirements mentioned earlier in this sec-tion. The dielectron invariant mass m ee is required to be greater than 50 GeV. The p T of thedielectron system must be greater than 70 GeV. The scalar p T sum over the electrons and twojets, S T = p T ( e ) + p T ( e ) + p T ( j ) + p T ( j ) , must be at least 300 GeV. This initial selection isused for the determination of backgrounds in control regions, as explained in Section 5.Final selections are then optimized by maximizing the Punzi criterion for observation of a sig-nal at a significance of five standard deviations [77]. These selections are determined by ex-amining three variables: m ee , S T , and m minej . The electron-jet pairing is chosen to minimize thedifference in the invariant mass of the LQ candidates, and the quantity m minej is defined as thesmaller of the two masses. Thresholds for the three observables are varied independently, andthe Punzi criterion is then calculated at each set of thresholds as well as for each m LQ hypoth-esis. The optimized thresholds as a function of m LQ are shown in Fig. 2 (left). For the m LQ hypotheses above 1050 GeV, the statistical uncertainty in the background prediction becomeslarge, making an optimization for these masses impossible, and thus the thresholds for the1050 GeV hypothesis are applied. e ν jj channel In the e ν jj channel, we select events containing exactly one electron, at least two jets, and p missT >
100 GeV. The electron and jets must pass the aforementioned identification criteria. Events withisolated muons are rejected, applying the same criteria as for the eejj channel. The absolutedifference in the angle between the (cid:126) p missT and the leading p T jet, ∆ φ ( (cid:126) p missT , j ) , is required tobe larger than 0.5 rad. This helps reject events with p missT arising primarily from instrumental [GeV] LQ m
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 T h r e s ho l d [ G e V ] eejj T S ejmin m ee m (13 TeV) -1 CMS [GeV] LQ m
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 T h r e s ho l d [ G e V ] jj n e T S ej m T m Tmiss p (13 TeV) -1 CMS
Figure 2: Optimized threshold values applied for the selection variables in the eejj (left) ande ν jj (right) channels as a function of m LQ .effects. The ∆ φ ( (cid:126) p missT , e ) must be greater than 0.8 rad for similar reasons. The p T and transversemass of the (cid:126) p missT -electron system must be greater than 70 and 50 GeV, respectively. Here andlater, the transverse mass of a two-object system is given by m T = √ p T,1 p T,2 ( − cos ∆ φ ) ,with ∆ φ being the angle between the p T vectors of two objects, namely (cid:126) p missT , electron and jet.The m T criterion helps suppress the W+jets contribution. Finally, selected events must have S T >
300 GeV, where S T = p T ( e ) + p missT + p T ( j ) + p T ( j ) . This initial selection is used for thedetermination of backgrounds in control regions, similarly to the eejj channel.The selection criteria are then optimized in a similar fashion as for the eejj channel, exceptthat four observables are considered for final selections at each m LQ hypothesis: S T , m T of the (cid:126) p missT -electron system, p missT , and the electron-jet invariant mass m ej . The (cid:126) p missT -jet and electron-jet pairing is chosen to minimize the difference in m T between the two LQ candidates. Theoptimized thresholds as a function of m LQ are shown in Fig. 2 (right). As with the eejj channel,for the m LQ hypotheses above 1200 GeV, the thresholds for the 1200 GeV hypothesis are used. The SM processes that produce electrons and jets can have final states similar to those of an LQsignal and are, therefore, considered as backgrounds for this search. These include dileptonevents from Z/ γ ∗ +jets, tt, and VV; single top quark production; and W+jets. Another back-ground arises from multijet production in which at least one jet is misidentified as an electron.The major backgrounds in the eejj channel are Z/ γ ∗ +jets and tt production. The Z/ γ ∗ +jetsbackground is estimated from simulation and normalized to the data in a control region thatcomprises the initial selection plus a window of 80 < m ee <
100 GeV around the nominal Zboson mass; the latter criterion is applied to enrich the sample with Z/ γ ∗ +jets events. The m ee distribution is corrected for the presence of non-Z/ γ ∗ +jets events in the data control regionusing simulation. The resulting normalization factor applied to the Z/ γ ∗ +jets simulated eventsis R Z = ± ceptances are determined using simulation. The difference in the trigger efficiency between theone- and two-electron final states is corrected by reweighting each event in the e µ sample withthe calculated efficiencies for the single electron final state.After application of event selection requirements, the background contribution to the eejj chan-nel arising from single top quark production, W+jets, and VV is found to be small and is esti-mated from simulations.The multijet background in the eejj channel is estimated using control samples in data. The elec-tron identification requirements for the calorimeter shower profile and track-cluster matchingare relaxed to define a loose selection. We measure the probability that an electron candidatethat passes the loose selection requirements also satisfies the electron identification and isola-tion criteria used in the analysis. This probability is obtained as a function of the candidate p T and η . The events are required to have exactly one loose electron, at least two jets, and low p missT ( <
100 GeV). Contributions from electrons satisfying the full identification requirementsare removed. The number of such electrons is calculated by comparing the number of candi-dates that pass the tight selection criteria minus the track-isolation requirement, with those thatsatisfy the track-isolation requirement but fail one of the other selection criteria. This sampleis dominated by QCD multijet events. The distribution of multijet events in the eejj channelfollowing final selections is obtained by applying the measured probability twice to an eventsample with two electrons passing loose electron requirements, and two or more jets that sat-isfy all the requirements of the signal selection. The normalization is obtained by scaling theweighted multijet sample to an orthogonal control region defined by inverting track-isolationrequirement for electrons.Distributions of kinematic variables for the eejj channel in data, including those used in thefinal selections, have been studied at the initial selection level, and are found to agree with thebackground models within background estimation uncertainties. The distributions of S T , m minej ,and m ee are shown in Fig. 3.The largest background in the e ν jj channel comes from W+jets and tt production. Single topquark, VV, and Z/ γ ∗ +jets backgrounds have small contributions and are estimated from simu-lations. The QCD multijet background is estimated from control samples in data using the sameprobability for jets to be misidentified as electrons as is used in the background estimation forthe eejj channel. The number of multijet events at the final selection is obtained by selectingevents having exactly one loose electron, large p missT , and at least two jets satisfying the signalselection criteria, and weighting these with the probability of a jet being misidentified as anelectron.The background contributions from W+jets and tt are estimated from simulation, and normal-ized to the data in a control region defined by requiring 50 < m T <
110 GeV after the initialselection. Then b-tagging information is used to distinguish W+jets from tt in the control re-gion. The W+jets contribution is enhanced by requiring zero b-tagged jets in the event, whilethe tt control region is defined by requiring at least one b-tagged jet in the event. These re-gions each have a purity of about 75%. The normalization factors for the two backgrounds aredetermined from these control regions using N = R tt N + R W N + N N = R tt N + R W N + N , (1)where N ( ) is the number of events in the tt (W+jets) control region in data. The terms N i ,tt and N i ,W are the numbers of tt and W+jets events in the simulated samples, while N i ,O is the E v en t s / b i n -
10 110 Data* + jets g Z/ttOther backgroundMultijetsyst uncertainty ¯ Stat = 1.0 b = 650 GeV, LQ m = 1.0 b = 1200 GeV, LQ m (13 TeV) -1 CMS [GeV] ee m da t a / b k g . E v en t s / b i n -
10 110 Data* + jets g Z/ttOther backgroundMultijetsyst uncertainty ¯ Stat = 1.0 b = 650 GeV, LQ m = 1.0 b = 1200 GeV, LQ m (13 TeV) -1 CMS [GeV] minej m da t a / b k g . E v en t s / b i n -
10 110 Data* + jets g Z/ttOther backgroundMultijetsyst uncertainty ¯ Stat = 1.0 b = 650 GeV, LQ m = 1.0 b = 1200 GeV, LQ m (13 TeV) -1 CMS [GeV] T S
500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 da t a / b k g . Figure 3: Data and background comparison for events passing the initial selection requirementsfor the eejj channel, shown for the variables used for final selection optimization: m ee (upper), m minej (lower left), and S T (lower right). “Other background” includes diboson, single top quark,and W+jets. Signal predictions for m LQ =
650 and 1200 GeV hypotheses are overlaid on theplots. The last bin includes all events beyond the upper x -axis boundary. number of events arising from other background sources, namely diboson, single top quark,Z/ γ ∗ +jets and multijet. The subscript i =
1, 2 refers to the two control regions described above.The background normalization factors R tt = ± R W = ± ν jj channel following the initial se-lection are found to agree with the background prediction within estimation uncertainties. Thedistributions of m T , m ej , S T , and p missT are shown in Fig. 4. E v en t s / b i n -
10 110 DataW + jetsttOther backgroundMultijetsyst uncertainty ¯ Stat = 0.5 b = 650 GeV, LQ m = 0.5 b = 1200 GeV, LQ m (13 TeV) -1 CMS [GeV] T m da t a / b k g . E v en t s / b i n -
10 110 DataW + jetsttOther backgroundMultijetsyst uncertainty ¯ Stat = 0.5 b = 650 GeV, LQ m = 0.5 b = 1200 GeV, LQ m (13 TeV) -1 CMS [GeV] ej m da t a / b k g . E v en t s / b i n -
10 110 DataW + jetsttOther backgroundMultijetsyst uncertainty ¯ Stat = 0.5 b = 650 GeV, LQ m = 0.5 b = 1200 GeV, LQ m (13 TeV) -1 CMS [GeV] T S
500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 da t a / b k g . E v en t s / b i n -
10 110 DataW + jetsttOther backgroundMultijetsyst uncertainty ¯ Stat = 0.5 b = 650 GeV, LQ m = 0.5 b = 1200 GeV, LQ m (13 TeV) -1 CMS [GeV] missT p da t a / b k g . Figure 4: Data and background for events passing the initial selection requirements in thee ν jj channel, shown for the variables used for final selection optimization: m T (upper left), m ej (upper right), S T (lower left), and p missT (lower right). “Other background” includes diboson,single top quark, and Z/ γ ∗ +jets. Signal predictions for m LQ =
650 and 1200 GeV hypothesesare overlaid on the plots. The last bin includes all events beyond the upper x -axis boundary. The sources of systematic uncertainties considered in this analysis are listed in Table 1. Uncer-tainties in the reconstruction of electrons, jets and p missT affect the selected sample of events usedin the analysis. The uncertainty due to the electron energy scale is obtained by shifting the elec-tron energy up and down by 2%. The uncertainty in the electron energy resolution is measuredby smearing the electron energy by ±
10% [78]. The uncertainties due to electron reconstructionand identification efficiencies are obtained by varying the corresponding scale factors appliedto simulated events by ± p T and η . The corresponding uncertainty depends on the number of data events and is almost entirely statistical in origin for the kinematic rangestudied in this analysis.The uncertainty due to the jet energy scale is obtained by varying the nominal scale correctionby ± p missT , we consider up and down shifts in the jet energy scaleand resolution, electron energy correction, and the scale corrections applied to the energy notassociated with any PF candidates. For each variation, a new p missT vector is computed for eachevent. The uncertainties corresponding to different variations in the quantities are then addedin quadrature to determine the variation in p missT , and the maximum difference of the eventyield with respect to nominal is taken as the uncertainty.Variations in the shape of the Z/ γ ∗ +jets (eejj channel only), W+jets and tt (e ν jj channel only),and diboson (both channels) backgrounds are determined using simulated samples with renor-malization and factorization scales independently varied up and down in the matrix elementby a factor of two, yielding eight different combinations. The event yields are then calculatedfor each of these variations and the maximum variation with respect to nominal is taken as thesystematic uncertainty. The corresponding normalization uncertainties are evaluated from thestatistical uncertainties in the scale factors obtained while normalizing these backgrounds todata in the control regions. In the e ν jj channel, an additional uncertainty of 10% is included toaccount for the observed differences associated with the choice of the m T range, defining thecontrol region used to calculate the normalization scale factors. As described above, b-taggingis used to define the control region for W+jets and tt normalization in the e ν jj channel; thereforethe uncertainty in the b-tagging efficiency (3%) is taken into account.The uncertainty in the QCD multijet background is assessed by using an independent datasample. This sample is required to have exactly two electron candidates satisfying loosenedcriteria applied to the track-cluster matching, the isolation (both track-based and calorimetric),and the shower profile. We compare the number of events in this sample, where one candi-date satisfies the electron selection requirements, to that predicted by the multijet backgroundmethod. This test is repeated on a subsample of the data after applying an S T threshold of320 GeV, which corresponds to the optimized final selection for an LQ mass of 200 GeV. Therelative difference of 25% observed between the results of the two tests is taken as the system-atic uncertainty in the probability for a jet to be misidentified as an electron and applied in thee ν jj channel. For the eejj case, we assume full correlation between the two electrons and take50% as the uncertainty.The uncertainty in the integrated luminosity is 2.5% [80]. An uncertainty in the modelingof pileup is evaluated by reweighting the simulated events after varying the inelastic pp crosssection by ± Table 1: Systematic uncertainties for the eejj and e ν jj channels. The values shown are calculatedfor the selections used in the m LQ = γ ∗ +jets (eejj), W+jets and tt(e ν jj), are normalized at the initial selection level when calculating the effect of shifts for varioussystematics. eejj e ν jjSource of the uncertainty Signal (%) Background (%) Signal (%) Background (%)Electron energy scale 1.5 2.5 1.9 6.9Electron energy resolution 0.2 5.3 0.1 4.9Electron reconstr. efficiency 3.0 3.0 0.6 0.8Electron identif. efficiency 1.3 0.3 0.6 0.1Trigger 1.1 1.4 9.5 7.6Jet energy scale 0.5 0.9 0.5 2.3Jet energy resolution 0.1 1.7 0.1 2.4 p missT — — 0.8 13.1Z/ γ ∗ +jets shape — 5.6 — —Z/ γ ∗ +jets normalization — 1.0 — —W+jets shape — — — 7.1W+jets normalization — — — 1.1W+jets sideband selection — — — 10.0W+jets b tagging — — — 3.0tt shape — — — 10.4tt normalization — 1.0 — 1.0tt b tagging — — — 3.0Diboson shape — 3.4 — 3.2QCD multijet — < After applying the final selection criteria shown in Fig. 2, the data are compared to SM back-ground expectations for both channels and each m LQ hypothesis. Distributions of m minej and S T are shown in Fig. 5 for the eejj channel with the selections applied for the 650 and 1200 GeV m LQ hypotheses. Figure 6 shows the corresponding distributions of m ej and S T for the e ν jj channelfor the same mass hypotheses.Figure 7 shows background, data, and expected signal for each LQ mass point after applyingthe final selection criteria. Signal efficiency times acceptance, along with tables listing eventyields for signal, background, and data are provided in Appendix A. The data are found tobe in agreement with SM background expectations in both channels. We set upper limits onthe product of the cross section and branching fraction for scalar LQs as a function of m LQ and β . The limits are calculated using the asymptotic approximation [86] of the CL s modi-fied frequentist approach [87–89]. Systematic uncertainties described in Sec. 6 are modeledwith log-normal probability density functions, while statistical uncertainties are modeled withgamma functions whose widths are calculated from the number of events in the control regionsor simulated samples.We set upper limits on the production cross section multiplied by the branching fraction β E v en t s / b i n -
10 110 Data* + jets g Z/ttOther backgroundMultijetsyst uncertainty ¯ Stat = 1.0 b = 650 GeV, LQ m (13 TeV) -1 CMS [GeV] minej m
500 1000 1500 da t a / b k g . E v en t s / b i n -
10 110 Data* + jets g Z/ttOther backgroundMultijetsyst uncertainty ¯ Stat = 1.0 b = 650 GeV, LQ m (13 TeV) -1 CMS [GeV] T S da t a / b k g . E v en t s / b i n -
10 110 Data* + jets g Z/ttOther backgroundMultijetsyst uncertainty ¯ Stat = 1.0 b = 1200 GeV, LQ m (13 TeV) -1 CMS [GeV] minej m
500 1000 1500 da t a / b k g . E v en t s / b i n -
10 110 Data* + jets g Z/ttOther backgroundMultijetsyst uncertainty ¯ Stat = 1.0 b = 1200 GeV, LQ m (13 TeV) -1 CMS [GeV] T S da t a / b k g . Figure 5: m minej (left) and S T (right) distributions for events passing the eejj final selection forLQs of mass 650 (upper) and 1200 (lower) GeV. The predicted signal model distributions areshown, along with major backgrounds and “other background” which consists of the sum ofthe W+jets, diboson, single top quark, and γ +jets contributions. The background contributionsare stacked, while the signal distributions are plotted unstacked. The dark shaded region in-dicates the statistical and systematic uncertainty in the total background. The last bin includesall events beyond the upper x -axis boundary.3
10 110 Data* + jets g Z/ttOther backgroundMultijetsyst uncertainty ¯ Stat = 1.0 b = 1200 GeV, LQ m (13 TeV) -1 CMS [GeV] T S da t a / b k g . Figure 5: m minej (left) and S T (right) distributions for events passing the eejj final selection forLQs of mass 650 (upper) and 1200 (lower) GeV. The predicted signal model distributions areshown, along with major backgrounds and “other background” which consists of the sum ofthe W+jets, diboson, single top quark, and γ +jets contributions. The background contributionsare stacked, while the signal distributions are plotted unstacked. The dark shaded region in-dicates the statistical and systematic uncertainty in the total background. The last bin includesall events beyond the upper x -axis boundary.3 E v en t s / b i n -
10 110 DataW + jetsttOther backgroundMultijetsyst uncertainty ¯ Stat = 0.5 b = 650 GeV, LQ m (13 TeV) -1 CMS [GeV] ej m
500 1000 1500 da t a / b k g . E v en t s / b i n -
10 110 DataW + jetsttOther backgroundMultijetsyst uncertainty ¯ Stat = 0.5 b = 650 GeV, LQ m (13 TeV) -1 CMS [GeV] T S da t a / b k g . E v en t s / b i n -
10 110 DataW + jetsttOther backgroundMultijetsyst uncertainty ¯ Stat = 0.5 b = 1200 GeV, LQ m (13 TeV) -1 CMS [GeV] ej m
500 1000 1500 da t a / b k g . E v en t s / b i n -
10 110 DataW + jetsttOther backgroundMultijetsyst uncertainty ¯ Stat = 0.5 b = 1200 GeV, LQ m (13 TeV) -1 CMS [GeV] T S da t a / b k g . Figure 6: m ej (left) and S T (right) distributions for events passing the e ν jj final selection forLQs of mass 650 (upper) and 1200 (lower) GeV. The predicted signal model distributions areshown, along with major backgrounds and “other background” which consists of the sum ofZ/ γ ∗ +jets, diboson, single top quark, and γ +jets contributions. The background contributionsare stacked, while the signal distributions are plotted unstacked. The dark shaded region in-dicates the statistical and systematic uncertainty in the total background. The last bin includesall events beyond the upper x -axis boundary.or 2 β ( − β ) at 95% CL as a function of m LQ . The expected and observed limits are shownwith NLO predictions for the scalar LQ pair production cross section in Fig. 8 for both eejj ande ν jj channels. The observed limits are within two standard deviations of expectations fromthe background-only hypothesis. The uncertainty in the theoretical prediction for the LQ pairproduction cross section is calculated as the quadrature sum of the PDF uncertainty in thesignal cross section and the uncertainty due to the choice of renormalization and factorizationscales. The latter is estimated by independently varying the scales up and down by a factor oftwo.Under the assumption β = β = ν jj channel alone, LQ masses are excluded below1195 GeV with the corresponding expected limit being 1210 GeV. As both eejj and e ν jj decayscontribute at β values smaller than 1, the LQ mass limit is improved using the combinationof the two channels. In this combination, systematic uncertainties are considered to be fullycorrelated between the channels, while statistical uncertainties are treated as fully uncorrelated.Limits for a range of β values from 0 to 1 are set at 95% CL for both eejj and e ν jj channels, aswell as for their combination, as shown in Fig. 9. In the β = E v en t s / b i n -
10 110 Data* + jets g Z/ttMultijetOther backgroundsyst uncertainty ¯ Stat = 1.0 b LQ signal, (13 TeV) -1 CMS [GeV] LQ m
500 1000 1500 2000 da t a / b k g . E v en t s / b i n -
10 110 DataW + jetsttMultijetOther backgroundsyst uncertainty ¯ Stat = 0.5 b LQ signal, (13 TeV) -1 CMS [GeV] LQ m
500 1000 1500 2000 da t a / b k g . Figure 7: Data, background, and expected signal yields after applying the final selection criteriafor the eejj (left) and e ν jj (right) channels. “Other background” includes diboson, single topquark, and W+jets (for the eejj channel) or Z/ γ ∗ +jets (for the e ν jj channel). The bin contents arecorrelated, because events selected for higher-mass LQ searches are a subset of those selectedfor lower mass searches. [GeV] LQ m
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 [ pb ] b · s - - - -
10 1 eejj fi LQScalar LQExpected 95% CL upper limitObserved 95% CL upper limit = 1) b , ( b · theory s (13 TeV) -1 CMS
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 -
10 110 [GeV] LQ m
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 2000 ) [ pb ] b ( - b · s - - - -
10 110 jj n e fi LQScalar LQExpected 95% CL upper limitObserved 95% CL upper limit = 0.5) b ), ( b (1- b · theory s (13 TeV) -1 CMS
Figure 8: Observed upper limits for scalar LQ pair-production cross section times β (left) and β ( − β ) (right) at 95% CL obtained with the eejj (left) and e ν jj (right) analysis. The median(dashed line), 68% (inner green band) and 95% (outer yellow band) confidence-interval ex-pected limits are also shown.first-generation scalar LQs with masses less than 1270 GeV, compared to a median expectedvalue of 1285 GeV. R -parity violating supersymmetry interpretation Many new physics models predict the existence of particles with couplings of the type expectedfor LQs. One such model is R -parity violating supersymmetry (RPV SUSY) [90, 91], where thesuperpartners of quarks or ‘squarks’ can decay into LQ-like final states. For example, the topsquark ( (cid:101) t) can decay to a bottom quark and an electron. The topology of the resulting eventsis similar to an LQ decay and hence these events will pass our nominal selection for the eejjchannel.The analysis is recast in terms of the possible production of prompt top-squark pairs ( c τ = (cid:101) t subsequently decaying to a bottom quark and an electron. Limits on the pro-duction cross section for (cid:101) t pairs are calculated from the eejj data, accounting for the difference [GeV] LQ m
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 1600 b eejj jj n e jj n ee jj + e
95% CL limitseejj (Exp.)eejj (Obs.)jj (Exp.) n e jj (Obs.) n e jj (Exp.) n eejj + e jj (Obs.) n eejj + e (13 TeV) -1 CMS
Figure 9: Expected and observed exclusion limits at 95% CL for pair production of first-generation scalar LQ shown in the β versus m LQ plane for the individual eejj and e ν jj channelsand their combination. The inner green and outer yellow bands represent the 68% and 95%confidence intervals on the expected limits.in branching fractions of LQ and (cid:101) t decays to electrons.Figure 10 shows the expected and observed 95% CL upper limits on the RPV SUSY (cid:101) t pairproduction cross section as a function of the (cid:101) t squark mass ( m (cid:101) t ). The observed exclusion limitis 1100 GeV for c τ =
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 -
10 110 [GeV] t~ m
200 400 600 800 1000 1200 [ pb ] s - - - ) = 0 cmt~( t eebb, c fi t~ t~ Expected 95% CL upper limit Observed 95% CL upper limit theory s (13 TeV) -1 CMS
Figure 10: Expected and observed upper limits at 95% CL on the RPV SUSY (cid:101) t squark pairproduction cross section as a function of M (cid:101) t for c τ = A search has been performed for the pair production of first-generation scalar leptoquarks infinal states consisting of two high-momentum electrons and two jets, or one electron, largemissing transverse momentum and two jets. The data sample used in the study corresponds toan integrated luminosity of 35.9 fb − recorded by the CMS experiment at √ s =
13 TeV. The dataare found to be in agreement with standard model background expectations and a lower limitat 95% confidence level is set on the scalar leptoquark mass at 1435 (1270) GeV for β = β is the branching fraction of the leptoquark decay to an electron and a quark. Theseresults constitute the most stringent limits on the mass of first-generation scalar leptoquarksto date. The data are also interpreted in the context of an R -parity violating supersymmetric model with promptly decaying top squarks, which can decay into leptoquark-like final states.Top squarks are excluded for masses below 1100 GeV. 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: BMBWF and FWF (Austria); FNRSand FWO (Belgium); CNPq, CAPES, FAPERJ, FAPERGS, and FAPESP (Brazil); MES (Bulgaria);CERN; CAS, MoST, and NSFC (China); COLCIENCIAS (Colombia); MSES and CSF (Croa-tia); RPF (Cyprus); SENESCYT (Ecuador); MoER, ERC IUT, and ERDF (Estonia); Academy ofFinland, MEC, and HIP (Finland); CEA and CNRS/IN2P3 (France); BMBF, DFG, and HGF(Germany); GSRT (Greece); NKFIA (Hungary); DAE and DST (India); IPM (Iran); SFI (Ireland);INFN (Italy); MSIP and NRF (Republic of Korea); MES (Latvia); LAS (Lithuania); MOE and UM(Malaysia); BUAP, CINVESTAV, CONACYT, LNS, SEP, and UASLP-FAI (Mexico); MOS (Mon-tenegro); MBIE (New Zealand); PAEC (Pakistan); MSHE and NSC (Poland); FCT (Portugal);JINR (Dubna); MON, RosAtom, RAS, RFBR, and NRC KI (Russia); MESTD (Serbia); SEIDI,CPAN, PCTI, and FEDER (Spain); MOSTR (Sri Lanka); Swiss Funding Agencies (Switzerland);MST (Taipei); ThEPCenter, IPST, STAR, and NSTDA (Thailand); TUBITAK and TAEK (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 Horizon 2020 Grant, contract No. 675440 (European Union); the Leventis Foun-dation; the A. P. Sloan Foundation; the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation; the Belgian Fed-eral Science Policy Office; the Fonds pour la Formation `a la Recherche dans l’Industrie et dansl’Agriculture (FRIA-Belgium); the Agentschap voor Innovatie door Wetenschap en Technologie(IWT-Belgium); the F.R.S.-FNRS and FWO (Belgium) under the “Excellence of Science - EOS” -be.h project n. 30820817; the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports (MEYS) of the Czech Re-public; the Lend ¨ulet (“Momentum”) Program and the J´anos Bolyai Research Scholarship of theHungarian Academy of Sciences, the New National Excellence Program ´UNKP, the NKFIA re-search grants 123842, 123959, 124845, 124850 and 125105 (Hungary); the Council of Science andIndustrial Research, India; the HOMING PLUS program of the Foundation for Polish Science,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 2014/13/B/ST2/02543, 2014/15/B/ST2/03998, and2015/19/B/ST2/02861, Sonata-bis 2012/07/E/ST2/01406; the National Priorities ResearchProgram by Qatar National Research Fund; the Programa Estatal de Fomento de la Investi-gaci ´on Cient´ıfica y T´ecnica de Excelencia Mar´ıa de Maeztu, grant MDM-2015-0509 and the Pro-grama Severo Ochoa del Principado de Asturias; the Thalis and Aristeia programs cofinancedby EU-ESF and the Greek NSRF; the Rachadapisek Sompot Fund for Postdoctoral Fellowship,Chulalongkorn University and the Chulalongkorn Academic into Its 2nd Century Project Ad-vancement Project (Thailand); the Welch Foundation, contract C-1845; and the Weston HavensFoundation (USA). eferences References [1] S. L. Glashow, “Partial-symmetries of weak interactions”,
Nucl. Phys. (1961) 579, doi:10.1016/0029-5582(61)90469-2 .[2] S. Weinberg, “A model of leptons”, Phys. Rev. Lett. (1967) 1264, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.19.1264 .[3] A. Salam, “Weak and electromagnetic interactions”, in Elementary particle physics:relativistic groups and analyticity , N. Svartholm, ed., p. 367. Almqvist & Wiksell,Stockholm, 1968. Proceedings of the eighth Nobel symposium.[4] J. C. Pati and A. Salam, “Unified lepton-hadron symmetry and a gauge theory of thebasic interactions”,
Phys. Rev. D (1973) 1240, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.8.1240 .[5] J. C. Pati and A. Salam, “Lepton number as the fourth ‘color”’, Phys. Rev. D (1974)275, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.10.275 .[6] H. Georgi and S. Glashow, “Unity of all elementary-particle forces”, Phys. Rev. Lett. (1974) 438, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.32.438 .[7] H. Murayama and T. Yanagida, “A viable SU(5) GUT with light leptoquark bosons”, Mod. Phys. Lett. A (1992) 147, doi:10.1142/S0217732392000070 .[8] H. Fritzsch and P. Minkowski, “Unified interactions of leptons and hadrons”, AnnalsPhys. (1975) 193, doi:10.1016/0003-4916(75)90211-0 .[9] G. Senjanovi´c and A. Sokorac, “Light lepto-quarks in SO(10)”, Z. Phys. C (1983) 255, doi:10.1007/BF01574858 .[10] P. H. Frampton and B.-H. Lee, “SU(15) grand unification”, Phys. Rev. Lett. (1990) 619, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.64.619 .[11] P. H. Frampton and T. W. Kephart, “Higgs sector and proton decay in SU(15) grandunification”, Phys. Rev. D (1990) 3892, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.42.3892 .[12] S. Dimopoulos and L. Susskind, “Mass without scalars”, Nucl. Phys. B (1979) 237, doi:10.1016/0550-3213(79)90364-X .[13] S. Dimopoulos, “Technicoloured signatures”,
Nucl. Phys. B (1980) 69, doi:10.1016/0550-3213(80)90277-1 .[14] E. Eichten and K. Lane, “Dynamical breaking of weak interaction symmetries”,
Phys.Lett. B (1980) 125, doi:10.1016/0370-2693(80)90065-9 .[15] J. L. Hewett and T. G. Rizzo, “Low-energy phenomenology of superstring-inspired E models”, Phys. Rept. (1989) 193, doi:10.1016/0370-1573(89)90071-9 .[16] B. Schrempp and F. Schrempp, “Light leptoquarks”,
Phys. Lett. B (1985) 101, doi:10.1016/0370-2693(85)91450-9 .[17] W. Buchm ¨uller, R. R ¨uckl, and D. Wyler, “Leptoquarks in lepton-quark collisions”,
Phys.Lett. B (1987) 442, doi:10.1016/0370-2693(87)90637-X .[18] W. Buchm ¨uller and D. Wyler, “Constraints on SU(5)-type leptoquarks”,
Phys. Lett. B (1986) 377, doi:10.1016/0370-2693(86)90771-9 . [19] O. Shanker, “ π (cid:96)
2, K (cid:96)
3, and K -K constraints on leptoquarks and supersymmetricparticles”, Nucl. Phys. B (1982) 375, doi:10.1016/0550-3213(82)90196-1 .[20] LHCb Collaboration, “Measurement of form-factor-independent observables in thedecay B → K ∗ µ + µ − ”, Phys. Rev. Lett. (2013) 191801, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.111.191801 , arXiv:1308.1707 .[21] LHCb Collaboration, “Test of lepton universality using B + → K + (cid:96) + (cid:96) − decays”, Phys.Rev. Lett. (2014) 151601, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.151601 , arXiv:1406.6482 .[22] LHCb Collaboration, “Angular analysis of the B → K ∗ µ + µ − decay using 3 fb − ofintegrated luminosity”, JHEP (2016) 104, doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2016)104 , arXiv:1512.04442 .[23] LHCb Collaboration, “Test of lepton universality with B → K ∗ (cid:96) + (cid:96) − decays”, JHEP (2017) 055, doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2017)055 , arXiv:1705.05802 .[24] Belle Collaboration, “Lepton-flavor-dependent angular analysis of B → K ∗ (cid:96) + (cid:96) − ”, Phys.Rev. Lett. (2017) 111801, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.111801 , arXiv:1612.05014 .[25] G. Hiller, “Lepton nonuniversality anomalies and implications”, in . arXiv:1804.02011 .[26] I. Dorˇsner et al., “Physics of leptoquarks in precision experiments and at particlecolliders”, Phys. Rept. (2016) 1, doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2016.06.001 , arXiv:1603.04993 .[27] OPAL Collaboration, “Search for pair-produced leptoquarks in e + e − interactions at √ s (cid:39) Eur. Phys. J. C (2003) 281, doi:10.1140/epjc/s2003-01325-y , arXiv:hep-ex/0305053 .[28] ZEUS Collaboration, “Search for resonance decays to lepton+jet at DESY HERA andlimits on leptoquarks”, Phys. Rev. D (2003) 052004, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.68.052004 , arXiv:hep-ex/0304008 .[29] H1 Collaboration, “Search for first generation leptoquarks in ep collisions at HERA”, Phys. Lett. B (2011) 388, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2011.09.017 , arXiv:1107.3716 .[30] CDF Collaboration, “Search for first-generation scalar leptoquarks in pp collisions at √ s = Phys. Rev. D (2005) 051107, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.72.051107 , arXiv:hep-ex/0506074 .[31] D0 Collaboration, “Search for pair production of first-generation leptoquarks in ppcollisions at √ s = Phys. Lett. B (2009) 224, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2009.10.016 , arXiv:0907.1048 .[32] CMS Collaboration, “Search for pair production of first and second generationleptoquarks in proton-proton collisions at √ s = Phys. Rev. D (2016) 032004, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.032004 , arXiv:1509.03744 . eferences [33] CMS Collaboration, “Search for single production of scalar leptoquarks in proton-protoncollisions at √ s = Phys. Rev. D (2016) 032005, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.032005 , arXiv:1509.03750 . [Erratum: doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.95.039906 ].[34] ATLAS Collaboration, “Search for scalar leptoquarks in pp collisions at √ s = 13 TeV withthe ATLAS experiment”, New J. Phys. (2016) 093016, doi:10.1088/1367-2630/18/9/093016 , arXiv:1605.06035 .[35] M. Kr¨amer, T. Plehn, M. Spira, and P. M. Zerwas, “Pair production of scalar leptoquarksat the CERN LHC”, Phys. Rev. D (2005) 057503, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.71.057503 , arXiv:hep-ph/0411038 .[36] CMS Collaboration, “The CMS trigger system”, JINST (2017) P01020, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/12/01/P01020 , arXiv:1609.02366 .[37] CMS Collaboration, “The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC”, JINST (2008) S08004, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/3/08/S08004 .[38] T. Sj ¨ostrand et al., “An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2”, Comput. Phys. Commun. (2015)159, doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2015.01.024 , arXiv:1410.3012 .[39] R. D. Ball et al., “Parton distributions with LHC data”, Nucl. Phys. B (2013) 244, doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2012.10.003 , arXiv:1207.1303 .[40] M. Kr¨amer, T. Plehn, M. Spira, and P. M. Zerwas, “Pair production of scalar leptoquarksat the Fermilab Tevatron”, Phys. Rev. Lett. (1997) 341, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.79.341 , arXiv:hep-ph/9704322 .[41] J. Pumplin et al., “New generation of parton distributions with uncertainties from globalQCD analysis”, JHEP (2002) 012, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2002/07/012 , arXiv:hep-ph/0201195 .[42] 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 .[43] R. Frederix and S. Frixione, “Merging meets matching in MC@NLO”, JHEP (2012)061, doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2012)061 , arXiv:1209.6215 .[44] P. Artoisenet, R. Frederix, O. Mattelaer, and R. Rietkerk, “Automatic spin-entangleddecays of heavy resonances in Monte Carlo simulations”, JHEP (2013) 015, doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2013)015 , arXiv:1212.3460 .[45] P. Nason, “A new method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carloalgorithms”, JHEP (2004) 040, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2004/11/040 , arXiv:hep-ph/0409146 .[46] S. Frixione, P. Nason, and C. Oleari, “Matching NLO QCD computations with partonshower simulations: the POWHEG method”, JHEP (2007) 070, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2007/11/070 , arXiv:0709.2092 .[47] S. Alioli, P. Nason, C. Oleari, and E. Re, “A general framework for implementing NLOcalculations in shower Monte Carlo programs: the POWHEG BOX”, JHEP (2010) 043, doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2010)043 , arXiv:1002.2581 . [48] 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 ].[49] 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 .[50] S. Frixione, P. Nason, and G. Ridolfi, “A positive-weight next-to-leading-order MonteCarlo for heavy flavour hadroproduction”, JHEP (2007) 126, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2007/09/126 , arXiv:0707.3088 .[51] J. Alwall et al., “Comparative study of various algorithms for the merging of partonshowers and matrix elements in hadronic collisions”, Eur. Phys. J. C (2008) 473, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-007-0490-5 , arXiv:0706.2569 .[52] NNPDF Collaboration, “Parton distributions for the LHC Run II”, JHEP (2015) 040, doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2015)040 , arXiv:1410.8849 .[53] Y. Li and F. Petriello, “Combining QCD and electroweak corrections to dileptonproduction in the framework of the FEWZ simluation code”, Phys. Rev. D (2012)094034, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.86.094034 , arXiv:1208.5967 .[54] M. Aliev et al., “HATHOR: HAdronic Top and Heavy quarks crOss section calculatoR”, Comput. Phys. Commun. (2011) 1034, doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2010.12.040 , arXiv:1007.1327 .[55] P. Kant et al., “HATHOR for single top-quark production: updated predictions anduncertainty estimates for single top-quark production in hadronic collisions”, Comput.Phys. Commun. (2015) 74, doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2015.02.001 , arXiv:1406.4403 .[56] N. Kidonakis, “Top quark production”, in Helmholtz International Summer School onPhysics of Heavy Quarks and Hadrons (HQ 2013): JINR, Dubna, Russia, July 15-28, 2013 . arXiv:1311.0283 . doi:10.3204/DESY-PROC-2013-03/Kidonakis .[57] M. Beneke, P. Falgari, S. Klein, and C. Schwinn, “Hadronic top-quark pair productionwith NNLL threshold resummation”, Nucl. Phys. B (2012) 695, doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2011.10.021 , arXiv:1109.1536 .[58] M. Cacciari et al., “Top-pair production at hadron colliders with next-to-next-to-leadinglogarithmic soft-gluon resummation”, Phys. Lett. B (2012) 612, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2012.03.013 , arXiv:1111.5869 .[59] P. B¨arnreuther, M. Czakon, and A. Mitov, “Percent-level-precision physics at theTevatron: next-to-next-to-leading order QCD corrections to qq → tt + x”, Phys. Rev. Lett. (2012) 132001, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.109.132001 , arXiv:1204.5201 .[60] M. Czakon and A. Mitov, “NNLO corrections to top-pair production at hadron colliders:the all-fermionic scattering channels”, JHEP (2012) 054, doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2012)054 , arXiv:1207.0236 . eferences [61] M. Czakon and A. Mitov, “NNLO corrections to top pair production at hadron colliders:the quark-gluon reaction”, JHEP (2013) 080, doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2013)080 , arXiv:1210.6832 .[62] 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 .[63] M. Czakon and A. Mitov, “Top++: A program for the calculation of the top-paircross-section at hadron colliders”, Comput. Phys. Commun. (2014) 2930, doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2014.06.021 , arXiv:1112.5675 .[64] CMS Collaboration, “Event generator tunes obtained from underlying event andmultiparton scattering measurements”, Eur. Phys. J. C (2016) 155, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-3988-x , arXiv:1512.00815 .[65] CMS Collaboration, “Investigations of the impact of the parton shower tuning inPYTHIA 8 in the modelling of tt at √ s = EANT
Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A (2003) 250, doi:10.1016/S0168-9002(03)01368-8 .[67] J. Allison et al., “G
EANT
IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. (2006) 270, doi:10.1109/TNS.2006.869826 .[68] CMS Collaboration, “Particle-flow reconstruction and global event description with theCMS detector”, JINST (2017) P10003, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/12/10/P10003 , arXiv:1706.04965 .[69] 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 .[70] 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 .[71] M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez, “FastJet user manual”, Eur. Phys. J. C (2012)1896, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1896-2 , arXiv:1111.6097 .[72] CMS Collaboration, “Performance of the CMS muon detector and muon reconstructionwith proton-proton collisions at √ s =
13 TeV”,
JINST (2018) P06015, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/13/06/P06015 , arXiv:1804.04528 .[73] CMS Collaboration, “Jet algorithms performance in 13 TeV data”, CMS Physics AnalysisSummary CMS-PAS-JME-16-003, 2017.[74] CMS Collaboration, “Jet energy scale and resolution in the CMS experiment in ppcollisions at 8 TeV”, JINST (2017) P02014, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/12/02/P02014 , arXiv:1607.03663 .[75] CMS Collaboration, “Performance of missing transverse momentum reconstructionalgorithms in proton-proton collisions at √ s = 8 TeV with the CMS detector”, CMSPhysics Analysis Summary CMS-PAS-JME-12-002, 2013. [76] CMS Collaboration, “Identification of heavy-flavour jets with the CMS detector in ppcollisions at 13 TeV”, JINST (2018) P05011, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/13/05/P05011 , arXiv:1712.07158 .[77] G. Punzi, “Sensitivity of searches for new signals and its optimization”, in PHYSTAT2003: Statistical problems in particle physics, astrophysics and cosmology . Stanford, USA,September, 2003. arXiv:physics/0308063 . [Conference C03-09-08].[78] CMS Collaboration, “Performance of photon reconstruction and identification with theCMS detector in proton-proton collisions at √ s = JINST (2015) P08010, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/10/08/P08010 , arXiv:1502.02702 .[79] CMS Collaboration, “Measurements of inclusive W and Z cross sections in pp collisionsat √ s = JHEP (2011) 080, doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2011)080 , arXiv:1012.2466 .[80] CMS Collaboration, “CMS luminosity measurements for the 2016 data taking period”,CMS Physics Analysis Summary CMS-PAS-LUM-17-001, 2017.[81] CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of the inelastic proton-proton cross section at √ s = JHEP (2018) 161, doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2018)161 , arXiv:1802.02613 .[82] M. Botje et al., “The PDF4LHC Working Group Interim Recommendations”, (2011). arXiv:1101.0538 .[83] S. Alekhin et al., “The PDF4LHC Working Group Interim Report”, (2011). arXiv:1101.0536 .[84] M. R. Whalley, D. Bourilkov, and R. C. Group, “The Les Houches accord PDFs (LHAPDF)and LHAGLUE”, in HERA and the LHC: A Workshop on the implications of HERA for LHCphysics. Proceedings, Part B . 2005. arXiv:hep-ph/0508110 .[85] D. Bourilkov, R. C. Group, and M. R. Whalley, “LHAPDF: PDF use from the Tevatron tothe LHC”, in
TeV4LHC Workshop - 4th meeting Batavia, Illinois, October 20-22, 2005 . arXiv:hep-ph/0605240 .[86] G. Cowan, K. Cranmer, E. Gross, and O. Vitells, “Asymptotic formulae forlikelihood-based tests of new physics”, Eur. Phys. J. C (2011) 1554, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1554-0 , arXiv:1007.1727 . [Erratum: doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-013-2501-z ].[87] T. Junk, “Confidence level computation for combining searches with small statistics”, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A (1999) 435, doi:10.1016/S0168-9002(99)00498-2 , arXiv:hep-ex/9902006 .[88] A. L. Read, “Presentation of search results: the CL s technique”, J. Phys. G (2002) 2693, doi:10.1088/0954-3899/28/10/313 .[89] The ATLAS Collaboration, The CMS Collaboration, The LHC Higgs Combination Group,“Procedure for the LHC Higgs boson search combination in Summer 2011”, TechnicalReport CMS NOTE-2011/005, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2011-11, 2011.[90] H. K. Dreiner, “An introduction to explicit R -parity violation”, Pramana (1998) 123, doi:10.1007/BF02827485 .[91] R. Barbier et al., “ R -parity-violating supersymmetry”, Phys. Rept. (2005) 1, doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2005.08.006 , arXiv:hep-ph/0406039 .3
TeV4LHC Workshop - 4th meeting Batavia, Illinois, October 20-22, 2005 . arXiv:hep-ph/0605240 .[86] G. Cowan, K. Cranmer, E. Gross, and O. Vitells, “Asymptotic formulae forlikelihood-based tests of new physics”, Eur. Phys. J. C (2011) 1554, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1554-0 , arXiv:1007.1727 . [Erratum: doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-013-2501-z ].[87] T. Junk, “Confidence level computation for combining searches with small statistics”, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A (1999) 435, doi:10.1016/S0168-9002(99)00498-2 , arXiv:hep-ex/9902006 .[88] A. L. Read, “Presentation of search results: the CL s technique”, J. Phys. G (2002) 2693, doi:10.1088/0954-3899/28/10/313 .[89] The ATLAS Collaboration, The CMS Collaboration, The LHC Higgs Combination Group,“Procedure for the LHC Higgs boson search combination in Summer 2011”, TechnicalReport CMS NOTE-2011/005, ATL-PHYS-PUB-2011-11, 2011.[90] H. K. Dreiner, “An introduction to explicit R -parity violation”, Pramana (1998) 123, doi:10.1007/BF02827485 .[91] R. Barbier et al., “ R -parity-violating supersymmetry”, Phys. Rept. (2005) 1, doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2005.08.006 , arXiv:hep-ph/0406039 .3 A Efficiencies and event yields
In Fig. 11 the product of signal acceptance and efficiency is shown after final optimized se-lections as a function of m LQ for the eejj (left) and e ν jj (right) channels. Tables 2 and 3 listthe number of events passing the final selection criteria in data and the various backgroundcomponents as a function of m LQ for the eejj and e ν jj channels, respectively. [GeV] LQ m
500 1000 1500 2000 e ff i c i en cy · A cc ep t an c e -1 Simulation
CMS eejj [GeV] LQ m
500 1000 1500 2000 e ff i c i en cy · A cc ep t an c e -1 Simulation
CMS jj n e Figure 11: The product of signal acceptance and efficiency after final optimized selections, as afunction of m LQ for the eejj (left) and e ν jj (right) channels. Table 2: Event yields after the optimized eejj selections. Uncertainties are statistical except forthe total background, where both statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown. An entryof 0.0 quoted for the uncertainty indicates that its value is negligibly small. LQ masses aregiven in units of GeV and init. sel. refers to initial selection.
LQ mass Signal Z/ γ ∗ +jets tt Multijet VV, W, single t, γ +jets Total background Datainit. sel. — 41600 ±
49 7100 ±
68 26 ± ±
36 51100 ± ± ± ±
16 2300 ±
39 15 ± ±
18 4800 ± ±
120 4709250 137400 ± ±
11 1200 ±
29 9.1 ± ±
14 2500 ± ±
69 2426300 63160 ±
510 470 ± ±
22 4.8 ± + − + − ±
24 1278350 30150 ±
230 250 ± ±
15 2.5 ± + − + − ±
27 652400 15440 ±
110 140 ± ±
11 1.0 ± + − + − ±
11 376450 8260 ±
60 85 ± ± ± + − + − ± ±
33 54 ± ± ± + − + − ± ±
19 33 ± ± ± + − + − ± ±
12 21 ± ± ± + − + − ± ± ± ± ± + − + − ± ± ± ± ± + − + − ± ± ± ± ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± Table 3: Event yields after the optimized e ν jj selections. Uncertainties are statistical except forthe total background, where both statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown. An entryof 0.0 quoted for the uncertainty indicates that its value is negligibly small. LQ masses aregiven in units of GeV and init. sel. refers to initial selection. LQ mass Signal W+jets tt Multijet VV, Z, single t, γ +jets Total background Datainit. sel. — 47900 ±
160 66900 ±
110 2800 ±
15 11300 ±
72 128900 ± ± ± ±
150 52800 ±
94 2100 ±
11 9600 ±
57 104500 ± ± ±
520 1800 ±
25 3800 ±
25 300 ± ±
38 7100 ± ±
430 7151300 19800 ±
220 800 ±
15 1400 ±
16 120 ± ±
37 3000 ± ±
170 3164350 9800 ±
100 410 ±
13 610 ±
10 62 ± ±
11 1400 ± ±
88 1539400 5100 ±
51 230 ± ± ± ±
10 760 ± ±
74 847450 2900 ±
27 150 ± ± ± ± ± ±
31 496500 1700 ±
15 90 ± ± ± + − + − ±
21 298550 990 ± ± ± ± + − + − ±
13 195600 620 ± ± ± ± + − + − ±
12 132650 400 ± ± ± ± + − + − ± ± ± ± ± + − + − ± ± ± ± ± + − + − ± ± ± ± ± + − + − ± ± ± ± ± + − + − ± ± ± ± ± + − + − ± ± ± ± ± + − + − ± ± ± ± ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± ± ± + − ± + − + − ± B The CMS Collaboration
Yerevan Physics Institute, Yerevan, Armenia
A.M. Sirunyan, A. Tumasyan
Institut f ¨ur Hochenergiephysik, Wien, Austria
W. Adam, F. Ambrogi, E. Asilar, T. Bergauer, J. Brandstetter, M. Dragicevic, J. Er ¨o,A. Escalante Del Valle, M. Flechl, R. Fr ¨uhwirth , V.M. Ghete, J. Hrubec, M. Jeitler , N. Krammer,I. Kr¨atschmer, D. Liko, T. Madlener, I. Mikulec, N. Rad, H. Rohringer, J. Schieck , R. Sch ¨ofbeck,M. Spanring, D. Spitzbart, A. Taurok, W. Waltenberger, J. Wittmann, C.-E. Wulz , M. Zarucki Institute for Nuclear Problems, Minsk, Belarus
V. Chekhovsky, V. Mossolov, J. Suarez Gonzalez
Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, Belgium
E.A. De Wolf, D. Di Croce, X. Janssen, J. Lauwers, M. Pieters, H. Van Haevermaet,P. Van Mechelen, N. Van Remortel
Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussel, Belgium
S. Abu Zeid, F. Blekman, J. D’Hondt, J. De Clercq, K. Deroover, G. Flouris, D. Lontkovskyi,S. Lowette, I. Marchesini, S. Moortgat, L. Moreels, Q. Python, K. Skovpen, S. Tavernier,W. Van Doninck, P. Van Mulders, I. Van Parijs
Universit´e Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium
D. Beghin, B. Bilin, H. Brun, B. Clerbaux, G. De Lentdecker, H. Delannoy, B. Dorney,G. Fasanella, L. Favart, R. Goldouzian, A. Grebenyuk, A.K. Kalsi, T. Lenzi, J. Luetic, N. Postiau,E. Starling, L. Thomas, C. Vander Velde, P. Vanlaer, D. Vannerom, Q. Wang
Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
T. Cornelis, D. Dobur, A. Fagot, M. Gul, I. Khvastunov , D. Poyraz, C. Roskas, D. Trocino,M. Tytgat, W. Verbeke, B. Vermassen, M. Vit, N. Zaganidis Universit´e Catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
H. Bakhshiansohi, O. Bondu, S. Brochet, G. Bruno, C. Caputo, P. David, C. Delaere,M. Delcourt, A. Giammanco, G. Krintiras, V. Lemaitre, A. Magitteri, K. Piotrzkowski, A. Saggio,M. Vidal Marono, S. Wertz, J. Zobec
Centro Brasileiro de Pesquisas Fisicas, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
F.L. Alves, G.A. Alves, M. Correa Martins Junior, G. Correia Silva, C. Hensel, A. Moraes,M.E. Pol, P. Rebello Teles
Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
E. Belchior Batista Das Chagas, W. Carvalho, J. Chinellato , E. Coelho, E.M. Da Costa,G.G. Da Silveira , D. De Jesus Damiao, C. De Oliveira Martins, S. Fonseca De Souza,H. Malbouisson, D. Matos Figueiredo, M. Melo De Almeida, C. Mora Herrera, L. Mundim,H. Nogima, W.L. Prado Da Silva, L.J. Sanchez Rosas, A. Santoro, A. Sznajder, M. Thiel,E.J. Tonelli Manganote , F. Torres Da Silva De Araujo, A. Vilela Pereira Universidade Estadual Paulista a , Universidade Federal do ABC b , S˜ao Paulo, Brazil S. Ahuja a , C.A. Bernardes a , L. Calligaris a , T.R. Fernandez Perez Tomei a , E.M. Gregores b ,P.G. Mercadante b , S.F. Novaes a , SandraS. Padula a Institute for Nuclear Research and Nuclear Energy, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, Bulgaria
A. Aleksandrov, R. Hadjiiska, P. Iaydjiev, A. Marinov, M. Misheva, M. Rodozov, M. Shopova,G. Sultanov
University of Sofia, Sofia, Bulgaria
A. Dimitrov, L. Litov, B. Pavlov, P. Petkov
Beihang University, Beijing, China
W. Fang , X. Gao , L. Yuan Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing, China
M. Ahmad, J.G. Bian, G.M. Chen, H.S. Chen, M. Chen, Y. Chen, C.H. Jiang, D. Leggat, H. Liao,Z. Liu, F. Romeo, S.M. Shaheen , A. Spiezia, J. Tao, Z. Wang, E. Yazgan, H. Zhang, S. Zhang ,J. Zhao State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China
Y. Ban, G. Chen, A. Levin, J. Li, L. Li, Q. Li, Y. Mao, S.J. Qian, D. Wang
Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
Y. Wang
Universidad de Los Andes, Bogota, Colombia
C. Avila, A. Cabrera, C.A. Carrillo Montoya, L.F. Chaparro Sierra, C. Florez,C.F. Gonz´alez Hern´andez, M.A. Segura Delgado
University of Split, Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering and NavalArchitecture, Split, Croatia
B. Courbon, N. Godinovic, D. Lelas, I. Puljak, 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, B. Mesic, A. Starodumov , T. Susa University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus
M.W. Ather, A. Attikis, M. Kolosova, G. Mavromanolakis, J. Mousa, C. Nicolaou, F. Ptochos,P.A. Razis, H. Rykaczewski
Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
M. Finger , M. Finger Jr. Escuela Politecnica Nacional, Quito, Ecuador
E. Ayala
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
Y. Assran , S. Elgammal , S. Khalil National Institute of Chemical Physics and Biophysics, Tallinn, Estonia
S. Bhowmik, A. Carvalho Antunes De Oliveira, R.K. Dewanjee, K. Ehataht, M. Kadastik,M. Raidal, C. Veelken Department of Physics, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
P. Eerola, H. Kirschenmann, J. Pekkanen, M. Voutilainen
Helsinki Institute of Physics, Helsinki, Finland
J. Havukainen, J.K. Heikkil¨a, T. J¨arvinen, V. Karim¨aki, R. Kinnunen, T. Lamp´en, K. Lassila-Perini, S. Laurila, S. Lehti, T. Lind´en, P. Luukka, T. M¨aenp¨a¨a, H. Siikonen, E. Tuominen,J. Tuominiemi
Lappeenranta University of Technology, Lappeenranta, Finland
T. Tuuva
IRFU, CEA, Universit´e Paris-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France
M. Besancon, F. Couderc, M. Dejardin, D. Denegri, J.L. Faure, F. Ferri, S. Ganjour, A. Givernaud,P. Gras, G. Hamel de Monchenault, P. Jarry, C. Leloup, E. Locci, J. Malcles, G. Negro, J. Rander,A. Rosowsky, M. ¨O. Sahin, M. Titov
Laboratoire Leprince-Ringuet, Ecole polytechnique, CNRS/IN2P3, Universit´e Paris-Saclay,Palaiseau, France
A. Abdulsalam , C. Amendola, I. Antropov, F. Beaudette, P. Busson, C. Charlot,R. Granier de Cassagnac, I. Kucher, A. Lobanov, J. Martin Blanco, C. Martin Perez, M. Nguyen,C. Ochando, G. Ortona, P. Paganini, P. Pigard, J. Rembser, R. Salerno, J.B. Sauvan, Y. Sirois,A.G. Stahl Leiton, A. Zabi, A. Zghiche Universit´e de Strasbourg, CNRS, IPHC UMR 7178, Strasbourg, France
J.-L. Agram , J. Andrea, D. Bloch, J.-M. Brom, E.C. Chabert, V. Cherepanov, C. Collard,E. Conte , J.-C. Fontaine , D. Gel´e, U. Goerlach, M. Jansov´a, A.-C. Le Bihan, N. Tonon,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, N. Chanon, R. Chierici, D. Contardo, P. Depasse,H. El Mamouni, J. Fay, L. Finco, S. Gascon, M. Gouzevitch, G. Grenier, B. Ille, F. Lagarde,I.B. Laktineh, H. Lattaud, M. Lethuillier, L. Mirabito, S. Perries, A. Popov , V. Sordini,G. Touquet, M. Vander Donckt, S. Viret Georgian Technical University, Tbilisi, Georgia
T. Toriashvili Tbilisi State University, Tbilisi, Georgia
Z. Tsamalaidze RWTH Aachen University, I. Physikalisches Institut, Aachen, Germany
C. Autermann, L. Feld, M.K. Kiesel, K. Klein, M. Lipinski, M. Preuten, M.P. Rauch,C. Schomakers, J. Schulz, M. Teroerde, B. Wittmer
RWTH Aachen University, III. Physikalisches Institut A, Aachen, Germany
A. Albert, D. Duchardt, M. Erdmann, S. Erdweg, T. Esch, R. Fischer, S. Ghosh, A. G ¨uth,T. Hebbeker, C. Heidemann, K. Hoepfner, H. Keller, L. Mastrolorenzo, M. Merschmeyer,A. Meyer, P. Millet, S. Mukherjee, T. Pook, M. Radziej, H. Reithler, M. Rieger, A. Schmidt,D. Teyssier, S. Th ¨uer RWTH Aachen University, III. Physikalisches Institut B, Aachen, Germany
G. Fl ¨ugge, O. Hlushchenko, T. Kress, T. M ¨uller, A. Nehrkorn, A. Nowack, C. Pistone, O. Pooth,D. Roy, H. Sert, A. Stahl Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron, Hamburg, Germany
M. Aldaya Martin, T. Arndt, C. Asawatangtrakuldee, I. Babounikau, K. Beernaert, O. Behnke,U. Behrens, A. Berm ´udez Mart´ınez, D. Bertsche, A.A. Bin Anuar, K. Borras , V. Botta,A. Campbell, P. Connor, C. Contreras-Campana, V. Danilov, A. De Wit, M.M. Defranchis,C. Diez Pardos, D. Dom´ınguez Damiani, G. Eckerlin, T. Eichhorn, A. Elwood, E. Eren,E. Gallo , A. Geiser, J.M. Grados Luyando, A. Grohsjean, M. Guthoff, M. Haranko, A. Harb,J. Hauk, H. Jung, M. Kasemann, J. Keaveney, C. Kleinwort, J. Knolle, D. Kr ¨ucker, W. Lange,A. Lelek, T. Lenz, J. Leonard, K. Lipka, W. Lohmann , R. Mankel, I.-A. Melzer-Pellmann,A.B. Meyer, M. Meyer, M. Missiroli, G. Mittag, J. Mnich, V. Myronenko, S.K. Pflitsch, D. Pitzl,A. Raspereza, M. Savitskyi, P. Saxena, P. Sch ¨utze, C. Schwanenberger, R. Shevchenko, A. Singh,H. Tholen, O. Turkot, A. Vagnerini, G.P. Van Onsem, R. Walsh, Y. Wen, K. Wichmann,C. Wissing, O. Zenaiev University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
R. Aggleton, S. Bein, L. Benato, A. Benecke, V. Blobel, T. Dreyer, A. Ebrahimi, E. Garutti,D. Gonzalez, P. Gunnellini, J. Haller, A. Hinzmann, A. Karavdina, G. Kasieczka, R. Klanner,R. Kogler, N. Kovalchuk, S. Kurz, V. Kutzner, J. Lange, D. Marconi, J. Multhaup, M. Niedziela,C.E.N. Niemeyer, D. Nowatschin, A. Perieanu, A. Reimers, O. Rieger, C. Scharf, P. Schleper,S. Schumann, J. Schwandt, J. Sonneveld, H. Stadie, G. Steinbr ¨uck, F.M. Stober, M. St ¨over,A. Vanhoefer, B. Vormwald, I. Zoi
Karlsruher Institut fuer Technologie, Karlsruhe, Germany
M. Akbiyik, C. Barth, M. Baselga, S. Baur, E. Butz, R. Caspart, T. Chwalek, F. Colombo,W. De Boer, A. Dierlamm, K. El Morabit, N. Faltermann, B. Freund, M. Giffels,M.A. Harrendorf, F. Hartmann , S.M. Heindl, U. Husemann, I. Katkov , S. Kudella, S. Mitra,M.U. Mozer, Th. M ¨uller, M. Musich, M. Plagge, G. Quast, K. Rabbertz, M. Schr ¨oder, I. Shvetsov,H.J. Simonis, R. Ulrich, S. Wayand, M. Weber, T. Weiler, C. W ¨ohrmann, R. Wolf Institute of Nuclear and Particle Physics (INPP), NCSR Demokritos, Aghia Paraskevi,Greece
G. Anagnostou, G. Daskalakis, T. Geralis, A. Kyriakis, D. Loukas, G. Paspalaki
National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
G. Karathanasis, P. Kontaxakis, A. Panagiotou, I. Papavergou, N. Saoulidou, E. Tziaferi,K. Vellidis
National Technical University of Athens, Athens, Greece
K. Kousouris, I. Papakrivopoulos, G. Tsipolitis
University of Io´annina, Io´annina, Greece
I. Evangelou, C. Foudas, P. Gianneios, P. Katsoulis, P. Kokkas, S. Mallios, N. Manthos,I. Papadopoulos, E. Paradas, J. Strologas, F.A. Triantis, D. Tsitsonis
MTA-ELTE Lend ¨ulet CMS Particle and Nuclear Physics Group, E ¨otv ¨os Lor´and University,Budapest, Hungary
M. Bart ´ok , M. Csanad, N. Filipovic, P. Major, M.I. Nagy, G. Pasztor, O. Sur´anyi, G.I. Veres Wigner Research Centre for Physics, Budapest, Hungary
G. Bencze, C. Hajdu, D. Horvath , ´A. Hunyadi, F. Sikler, T. ´A. V´ami, V. Veszpremi,G. Vesztergombi † Institute of Nuclear Research ATOMKI, Debrecen, Hungary
N. Beni, S. Czellar, J. Karancsi , A. Makovec, J. Molnar, Z. Szillasi Institute of Physics, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary
P. Raics, Z.L. Trocsanyi, B. Ujvari
Indian Institute of Science (IISc), Bangalore, India
S. Choudhury, J.R. Komaragiri, P.C. Tiwari
National Institute of Science Education and Research, HBNI, Bhubaneswar, India
S. Bahinipati , C. Kar, P. Mal, K. Mandal, A. Nayak , D.K. Sahoo , S.K. Swain Panjab University, Chandigarh, India
S. Bansal, S.B. Beri, V. Bhatnagar, S. Chauhan, R. Chawla, N. Dhingra, R. Gupta, A. Kaur,M. Kaur, S. Kaur, P. Kumari, M. Lohan, A. Mehta, K. Sandeep, S. Sharma, J.B. Singh, A.K. Virdi,G. Walia
University of Delhi, Delhi, India
A. Bhardwaj, B.C. Choudhary, R.B. Garg, M. Gola, S. Keshri, Ashok Kumar, S. Malhotra,M. Naimuddin, P. Priyanka, K. Ranjan, Aashaq Shah, R. Sharma
Saha Institute of Nuclear Physics, HBNI, Kolkata, India
R. Bhardwaj , M. Bharti , R. Bhattacharya, S. Bhattacharya, U. Bhawandeep , D. Bhowmik,S. Dey, S. Dutt , S. Dutta, S. Ghosh, K. Mondal, S. Nandan, A. Purohit, P.K. Rout, A. Roy,S. Roy Chowdhury, G. Saha, S. Sarkar, M. Sharan, B. Singh , 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, P.K. Netrakanti, L.M. Pant, P. Shukla
Tata Institute of Fundamental Research-A, Mumbai, India
T. Aziz, M.A. Bhat, S. Dugad, G.B. Mohanty, N. Sur, B. Sutar, RavindraKumar Verma
Tata Institute of Fundamental Research-B, Mumbai, India
S. Banerjee, S. Bhattacharya, S. Chatterjee, P. Das, M. Guchait, Sa. Jain, S. Karmakar, S. Kumar,M. Maity , G. Majumder, K. Mazumdar, N. Sahoo, T. Sarkar Indian Institute of Science Education and Research (IISER), Pune, India
S. Chauhan, S. Dube, V. Hegde, A. Kapoor, K. Kothekar, S. Pandey, A. Rane, A. Rastogi,S. Sharma
Institute for Research in Fundamental Sciences (IPM), Tehran, Iran
S. Chenarani , E. Eskandari Tadavani, S.M. Etesami , M. Khakzad, M. Mohammadi Na-jafabadi, M. Naseri, 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 , A. Colaleo a , D. Creanza a , c , L. Cristella a , b , N. De Filippis a , c ,M. De Palma a , b , A. Di Florio a , b , F. Errico a , b , L. Fiore a , A. Gelmi a , b , G. Iaselli a , c , M. Ince a , b ,S. Lezki a , b , 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 , A. Ranieri a , G. Selvaggi a , b , A. Sharma a , L. Silvestris a , R. Venditti a ,P. Verwilligen a , G. Zito a INFN Sezione di Bologna a , Universit`a di Bologna b , Bologna, Italy G. Abbiendi a , C. Battilana a , b , D. Bonacorsi a , b , L. Borgonovi a , b , S. Braibant-Giacomelli a , b ,R. Campanini a , b , P. Capiluppi a , b , A. Castro a , b , F.R. Cavallo a , S.S. Chhibra a , b , C. Ciocca a ,G. Codispoti a , b , M. Cuffiani a , b , G.M. Dallavalle a , F. Fabbri a , A. Fanfani a , b , E. Fontanesi,P. Giacomelli a , C. Grandi a , L. Guiducci a , b , S. Lo Meo a , S. Marcellini a , G. Masetti a ,A. Montanari a , F.L. Navarria a , b , A. Perrotta a , F. Primavera a , b ,16 , A.M. Rossi a , b , T. Rovelli a , b ,G.P. Siroli a , b , N. Tosi a INFN Sezione di Catania a , Universit`a di Catania b , Catania, Italy S. Albergo a , b , A. Di Mattia a , R. Potenza a , b , A. Tricomi a , b , C. Tuve a , b INFN Sezione di Firenze a , Universit`a di Firenze b , Firenze, Italy G. Barbagli a , K. Chatterjee a , b , V. Ciulli a , b , C. Civinini a , R. D’Alessandro a , b , E. Focardi a , b ,G. Latino, P. Lenzi a , b , M. Meschini a , S. Paoletti a , L. Russo a ,29 , G. Sguazzoni a , D. Strom a ,L. Viliani a INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy
L. Benussi, S. Bianco, F. Fabbri, D. Piccolo
INFN Sezione di Genova a , Universit`a di Genova b , Genova, Italy F. Ferro a , R. Mulargia a , b , F. Ravera a , b , E. Robutti a , S. Tosi a , b INFN Sezione di Milano-Bicocca a , Universit`a di Milano-Bicocca b , Milano, Italy A. Benaglia a , A. Beschi b , F. Brivio a , b , V. Ciriolo a , b ,16 , S. Di Guida a , d ,16 , M.E. Dinardo a , b ,S. Fiorendi a , b , S. Gennai a , A. Ghezzi a , b , P. Govoni a , b , M. Malberti a , b , S. Malvezzi a ,A. Massironi a , b , D. Menasce a , F. Monti, L. Moroni a , M. Paganoni a , b , D. Pedrini a , S. Ragazzi a , b ,T. Tabarelli de Fatis a , b , D. Zuolo 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 , A. De Iorio a , b , A. Di Crescenzo a , b , F. Fabozzi a , c , F. Fienga a ,G. Galati a , A.O.M. Iorio a , b , W.A. Khan a , L. Lista a , S. Meola a , d ,16 , P. Paolucci a ,16 , C. Sciacca a , b ,E. Voevodina a , b INFN Sezione di Padova a , Universit`a di Padova b , Padova, Italy, Universit`a di Trento c ,Trento, Italy P. Azzi a , N. Bacchetta a , D. Bisello a , b , A. Boletti a , b , A. Bragagnolo, R. Carlin a , b , P. Checchia a ,M. Dall’Osso a , b , P. De Castro Manzano a , T. Dorigo a , U. Dosselli a , F. Gasparini a , b ,U. Gasparini a , b , A. Gozzelino a , S.Y. Hoh, S. Lacaprara a , P. Lujan, M. Margoni a , b ,A.T. Meneguzzo a , b , J. Pazzini a , b , P. Ronchese a , b , R. Rossin a , b , F. Simonetto a , b , A. Tiko,E. Torassa a , M. Tosi a , b , M. Zanetti a , b , P. Zotto a , b , G. Zumerle a , b INFN Sezione di Pavia a , Universit`a di Pavia b , Pavia, Italy A. Braghieri a , A. Magnani a , P. Montagna a , b , S.P. Ratti a , b , V. Re a , M. Ressegotti a , b , 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 M. Biasini a , b , G.M. Bilei a , C. Cecchi a , b , D. Ciangottini a , b , L. Fan `o a , b , P. Lariccia a , b , R. Leonardi a , b ,E. Manoni a , G. Mantovani a , b , V. Mariani a , b , M. Menichelli a , A. Rossi a , b , A. Santocchia a , b ,D. Spiga a INFN Sezione di Pisa a , Universit`a di Pisa b , Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa c , Pisa, Italy K. Androsov a , P. Azzurri a , G. Bagliesi a , L. Bianchini a , T. Boccali a , L. Borrello, R. Castaldi a ,M.A. Ciocci a , b , R. Dell’Orso a , G. Fedi a , F. Fiori a , c , L. Giannini a , c , A. Giassi a , M.T. Grippo a ,3
INFN Sezione di Genova a , Universit`a di Genova b , Genova, Italy F. Ferro a , R. Mulargia a , b , F. Ravera a , b , E. Robutti a , S. Tosi a , b INFN Sezione di Milano-Bicocca a , Universit`a di Milano-Bicocca b , Milano, Italy A. Benaglia a , A. Beschi b , F. Brivio a , b , V. Ciriolo a , b ,16 , S. Di Guida a , d ,16 , M.E. Dinardo a , b ,S. Fiorendi a , b , S. Gennai a , A. Ghezzi a , b , P. Govoni a , b , M. Malberti a , b , S. Malvezzi a ,A. Massironi a , b , D. Menasce a , F. Monti, L. Moroni a , M. Paganoni a , b , D. Pedrini a , S. Ragazzi a , b ,T. Tabarelli de Fatis a , b , D. Zuolo 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 , A. De Iorio a , b , A. Di Crescenzo a , b , F. Fabozzi a , c , F. Fienga a ,G. Galati a , A.O.M. Iorio a , b , W.A. Khan a , L. Lista a , S. Meola a , d ,16 , P. Paolucci a ,16 , C. Sciacca a , b ,E. Voevodina a , b INFN Sezione di Padova a , Universit`a di Padova b , Padova, Italy, Universit`a di Trento c ,Trento, Italy P. Azzi a , N. Bacchetta a , D. Bisello a , b , A. Boletti a , b , A. Bragagnolo, R. Carlin a , b , P. Checchia a ,M. Dall’Osso a , b , P. De Castro Manzano a , T. Dorigo a , U. Dosselli a , F. Gasparini a , b ,U. Gasparini a , b , A. Gozzelino a , S.Y. Hoh, S. Lacaprara a , P. Lujan, M. Margoni a , b ,A.T. Meneguzzo a , b , J. Pazzini a , b , P. Ronchese a , b , R. Rossin a , b , F. Simonetto a , b , A. Tiko,E. Torassa a , M. Tosi a , b , M. Zanetti a , b , P. Zotto a , b , G. Zumerle a , b INFN Sezione di Pavia a , Universit`a di Pavia b , Pavia, Italy A. Braghieri a , A. Magnani a , P. Montagna a , b , S.P. Ratti a , b , V. Re a , M. Ressegotti a , b , 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 M. Biasini a , b , G.M. Bilei a , C. Cecchi a , b , D. Ciangottini a , b , L. Fan `o a , b , P. Lariccia a , b , R. Leonardi a , b ,E. Manoni a , G. Mantovani a , b , V. Mariani a , b , M. Menichelli a , A. Rossi a , b , A. Santocchia a , b ,D. Spiga a INFN Sezione di Pisa a , Universit`a di Pisa b , Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa c , Pisa, Italy K. Androsov a , P. Azzurri a , G. Bagliesi a , L. Bianchini a , T. Boccali a , L. Borrello, R. Castaldi a ,M.A. Ciocci a , b , R. Dell’Orso a , G. Fedi a , F. Fiori a , c , L. Giannini a , c , A. Giassi a , M.T. Grippo a ,3 F. Ligabue a , c , E. Manca a , c , G. Mandorli a , c , A. Messineo a , b , F. Palla a , A. Rizzi a , b , G. Rolandi ,P. Spagnolo a , R. Tenchini a , G. Tonelli a , b , A. Venturi a , P.G. Verdini a INFN Sezione di Roma a , Sapienza Universit`a di Roma b , Rome, Italy L. Barone a , b , F. Cavallari a , M. Cipriani a , b , D. Del Re a , b , E. Di Marco a , b , M. Diemoz a , S. Gelli a , b ,E. Longo a , b , B. Marzocchi a , b , P. Meridiani a , G. Organtini a , b , F. Pandolfi a , R. Paramatti a , b ,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 , S. Argiro a , b , M. Arneodo a , c , N. Bartosik a , R. Bellan a , b ,C. Biino a , A. Cappati a , b , N. Cartiglia a , F. Cenna a , b , S. Cometti a , M. Costa a , b , R. Covarelli a , b ,N. Demaria a , B. Kiani a , b , C. Mariotti a , S. Maselli a , E. Migliore a , b , V. Monaco a , b ,E. Monteil a , b , M. Monteno a , M.M. Obertino a , b , L. Pacher a , b , N. Pastrone a , M. Pelliccioni a ,G.L. Pinna Angioni a , b , A. Romero a , b , M. Ruspa a , c , R. Sacchi a , b , R. Salvatico a , b , K. Shchelina a , b ,V. Sola a , A. Solano a , b , D. Soldi a , b , A. Staiano a INFN Sezione di Trieste a , Universit`a di Trieste b , Trieste, Italy S. Belforte a , V. Candelise a , b , M. Casarsa a , F. Cossutti a , A. Da Rold a , b , G. Della Ricca a , b ,F. Vazzoler a , b , A. Zanetti a Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Korea
D.H. Kim, G.N. Kim, M.S. Kim, J. Lee, S. Lee, S.W. Lee, C.S. Moon, Y.D. Oh, S.I. Pak, S. Sekmen,D.C. Son, Y.C. Yang
Chonnam National University, Institute for Universe and Elementary Particles, Kwangju,Korea
H. Kim, D.H. Moon, G. Oh
Hanyang University, Seoul, Korea
B. Francois, J. Goh , T.J. Kim Korea University, Seoul, Korea
S. Cho, S. Choi, Y. Go, D. Gyun, S. Ha, B. Hong, Y. Jo, K. Lee, K.S. Lee, S. Lee, J. Lim, S.K. Park,Y. Roh
Sejong University, Seoul, Korea
H.S. Kim
Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea
J. Almond, J. Kim, J.S. Kim, H. Lee, K. Lee, K. Nam, S.B. Oh, B.C. Radburn-Smith, S.h. Seo,U.K. Yang, H.D. Yoo, G.B. Yu
University of Seoul, Seoul, Korea
D. Jeon, H. Kim, J.H. Kim, J.S.H. Lee, I.C. Park
Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon, Korea
Y. Choi, 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, M.A.B. Md Ali , F. Mohamad Idris , W.A.T. Wan Abdullah,M.N. Yusli, Z. Zolkapli Universidad de Sonora (UNISON), Hermosillo, Mexico
J.F. Benitez, A. Castaneda Hernandez, J.A. Murillo Quijada
Centro de Investigacion y de Estudios Avanzados del IPN, Mexico City, Mexico
H. Castilla-Valdez, E. De La Cruz-Burelo, M.C. Duran-Osuna, I. Heredia-De La Cruz ,R. Lopez-Fernandez, J. Mejia Guisao, R.I. Rabadan-Trejo, M. Ramirez-Garcia, G. Ramirez-Sanchez, R. Reyes-Almanza, A. Sanchez-Hernandez Universidad Iberoamericana, Mexico City, Mexico
S. Carrillo Moreno, C. Oropeza Barrera, F. Vazquez Valencia
Benemerita Universidad Autonoma de Puebla, Puebla, Mexico
J. Eysermans, 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
S. Bheesette, P.H. Butler
National Centre for Physics, Quaid-I-Azam University, Islamabad, Pakistan
A. Ahmad, M. Ahmad, M.I. Asghar, Q. Hassan, H.R. Hoorani, A. Saddique, M.A. Shah,M. Shoaib, M. Waqas
National Centre for Nuclear Research, Swierk, Poland
H. Bialkowska, M. Bluj, B. Boimska, T. Frueboes, M. G ´orski, M. Kazana, M. Szleper, P. Traczyk,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, A. Pyskir, M. Walczak Laborat ´orio de Instrumenta¸c˜ao e F´ısica Experimental de Part´ıculas, Lisboa, Portugal
M. Araujo, P. Bargassa, C. Beir˜ao Da Cruz E Silva, A. Di Francesco, P. Faccioli, B. Galinhas,M. Gallinaro, J. Hollar, N. Leonardo, J. Seixas, G. Strong, O. Toldaiev, J. Varela
Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia
S. Afanasiev, P. Bunin, M. Gavrilenko, I. Golutvin, I. Gorbunov, A. Kamenev, V. Karjavine,A. Lanev, A. Malakhov, V. Matveev , P. Moisenz, V. Palichik, V. Perelygin, S. Shmatov,S. Shulha, N. Skatchkov, V. Smirnov, N. Voytishin, A. Zarubin
Petersburg Nuclear Physics Institute, Gatchina (St. Petersburg), Russia
V. Golovtsov, Y. Ivanov, V. Kim , E. Kuznetsova , P. Levchenko, V. Murzin, V. Oreshkin,I. Smirnov, D. Sosnov, V. Sulimov, L. Uvarov, S. Vavilov, 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, A. Stepennov, V. Stolin, M. Toms, E. Vlasov, A. Zhokin Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, Moscow, Russia
T. Aushev
National Research Nuclear University ’Moscow Engineering Physics Institute’ (MEPhI),Moscow, Russia
R. Chistov , M. Danilov , P. Parygin, D. Philippov, S. Polikarpov , E. Tarkovskii P.N. Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia
V. Andreev, M. Azarkin, I. Dremin , M. Kirakosyan, A. Terkulov Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow,Russia
A. Baskakov, A. Belyaev, E. Boos, M. Dubinin , L. Dudko, A. Ershov, A. Gribushin,V. Klyukhin, O. Kodolova, I. Lokhtin, I. Miagkov, S. Obraztsov, S. Petrushanko, V. Savrin,A. Snigirev Novosibirsk State University (NSU), Novosibirsk, Russia
A. Barnyakov , V. Blinov , T. Dimova , L. Kardapoltsev , Y. Skovpen Institute for High Energy Physics of National Research Centre ’Kurchatov Institute’,Protvino, Russia
I. Azhgirey, I. Bayshev, S. Bitioukov, D. Elumakhov, A. Godizov, V. Kachanov, A. Kalinin,D. Konstantinov, P. Mandrik, V. Petrov, R. Ryutin, S. Slabospitskii, A. Sobol, S. Troshin,N. Tyurin, A. Uzunian, A. Volkov
National Research Tomsk Polytechnic University, Tomsk, Russia
A. Babaev, S. Baidali, V. Okhotnikov
University of Belgrade, Faculty of Physics and Vinca Institute of Nuclear Sciences, Belgrade,Serbia
P. Adzic , P. Cirkovic, D. Devetak, M. Dordevic, J. Milosevic Centro de Investigaciones Energ´eticas Medioambientales y Tecnol ´ogicas (CIEMAT),Madrid, Spain
J. Alcaraz Maestre, A. ´Alvarez Fern´andez, I. Bachiller, M. Barrio Luna, J.A. Brochero Cifuentes,M. Cerrada, N. Colino, B. De La Cruz, A. Delgado Peris, C. Fernandez Bedoya,J.P. Fern´andez Ramos, J. Flix, M.C. Fouz, O. Gonzalez Lopez, S. Goy Lopez, J.M. Hernandez,M.I. Josa, D. Moran, A. P´erez-Calero Yzquierdo, J. Puerta Pelayo, I. Redondo, L. Romero,M.S. Soares, A. Triossi
Universidad Aut ´onoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
C. Albajar, J.F. de Troc ´oniz
Universidad de Oviedo, Oviedo, Spain
J. Cuevas, C. Erice, J. Fernandez Menendez, S. Folgueras, I. Gonzalez Caballero,J.R. Gonz´alez Fern´andez, E. Palencia Cortezon, V. Rodr´ıguez Bouza, S. Sanchez Cruz, P. Vischia,J.M. Vizan Garcia
Instituto de F´ısica de Cantabria (IFCA), CSIC-Universidad de Cantabria, Santander, Spain
I.J. Cabrillo, A. Calderon, B. Chazin Quero, J. Duarte Campderros, M. Fernandez,P.J. Fern´andez Manteca, A. Garc´ıa Alonso, J. Garcia-Ferrero, G. Gomez, A. Lopez Virto,J. Marco, C. Martinez Rivero, P. Martinez Ruiz del Arbol, F. Matorras, J. Piedra Gomez,C. Prieels, T. Rodrigo, A. Ruiz-Jimeno, L. Scodellaro, N. Trevisani, I. Vila, R. Vilar Cortabitarte University of Ruhuna, Department of Physics, Matara, Sri Lanka
N. Wickramage
CERN, European Organization for Nuclear Research, Geneva, Switzerland
D. Abbaneo, B. Akgun, E. Auffray, G. Auzinger, P. Baillon, A.H. Ball, D. Barney, J. Bendavid,M. Bianco, A. Bocci, C. Botta, E. Brondolin, T. Camporesi, M. Cepeda, G. Cerminara, E. Chapon,Y. Chen, G. Cucciati, D. d’Enterria, A. Dabrowski, N. Daci, V. Daponte, A. David, A. De Roeck,N. Deelen, M. Dobson, M. D ¨unser, N. Dupont, A. Elliott-Peisert, P. Everaerts, F. Fallavollita ,D. Fasanella, G. Franzoni, J. Fulcher, W. Funk, D. Gigi, A. Gilbert, K. Gill, F. Glege, M. Gruchala,M. Guilbaud, D. Gulhan, J. Hegeman, C. Heidegger, V. Innocente, A. Jafari, P. Janot,O. Karacheban , J. Kieseler, A. Kornmayer, M. Krammer , C. Lange, P. Lecoq, C. Lourenc¸o,L. Malgeri, M. Mannelli, F. Meijers, J.A. Merlin, S. Mersi, E. Meschi, P. Milenovic , F. Moortgat,M. Mulders, J. Ngadiuba, S. Nourbakhsh, S. Orfanelli, L. Orsini, F. Pantaleo , L. Pape, E. Perez,M. Peruzzi, A. Petrilli, G. Petrucciani, A. Pfeiffer, M. Pierini, F.M. Pitters, D. Rabady, A. Racz,T. Reis, M. Rovere, H. Sakulin, C. Sch¨afer, C. Schwick, M. Seidel, M. Selvaggi, A. Sharma,P. Silva, P. Sphicas , A. Stakia, J. Steggemann, D. Treille, A. Tsirou, V. Veckalns , M. Verzetti,W.D. Zeuner Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen, Switzerland
L. Caminada , K. Deiters, W. Erdmann, R. Horisberger, Q. Ingram, H.C. Kaestli, D. Kotlinski,U. Langenegger, T. Rohe, S.A. Wiederkehr ETH Zurich - Institute for Particle Physics and Astrophysics (IPA), Zurich, Switzerland
M. Backhaus, L. B¨ani, P. Berger, N. Chernyavskaya, G. Dissertori, M. Dittmar, M. Doneg`a,C. Dorfer, T.A. G ´omez Espinosa, C. Grab, D. Hits, T. Klijnsma, W. Lustermann, R.A. Manzoni,M. Marionneau, M.T. Meinhard, F. Micheli, P. Musella, F. Nessi-Tedaldi, J. Pata, F. Pauss,G. Perrin, L. Perrozzi, S. Pigazzini, M. Quittnat, C. Reissel, D. Ruini, D.A. Sanz Becerra,M. Sch ¨onenberger, L. Shchutska, V.R. Tavolaro, K. Theofilatos, M.L. Vesterbacka Olsson,R. Wallny, D.H. Zhu
Universit¨at Z ¨urich, Zurich, Switzerland
T.K. Aarrestad, C. Amsler , D. Brzhechko, M.F. Canelli, A. De Cosa, R. Del Burgo, S. Donato,C. Galloni, T. Hreus, B. Kilminster, S. Leontsinis, I. Neutelings, G. Rauco, P. Robmann,D. Salerno, K. Schweiger, C. Seitz, Y. Takahashi, A. Zucchetta National Central University, Chung-Li, Taiwan
T.H. Doan, R. Khurana, C.M. Kuo, W. Lin, A. Pozdnyakov, S.S. Yu
National Taiwan University (NTU), Taipei, Taiwan
P. Chang, Y. Chao, K.F. Chen, P.H. Chen, W.-S. Hou, Arun Kumar, Y.F. Liu, R.-S. Lu, E. Paganis,A. Psallidas, A. Steen
Chulalongkorn University, Faculty of Science, Department of Physics, Bangkok, Thailand
B. Asavapibhop, N. Srimanobhas, N. Suwonjandee
C¸ ukurova University, Physics Department, Science and Art Faculty, Adana, Turkey
M.N. Bakirci , A. Bat, F. Boran, S. Damarseckin, Z.S. Demiroglu, F. Dolek, C. Dozen, E. Eskut,S. Girgis, G. Gokbulut, Y. Guler, E. Gurpinar, I. Hos , C. Isik, E.E. Kangal , O. Kara,U. Kiminsu, M. Oglakci, G. Onengut, K. Ozdemir , A. Polatoz, D. Sunar Cerci , B. Tali ,U.G. Tok, H. Topakli , S. Turkcapar, I.S. Zorbakir, C. Zorbilmez Middle East Technical University, Physics Department, Ankara, Turkey
B. Isildak , G. Karapinar , M. Yalvac, M. Zeyrek Bogazici University, Istanbul, Turkey
I.O. Atakisi, E. G ¨ulmez, M. Kaya , O. Kaya , S. Ozkorucuklu , S. Tekten, E.A. Yetkin Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey
M.N. Agaras, A. Cakir, K. Cankocak, Y. Komurcu, 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
University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
F. Ball, J.J. Brooke, D. Burns, E. Clement, D. Cussans, O. Davignon, H. Flacher, J. Goldstein,G.P. Heath, H.F. Heath, L. Kreczko, D.M. Newbold , S. Paramesvaran, B. Penning, T. Sakuma,D. Smith, V.J. Smith, J. Taylor, A. Titterton Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom
K.W. Bell, A. Belyaev , C. Brew, R.M. Brown, D. Cieri, D.J.A. Cockerill, J.A. Coughlan,K. Harder, S. Harper, J. Linacre, E. Olaiya, D. Petyt, C.H. Shepherd-Themistocleous, A. Thea,I.R. Tomalin, T. Williams, W.J. Womersley Imperial College, London, United Kingdom
R. Bainbridge, P. Bloch, J. Borg, S. Breeze, O. Buchmuller, A. Bundock, D. Colling, P. Dauncey,G. Davies, M. Della Negra, R. Di Maria, G. Hall, G. Iles, T. James, M. Komm, C. Laner, L. Lyons,A.-M. Magnan, S. Malik, A. Martelli, J. Nash , A. Nikitenko , V. Palladino, M. Pesaresi,D.M. Raymond, A. Richards, A. Rose, E. Scott, C. Seez, A. Shtipliyski, G. Singh, M. Stoye,T. Strebler, S. Summers, A. Tapper, K. Uchida, T. Virdee , N. Wardle, D. Winterbottom,J. Wright, S.C. Zenz Brunel University, Uxbridge, United Kingdom
J.E. Cole, P.R. Hobson, A. Khan, P. Kyberd, C.K. Mackay, A. Morton, I.D. Reid, L. Teodorescu,S. Zahid
Baylor University, Waco, USA
K. Call, J. Dittmann, K. Hatakeyama, H. Liu, C. Madrid, B. McMaster, N. Pastika, C. Smith
Catholic University of America, Washington DC, USA
R. Bartek, A. Dominguez
The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, USA
A. Buccilli, S.I. Cooper, C. Henderson, P. Rumerio, C. West
Boston University, Boston, USA
D. Arcaro, T. Bose, D. Gastler, D. Pinna, D. Rankin, C. Richardson, J. Rohlf, L. Sulak, D. Zou
Brown University, Providence, USA
G. Benelli, X. Coubez, D. Cutts, M. Hadley, J. Hakala, U. Heintz, J.M. Hogan , K.H.M. Kwok,E. Laird, G. Landsberg, J. Lee, Z. Mao, M. Narain, S. Sagir , R. Syarif, E. Usai, D. Yu University of California, Davis, Davis, USA
R. Band, C. Brainerd, R. Breedon, D. Burns, M. Calderon De La Barca Sanchez, M. Chertok,J. Conway, R. Conway, P.T. Cox, R. Erbacher, C. Flores, G. Funk, W. Ko, O. Kukral, R. Lander,M. Mulhearn, D. Pellett, J. Pilot, S. Shalhout, M. Shi, D. Stolp, D. Taylor, K. Tos, M. Tripathi,Z. Wang, F. Zhang University of California, Los Angeles, USA
M. Bachtis, C. Bravo, R. Cousins, A. Dasgupta, A. Florent, J. Hauser, M. Ignatenko, N. Mccoll,S. Regnard, D. Saltzberg, C. Schnaible, V. Valuev
University of California, Riverside, Riverside, USA
E. Bouvier, K. Burt, R. Clare, J.W. Gary, S.M.A. Ghiasi Shirazi, G. Hanson, G. Karapostoli,E. Kennedy, F. Lacroix, O.R. Long, M. Olmedo Negrete, M.I. Paneva, W. Si, L. Wang, H. Wei,S. Wimpenny, B.R. Yates
University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, USA
J.G. Branson, P. Chang, S. Cittolin, M. Derdzinski, R. Gerosa, D. Gilbert, B. Hashemi,A. Holzner, D. Klein, G. Kole, V. Krutelyov, J. Letts, M. Masciovecchio, D. Olivito, S. Padhi,M. Pieri, M. Sani, V. Sharma, S. Simon, M. Tadel, A. Vartak, S. Wasserbaech , J. Wood,F. W ¨urthwein, A. Yagil, G. Zevi Della Porta University of California, Santa Barbara - Department of Physics, Santa Barbara, USA
N. Amin, R. Bhandari, C. Campagnari, M. Citron, V. Dutta, M. Franco Sevilla, L. Gouskos,R. Heller, J. Incandela, A. Ovcharova, H. Qu, J. Richman, D. Stuart, I. Suarez, S. Wang, J. Yoo
California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, USA
D. Anderson, A. Bornheim, J.M. Lawhorn, N. Lu, H.B. Newman, T.Q. Nguyen, M. Spiropulu,J.R. Vlimant, R. Wilkinson, S. Xie, Z. Zhang, R.Y. Zhu
Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, USA
M.B. Andrews, T. Ferguson, T. Mudholkar, M. Paulini, M. Sun, I. Vorobiev, M. Weinberg
University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, USA
J.P. Cumalat, W.T. Ford, F. Jensen, A. Johnson, E. MacDonald, T. Mulholland, R. Patel, A. Perloff,K. Stenson, K.A. Ulmer, S.R. Wagner
Cornell University, Ithaca, USA
J. Alexander, J. Chaves, Y. Cheng, J. Chu, A. Datta, K. Mcdermott, N. Mirman, J.R. Patterson,D. Quach, A. Rinkevicius, A. Ryd, L. Skinnari, L. Soffi, S.M. Tan, Z. Tao, J. Thom, J. Tucker,P. Wittich, M. Zientek
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, USA
S. Abdullin, M. Albrow, M. Alyari, G. Apollinari, A. Apresyan, A. Apyan, S. Banerjee,L.A.T. Bauerdick, A. Beretvas, J. Berryhill, P.C. Bhat, K. Burkett, J.N. Butler, A. Canepa,G.B. Cerati, H.W.K. Cheung, F. Chlebana, M. Cremonesi, J. Duarte, V.D. Elvira, J. Freeman,Z. Gecse, E. Gottschalk, L. Gray, D. Green, S. Gr ¨unendahl, O. Gutsche, J. Hanlon, R.M. Harris,S. Hasegawa, J. Hirschauer, Z. Hu, B. Jayatilaka, S. Jindariani, M. Johnson, U. Joshi, B. Klima,M.J. Kortelainen, B. Kreis, S. Lammel, D. Lincoln, R. Lipton, M. Liu, T. Liu, J. Lykken,K. Maeshima, J.M. Marraffino, D. Mason, P. McBride, P. Merkel, S. Mrenna, S. Nahn, V. O’Dell,K. Pedro, C. Pena, O. Prokofyev, G. Rakness, L. Ristori, A. Savoy-Navarro , B. Schneider,E. Sexton-Kennedy, A. Soha, W.J. Spalding, L. Spiegel, S. Stoynev, J. Strait, 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, L. Cadamuro, A. Carnes,D. Curry, R.D. Field, S.V. Gleyzer, B.M. Joshi, J. Konigsberg, A. Korytov, K.H. Lo, P. Ma,K. Matchev, H. Mei, G. Mitselmakher, D. Rosenzweig, K. Shi, D. Sperka, J. Wang, S. Wang,X. Zuo Florida International University, Miami, USA
Y.R. Joshi, S. Linn
Florida State University, Tallahassee, USA
A. Ackert, T. Adams, A. Askew, S. Hagopian, V. Hagopian, K.F. Johnson, T. Kolberg,G. Martinez, T. Perry, H. Prosper, A. Saha, C. Schiber, R. Yohay
Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne, USA
M.M. Baarmand, V. Bhopatkar, S. Colafranceschi, M. Hohlmann, D. Noonan, M. Rahmani,T. Roy, F. Yumiceva
University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC), Chicago, USA
M.R. Adams, L. Apanasevich, D. Berry, R.R. Betts, R. Cavanaugh, X. Chen, S. Dittmer,O. Evdokimov, C.E. Gerber, D.A. Hangal, D.J. Hofman, K. Jung, J. Kamin, C. Mills,I.D. Sandoval Gonzalez, M.B. Tonjes, H. Trauger, N. Varelas, H. Wang, X. Wang, Z. Wu, J. Zhang
The University of Iowa, Iowa City, USA
M. Alhusseini, B. Bilki , W. Clarida, K. Dilsiz , S. Durgut, R.P. Gandrajula, M. Haytmyradov,V. Khristenko, J.-P. Merlo, A. Mestvirishvili, A. Moeller, J. Nachtman, H. Ogul , Y. Onel,F. Ozok , A. Penzo, C. Snyder, E. Tiras, J. Wetzel Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA
B. Blumenfeld, A. Cocoros, N. Eminizer, D. Fehling, L. Feng, A.V. Gritsan, W.T. Hung,P. Maksimovic, J. Roskes, U. Sarica, M. Swartz, M. Xiao, C. You
The University of Kansas, Lawrence, USA
A. Al-bataineh, P. Baringer, A. Bean, S. Boren, J. Bowen, A. Bylinkin, J. Castle, S. Khalil,A. Kropivnitskaya, D. Majumder, W. Mcbrayer, M. Murray, C. Rogan, S. Sanders, E. Schmitz,J.D. Tapia Takaki, Q. Wang
Kansas State University, Manhattan, USA
S. Duric, A. Ivanov, K. Kaadze, D. Kim, Y. Maravin, D.R. Mendis, T. Mitchell, A. Modak,A. Mohammadi, L.K. Saini
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, USA
F. Rebassoo, D. Wright
University of Maryland, College Park, USA
A. Baden, O. Baron, A. Belloni, S.C. Eno, Y. Feng, C. Ferraioli, N.J. Hadley, S. Jabeen, G.Y. Jeng,R.G. Kellogg, J. Kunkle, A.C. Mignerey, S. Nabili, F. Ricci-Tam, Y.H. Shin, A. Skuja, S.C. Tonwar,K. Wong
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, USA
D. Abercrombie, B. Allen, V. Azzolini, A. Baty, G. Bauer, R. Bi, S. Brandt, W. Busza, I.A. Cali,M. D’Alfonso, Z. Demiragli, G. Gomez Ceballos, M. Goncharov, P. Harris, D. Hsu, M. Hu,Y. Iiyama, G.M. Innocenti, M. Klute, D. Kovalskyi, Y.-J. Lee, P.D. Luckey, B. Maier, A.C. Marini,C. Mcginn, C. Mironov, S. Narayanan, X. Niu, C. Paus, C. Roland, G. Roland, Z. Shi,G.S.F. Stephans, K. Sumorok, K. Tatar, D. Velicanu, J. Wang, T.W. Wang, B. Wyslouch
University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA
A.C. Benvenuti † , R.M. Chatterjee, A. Evans, P. Hansen, J. Hiltbrand, Sh. Jain, S. Kalafut,M. Krohn, Y. Kubota, Z. Lesko, J. Mans, N. Ruckstuhl, R. Rusack, M.A. Wadud University of Mississippi, Oxford, USA
J.G. Acosta, S. Oliveros University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, USA
E. Avdeeva, K. Bloom, D.R. Claes, C. Fangmeier, F. Golf, R. Gonzalez Suarez, R. Kamalieddin,I. Kravchenko, J. Monroy, J.E. Siado, G.R. Snow, B. Stieger
State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, USA
A. Godshalk, C. Harrington, I. Iashvili, A. Kharchilava, C. Mclean, D. Nguyen, A. Parker,S. Rappoccio, B. Roozbahani
Northeastern University, Boston, USA
G. Alverson, E. Barberis, C. Freer, Y. Haddad, A. Hortiangtham, D.M. Morse, T. Orimoto,R. Teixeira De Lima, T. Wamorkar, B. Wang, A. Wisecarver, D. Wood
Northwestern University, Evanston, USA
S. Bhattacharya, J. Bueghly, O. Charaf, K.A. Hahn, N. Mucia, N. Odell, M.H. Schmitt, K. Sung,M. Trovato, M. Velasco
University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, USA
R. Bucci, N. Dev, M. Hildreth, K. Hurtado Anampa, C. Jessop, D.J. Karmgard, N. Kellams,K. Lannon, W. Li, N. Loukas, N. Marinelli, F. Meng, C. Mueller, Y. Musienko , M. Planer,A. Reinsvold, R. Ruchti, P. Siddireddy, G. Smith, S. Taroni, M. Wayne, A. Wightman, M. Wolf,A. Woodard The Ohio State University, Columbus, USA
J. Alimena, L. Antonelli, B. Bylsma, L.S. Durkin, S. Flowers, B. Francis, C. Hill, W. Ji, T.Y. Ling,W. Luo, B.L. Winer
Princeton University, Princeton, USA
S. Cooperstein, P. Elmer, J. Hardenbrook, S. Higginbotham, A. Kalogeropoulos, D. Lange,M.T. Lucchini, J. Luo, D. Marlow, K. Mei, I. Ojalvo, J. Olsen, C. Palmer, P. Pirou´e, J. Salfeld-Nebgen, D. Stickland, C. Tully, Z. Wang
University of Puerto Rico, Mayaguez, USA
S. Malik, S. Norberg
Purdue University, West Lafayette, USA
A. Barker, V.E. Barnes, S. Das, L. Gutay, M. Jones, A.W. Jung, A. Khatiwada, B. Mahakud,D.H. Miller, N. Neumeister, C.C. Peng, S. Piperov, H. Qiu, J.F. Schulte, J. Sun, F. Wang, R. Xiao,W. Xie
Purdue University Northwest, Hammond, USA
T. Cheng, J. Dolen, N. Parashar
Rice University, Houston, USA
Z. Chen, K.M. Ecklund, S. Freed, F.J.M. Geurts, M. Kilpatrick, W. Li, B.P. Padley, R. Redjimi,J. Roberts, J. Rorie, W. Shi, Z. Tu, A. Zhang
University of Rochester, Rochester, USA
A. Bodek, P. de Barbaro, R. Demina, Y.t. Duh, J.L. Dulemba, C. Fallon, T. Ferbel, M. Galanti,A. Garcia-Bellido, J. Han, O. Hindrichs, A. Khukhunaishvili, E. Ranken, P. Tan, R. Taus
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Piscataway, USA
A. Agapitos, J.P. Chou, Y. Gershtein, E. Halkiadakis, A. Hart, M. Heindl, E. Hughes, S. Kaplan,R. Kunnawalkam Elayavalli, S. Kyriacou, A. Lath, R. Montalvo, K. Nash, M. Osherson, H. Saka,S. Salur, S. Schnetzer, D. Sheffield, S. Somalwar, R. Stone, S. Thomas, P. Thomassen, M. Walker University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA
A.G. Delannoy, J. Heideman, G. Riley, S. Spanier
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, T. Kamon , S. Luo, R. Mueller, D. Overton, L. Perni`e, D. Rathjens,A. Safonov Texas Tech University, Lubbock, USA
N. Akchurin, J. Damgov, F. De Guio, P.R. Dudero, S. Kunori, K. Lamichhane, S.W. Lee,T. Mengke, S. Muthumuni, T. Peltola, S. Undleeb, I. Volobouev, Z. Wang
Vanderbilt University, Nashville, USA
S. Greene, A. Gurrola, R. Janjam, W. Johns, C. Maguire, A. Melo, H. Ni, K. Padeken,J.D. Ruiz Alvarez, P. Sheldon, S. Tuo, J. Velkovska, M. Verweij, Q. Xu
University of Virginia, Charlottesville, USA
M.W. Arenton, P. Barria, B. Cox, R. Hirosky, M. Joyce, A. Ledovskoy, H. Li, C. Neu,T. Sinthuprasith, Y. Wang, E. Wolfe, F. Xia
Wayne State University, Detroit, USA
R. Harr, P.E. Karchin, N. Poudyal, J. Sturdy, P. Thapa, S. Zaleski
University of Wisconsin - Madison, Madison, WI, USA
M. Brodski, J. Buchanan, C. Caillol, D. Carlsmith, S. Dasu, I. De Bruyn, L. Dodd, B. Gomber,M. Grothe, M. Herndon, A. Herv´e, U. Hussain, P. Klabbers, A. Lanaro, K. Long, R. Loveless,T. Ruggles, A. Savin, V. Sharma, N. Smith, W.H. Smith, N. Woods † : Deceased1: Also at Vienna University of Technology, Vienna, Austria2: Also at IRFU, CEA, Universit´e Paris-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France3: Also at Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, Brazil4: Also at Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil5: Also at Universit´e Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium6: Also at University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China7: Also at Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia8: Also at Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia9: Also at Suez University, Suez, Egypt10: Now at British University in Egypt, Cairo, Egypt11: Also at Zewail City of Science and Technology, Zewail, Egypt12: Also at Department of Physics, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia13: Also at Universit´e de Haute Alsace, Mulhouse, France14: Also at Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics, Lomonosov Moscow State University,Moscow, Russia15: Also at Tbilisi State University, Tbilisi, Georgia16: Also at CERN, European Organization for Nuclear Research, Geneva, Switzerland17: Also at RWTH Aachen University, III. Physikalisches Institut A, Aachen, Germany18: Also at University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany19: Also at Brandenburg University of Technology, Cottbus, Germany20: Also at Institute of Physics, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary21: Also at Institute of Nuclear Research ATOMKI, Debrecen, Hungary22: Also at MTA-ELTE Lend ¨ulet CMS Particle and Nuclear Physics Group, E ¨otv ¨os Lor´andUniversity, Budapest, Hungary
23: Also at Indian Institute of Technology Bhubaneswar, Bhubaneswar, India24: Also at Institute of Physics, Bhubaneswar, India25: Also at Shoolini University, Solan, India26: Also at University of Visva-Bharati, Santiniketan, India27: Also at Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, Iran28: Also at Plasma Physics Research Center, Science and Research Branch, Islamic AzadUniversity, Tehran, Iran29: Also at Universit`a degli Studi di Siena, Siena, Italy30: Also at Scuola Normale e Sezione dell’INFN, Pisa, Italy31: Also at Kyunghee University, Seoul, Korea32: Also at International Islamic University of Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia33: Also at Malaysian Nuclear Agency, MOSTI, Kajang, Malaysia34: Also at Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnolog´ıa, Mexico city, Mexico35: Also at Warsaw University of Technology, Institute of Electronic Systems, Warsaw, Poland36: Also at Institute for Nuclear Research, Moscow, Russia37: Now at National Research Nuclear University ’Moscow Engineering Physics Institute’(MEPhI), Moscow, Russia38: Also at St. Petersburg State Polytechnical University, St. Petersburg, Russia39: Also at University of Florida, Gainesville, USA40: Also at P.N. Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia41: Also at California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, USA42: Also at Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics, Novosibirsk, Russia43: Also at Faculty of Physics, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia44: Also at INFN Sezione di Pavia a , Universit`a di Pavia b , Pavia, Italy45: Also at University of Belgrade, Faculty of Physics and Vinca Institute of Nuclear Sciences,Belgrade, Serbia46: Also at National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece47: Also at Riga Technical University, Riga, Latvia48: Also at Universit¨at Z ¨urich, Zurich, Switzerland49: Also at Stefan Meyer Institute for Subatomic Physics (SMI), Vienna, Austria50: Also at Gaziosmanpasa University, Tokat, Turkey51: Also at Istanbul Aydin University, Istanbul, Turkey52: Also at Mersin University, Mersin, Turkey53: Also at Piri Reis University, Istanbul, Turkey54: Also at Adiyaman University, Adiyaman, Turkey55: Also at Ozyegin University, Istanbul, Turkey56: Also at Izmir Institute of Technology, Izmir, Turkey57: Also at Marmara University, Istanbul, Turkey58: Also at Kafkas University, Kars, Turkey59: Also at Istanbul University, Faculty of Science, Istanbul, Turkey60: Also at Istanbul Bilgi University, Istanbul, Turkey61: Also at Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey62: Also at Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom63: Also at School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Southampton, Southampton,United Kingdom64: Also at Monash University, Faculty of Science, Clayton, Australia65: Also at Bethel University, St. Paul, USA66: Also at Karamano ˘glu Mehmetbey University, Karaman, Turkey67: Also at Utah Valley University, Orem, USA3