Search for single production of a heavy vector-like T quark decaying to a Higgs boson and a top quark with a lepton and jets in the final state
EEUROPEAN ORGANIZATION FOR NUCLEAR RESEARCH (CERN)
CERN-EP/2016-2792017/05/25
CMS-B2G-15-008
Search for single production of a heavy vector-like T quarkdecaying to a Higgs boson and a top quark with a leptonand jets in the final state
The CMS Collaboration ∗ Abstract
A search for single production of vector-like top quark partners (T) decaying into aHiggs boson and a top quark is performed using data from pp collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV collected by the CMS experiment at the CERN LHC, corre-sponding to an integrated luminosity of 2.3 fb − . The top quark decay includes anelectron or a muon while the Higgs boson decays into a pair of b quarks. No signif-icant excess over standard model backgrounds is observed. Exclusion limits on theproduct of the production cross section and the branching fraction are derived in theT quark mass range 700 to 1800 GeV. For a mass of 1000 GeV, values of the productof the production cross section and the branching fraction greater than 0.8 and 0.7 pbare excluded at 95% confidence level, assuming left- and right-handed coupling ofthe T quark to standard model particles, respectively. This is the first analysis set-ting exclusion limits on the cross section of singly produced vector-like T quarks at acentre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV. Published in Physics Letters B as doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2017.05.019. c (cid:13) ∗ See Appendix A for the list of collaboration members a r X i v : . [ h e p - e x ] M a y Over the past decades several theoretical models have been formulated trying to give new in-sights into electroweak symmetry breaking and the mechanisms that stabilise the mass of theHiggs boson. Many of these models predict the existence of heavy vector-like quarks. Exam-ples are little Higgs models [1–3], models with extra dimensions [4, 5], and composite Higgsboson models [6–10].The distinctive property of vector-like quarks is that their left- and right-handed componentstransform in the same way under the electroweak symmetry group SU ( ) L × U ( ) Y of the stan-dard model (SM). As a consequence, vector-like quarks can obtain mass through direct massterms in the Lagrangian of the form m ψψ , unlike the SM chiral quarks, which obtain massthrough Yukawa coupling.The discovery of a Higgs boson by the ATLAS [11] and CMS [12, 13] Collaborations and theelectroweak fits within the framework of the SM [14] strongly disfavour the existence of afourth generation of chiral fermions. Given the limited impact that vector-like quarks have onthe properties of the SM Higgs boson, they are not similarly constrained [15].This letter presents the results of the first search for singly produced vector-like top quarkpartners with charge + √ s =
13 TeV. Single productionis of particular interest, since its rate dominates over the rate of pair production at large quarkmasses. Many of the models mentioned above predict that the T quark will predominantlydecay to third-generation SM quarks via three channels: tH, tZ, and bW [15]. Searches for Tquarks have been performed by the ATLAS and CMS Collaborations setting lower limits onthe T quark mass ranging from 715 to 950 GeV for various T quark branching fractions [16–22].While most of the past searches considered pair production of the T quarks via the stronginteraction, the single production mode where the T quark is produced via the weak interactionhas recently been investigated by the ATLAS Collaboration [16, 19, 20] at 8 TeV, and is targetedin this letter. The strength of the T quark coupling to electroweak bosons has an effect bothon the cross section and the width of the T quark [23]. There are no a priori constraints onthe electroweak T quark coupling. Therefore, not only the general coupling to the electroweaksector but the couplings of the T quark to bW, tZ, and tH can also take arbitrary values. Thepresent analysis targets decays of the T quark into a Higgs boson and a top quark. It willbe sensitive to the existence of a T quark only if sufficiently large couplings to bW or tZ arepresent as well, since the T quark production through a Higgs boson is strongly suppressed.An example of a Feynman diagram for this process is shown in Fig. 1.The analysis is performed on the proton-proton collision data collected during 2015 by theCMS experiment at the CERN LHC at √ s =
13 TeV. The search is optimised for decays ofthe T quark into a Higgs boson and a top quark, where the top quark decay includes a lepton(electron or muon) and the Higgs boson is required to decay into b quarks. For a T quark massin the TeV range, the Higgs boson and the top quark obtain large Lorentz boosts leading tomerged jets and nonisolated leptons in the final state. Jet substructure analysis in combinationwith algorithms for the identification of b quark jets (b tagging) can efficiently identify boosteddecays of the Higgs boson into b quark pairs [22]. An additional distinctive feature of thesignal is the presence of a jet in the regions close to the beam pipe, a so-called forward jet.This jet results from the light-flavour quark that is produced in association with the T quark.Background processes due to top quark pair production are dominant, followed by W+jets andquantum chromodynamics (QCD) multijet processes.For every event, a T quark candidate four-momentum is reconstructed, with mass M T . Events W/Z Tqg q Htb/t
Figure 1: Feynman diagram of the production and decay mechanisms of a vector-like T quark,as targeted in this analysis.are selected by imposing requirements on the T quark candidate and other attributes of theevent. The M T variable is used as the final discriminant in a combined signal plus backgroundfit to the data. The shape of the total background is estimated from a signal-depleted region inthe recorded data. The central feature of the CMS apparatus is a superconducting solenoid of 6 m internal dia-meter, providing a magnetic field of 3.8 T. Within the solenoid volume are a silicon pixel andstrip tracker, a lead tungstate crystal electromagnetic calorimeter (ECAL), and a brass and scin-tillator hadron calorimeter (HCAL), each composed of a barrel and two endcap sections. For-ward calorimeters extend the coverage provided by the barrel and endcap detectors to regionsclose to the beam pipe. Muons are measured in gas-ionisation detectors embedded in the steelflux-return yoke outside the solenoid. A more detailed description of the CMS detector, to-gether with a definition of the coordinate system used and the relevant kinematic variables,can be found in Ref. [24].A particle-flow (PF) algorithm [25, 26] is used to combine information from all CMS subdetec-tors in order to reconstruct and identify individual particles in the event: photons, electrons,muons, and charged and neutral hadrons. The energy of photons is directly obtained from theECAL measurement. The energy of electrons is determined from a combination of the elec-tron momentum at the primary interaction vertex determined by the tracker, the energy of thecorresponding ECAL cluster, and the energy sum of all bremsstrahlung photons spatially com-patible with originating from the electron track. The momentum resolution for electrons withtransverse momentum p T ≈
45 GeV and above from Z → ee decays ranges from 1.7% for non-showering electrons in the barrel region to 4.5% for showering electrons in the endcaps [27].Muons are measured in the pseudorapidity range | η | < p T resolution of 1.2–2.0% formuons with 20 < p T <
100 GeV in the barrel and better than 6% in the endcaps. The p T resolu-tion in the barrel is better than 10% for muons with p T up to 1 TeV [28]. The energy of chargedhadrons is determined from a combination of their momentum measured in the tracker andthe matching of ECAL and HCAL energy deposits, corrected for the response function of thecalorimeters to hadronic showers. Finally, the energy of neutral hadrons is obtained from thecorresponding corrected ECAL and HCAL energy. Jets are reconstructed from the individual particles identified by the PF event algorithm, clus-tered by the anti- k t algorithm [29, 30]. Two different jet sizes are used independently: jets witha size parameter of 0.4 (“AK4 jets”) and 0.8 (“AK8 jets”). Jet momentum is determined as thevector sum of the charged particle momenta in the jet that are identified as originating fromthe primary interaction vertex, and the neutral particle momenta. An area-based correctionis applied to jet energies to take into account the contribution from additional proton-protoninteractions within the same or adjacent bunch crossings (“pileup”) [31]. The energy of a jetis found from simulation to be within 5–10% of the true jet momentum at particle level overthe entire p T spectrum and detector acceptance. Jet energy corrections are derived from simula-tion, and are confirmed with in situ measurements of the energy balance in dijet and photon+jetevents [32]. A smearing of the jet energy is applied to simulated events to mimic detector reso-lution effects observed in data. For the identification of b jets, the combined secondary vertex btagging algorithm is used [33]. The algorithm uses information from secondary b hadron decayvertices to distinguish b jets from other jet flavours. The jet energy resolution is typically 15%at 10 GeV, 8% at 100 GeV, and 4% at 1 TeV. Jets are reconstructed up to | η | = | η | < (cid:126) p missT is defined as the negative vector sum of the p T of all PF particle candidates in an event. Its magnitude is referred to as E missT . Events in the electron channel are selected using an electron trigger, which requires an electronwith p T >
45 GeV and the additional presence of at least two jets, with p T >
200 GeV and50 GeV, respectively for the jets with the highest and second highest p T . Events in the muonchannel are collected with a single-muon trigger, requiring the presence of a muon candidatewith p T >
45 GeV and | η | < L = − , while the electron triggerprovides a luminosity L = − .Signal samples are generated using M AD G RAPH MC @ NLO
POWHEG AD G RAPH MC @ NLO at NLO accuracy is used to generate samplesof single top quarks in the s- and t-channels. The generation of the W+jets and Z+jets events isperformed at LO with the M AD G RAPH MC @ NLO , with up to four partons included in the matrix element calculations, matched to parton showers using the so-called MLM scheme [39].All samples are interfaced with
PYTHIA
PYTHIA for both matrix element and showering descriptions.All samples are generated using NNPDF 3.0 [43] parton distribution functions (PDFs) either atLO or at NLO, to match the precision of the matrix element calculation. The effects of pileupare simulated in all samples by adding simulated minimum bias events to the hard scatteringprocess, according to a distribution having an average multiplicity of 11 collisions per bunchcrossing, as observed in data.All events are processed through a full simulation of the CMS detector using G
EANT
Primary vertices are reconstructed using a deterministic annealing filtering algorithm [46]. Theleading vertex of the event is defined as the one with the largest sum of squared p T of associatedtracks. Its position is reconstructed using an adaptive vertex fit [47] and is required to be within24 cm in the z direction and 2 cm in the x - y plane of the nominal interaction point.Events are required to have at least one lepton. For large T quark masses, the top quark fromthe T → tH decay has a significant Lorentz boost causing its products to be approximatelycollinear. Thus as the lepton is not isolated from the b quark jet (“b jet”), no conventionalisolation requirement (i.e. requiring the energy deposited in a cone around the lepton to besmall) is applied. In order to suppress QCD multijet events with a lepton (electron or muon)contained within an AK4 jet, the selection criteria ∆ R ( (cid:96) , j ) > p relT ( (cid:96) , j ) >
40 GeV areapplied, where (cid:96) indicates the lepton and j indicates the AK4 jet with lowest angular separationfrom the lepton. The angular distance is defined as ∆ R = √ ( ∆ η ) + ( ∆ φ ) , where ∆ φ ( ∆ η ) isthe difference in azimuthal angle (pseudorapidity) between the AK4 jet and the lepton, and p relT is the projection of the three-momentum of the lepton onto a plane perpendicular to the jet axis.In addition to this selection, electrons (muons) must have p T >
50 (47) GeV and | η | < ( ) ,to fall within a region where the trigger efficiency is constant. In the case of more than onereconstructed lepton in the given channel, only the lepton with the highest p T is used in theevaluation of physics quantities needed for this analysis and shown in the plots below. Thelepton isolation and trigger selection efficiencies are measured in the data and simulation as afunction of η and p T of the lepton and are found to agree within their uncertainties.All AK4 jets are required to have p T >
30 GeV. If a selected lepton is found within a coneof ∆ R ( j , (cid:96) ) < | η | > p T is required to exceed 250 (70) GeV in the electron channel and100 (50) GeV in the muon channel. The different p T thresholds for the two channels are due tothe tighter criteria of the electron trigger, which selects events with two high- p T jets (Section 3).Since the decay of a heavy T quark would produce high-energy final-state particles, all eventsare required to have S T >
400 GeV, where S T is defined as the scalar sum over E missT , the p T ofthe lepton and the transverse momenta of all selected AK4 jets in the event.The AK8 jets are required to have p T >
200 GeV and | η | < β =
0, softthreshold z cut < R = angle radiation from the jet. Subjets of AK8 jets are identified in the last reclustering step ofthe soft-drop algorithm. The soft-drop jet mass scale and resolution have been estimated usinga tt control region. This control region is defined by the baseline selection (see below) andadditionally requiring two b-tagged AK4 jets as well as the N-subjettiness ratio τ / τ to besmaller than 0.4 [50, 51] for the Higgs boson candidate (see below). The mass scale is found tobe compatible between data and simulation within uncertainties. A degradation of the jet massresolution of 10% is applied in the simulation to match the resolution found in the data.For the identification of b jets, the combined secondary vertex b tagging algorithm is used.In this analysis, it is only applied to the final two soft-drop subjets of AK8 jets. A workingpoint that typically yields b tagging efficiencies of approximately 80% and misidentificationrates from light-flavour jets of about 10% in tt events [33] is chosen. The b tagging of subjetsresults in a better performance compared to the b tagging of AK4 jets in tt events, reducing themisidentification rate at the working point by a factor of approximately two.In order to identify decays of the boosted Higgs boson to b quark pairs (H tagging) [22], thesoft-drop mass of the jet, M H , is required to be within 90 < M H <
160 GeV. At least one Higgsboson candidate is required to be present and to have an angular separation of ∆ R ( H, (cid:96) ) > x and y components of (cid:126) p missT , the lepton four-momentum, and the nominal mass of the W boson(80.4 GeV), [52] the z component of the neutrino momentum is reconstructed by solving a qua-dratic equation, resulting in up to two solutions. If a complex solution is obtained, only thereal part is used. Combining the four-momenta of these neutrino hypotheses and the lepton,up to two W boson candidates are obtained. Each W boson candidate is paired to every centralAK4 jet in the event, giving a number of reconstruction hypotheses for the top quark. In or-der to accommodate final-state radiation from the top quark, further top quark reconstructionhypotheses are found by the addition of one more AK4 jet, such that one top quark candidateis established for every single AK4 jet and every possible combination of two AK4 jets. The btagging information is not used in the top quark reconstruction.Top quark and Higgs boson candidates are combined into pairs. Combinations are rejected ifany AK4 jet ( j t ) of the top quark candidate overlaps with the Higgs boson candidate within ∆ R ( j t , H ) < χ value is used in the following analysis, where the χ function is defined as follows: χ = (cid:18) M H,MC − M H σ M H ,MC (cid:19) + (cid:18) M t,MC − M t σ M t ,MC (cid:19) + (cid:18) ∆ R ( t, H ) MC − ∆ R ( t, H ) σ ∆ R ,MC (cid:19) .Here, M denotes the mass of a candidate, and the H and t subscripts stand for the Higgs bo-son and top quark candidates, respectively. The “MC” subscript denotes that a quantity isderived from the signal simulation, using the correct pairing of the reconstructed objects basedon Monte Carlo information. Other quantities are obtained from the pair of top quark andHiggs boson candidates.After event reconstruction, the selection is further refined by requiring a large separation of ∆ R ( t, H ) > p T >
100 GeV.
The selection criteria described above define the “baseline selection”. Distributions of somerelevant variables after the baseline selection are shown in Figs. 2 and 3. The backgroundcontributions are estimated from simulated events. The hypothetical signal is scaled to a crosssection of 20 pb as indicated in the legend of the figure. The simulated background events anddata are found to be in agreement. / GeV T lepton p E v en t s / G e V (13 TeV) -1 CMS
Electronchannel (GeV) T Electron p M CD a t a - M C - Data tH (20pb) fi (1700) lh T tH (20pb) fi (1200) lh T tH (20pb) fi (700) lh TTot. uncert. MCttW+jetsSingle tZ+jetsMultijet / GeV T lepton p E v en t s / G e V (13 TeV) -1 CMS
Muonchannel (GeV) T Muon p M CD a t a - M C - Data tH (20pb) fi (1700) lh T tH (20pb) fi (1200) lh T tH (20pb) fi (700) lh TTot. uncert. MCttW+jetsSingle tZ+jetsMultijet / GeV T S
500 1000 1500 2000 2500 E v en t s / G e V (13 TeV) -1 CMS
Electronchannel (GeV) T S
500 1000 1500 2000 2500 M CD a t a - M C - Data tH (20pb) fi (1700) lh T tH (20pb) fi (1200) lh T tH (20pb) fi (700) lh TTot. uncert. MCttW+jetsSingle tZ+jetsMultijet
H candidate mass / GeV
50 100 150 200 250 E v en t s / G e V (13 TeV) -1 CMS
Muonchannel
H candidate mass (GeV)
50 100 150 200 250 M CD a t a - M C - Data tH (20pb) fi (1700) lh T tH (20pb) fi (1200) lh T tH (20pb) fi (700) lh TTot. uncert. MCttW+jetsSingle tZ+jetsMultijet
Figure 2: Distributions of kinematic variables after baseline selection. Electron and muon p T distributions are depicted in the upper-left and upper-right panels. The lower-left panel shows S T in the electron channel while the soft-drop mass of the Higgs boson candidate in the muonchannel is depicted in the lower right. The different background contributions are shown usingfull histograms while the open histograms are signal yields and the data are shown as solid cir-cles. The hatched bands represent the statistical and systematic uncertainties of the simulatedevent samples. The systematic uncertainties include those discussed in Section 6, except theforward jet uncertainty. Signal cross sections are enhanced to 20 pb.After the baseline selection, two event categories are defined. The signal region is used forsignal extraction and is defined by requiring that both soft-drop subjets of the Higgs bosoncandidate are b tagged and that there is at least one forward jet. The “control region” for back-ground estimation is defined by requiring the absence of forward jets and that exactly one ofthe soft-drop subjets of the Higgs boson candidates is b tagged. In addition, two validation re-gions with zero subjet b-tags, “region A” and “region B”, are defined. These validation regionsare used to cross-check the background estimation method as described in Section 5. The eventselection criteria of all regions are summarised in Table 1. lept. top mass / GeV
100 150 200 250 300 350 E v en t s / G e V (13 TeV) -1 CMS
Muonchannel t quark candidate mass (GeV)
100 150 200 250 300 350 M CD a t a - M C - Data tH (20pb) fi (1700) lh T tH (20pb) fi (1200) lh T tH (20pb) fi (700) lh TTot. uncert. MCttW+jetsSingle tZ+jetsMultijet / GeV T lept. top p E v en t s / G e V (13 TeV) -1 CMS
Muonchannel (GeV) T t quark candidate p M CD a t a - M C - Data tH (20pb) fi (1700) lh T tH (20pb) fi (1200) lh T tH (20pb) fi (700) lh TTot. uncert. MCttW+jetsSingle tZ+jetsMultijet
Figure 3: Mass (left) and p T (right) distributions of the reconstructed top quark candidate in themuon channel after the baseline selection. The different background contributions are shownusing full histograms while the open histograms are signal yields and the data are shown assolid circles. The hatched bands represent the statistical and systematic uncertainties of thesimulated event samples. The systematic uncertainties include those discussed in Section 6,except the forward jet uncertainty. Signal cross sections are enhanced to 20 pb.Table 1: Event selection criteria: required number of b tagged subjets for the Higgs bosoncandidate, and number of forward jets. Validation ValidationRegion Signal region Control region region A region BSubjet b tags (H candidate) exactly 2 exactly 1 exactly 0 exactly 0Forward jets at least 1 exactly 0 exactly 0 at least 1The T quark candidate is reconstructed from the sum of the Higgs boson and the top quarkcandidate four-momenta. The M T is used as the discriminating variable in the limit settingprocedure. Figure 4 shows the simulated signal and background distributions of M T in thesignal region. In the electron (muon) channel 35 (134) data events are selected, as summarisedin Table 2 along with the event yields and selection efficiencies for three of the signal samples.The signal selection efficiency is depicted as a function of the generated T quark mass in Fig. 5.The denominator of the efficiency includes all decay modes of the top quark and the Higgsboson, i.e. the product of the branching fractions for the top quark decaying to final states in-cluding a lepton, and the Higgs boson decaying to bottom quarks, amounting to approximately8%, is included in the signal selection efficiency. The selection efficiency is notably larger forthe right-handed signal samples, because of the harder p T spectrum of leptons stemming fromright-handed T quarks, and the presence of additional leptons from the associated top quarkproduction. The combined shape of the M T distribution of all background processes is provided by the datain the control region. It is used together with the simulated signal distribution in a fit of signalplus background distributions to the observed data. The normalization of the backgrounddistribution is estimated in the fit.Figure 6 shows the reconstructed mass of the T quark candidates in the control region, where T quark candidate mass (GeV) E v en t s / G e V tH (1pb) fi (1700) lh T tH (1pb) fi (1200) lh T tH (1pb) fi (700) lh TTot. uncert. MCttW+jetsSingle tZ+jetsMultijet (13 TeV) -1 CMS
Simulation
Electronchannel
T quark candidate mass (GeV) E v en t s / G e V tH (1pb) fi (1700) lh T tH (1pb) fi (1200) lh T tH (1pb) fi (700) lh TTot. uncert. MCttW+jetsSingle tZ+jetsMultijet (13 TeV) -1 CMS
Simulation
Muonchannel
Figure 4: Vector-like T quark candidate mass in the signal region for the electron (left) andmuon (right) channels. The different background contributions are shown using full his-tograms while the open histograms are signal yields and the data are shown as solid circles.The hatched bands represent the statistical and systematic uncertainties of the simulated eventsamples. The systematic uncertainties include those discussed in Section 6.Table 2: Number of selected events N sel and selection efficiency (cid:101) sel for the signal region includ-ing both statistical (stat) and systematic (sys) uncertainties. For the background, the post-fitvalue (as described in Sections 5 and 7) is quoted. The left- (right-) handed T quark productionin association with a bottom (top) quark is denoted by a subscript lh (rh) and following b (t).All signal samples are normalized to a cross section of 1 pb, i.e. the product of the branchingfractions for the top quark decaying to final states including a lepton, and the Higgs bosondecaying to bottom quarks, amounting to approximately 8%, is included in the signal selectionefficiency. Electron channel Muon channel N sel ± stat ± sys (cid:101) sel ( % ) N sel ± stat ± sys (cid:101) sel ( % ) T lh (700) b 1.2 ± ± ± ± lh (1200) b 14.4 ± ± ± ± lh (1700) b 15.3 ± ± ± ± rh (700) t 6.4 ± ± ± ± rh (1200) t 20.3 ± ± ± ± rh (1700) t 21.7 ± ± ± ± N sel ± stat ± fit N sel ± stat ± fitBackground (post-fit) 34.8 ± ± ± ± T quark mass (GeV) ( % ) s e l . ˛ t+X (mu. ch.) rh T fi pp b+X (mu. ch.) lh T fi pp t+X (ele. ch.) rh T fi pp b+X (ele. ch.) lh T fi pp (13 TeV) CMS
Simulation
Figure 5: Selection efficiency (cid:101) sel for the signal, i.e. the product of the branching fractions forthe top quark decaying to final states including a lepton, and the Higgs boson decaying tobottom quarks, amounting to approximately 8%, is included in the signal selection efficiency.Left-handed (denoted by lh) and right-handed (denoted by rh) couplings of the T quark toSM particles in associated production with bottom and top quarks, respectively, are shownseparately.comparison of the M T distribution between the signal and control regions in simulated events,as shown in Fig. 7. The compatibility of the distributions is evaluated with a χ test [53], includ-ing the statistical uncertainties of the simulation as weights in the test. The p-values obtained inthe electron and muon channels are 0.22 and 0.09, respectively. Therefore, the M T distributionsare assumed to be compatible in the signal and control regions. In addition Fig. 7 shows fur-ther cross checks using zero subjet b tags on the Higgs boson candidate, thereby enriching thecontribution of the W+jets and QCD backgrounds. Also these regions are in good agreement.The aforementioned shape comparison is repeated for systematic uncertainties that can changethe shape of the M T distribution in either the signal or the control region. These are the jetenergy scale and resolution uncertainties, as well as uncertainties in the b tag status of a Higgsboson candidate subjet. Background cross sections are varied by twice their uncertainty, exceptfor the multijet background, which is varied by half the estimated value. Each variation in asystematic uncertainty is applied consistently in both regions.The compatibility between the validation regions and the control region is also checked in data,as shown in Fig. 8. Agreement between the corresponding regions is observed in all cases.In the control region, 632 (2949) events are selected in the electron (muon) channel. Theserelatively large numbers of events ensure that the statistical uncertainty is negligible comparedto that in the signal region. In Fig. 9 the background estimate is shown with the distribution of M T in data. Sources of systematic uncertainty may influence the rate and shape of the signal predictionsas well as the shape of the background distribution. The background shape uncertainty istaken as the uncertainty in each bin of the distribution of its estimate. Note that there is norate uncertainty associated with the background prediction described in Section 5, since itsnormalization is not used to obtain the final results. In the above figures, several rate and T quark mass / GeV E v en t s / G e V (13 TeV) -1 CMS
Electronchannel
T quark candidate mass (GeV) M CD a t a - M C - Data tH (20pb) fi (1700) lh T tH (20pb) fi (1200) lh T tH (20pb) fi (700) lh TTot. uncert. MCttW+jetsSingle tZ+jetsMultijet
T quark mass / GeV E v en t s / G e V (13 TeV) -1 CMS
Muonchannel
T quark candidate mass (GeV) M CD a t a - M C - Data tH (20pb) fi (1700) lh T tH (20pb) fi (1200) lh T tH (20pb) fi (700) lh TTot. uncert. MCttW+jetsSingle tZ+jetsMultijet
Figure 6: Vector-like T quark candidate mass in the control region for the electron (left) andmuon (right) channels. Signal samples are normalized to 20 pb, which is a factor of 20 largerthan what is used in Figure 4. The shape of the data distribution provides the background esti-mate. The different background contributions are shown using full histograms while the openhistogram are signal yields and the data are shown as solid circles. The hatched bands repre-sent the statistical and systematic uncertainties of the simulated event samples. The systematicuncertainties include those discussed in Section 6, except the forward jet uncertainty.
T quark candidate mass (GeV) A r b i t r a r y un i t s (13 TeV) CMS
Simulation
Electronchannel
T quark candidate mass (GeV) b k g S i g - b k g - Signal regionRegion ARegion BStat. uncert. bkg.Control region
T quark candidate mass (GeV) A r b i t r a r y un i t s (13 TeV) CMS
Simulation
Muonchannel
T quark candidate mass (GeV) b k g S i g - b k g - Signal regionRegion ARegion BStat. uncert. bkg.Control region
Figure 7: Shape comparison of the T quark candidate mass distributions in the signal (violetsolid line) and control (shaded histogram) regions as well as the validation regions A (dark bluedashed line) and B (light blue dashed line) for the electron (left) and muon (right) channels.The distributions show the sum of all simulated backgrounds, with the statistical uncertaintiesindicated as the error bars (signal region) or the hatched band (control region). T quark candidate mass (GeV) A r b i t r a r y un i t s (13 TeV) -1 CMS
Electronchannel
T quark candidate mass (GeV) b k g S i g - b k g - Region A (data)Region B (data)Control region (data)Stat. uncert. CR
T quark candidate mass (GeV) A r b i t r a r y un i t s (13 TeV) -1 CMS
Muonchannel
T quark candidate mass (GeV) b k g S i g - b k g - Region A (data)Region B (data)Control region (data)Stat. uncert. CR
Figure 8: Shape comparison of the T quark candidate mass distributions in the control region(shaded histogram) regions and the validation regions A (green) and B (blue) for the electron(left) and muon (right) channels in data.
T quark mass / GeV E v en t s / G e V (13 TeV) -1 CMS
Electronchannel
T quark candidate mass (GeV) M CD a t a - M C Data tH (1pb) fi (1700) lh T tH (1pb) fi (1200) lh T tH (1pb) fi (700) lh TStat. uncert. bkg.Bkg. post-fit
T quark mass / GeV E v en t s / G e V (13 TeV) -1 CMS
Muonchannel
T quark candidate mass (GeV) M CD a t a - M C Data tH (1pb) fi (1700) lh T tH (1pb) fi (1200) lh T tH (1pb) fi (700) lh TStat. uncert. bkg.Bkg. post-fit
Figure 9: Final background, data, and expected signal distributions in M T in the signal regionfor the electron (left) and muon (right) channels. The hatched uncertainty band shows thestatistical uncertainty in the background prediction, which is used as the shape uncertainty inthe fit, as detailed in Section 6. The normalization of the background estimate is taken from thefit, its uncertainty is 12% (not included in the hatched uncertainty band). shape uncertainties are considered, for the simulations of both the signal and the background.The one with the largest effect on the final result originates from the uncertainty in the forwardjet selection efficiency. The next largest contributions arise from the uncertainties in the b tagefficiency and jet energy corrections. The impacts of the systematic uncertainties on the eventrates are listed in Table 3.Table 3: Impacts of the largest systematic uncertainties in the signal event yields. The signalsamples for T lh b production are shown. The uncertainties in the forward jet, and lepton iso-lation and trigger are rate uncertainties, all other uncertainties are evaluated bin-by-bin. Allvalues are reported as percentage of the signal event yield.Electron channel Muon channelT lh ( ) T lh ( ) T lh ( ) T lh ( ) T lh ( ) T lh ( ) b tagging, heavy flavour 7.8 7.6 8.7 6.0 7.5 8.5b tagging, light flavour 0.7 0.7 0.5 1.2 0.6 0.7Forward jet 15 15 15 15 15 15Jet energy resolution 7.0 0.6 0.2 0.2 2.3 0.9Jet energy scale 9.0 4.2 4.9 3.8 3.8 4.4Lepton isolation and trigger 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0Soft-drop mass 3.1 1.1 0.3 0.5 0.3 1.3PDF 4.8 2.7 4.2 4.8 2.8 4.1Luminosity 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7 2.7Pileup 1.4 0.6 0.1 1.3 0.7 1.1Scale factors for the b tagging efficiency are applied to simulated events to match the b taggingperformance observed in data [33]. The scale factors have a systematic uncertainty of 2–5%for jets originating from b hadrons, 4–10% for c quark jets and 7–10% for light-flavour jets, alldepending on the p T of the jet. Those uncertainties are propagated to the final result, wherethe uncertainties for heavy-flavour (b and c) jets and light-flavour (u, d, s, g) jets are treatedas correlated within their group, but the uncertainties for heavy-flavour jets are assumed to beuncorrelated with those for light-flavour jets.Jet energy scale and resolution corrections depend on the jet p T and η . The associated uncer-tainties are typically a few percent. The resulting uncertainty in the signal yield is derived byapplying the ± σ variations simultaneously to AK4 and AK8 jets and also propagating thevariation of jet momenta into the calculation of E missT at the same time. The ± σ variations forthe resolution smearing in the soft-drop mass are evaluated separately. Additionally, as thereconstruction efficiency of forward jets has been observed to be larger in the simulation com-pared to the data, a rate uncertainty of ±
15% is assigned to the signal samples. This uncertaintyis determined by evaluating the event selection efficiency using forward jets in two control re-gions requiring an event to be selected by the baseline selection and additionally having eitherzero subjet b tags or exactly one, in association with the H boson candidate. The central regionis well modelled by the simulation.To estimate the uncertainty in the pileup simulation, a variation of ±
5% in the inelastic crosssection value [54], controlling the average pileup multiplicity, is used. The uncertainty in theluminosity measurement is ± ∆ R ( (cid:96) , j ) or p relT ( (cid:96) , j ) ) selection efficiency has a rate uncertainty of ± No significant deviation is observed from the shape predicted by the SM (see Fig. 9). The p-values of the compatibility tests between the predicted and observed distributions are 0.97 and0.51 in the electron and muon channels, respectively.Exclusion limits are set on the product of the production cross section and the branching frac-tion for single production of a vector-like T quark decaying to a top quark and a Higgs bo-son. The 95% confidence level (CL) exclusion limits are derived with a Bayesian statisticalmethod [57, 58], where background and signal templates in the M T distribution are used tomake a combined fit to the data in the electron and muon channels. Systematic uncertaintiesare included as nuisance parameters. For rate-only uncertainties a log-normal prior is assigned.A flat prior is used for the signal strength. Shape uncertainties in the signal templates are takeninto account using template morphing with cubic-linear interpolation, where the cubic inter-polation is used up to the one sigma deviation and the linear interpolation beyond that. Forthe background normalization a Gaussian prior with 100% width is used. The statistical un-certainty in the background estimate is included with the “Barlow-Beeston light” method [59],which uses a Gaussian approximation of the uncertainty in each bin. A bias-test is performedby injecting a signal into the fitted data. The biases are observed to be negligible.The obtained exclusion limits are compared with predictions from two benchmark models. ForT lh b production, branching fractions of 50/25/25% for the T quark decay to bW/tZ/tH areconsidered. These branching fractions correspond to the predictions for a vector-like isospinsinglet. A scenario with neutral currents only and equal couplings to tZ and tH is used for T rh tproduction (0/50/50%), corresponding to the prediction for an isospin doublet. Signal crosssections are taken from NLO calculations [23, 60] and multiplied with a factor of 0.25 and 0.5 inorder to accommodate the branching fraction B ( tH ) = B ( bW ) /2 and B ( tH ) = B ( tZ ) for T lh band T rh t production, respectively. Single vector-like quark production is parametrised with acoupling constant to the electroweak sector. For the coupling of a left- (right-) handed T quarkto a quark and boson pair, qV, the coupling strength, as defined in Ref. [23], of c bW ( tZ ) L ( R ) = c is a factor multiplying the weak coupling constant g w . For acoupling parameter of 0.5, it has been verified that the experimental resolution is much largerthan the width of the T quark in the simplified model.In the simplest Simplified Model [23], only the left- (right-) handed couplings are allowed forthe singlet (doublet) scenarios, i.e. c bW ( tZ ) R ( L ) =
0, simultaneously for production and decay ofthe T quark. Therefore, only fully left- (right-) handed polarisations are considered for theexclusion limits.Figure 10 shows the 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section and the branchingfraction, along with the predictions of the simplest Simplified Model with coupling to thirdgeneration SM quarks only. It can be seen that the excluded cross sections are an order ofmagnitude higher than the predictions, and the current data do not place constraints on thisparticular model. This is the first search for singly produced VLQ by the CMS Collaboration. Inthe future, results in this channel will become more sensitive by combining results with otherfinal states, and it is anticipated that such Simplified Model cross sections will be probed withthe large expected LHC Run 2 dataset. T quark mass (GeV) t H ) ( pb ) fi ( T B · s (bW)/2 B (tH)= B =0.5, LbW b+X, c lh T fi ppObs 95% CL Exp 95% CL 1 std. deviation – – (13 TeV) -1 CMS
T quark mass (GeV) t H ) ( pb ) fi ( T B · s (tZ) B (tH)= B =0.5, RtZ t+X, c rh T fi ppObs 95% CL Exp 95% CL 1 std. deviation – – (13 TeV) -1 CMS
Figure 10: Exclusion limits on the product of the cross section and the branching fraction ofsingle T quark production and T → tH decay. A simultaneous fit is made to the electron andmuon channels. Left- (right-) handed T quark production in association with a bottom (top)quark is shown in the left- (right-) diagram. A search for a singly produced vector-like T quark decaying to a top quark and a Higgs bosonhas been presented, where the top quark decay includes an electron or a muon and the Higgsboson decays into a pair of b quarks. For every event, the four-momentum of the vector-likeT quark candidate is reconstructed and its mass is evaluated. No excess over the estimatedbackgrounds is observed. Upper limits are placed on the product of the cross section and thebranching fraction for vector-like T quarks to a top quark and a Higgs boson in the mass rangeof 700 to 1800 GeV, at 95% confidence level. For a T quark with a mass of 1000 GeV with left-(right-) handed coupling to standard model particles, we exclude a value of the product of theproduction cross section and the branching fraction greater than 0.8 (0.7) pb. This is the firstanalysis setting exclusion limits on the cross section of singly produced vector-like T quarks ata centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV.
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 centres and personnel of the Worldwide LHC Computing Gridfor delivering so effectively the computing infrastructure essential to our analyses. Finally,we acknowledge the enduring support for the construction and operation of the LHC and theCMS detector provided by the following funding agencies: BMWFW and FWF (Austria); FNRSand FWO (Belgium); CNPq, CAPES, FAPERJ, and FAPESP (Brazil); MES (Bulgaria); CERN;CAS, MoST, and NSFC (China); COLCIENCIAS (Colombia); MSES and CSF (Croatia); RPF(Cyprus); SENESCYT (Ecuador); MoER, ERC IUT, and ERDF (Estonia); Academy of Finland,MEC, and HIP (Finland); CEA and CNRS/IN2P3 (France); BMBF, DFG, and HGF (Germany);GSRT (Greece); OTKA and NIH (Hungary); DAE and DST (India); IPM (Iran); SFI (Ireland);INFN (Italy); MSIP and NRF (Republic of Korea); LAS (Lithuania); MOE and UM (Malaysia);BUAP, CINVESTAV, CONACYT, LNS, SEP, and UASLP-FAI (Mexico); MBIE (New Zealand);PAEC (Pakistan); MSHE and NSC (Poland); FCT (Portugal); JINR (Dubna); MON, RosAtom, eferences RAS, and RFBR (Russia); MESTD (Serbia); SEIDI and CPAN (Spain); Swiss Funding Agencies(Switzerland); MST (Taipei); ThEPCenter, IPST, STAR, and NSTDA (Thailand); TUBITAK andTAEK (Turkey); NASU and SFFR (Ukraine); STFC (United Kingdom); DOE and NSF (USA).Individuals have received support from the Marie-Curie programme and the European Re-search Council and EPLANET (European Union); the Leventis Foundation; the A. P. SloanFoundation; the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation; the Belgian Federal Science Policy Of-fice; the Fonds pour la Formation `a la Recherche dans l’Industrie et dans l’Agriculture (FRIA-Belgium); the Agentschap voor Innovatie door Wetenschap en Technologie (IWT-Belgium); theMinistry of Education, Youth and Sports (MEYS) of the Czech Republic; the Council of Sci-ence and Industrial Research, India; the HOMING PLUS programme of the Foundation forPolish Science, cofinanced from European Union, Regional Development Fund, the Mobil-ity Plus programme of the Ministry of Science and Higher Education, the National ScienceCenter (Poland), contracts Harmonia 2014/14/M/ST2/00428, Opus 2014/13/B/ST2/02543,2014/15/B/ST2/03998, and 2015/19/B/ST2/02861, Sonata-bis 2012/07/E/ST2/01406; the Thalisand Aristeia programmes cofinanced by EU-ESF and the Greek NSRF; the National PrioritiesResearch Program by Qatar National Research Fund; the Programa Clar´ın-COFUND del Princi-pado de Asturias; the Rachadapisek Sompot Fund for Postdoctoral Fellowship, ChulalongkornUniversity and the Chulalongkorn Academic into Its 2nd Century Project Advancement Project(Thailand); and the Welch Foundation, contract C-1845.
References [1] N. Arkani-Hamed, A. G. Cohen, and H. Georgi, “Electroweak symmetry breaking fromdimensional deconstruction”,
Phys. Lett. B (2001) 232, doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(01)00741-9 , arXiv:hep-ph/0105239 .[2] M. Schmaltz and D. Tucker-Smith, “Little Higgs review”, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. (2005) 229, doi:10.1146/annurev.nucl.55.090704.151502 , arXiv:hep-ph/0502182 .[3] M. Perelstein, M. E. Peskin, and A. Pierce, “Top quarks and electroweak symmetrybreaking in little Higgs models”, Phys. Rev. D (2004) 075002, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.69.075002 , arXiv:hep-ph/0310039 .[4] I. Antoniadis, K. Benakli, and M. Quiros, “Finite Higgs mass without supersymmetry”, New J. Phys. (2001) 20, doi:10.1088/1367-2630/3/1/320 , arXiv:hep-th/0108005 .[5] Y. Hosotani, S. Noda, and K. Takenaga, “Dynamical gauge-Higgs unification in theelectroweak theory”, Phys. Lett. B (2005) 276, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2004.12.029 , arXiv:hep-ph/0410193 .[6] M. J. Dugan, H. Georgi, and D. B. Kaplan, “Anatomy of a composite Higgs model”, Nucl.Phys. B (1985) 299, doi:10.1016/0550-3213(85)90221-4 .[7] D. B. Kaplan, “Flavor at SSC energies: A new mechanism for dynamically generatedfermion masses”,
Nucl. Phys. B (1991) 259, doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(05)80021-5 . References [8] K. Agashe, R. Contino, and A. Pomarol, “The minimal composite Higgs model”,
Nucl.Phys. B (2005) 165, doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2005.04.035 , arXiv:hep-ph/0412089 .[9] R. Contino, L. Da Rold, and A. Pomarol, “Light custodians in natural composite Higgsmodels”, Phys. Rev. D (2007) 055014, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.75.055014 , arXiv:hep-ph/0612048 .[10] A. De Simone, O. Matsedonskyi, R. Rattazzi, and A. Wulzer, “A first top partner hunter’sguide”, JHEP (2013) 1, doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2013)004 , arXiv:1211.5663 .[11] ATLAS Collaboration, “Observation of a new particle in the search for the StandardModel Higgs boson with the ATLAS detector at the LHC”, Phys. Lett. B (2012) 1, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2012.08.020 , arXiv:1207.7214 .[12] CMS Collaboration, “Observation of a new boson at a mass of 125 GeV with the CMSexperiment at the LHC”, Phys. Lett. B (2012) 30, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2012.08.021 , arXiv:1207.7235 .[13] CMS Collaboration, “Observation of a new boson with mass near 125 GeV in ppcollisions at √ s = 7 and 8 TeV”, JHEP (2013) 081, doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2013)081 , arXiv:1303.4571 .[14] O. Eberhardt et al., “Joint analysis of Higgs boson decays and electroweak precisionobservables in the standard model with a sequential fourth generation”, Phys. Rev. D (2012) 013011, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.86.013011 , arXiv:1204.3872 .[15] J. A. Aguilar-Saavedra, R. Benbrik, S. Heinemeyer, and M. P´erez-Victoria, “Handbook ofvector-like quarks: mixing and single production”, Phys. Rev. D (2013) 094010, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.88.094010 , arXiv:1306.0572 .[16] ATLAS Collaboration, “Search for pair and single production of new heavy quarks thatdecay to a Z boson and a third-generation quark in pp collisions at √ s = JHEP (2014) 104, doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2014)104 , arXiv:1409.5500 .[17] ATLAS Collaboration, “Analysis of events with b-jets and a pair of leptons of the samecharge in pp collisions at √ s = JHEP (2015) 150, doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2015)150 , arXiv:1504.04605 .[18] ATLAS Collaboration, “Search for production of vector-like quark pairs and of four topquarks in the lepton-plus-jets final state in pp collisions at √ s = JHEP (2015) 105, doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2015)105 , arXiv:1505.04306 .[19] ATLAS Collaboration, “Search for the production of single vector-like and excited quarksin the Wt final state in pp collisions at √ s = JHEP (2016) 110, doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2016)110 , arXiv:1510.02664 .[20] ATLAS Collaboration, “Search for single production of vector-like quarks decaying into Wb in pp collisions at √ s = Eur. Phys. J. C (2016),no. 8, 442, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-4281-8 , arXiv:1602.05606 . eferences [21] CMS Collaboration, “Search for vector-like charge 2/3 T quarks in proton-protoncollisions at √ s = 8 TeV”, Phys. Rev. D (2016) 012003, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.012003 , arXiv:1509.04177 .[22] CMS Collaboration, “Search for vector-like T quarks decaying to top quarks and Higgsbosons in the all-hadronic channel using jet substructure”, JHEP (2015) 080, doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2015)080 , arXiv:1503.01952 .[23] O. Matsedonskyi, G. Panico, and A. Wulzer, “On the interpretation of top partnerssearches”, JHEP (2014) 097, doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2014)097 , arXiv:1409.0100 .[24] CMS Collaboration, “The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC”, JINST (2008) S08004, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/3/08/S08004 .[25] CMS Collaboration, “Particle-flow event reconstruction in CMS and performance for jets,taus, and E missT ”, CMS Physics Analysis Summary CMS-PAS-PFT-09-001, 2009.[26] CMS Collaboration, “Commissioning of the particle-flow event with the first LHCcollisions recorded in the CMS detector”, CMS Physics Analysis SummaryCMS-PAS-PFT-10-001, 2010.[27] 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 .[28] CMS Collaboration, “Performance of CMS muon reconstruction in pp collision events at √ s = JINST (2012) P10002, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/7/10/P10002 , arXiv:1206.4071 .[29] 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 .[30] 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 .[31] M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez, “The catchment area of jets”, JHEP (2008) 005, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2008/04/005 , arXiv:0802.1188 .[32] CMS Collaboration, “Determination of jet energy calibration and transverse momentumresolution in CMS”, JINST (2011) P11002, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/6/11/P11002 , arXiv:1107.4277 .[33] CMS Collaboration, “Identification of b-quark jets with the CMS experiment”, JINST (2013) P04013, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/8/04/P04013 , arXiv:1211.4462 .[34] 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 .[35] 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 . References [36] 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 .[37] 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 .[38] 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 .[39] M. L. Mangano, M. Moretti, F. Piccinini, and M. Treccani, “Matching matrix elements andshower evolution for top-pair production in hadronic collisions”, JHEP (2007) 013, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2007/01/013 , arXiv:hep-ph/0611129 .[40] T. Sj ¨ostrand, S. Mrenna, and P. Skands, “PYTHIA 6.4 physics and manual”, JHEP (2006) 026, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2006/05/026 , arXiv:hep-ph/0603175 .[41] 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 .[42] CMS Collaboration, “Event generator tunes obtained from underlying event andmultiparton scattering measurements”, Eur. Phys. J. C (2016) 1, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-3988-x .[43] NNPDF Collaboration, “Parton distributions for the LHC Run II”, JHEP (2015) 040, doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2015)040 , arXiv:1410.8849 .[44] GEANT4 Collaboration, “GEANT4—a simulation toolkit”, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A (2003) 250, doi:10.1016/S0168-9002(03)01368-8 .[45] J. Allison et al., “GEANT4 developments and applications”,
IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. (2006) 270, doi:10.1109/TNS.2006.869826 .[46] CMS Collaboration, “Description and performance of track and primary-vertexreconstruction with the CMS tracker”, JINST (2014) P10009, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/9/10/P10009 , arXiv:1405.6569 .[47] W. Waltenberger, R. Fr ¨uwirth, and P. Vanlaer, “Adaptive Vertex Fitting”, J. Phys. G (2007) N343, doi:10.1088/0954-3899/34/12/N01 .[48] M. Dasgupta, A. Fregoso, S. Marzani, and G. P. Salam, “Towards an understanding of jetsubstructure”, JHEP (2013) 029, doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2013)029 , arXiv:1307.0007 .[49] A. J. Larkoski, S. Marzani, G. Soyez, and J. Thaler, “Soft drop”, JHEP (2014) 146, doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2014)146 , arXiv:1402.2657 .[50] J. Thaler and K. Van Tilburg, “Maximizing boosted top identification by minimizingN-subjettiness”, JHEP (2012) 093, doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2012)093 , arXiv:1108.2701 .[51] J. Thaler and K. Van Tilburg, “Identifying boosted objects with N-subjettiness”, JHEP (2011) 015, doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2011)015 , arXiv:1011.2268 . eferences [52] Particle Data Group Collaboration, “Review of Particle Physics”, Chin. Phys. C (2014)090001, doi:10.1088/1674-1137/38/9/090001 .[53] N. D. Gagunashvili, “Pearson’s Chi-Square Test Modifications for Comparison ofUnweighted and Weighted Histograms and Two Weighted Histograms”, in XIInternational Workshop on Advanced Computing and Analysis Techniques in Physics Research .SISSA, 2007. arXiv:physics/0605123 . PoS(ACAT)060.[54] ATLAS Collaboration, “Measurement of the Inelastic Proton-Proton Cross Section at √ s =
13 TeV with the ATLAS Detector at the LHC”,
Phys. Rev. Lett. (2016), no. 117,182002, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.117.182002 , arXiv:1606.02625 .[55] CMS Collaboration, “CMS Luminosity Measurement for the 2015 Data Taking Period”,CMS Physics Analysis Summary CMS-PAS-LUM-15-001, 2016.[56] J. Butterworth et al., “PDF4LHC recommendations for LHC Run II”, J. Phys. G (2016)023001, doi:10.1088/0954-3899/43/2/023001 , arXiv:1510.03865 .[57] T. M ¨uller, J. Ott, and J. Wagner-Kuhr, “theta – a framework for template-based modelingand inference”, 2010.[58] A. O’Hagan and J. J. Forster, “Kendall’s Advanced Theory of Statistics. Vol. 2B: BayesianInference”. Arnold, London, 2004.[59] R. J. Barlow and C. Beeston, “Fitting using finite Monte Carlo samples”, Comput. Phys.Commun. (1993) 219, doi:10.1016/0010-4655(93)90005-W .[60] J. Campbell, R. K. Ellis, and F. Tramontano, “Single top-quark production and decay atnext-to-leading order”, Phys. Rev. D (2004) 094012, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.70.094012 , arXiv:hep-ph/0408180 . References A The CMS Collaboration
Yerevan Physics Institute, Yerevan, Armenia
V. Khachatryan, A.M. Sirunyan, A. Tumasyan
Institut f ¨ur Hochenergiephysik, Wien, Austria
W. Adam, E. Asilar, T. Bergauer, J. Brandstetter, E. Brondolin, M. Dragicevic, J. Er ¨o, M. Flechl,M. Friedl, R. Fr ¨uhwirth , V.M. Ghete, C. Hartl, N. H ¨ormann, J. Hrubec, M. Jeitler , A. K ¨onig,I. Kr¨atschmer, D. Liko, T. Matsushita, I. Mikulec, D. Rabady, N. Rad, B. Rahbaran, H. Rohringer,J. Schieck , J. Strauss, W. Waltenberger, C.-E. Wulz Institute for Nuclear Problems, Minsk, Belarus
O. Dvornikov, V. Makarenko, V. Zykunov
National Centre for Particle and High Energy Physics, Minsk, Belarus
V. Mossolov, N. Shumeiko, J. Suarez Gonzalez
Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, Belgium
S. Alderweireldt, E.A. De Wolf, X. Janssen, J. Lauwers, M. Van De Klundert, H. VanHaevermaet, P. Van Mechelen, N. Van Remortel, A. Van Spilbeeck
Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussel, Belgium
S. Abu Zeid, F. Blekman, J. D’Hondt, N. Daci, I. De Bruyn, K. Deroover, S. Lowette, S. Moortgat,L. Moreels, A. Olbrechts, Q. Python, S. Tavernier, W. Van Doninck, P. Van Mulders, I. Van Parijs
Universit´e Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium
H. Brun, B. Clerbaux, G. De Lentdecker, H. Delannoy, G. Fasanella, L. Favart, R. Goldouzian,A. Grebenyuk, G. Karapostoli, T. Lenzi, A. L´eonard, J. Luetic, T. Maerschalk, A. Marinov,A. Randle-conde, T. Seva, C. Vander Velde, P. Vanlaer, D. Vannerom, R. Yonamine, F. Zenoni,F. Zhang Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
A. Cimmino, T. Cornelis, D. Dobur, A. Fagot, G. Garcia, M. Gul, I. Khvastunov, D. Poyraz,S. Salva, R. Sch ¨ofbeck, A. Sharma, M. Tytgat, W. Van Driessche, E. Yazgan, N. Zaganidis
Universit´e Catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
H. Bakhshiansohi, C. Beluffi , O. Bondu, S. Brochet, G. Bruno, A. Caudron, S. DeVisscher, C. Delaere, M. Delcourt, B. Francois, A. Giammanco, A. Jafari, P. Jez, M. Komm,G. Krintiras, V. Lemaitre, A. Magitteri, A. Mertens, M. Musich, C. Nuttens, K. Piotrzkowski,L. Quertenmont, M. Selvaggi, M. Vidal Marono, S. Wertz Universit´e de Mons, Mons, Belgium
N. Beliy
Centro Brasileiro de Pesquisas Fisicas, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
W.L. Ald´a J ´unior, F.L. Alves, G.A. Alves, L. Brito, C. Hensel, A. Moraes, M.E. Pol, P. RebelloTeles
Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
E. Belchior Batista Das Chagas, W. Carvalho, J. Chinellato , A. Cust ´odio, E.M. Da Costa,G.G. Da Silveira , D. De Jesus Damiao, C. De Oliveira Martins, S. Fonseca De Souza,L.M. Huertas Guativa, H. Malbouisson, D. Matos Figueiredo, C. Mora Herrera, L. Mundim,H. Nogima, W.L. Prado Da Silva, A. Santoro, A. Sznajder, E.J. Tonelli Manganote , A. VilelaPereira A The CMS Collaboration
Universidade Estadual Paulista a , Universidade Federal do ABC b , S˜ao Paulo, Brazil S. Ahuja a , C.A. Bernardes b , S. Dogra a , T.R. Fernandez Perez Tomei a , E.M. Gregores b ,P.G. Mercadante b , C.S. Moon a , S.F. Novaes a , Sandra S. Padula a , D. Romero Abad b , J.C. RuizVargas Institute for Nuclear Research and Nuclear Energy, Sofia, Bulgaria
A. Aleksandrov, R. Hadjiiska, P. Iaydjiev, M. Rodozov, S. Stoykova, G. Sultanov, M. Vutova
University of Sofia, Sofia, Bulgaria
A. Dimitrov, I. Glushkov, L. Litov, B. Pavlov, P. Petkov
Beihang University, Beijing, China
W. Fang Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing, China
M. Ahmad, J.G. Bian, G.M. Chen, H.S. Chen, M. Chen, Y. Chen , T. Cheng, C.H. Jiang,D. Leggat, Z. Liu, F. Romeo, S.M. Shaheen, A. Spiezia, J. Tao, C. Wang, Z. Wang, H. Zhang,J. Zhao State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China
Y. Ban, G. Chen, Q. Li, S. Liu, Y. Mao, S.J. Qian, D. Wang, Z. Xu
Universidad de Los Andes, Bogota, Colombia
C. Avila, A. Cabrera, L.F. Chaparro Sierra, C. Florez, J.P. Gomez, C.F. Gonz´alez Hern´andez,J.D. Ruiz Alvarez, J.C. Sanabria
University of Split, Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering and NavalArchitecture, Split, Croatia
N. Godinovic, D. Lelas, I. Puljak, P.M. Ribeiro Cipriano, T. Sculac
University of Split, Faculty of Science, Split, Croatia
Z. Antunovic, M. Kovac
Institute Rudjer Boskovic, Zagreb, Croatia
V. Brigljevic, D. Ferencek, K. Kadija, S. Micanovic, L. Sudic, T. Susa
University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus
A. Attikis, G. Mavromanolakis, J. Mousa, C. Nicolaou, F. Ptochos, P.A. Razis, H. Rykaczewski,D. Tsiakkouri
Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
M. Finger , M. Finger Jr. Universidad San Francisco de Quito, Quito, Ecuador
E. Carrera Jarrin
Academy of Scientific Research and Technology of the Arab Republic of Egypt, EgyptianNetwork of High Energy Physics, Cairo, Egypt
Y. Assran , T. Elkafrawy , A. Mahrous National Institute of Chemical Physics and Biophysics, Tallinn, Estonia
B. Calpas, M. Kadastik, M. Murumaa, L. Perrini, M. Raidal, A. Tiko, C. Veelken
Department of Physics, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
P. Eerola, J. Pekkanen, M. Voutilainen Helsinki Institute of Physics, Helsinki, Finland
J. H¨ark ¨onen, T. J¨arvinen, V. Karim¨aki, R. Kinnunen, T. Lamp´en, K. Lassila-Perini, S. Lehti,T. Lind´en, P. Luukka, J. Tuominiemi, E. Tuovinen, L. Wendland
Lappeenranta University of Technology, Lappeenranta, Finland
J. Talvitie, T. Tuuva
IRFU, CEA, Universit´e Paris-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France
M. Besancon, F. Couderc, M. Dejardin, D. Denegri, B. Fabbro, J.L. Faure, C. Favaro, F. Ferri,S. Ganjour, S. Ghosh, A. Givernaud, P. Gras, G. Hamel de Monchenault, P. Jarry, I. Kucher,E. Locci, M. Machet, J. Malcles, J. Rander, A. Rosowsky, M. Titov, A. Zghiche
Laboratoire Leprince-Ringuet, Ecole Polytechnique, IN2P3-CNRS, Palaiseau, France
A. Abdulsalam, I. Antropov, S. Baffioni, F. Beaudette, P. Busson, L. Cadamuro, E. Chapon,C. Charlot, O. Davignon, R. Granier de Cassagnac, M. Jo, S. Lisniak, P. Min´e, M. Nguyen,C. Ochando, G. Ortona, P. Paganini, P. Pigard, S. Regnard, R. Salerno, Y. Sirois, T. Strebler,Y. Yilmaz, A. Zabi
Institut Pluridisciplinaire Hubert Curien, Universit´e de Strasbourg, Universit´e de HauteAlsace Mulhouse, CNRS/IN2P3, Strasbourg, France
J.-L. Agram , J. Andrea, A. Aubin, D. Bloch, J.-M. Brom, M. Buttignol, E.C. Chabert,N. Chanon, C. Collard, E. Conte , X. Coubez, J.-C. Fontaine , D. Gel´e, U. Goerlach, A.-C. LeBihan, K. Skovpen, P. Van Hove Centre de Calcul de l’Institut National de Physique Nucleaire et de Physique des Particules,CNRS/IN2P3, Villeurbanne, France
S. Gadrat
Universit´e de Lyon, Universit´e Claude Bernard Lyon 1, CNRS-IN2P3, Institut de PhysiqueNucl´eaire de Lyon, Villeurbanne, France
S. Beauceron, C. Bernet, G. Boudoul, E. Bouvier, C.A. Carrillo Montoya, R. Chierici,D. Contardo, B. Courbon, P. Depasse, H. El Mamouni, J. Fan, J. Fay, S. Gascon, M. Gouzevitch,G. Grenier, B. Ille, F. Lagarde, I.B. Laktineh, M. Lethuillier, L. Mirabito, A.L. Pequegnot,S. Perries, A. Popov , D. Sabes, V. Sordini, M. Vander Donckt, P. Verdier, S. Viret Georgian Technical University, Tbilisi, Georgia
T. Toriashvili Tbilisi State University, Tbilisi, Georgia
Z. Tsamalaidze RWTH Aachen University, I. Physikalisches Institut, Aachen, Germany
C. Autermann, S. Beranek, L. Feld, A. Heister, M.K. Kiesel, K. Klein, M. Lipinski, A. Ostapchuk,M. Preuten, F. Raupach, S. Schael, C. Schomakers, J. Schulz, T. Verlage, H. Weber, V. Zhukov RWTH Aachen University, III. Physikalisches Institut A, Aachen, Germany
A. Albert, M. Brodski, E. Dietz-Laursonn, D. Duchardt, M. Endres, M. Erdmann, S. Erdweg,T. Esch, R. Fischer, A. G ¨uth, M. Hamer, T. Hebbeker, C. Heidemann, K. Hoepfner, S. Knutzen,M. Merschmeyer, A. Meyer, P. Millet, S. Mukherjee, M. Olschewski, K. Padeken, T. Pook,M. Radziej, H. Reithler, M. Rieger, F. Scheuch, L. Sonnenschein, D. Teyssier, S. Th ¨uer
RWTH Aachen University, III. Physikalisches Institut B, Aachen, Germany
V. Cherepanov, G. Fl ¨ugge, F. Hoehle, B. Kargoll, T. Kress, A. K ¨unsken, J. Lingemann, T. M ¨uller,A. Nehrkorn, A. Nowack, I.M. Nugent, C. Pistone, O. Pooth, A. Stahl A The CMS Collaboration
Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron, Hamburg, Germany
M. Aldaya Martin, T. Arndt, C. Asawatangtrakuldee, K. Beernaert, O. Behnke, U. Behrens,A.A. Bin Anuar, K. Borras , A. Campbell, P. Connor, C. Contreras-Campana, F. Costanza,C. Diez Pardos, G. Dolinska, G. Eckerlin, D. Eckstein, T. Eichhorn, E. Eren, E. Gallo ,J. Garay Garcia, A. Geiser, A. Gizhko, J.M. Grados Luyando, P. Gunnellini, A. Harb,J. Hauk, M. Hempel , H. Jung, A. Kalogeropoulos, O. Karacheban , M. Kasemann,J. Keaveney, C. Kleinwort, I. Korol, D. Kr ¨ucker, W. Lange, A. Lelek, J. Leonard, K. Lipka,A. Lobanov, W. Lohmann , R. Mankel, I.-A. Melzer-Pellmann, A.B. Meyer, G. Mittag, J. Mnich,A. Mussgiller, E. Ntomari, D. Pitzl, R. Placakyte, A. Raspereza, B. Roland, M. ¨O. Sahin,P. Saxena, T. Schoerner-Sadenius, C. Seitz, S. Spannagel, N. Stefaniuk, G.P. Van Onsem,R. Walsh, C. Wissing University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
V. Blobel, M. Centis Vignali, A.R. Draeger, T. Dreyer, E. Garutti, D. Gonzalez, J. Haller,M. Hoffmann, A. Junkes, R. Klanner, R. Kogler, N. Kovalchuk, T. Lapsien, T. Lenz,I. Marchesini, D. Marconi, M. Meyer, M. Niedziela, D. Nowatschin, F. Pantaleo , T. Peiffer,A. Perieanu, J. Poehlsen, C. Sander, C. Scharf, P. Schleper, A. Schmidt, S. Schumann,J. Schwandt, H. Stadie, G. Steinbr ¨uck, F.M. Stober, M. St ¨over, H. Tholen, D. Troendle, E. Usai,L. Vanelderen, A. Vanhoefer, B. Vormwald Institut f ¨ur Experimentelle Kernphysik, Karlsruhe, Germany
M. Akbiyik, C. Barth, S. Baur, C. Baus, J. Berger, E. Butz, R. Caspart, T. Chwalek, F. Colombo,W. De Boer, A. Dierlamm, S. Fink, B. Freund, R. Friese, M. Giffels, A. Gilbert, P. Goldenzweig,D. Haitz, F. Hartmann , S.M. Heindl, U. Husemann, I. Katkov , S. Kudella, P. Lobelle Pardo,H. Mildner, M.U. Mozer, Th. M ¨uller, M. Plagge, G. Quast, K. Rabbertz, S. R ¨ocker, F. Roscher,M. Schr ¨oder, I. Shvetsov, G. Sieber, H.J. Simonis, R. Ulrich, J. Wagner-Kuhr, S. Wayand,M. Weber, T. Weiler, S. Williamson, C. W ¨ohrmann, R. Wolf Institute of Nuclear and Particle Physics (INPP), NCSR Demokritos, Aghia Paraskevi,Greece
G. Anagnostou, G. Daskalakis, T. Geralis, V.A. Giakoumopoulou, A. Kyriakis, D. Loukas,I. Topsis-Giotis
National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
S. Kesisoglou, A. Panagiotou, N. Saoulidou, E. Tziaferi
University of Io´annina, Io´annina, Greece
I. Evangelou, G. Flouris, C. Foudas, P. Kokkas, N. Loukas, N. Manthos, I. Papadopoulos,E. Paradas
MTA-ELTE Lend ¨ulet CMS Particle and Nuclear Physics Group, E ¨otv ¨os Lor´and University,Budapest, Hungary
N. Filipovic
Wigner Research Centre for Physics, Budapest, Hungary
G. Bencze, C. Hajdu, P. Hidas, D. Horvath , F. Sikler, V. Veszpremi, G. Vesztergombi ,A.J. Zsigmond Institute of Nuclear Research ATOMKI, Debrecen, Hungary
N. Beni, S. Czellar, J. Karancsi , A. Makovec, J. Molnar, Z. Szillasi Institute of Physics, University of Debrecen
M. Bart ´ok , P. Raics, Z.L. Trocsanyi, B. Ujvari National Institute of Science Education and Research, Bhubaneswar, India
S. Bahinipati, S. Choudhury , P. Mal, K. Mandal, A. Nayak , D.K. Sahoo, N. Sahoo, S.K. Swain Panjab University, Chandigarh, India
S. Bansal, S.B. Beri, V. Bhatnagar, R. Chawla, U.Bhawandeep, A.K. Kalsi, A. Kaur, M. Kaur,R. Kumar, P. Kumari, A. Mehta, M. Mittal, J.B. Singh, G. Walia
University of Delhi, Delhi, India
Ashok Kumar, A. Bhardwaj, B.C. Choudhary, R.B. Garg, S. Keshri, S. Malhotra, M. Naimuddin,N. Nishu, K. Ranjan, R. Sharma, V. Sharma
Saha Institute of Nuclear Physics, Kolkata, India
R. Bhattacharya, S. Bhattacharya, K. Chatterjee, S. Dey, S. Dutt, S. Dutta, S. Ghosh,N. Majumdar, A. Modak, K. Mondal, S. Mukhopadhyay, S. Nandan, A. Purohit, A. Roy, D. Roy,S. Roy Chowdhury, S. Sarkar, M. Sharan, S. Thakur
Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Madras, India
P.K. Behera
Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai, India
R. Chudasama, D. Dutta, V. Jha, V. Kumar, A.K. Mohanty , P.K. Netrakanti, L.M. Pant,P. Shukla, A. Topkar Tata Institute of Fundamental Research-A, Mumbai, India
T. Aziz, S. Dugad, G. Kole, B. Mahakud, S. Mitra, G.B. Mohanty, B. Parida, N. Sur, B. Sutar
Tata Institute of Fundamental Research-B, Mumbai, India
S. Banerjee, S. Bhowmik , R.K. Dewanjee, S. Ganguly, M. Guchait, Sa. Jain, S. Kumar,M. Maity , G. Majumder, K. Mazumdar, T. Sarkar , N. Wickramage Indian Institute of Science Education and Research (IISER), Pune, India
S. Chauhan, S. Dube, V. Hegde, A. Kapoor, K. Kothekar, S. Pandey, A. Rane, S. Sharma
Institute for Research in Fundamental Sciences (IPM), Tehran, Iran
H. Behnamian, S. Chenarani , E. Eskandari Tadavani, S.M. Etesami , A. Fahim , M. Khakzad,M. Mohammadi Najafabadi, M. Naseri, S. Paktinat Mehdiabadi , F. Rezaei Hosseinabadi,B. Safarzadeh , M. Zeinali University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
M. Felcini, M. Grunewald
INFN Sezione di Bari a , Universit`a di Bari b , Politecnico di Bari c , Bari, Italy M. Abbrescia a , b , C. Calabria a , b , C. Caputo a , b , A. Colaleo a , D. Creanza a , c , L. Cristella a , b , N. DeFilippis a , c , M. De Palma a , b , L. Fiore a , G. Iaselli a , c , G. Maggi a , c , M. Maggi a , G. Miniello a , b ,S. My a , b , S. Nuzzo a , b , A. Pompili a , b , G. Pugliese a , c , R. Radogna a , b , A. Ranieri a , G. Selvaggi a , b ,L. Silvestris a ,16 , R. Venditti a , b , P. Verwilligen a INFN Sezione di Bologna a , Universit`a di Bologna b , Bologna, Italy G. Abbiendi a , C. Battilana, D. Bonacorsi a , b , S. Braibant-Giacomelli a , b , L. Brigliadori a , b ,R. Campanini a , b , P. Capiluppi a , b , A. Castro a , b , F.R. Cavallo a , S.S. Chhibra a , b , G. Codispoti a , b ,M. Cuffiani a , b , G.M. Dallavalle a , F. Fabbri a , A. Fanfani a , b , D. Fasanella a , b , P. Giacomelli a ,C. Grandi a , L. Guiducci a , b , S. Marcellini a , G. Masetti a , A. Montanari a , F.L. Navarria a , b ,A. Perrotta a , A.M. Rossi a , b , T. Rovelli a , b , G.P. Siroli a , b , N. Tosi a , b ,16 A The CMS Collaboration
INFN Sezione di Catania a , Universit`a di Catania b , Catania, Italy S. Albergo a , b , M. Chiorboli a , b , S. Costa a , b , A. Di Mattia a , F. Giordano a , b , R. Potenza a , b ,A. Tricomi a , b , C. Tuve a , b INFN Sezione di Firenze a , Universit`a di Firenze b , Firenze, Italy G. Barbagli a , V. Ciulli a , b , C. Civinini a , R. D’Alessandro a , b , E. Focardi a , b , V. Gori a , b , P. Lenzi a , b ,M. Meschini a , S. Paoletti a , G. Sguazzoni a , L. Viliani a , b ,16 INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy
L. Benussi, S. Bianco, F. Fabbri, D. Piccolo, F. Primavera INFN Sezione di Genova a , Universit`a di Genova b , Genova, Italy V. Calvelli a , b , F. Ferro a , M. Lo Vetere a , b , M.R. Monge a , b , E. Robutti a , S. Tosi a , b INFN Sezione di Milano-Bicocca a , Universit`a di Milano-Bicocca b , Milano, Italy L. Brianza , M.E. Dinardo a , b , S. Fiorendi a , b ,16 , S. Gennai a , A. Ghezzi a , b , P. Govoni a , b ,M. Malberti, S. Malvezzi a , R.A. Manzoni a , b ,16 , D. Menasce a , L. Moroni a , M. Paganoni a , b ,D. Pedrini a , S. Pigazzini, S. Ragazzi a , b , T. Tabarelli de Fatis a , b INFN Sezione di Napoli a , Universit`a di Napoli ’Federico II’ b , Napoli, Italy, Universit`a dellaBasilicata c , Potenza, Italy, Universit`a G. Marconi d , Roma, Italy S. Buontempo a , N. Cavallo a , c , G. De Nardo, S. Di Guida a , d ,16 , M. Esposito a , b , F. Fabozzi a , c ,F. Fienga a , b , A.O.M. Iorio a , b , G. Lanza a , L. Lista a , S. Meola a , d ,16 , P. Paolucci a ,16 , C. Sciacca a , b ,F. Thyssen INFN Sezione di Padova a , Universit`a di Padova b , Padova, Italy, Universit`a di Trento c ,Trento, Italy P. Azzi a ,16 , N. Bacchetta a , L. Benato a , b , D. Bisello a , b , A. Boletti a , b , R. Carlin a , b , A. CarvalhoAntunes De Oliveira 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. Lacaprara a , M. Margoni a , b ,A.T. Meneguzzo a , b , J. Pazzini a , b , N. Pozzobon a , b , P. Ronchese a , b , F. Simonetto a , b , E. Torassa a ,M. Zanetti, 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 , b , P. Montagna a , b , S.P. Ratti a , b , V. Re a , C. Riccardi a , b , P. Salvini a ,I. Vai a , b , P. Vitulo a , b INFN Sezione di Perugia a , Universit`a di Perugia b , Perugia, Italy L. Alunni Solestizi a , b , G.M. Bilei a , D. Ciangottini a , b , L. Fan `o a , b , P. Lariccia a , b , R. Leonardi a , b ,G. Mantovani a , b , M. Menichelli a , A. Saha a , A. Santocchia a , b INFN Sezione di Pisa a , Universit`a di Pisa b , Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa c , Pisa, Italy K. Androsov a ,31 , P. Azzurri a ,16 , G. Bagliesi a , J. Bernardini a , T. Boccali a , R. Castaldi a ,M.A. Ciocci a ,31 , R. Dell’Orso a , S. Donato a , c , G. Fedi, A. Giassi a , M.T. Grippo a ,31 , F. Ligabue a , c ,T. Lomtadze a , L. Martini a , b , A. Messineo a , b , F. Palla a , A. Rizzi a , b , A. Savoy-Navarro a ,32 ,P. Spagnolo a , R. Tenchini a , G. Tonelli a , b , A. Venturi a , P.G. Verdini a INFN Sezione di Roma a , Universit`a di Roma b , Roma, Italy L. Barone a , b , F. Cavallari a , M. Cipriani a , b , D. Del Re a , b ,16 , M. Diemoz a , S. Gelli a , b , E. Longo a , b ,F. Margaroli a , b , B. Marzocchi a , b , P. Meridiani a , G. Organtini a , b , R. Paramatti a , F. Preiato a , b ,S. Rahatlou a , b , C. Rovelli a , F. Santanastasio a , b INFN Sezione di Torino a , Universit`a di Torino b , Torino, Italy, Universit`a del PiemonteOrientale c , Novara, Italy N. Amapane a , b , R. Arcidiacono a , c ,16 , S. Argiro a , b , M. Arneodo a , c , N. Bartosik a , R. Bellan a , b , C. Biino a , N. Cartiglia a , F. Cenna a , b , M. Costa a , b , R. Covarelli a , b , A. Degano a , b , G. Dellacasa a ,N. Demaria a , L. Finco a , b , B. Kiani a , b , C. Mariotti a , S. Maselli a , E. Migliore a , b , V. Monaco a , b ,E. Monteil a , b , M.M. Obertino a , b , L. Pacher a , b , N. Pastrone a , M. Pelliccioni a , G.L. PinnaAngioni a , b , F. Ravera a , b , A. Romero a , b , M. Ruspa a , c , R. Sacchi a , b , V. Sola a , A. Solano a , b ,A. Staiano a , P. Traczyk a , b INFN Sezione di Trieste a , Universit`a di Trieste b , Trieste, Italy S. Belforte a , M. Casarsa a , F. Cossutti a , G. Della Ricca a , b , A. Zanetti a Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Korea
D.H. Kim, G.N. Kim, M.S. Kim, S. Lee, S.W. Lee, Y.D. Oh, S. Sekmen, D.C. Son, Y.C. Yang
Chonbuk National University, Jeonju, Korea
A. Lee
Chonnam National University, Institute for Universe and Elementary Particles, Kwangju,Korea
H. Kim
Hanyang University, Seoul, Korea
J.A. Brochero Cifuentes, T.J. Kim
Korea University, Seoul, Korea
S. Cho, S. Choi, Y. Go, D. Gyun, S. Ha, B. Hong, Y. Jo, Y. Kim, B. Lee, K. Lee, K.S. Lee, S. Lee,J. Lim, S.K. Park, Y. Roh
Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea
J. Almond, J. Kim, H. Lee, S.B. Oh, B.C. Radburn-Smith, S.h. Seo, U.K. Yang, H.D. Yoo, G.B. Yu
University of Seoul, Seoul, Korea
M. Choi, H. Kim, J.H. Kim, J.S.H. Lee, I.C. Park, G. Ryu, M.S. Ryu
Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon, Korea
Y. Choi, J. Goh, C. Hwang, J. Lee, I. Yu
Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania
V. Dudenas, A. Juodagalvis, J. Vaitkus
National Centre for Particle Physics, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
I. Ahmed, Z.A. Ibrahim, J.R. Komaragiri, M.A.B. Md Ali , F. Mohamad Idris , W.A.T. WanAbdullah, M.N. Yusli, Z. Zolkapli Centro de Investigacion y de Estudios Avanzados del IPN, Mexico City, Mexico
H. Castilla-Valdez, E. De La Cruz-Burelo, I. Heredia-De La Cruz , A. Hernandez-Almada,R. Lopez-Fernandez, R. Maga ˜na Villalba, J. Mejia Guisao, A. Sanchez-Hernandez Universidad Iberoamericana, Mexico City, Mexico
S. Carrillo Moreno, C. Oropeza Barrera, F. Vazquez Valencia
Benemerita Universidad Autonoma de Puebla, Puebla, Mexico
S. Carpinteyro, I. Pedraza, H.A. Salazar Ibarguen, C. Uribe Estrada
Universidad Aut ´onoma de San Luis Potos´ı, San Luis Potos´ı, Mexico
A. Morelos Pineda
University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
D. Krofcheck A The CMS Collaboration
University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
P.H. Butler
National Centre for Physics, Quaid-I-Azam University, Islamabad, Pakistan
A. Ahmad, M. Ahmad, Q. Hassan, H.R. Hoorani, W.A. Khan, 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, K. Nawrocki,K. Romanowska-Rybinska, M. Szleper, P. Zalewski
Institute of Experimental Physics, Faculty of Physics, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
K. Bunkowski, A. Byszuk , K. Doroba, A. Kalinowski, M. Konecki, J. Krolikowski, M. Misiura,M. Olszewski, M. Walczak Laborat ´orio de Instrumenta¸c˜ao e F´ısica Experimental de Part´ıculas, Lisboa, Portugal
P. Bargassa, C. Beir˜ao Da Cruz E Silva, A. Di Francesco, P. Faccioli, P.G. Ferreira Parracho,M. Gallinaro, J. Hollar, N. Leonardo, L. Lloret Iglesias, M.V. Nemallapudi, J. RodriguesAntunes, J. Seixas, O. Toldaiev, D. Vadruccio, J. Varela, P. Vischia
Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia
S. Afanasiev, M. Gavrilenko, I. Golutvin, I. Gorbunov, A. Kamenev, V. Karjavin, A. Lanev,A. Malakhov, V. Matveev , V. Palichik, V. Perelygin, M. Savina, S. Shmatov, S. Shulha,N. Skatchkov, V. Smirnov, N. Voytishin, A. Zarubin
Petersburg Nuclear Physics Institute, Gatchina (St. Petersburg), Russia
L. Chtchipounov, V. Golovtsov, Y. Ivanov, V. Kim , E. Kuznetsova , V. Murzin, V. Oreshkin,V. Sulimov, A. Vorobyev Institute for Nuclear Research, Moscow, Russia
Yu. Andreev, A. Dermenev, S. Gninenko, N. Golubev, A. Karneyeu, M. Kirsanov, N. Krasnikov,A. Pashenkov, D. Tlisov, A. Toropin
Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia
V. Epshteyn, V. Gavrilov, N. Lychkovskaya, V. Popov, I. Pozdnyakov, G. Safronov,A. Spiridonov, M. Toms, E. Vlasov, A. Zhokin
Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, Moscow, Russia
A. Bylinkin National Research Nuclear University ’Moscow Engineering Physics Institute’ (MEPhI),Moscow, Russia
R. Chistov , M. Danilov , S. Polikarpov P.N. Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia
V. Andreev, M. Azarkin , I. Dremin , M. Kirakosyan, A. Leonidov , S.V. Rusakov,A. Terkulov Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow,Russia
A. Baskakov, A. Belyaev, E. Boos, V. Bunichev, M. Dubinin , L. Dudko, A. Gribushin,V. Klyukhin, O. Kodolova, I. Lokhtin, I. Miagkov, S. Obraztsov, M. Perfilov, S. Petrushanko,V. Savrin Novosibirsk State University (NSU), Novosibirsk, Russia
V. Blinov , Y.Skovpen , D. Shtol State Research Center of Russian Federation, Institute for High Energy Physics, Protvino,Russia
I. Azhgirey, I. Bayshev, S. Bitioukov, D. Elumakhov, V. Kachanov, A. Kalinin, D. Konstantinov,V. Krychkine, V. Petrov, R. Ryutin, A. Sobol, S. Troshin, N. Tyurin, A. Uzunian, A. Volkov
University of Belgrade, Faculty of Physics and Vinca Institute of Nuclear Sciences, Belgrade,Serbia
P. Adzic , P. Cirkovic, D. Devetak, M. Dordevic, J. Milosevic, V. Rekovic Centro de Investigaciones Energ´eticas Medioambientales y Tecnol ´ogicas (CIEMAT),Madrid, Spain
J. Alcaraz Maestre, M. Barrio Luna, E. Calvo, M. Cerrada, M. Chamizo Llatas, N. Colino, B. DeLa Cruz, A. Delgado Peris, A. Escalante Del Valle, C. Fernandez Bedoya, J.P. Fern´andez Ramos,J. Flix, M.C. Fouz, P. Garcia-Abia, O. Gonzalez Lopez, S. Goy Lopez, J.M. Hernandez, M.I. Josa,E. Navarro De Martino, A. P´erez-Calero Yzquierdo, J. Puerta Pelayo, A. Quintario Olmeda,I. Redondo, L. Romero, M.S. Soares
Universidad Aut ´onoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
J.F. de Troc ´oniz, M. Missiroli, D. Moran
Universidad de Oviedo, Oviedo, Spain
J. Cuevas, J. Fernandez Menendez, I. Gonzalez Caballero, J.R. Gonz´alez Fern´andez, E. PalenciaCortezon, S. Sanchez Cruz, I. Su´arez Andr´es, J.M. Vizan Garcia
Instituto de F´ısica de Cantabria (IFCA), CSIC-Universidad de Cantabria, Santander, Spain
I.J. Cabrillo, A. Calderon, J.R. Casti ˜neiras De Saa, E. Curras, M. Fernandez, J. Garcia-Ferrero,G. Gomez, A. Lopez Virto, J. Marco, C. Martinez Rivero, F. Matorras, J. Piedra Gomez,T. Rodrigo, A. Ruiz-Jimeno, L. Scodellaro, N. Trevisani, I. Vila, R. Vilar Cortabitarte
CERN, European Organization for Nuclear Research, Geneva, Switzerland
D. Abbaneo, E. Auffray, G. Auzinger, M. Bachtis, P. Baillon, A.H. Ball, D. Barney, P. Bloch,A. Bocci, A. Bonato, C. Botta, T. Camporesi, R. Castello, M. Cepeda, G. Cerminara,M. D’Alfonso, D. d’Enterria, A. Dabrowski, V. Daponte, A. David, M. De Gruttola, A. De Roeck,E. Di Marco , M. Dobson, B. Dorney, T. du Pree, D. Duggan, M. D ¨unser, N. Dupont, A. Elliott-Peisert, S. Fartoukh, G. Franzoni, J. Fulcher, W. Funk, D. Gigi, K. Gill, M. Girone, F. Glege,D. Gulhan, S. Gundacker, M. Guthoff, J. Hammer, P. Harris, J. Hegeman, V. Innocente, P. Janot,J. Kieseler, H. Kirschenmann, V. Kn ¨unz, A. Kornmayer , M.J. Kortelainen, K. Kousouris,M. Krammer , C. Lange, P. Lecoq, C. Lourenc¸o, M.T. Lucchini, L. Malgeri, M. Mannelli,A. Martelli, F. Meijers, J.A. Merlin, S. Mersi, E. Meschi, P. Milenovic , F. Moortgat, S. Morovic,M. Mulders, H. Neugebauer, S. Orfanelli, L. Orsini, L. Pape, E. Perez, M. Peruzzi, A. Petrilli,G. Petrucciani, A. Pfeiffer, M. Pierini, A. Racz, T. Reis, G. Rolandi , M. Rovere, M. Ruan,H. Sakulin, J.B. Sauvan, C. Sch¨afer, C. Schwick, M. Seidel, A. Sharma, P. Silva, P. Sphicas ,J. Steggemann, M. Stoye, Y. Takahashi, M. Tosi, D. Treille, A. Triossi, A. Tsirou, V. Veckalns ,G.I. Veres , M. Verweij, N. Wardle, H.K. W ¨ohri, A. Zagozdzinska , W.D. Zeuner Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen, Switzerland
W. Bertl, K. Deiters, W. Erdmann, R. Horisberger, Q. Ingram, H.C. Kaestli, D. Kotlinski,U. Langenegger, T. Rohe
Institute for Particle Physics, ETH Zurich, Zurich, Switzerland
F. Bachmair, L. B¨ani, L. Bianchini, B. Casal, G. Dissertori, M. Dittmar, M. Doneg`a, C. Grab,C. Heidegger, D. Hits, J. Hoss, G. Kasieczka, P. Lecomte † , W. Lustermann, B. Mangano,M. Marionneau, P. Martinez Ruiz del Arbol, M. Masciovecchio, M.T. Meinhard, D. Meister, A The CMS Collaboration
F. Micheli, P. Musella, F. Nessi-Tedaldi, F. Pandolfi, J. Pata, F. Pauss, G. Perrin, L. Perrozzi,M. Quittnat, M. Rossini, M. Sch ¨onenberger, A. Starodumov , V.R. Tavolaro, K. Theofilatos,R. Wallny Universit¨at Z ¨urich, Zurich, Switzerland
T.K. Aarrestad, C. Amsler , L. Caminada, M.F. Canelli, A. De Cosa, C. Galloni, A. Hinzmann,T. Hreus, B. Kilminster, J. Ngadiuba, D. Pinna, G. Rauco, P. Robmann, D. Salerno, Y. Yang,A. Zucchetta National Central University, Chung-Li, Taiwan
V. Candelise, T.H. Doan, Sh. Jain, R. Khurana, M. Konyushikhin, C.M. Kuo, W. Lin, Y.J. Lu,A. Pozdnyakov, S.S. Yu
National Taiwan University (NTU), Taipei, Taiwan
Arun Kumar, P. Chang, Y.H. Chang, Y.W. Chang, Y. Chao, K.F. Chen, P.H. Chen, C. Dietz,F. Fiori, W.-S. Hou, Y. Hsiung, Y.F. Liu, R.-S. Lu, M. Mi ˜nano Moya, E. Paganis, A. Psallidas,J.f. Tsai, Y.M. Tzeng
Chulalongkorn University, Faculty of Science, Department of Physics, Bangkok, Thailand
B. Asavapibhop, G. Singh, N. Srimanobhas, N. Suwonjandee
Cukurova University - Physics Department, Science and Art Faculty
A. Adiguzel, M.N. Bakirci , S. Damarseckin, Z.S. Demiroglu, C. Dozen, E. Eskut, S. Girgis,G. Gokbulut, Y. Guler, I. Hos, E.E. Kangal , O. Kara, U. Kiminsu, M. Oglakci, G. Onengut ,K. Ozdemir , S. Ozturk , A. Polatoz, D. Sunar Cerci , S. Turkcapar, I.S. Zorbakir,C. Zorbilmez Middle East Technical University, Physics Department, Ankara, Turkey
B. Bilin, S. Bilmis, B. Isildak , G. Karapinar , M. Yalvac, M. Zeyrek Bogazici University, Istanbul, Turkey
E. G ¨ulmez, M. Kaya , O. Kaya , E.A. Yetkin , T. Yetkin Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey
A. Cakir, K. Cankocak, S. Sen Institute for Scintillation Materials of National Academy of Science of Ukraine, Kharkov,Ukraine
B. Grynyov
National Scientific Center, Kharkov Institute of Physics and Technology, Kharkov, Ukraine
L. Levchuk, P. Sorokin
University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
R. Aggleton, F. Ball, L. Beck, J.J. Brooke, D. Burns, E. Clement, D. Cussans, H. Flacher,J. Goldstein, M. Grimes, G.P. Heath, H.F. Heath, J. Jacob, L. Kreczko, C. Lucas, D.M. Newbold ,S. Paramesvaran, A. Poll, T. Sakuma, S. Seif El Nasr-storey, D. Smith, V.J. Smith Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom
K.W. Bell, A. Belyaev , C. Brew, R.M. Brown, L. Calligaris, D. Cieri, D.J.A. Cockerill,J.A. Coughlan, K. Harder, S. Harper, E. Olaiya, D. Petyt, C.H. Shepherd-Themistocleous,A. Thea, I.R. Tomalin, T. Williams Imperial College, London, United Kingdom
M. Baber, R. Bainbridge, O. Buchmuller, A. Bundock, D. Burton, S. Casasso, M. Citron,D. Colling, L. Corpe, P. Dauncey, G. Davies, A. De Wit, M. Della Negra, R. Di Maria, P. Dunne, A. Elwood, D. Futyan, Y. Haddad, G. Hall, G. Iles, T. James, R. Lane, C. Laner, R. Lucas ,L. Lyons, A.-M. Magnan, S. Malik, L. Mastrolorenzo, J. Nash, A. Nikitenko , J. Pela, B. Penning,M. Pesaresi, D.M. Raymond, A. Richards, A. Rose, C. Seez, S. Summers, A. Tapper, K. Uchida,M. Vazquez Acosta , T. Virdee , J. Wright, S.C. Zenz Brunel University, Uxbridge, United Kingdom
J.E. Cole, P.R. Hobson, A. Khan, P. Kyberd, D. Leslie, I.D. Reid, P. Symonds, L. Teodorescu,M. Turner
Baylor University, Waco, USA
A. Borzou, K. Call, J. Dittmann, K. Hatakeyama, H. Liu, N. Pastika
The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, USA
O. Charaf, S.I. Cooper, C. Henderson, P. Rumerio, C. West
Boston University, Boston, USA
D. Arcaro, A. Avetisyan, T. Bose, D. Gastler, D. Rankin, C. Richardson, J. Rohlf, L. Sulak, D. Zou
Brown University, Providence, USA
G. Benelli, E. Berry, D. Cutts, A. Garabedian, J. Hakala, U. Heintz, J.M. Hogan, O. Jesus,K.H.M. Kwok, E. Laird, G. Landsberg, Z. Mao, M. Narain, S. Piperov, S. Sagir, E. Spencer,R. Syarif
University of California, Davis, Davis, USA
R. Breedon, G. Breto, D. Burns, M. Calderon De La Barca Sanchez, S. Chauhan, M. Chertok,J. Conway, R. Conway, P.T. Cox, R. Erbacher, C. Flores, G. Funk, M. Gardner, W. Ko, R. Lander,C. Mclean, M. Mulhearn, D. Pellett, J. Pilot, S. Shalhout, J. Smith, M. Squires, D. Stolp,M. Tripathi, S. Wilbur, R. Yohay
University of California, Los Angeles, USA
C. Bravo, R. Cousins, A. Dasgupta, P. Everaerts, A. Florent, J. Hauser, M. Ignatenko, N. Mccoll,D. Saltzberg, C. Schnaible, E. Takasugi, V. Valuev, M. Weber
University of California, Riverside, Riverside, USA
K. Burt, R. Clare, J. Ellison, J.W. Gary, S.M.A. Ghiasi Shirazi, G. Hanson, J. Heilman, P. Jandir,E. Kennedy, F. Lacroix, O.R. Long, M. Olmedo Negrete, M.I. Paneva, A. Shrinivas, W. Si, H. Wei,S. Wimpenny, B. R. Yates
University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, USA
J.G. Branson, G.B. Cerati, S. Cittolin, M. Derdzinski, R. Gerosa, A. Holzner, D. Klein,V. Krutelyov, J. Letts, I. Macneill, D. Olivito, S. Padhi, M. Pieri, M. Sani, V. Sharma, S. Simon,M. Tadel, A. Vartak, S. Wasserbaech , C. Welke, J. Wood, F. W ¨urthwein, A. Yagil, G. Zevi DellaPorta University of California, Santa Barbara - Department of Physics, Santa Barbara, USA
N. Amin, R. Bhandari, J. Bradmiller-Feld, C. Campagnari, A. Dishaw, V. Dutta, K. Flowers,M. Franco Sevilla, P. Geffert, C. George, F. Golf, L. Gouskos, J. Gran, R. Heller, J. Incandela,S.D. Mullin, A. Ovcharova, H. Qu, J. Richman, D. Stuart, I. Suarez, J. Yoo
California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, USA
D. Anderson, A. Apresyan, J. Bendavid, A. Bornheim, J. Bunn, Y. Chen, J. Duarte, J.M. Lawhorn,A. Mott, H.B. Newman, C. Pena, M. Spiropulu, J.R. Vlimant, S. Xie, R.Y. Zhu A The CMS Collaboration
Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, USA
M.B. Andrews, V. Azzolini, T. Ferguson, M. Paulini, J. Russ, M. Sun, H. Vogel, I. Vorobiev,M. Weinberg
University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, USA
J.P. Cumalat, W.T. Ford, F. Jensen, A. Johnson, M. Krohn, T. Mulholland, K. Stenson,S.R. Wagner
Cornell University, Ithaca, USA
J. Alexander, J. Chaves, J. Chu, S. Dittmer, K. Mcdermott, N. Mirman, G. Nicolas Kaufman,J.R. Patterson, A. Rinkevicius, A. Ryd, L. Skinnari, L. Soffi, S.M. Tan, Z. Tao, J. Thom, J. Tucker,P. Wittich, M. Zientek
Fairfield University, Fairfield, USA
D. Winn
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, USA
S. Abdullin, M. Albrow, G. Apollinari, S. Banerjee, L.A.T. Bauerdick, A. Beretvas, J. Berryhill,P.C. Bhat, G. Bolla, K. Burkett, J.N. Butler, H.W.K. Cheung, F. Chlebana, S. Cihangir † ,M. Cremonesi, V.D. Elvira, I. Fisk, J. Freeman, E. Gottschalk, L. Gray, D. Green, S. Gr ¨unendahl,O. Gutsche, D. Hare, R.M. Harris, S. Hasegawa, J. Hirschauer, Z. Hu, B. Jayatilaka, S. Jindariani,M. Johnson, U. Joshi, B. Klima, B. Kreis, S. Lammel, J. Linacre, D. Lincoln, R. Lipton, M. Liu,T. Liu, R. Lopes De S´a, J. Lykken, K. Maeshima, N. Magini, J.M. Marraffino, S. Maruyama,D. Mason, P. McBride, P. Merkel, S. Mrenna, S. Nahn, C. Newman-Holmes † , V. O’Dell, K. Pedro,O. Prokofyev, G. Rakness, L. Ristori, E. Sexton-Kennedy, A. Soha, W.J. Spalding, L. Spiegel,S. Stoynev, 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, Y. Wu University of Florida, Gainesville, USA
D. Acosta, P. Avery, P. Bortignon, D. Bourilkov, A. Brinkerhoff, A. Carnes, M. Carver, D. Curry,S. Das, R.D. Field, I.K. Furic, J. Konigsberg, A. Korytov, J.F. Low, P. Ma, K. Matchev, H. Mei,G. Mitselmakher, D. Rank, L. Shchutska, D. Sperka, L. Thomas, J. Wang, S. Wang, J. Yelton
Florida International University, Miami, USA
S. Linn, P. Markowitz, G. Martinez, J.L. Rodriguez
Florida State University, Tallahassee, USA
A. Ackert, J.R. Adams, T. Adams, A. Askew, S. Bein, B. Diamond, S. Hagopian, V. Hagopian,K.F. Johnson, A. Khatiwada, H. Prosper, A. Santra
Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne, USA
M.M. Baarmand, V. Bhopatkar, S. Colafranceschi, M. Hohlmann, D. Noonan, T. Roy,F. Yumiceva
University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC), Chicago, USA
M.R. Adams, L. Apanasevich, D. Berry, R.R. Betts, I. Bucinskaite, R. Cavanaugh, O. Evdokimov,L. Gauthier, C.E. Gerber, D.J. Hofman, K. Jung, P. Kurt, C. O’Brien, I.D. Sandoval Gonzalez,P. Turner, N. Varelas, H. Wang, Z. Wu, M. Zakaria, J. Zhang
The University of Iowa, Iowa City, USA
B. Bilki , W. Clarida, K. Dilsiz, S. Durgut, R.P. Gandrajula, M. Haytmyradov, V. Khristenko,J.-P. Merlo, H. Mermerkaya , A. Mestvirishvili, A. Moeller, J. Nachtman, H. Ogul, Y. Onel,F. Ozok , A. Penzo, C. Snyder, E. Tiras, J. Wetzel, K. Yi Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA
I. Anderson, B. Blumenfeld, A. Cocoros, N. Eminizer, D. Fehling, L. Feng, A.V. Gritsan,P. Maksimovic, C. Martin, M. Osherson, J. Roskes, U. Sarica, M. Swartz, M. Xiao, Y. Xin, C. You
The University of Kansas, Lawrence, USA
A. Al-bataineh, P. Baringer, A. Bean, S. Boren, J. Bowen, C. Bruner, J. Castle, L. Forthomme,R.P. Kenny III, S. Khalil, A. Kropivnitskaya, D. Majumder, W. Mcbrayer, M. Murray, S. Sanders,R. Stringer, J.D. Tapia Takaki, Q. Wang
Kansas State University, Manhattan, USA
A. Ivanov, K. Kaadze, Y. Maravin, A. Mohammadi, L.K. Saini, N. Skhirtladze, S. Toda
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, USA
F. Rebassoo, D. Wright
University of Maryland, College Park, USA
C. Anelli, A. Baden, O. Baron, A. Belloni, B. Calvert, S.C. Eno, C. Ferraioli, J.A. Gomez,N.J. Hadley, S. Jabeen, R.G. Kellogg, T. Kolberg, J. Kunkle, Y. Lu, A.C. Mignerey, F. Ricci-Tam,Y.H. Shin, A. Skuja, M.B. Tonjes, S.C. Tonwar
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, USA
D. Abercrombie, B. Allen, A. Apyan, R. Barbieri, A. Baty, R. Bi, K. Bierwagen, S. Brandt,W. Busza, I.A. Cali, Z. Demiragli, L. Di Matteo, G. Gomez Ceballos, M. Goncharov, D. Hsu,Y. Iiyama, G.M. Innocenti, M. Klute, D. Kovalskyi, K. Krajczar, Y.S. Lai, Y.-J. Lee, A. Levin,P.D. Luckey, B. Maier, A.C. Marini, C. Mcginn, C. Mironov, S. Narayanan, X. Niu, C. Paus,C. Roland, G. Roland, J. Salfeld-Nebgen, G.S.F. Stephans, K. Sumorok, K. Tatar, M. Varma,D. Velicanu, J. Veverka, J. Wang, T.W. Wang, B. Wyslouch, M. Yang, V. Zhukova
University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA
A.C. Benvenuti, R.M. Chatterjee, A. Evans, A. Finkel, A. Gude, P. Hansen, S. Kalafut, S.C. Kao,Y. Kubota, Z. Lesko, J. Mans, S. Nourbakhsh, N. Ruckstuhl, R. Rusack, N. Tambe, J. Turkewitz
University of Mississippi, Oxford, USA
J.G. Acosta, S. Oliveros
University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, USA
E. Avdeeva, R. Bartek , K. Bloom, D.R. Claes, A. Dominguez , C. Fangmeier, R. GonzalezSuarez, R. Kamalieddin, I. Kravchenko, A. Malta Rodrigues, F. Meier, J. Monroy, J.E. Siado,G.R. Snow, B. Stieger State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, USA
M. Alyari, J. Dolen, J. George, A. Godshalk, C. Harrington, I. Iashvili, J. Kaisen, A. Kharchilava,A. Kumar, A. Parker, S. Rappoccio, B. Roozbahani
Northeastern University, Boston, USA
G. Alverson, E. Barberis, A. Hortiangtham, A. Massironi, D.M. Morse, D. Nash, T. Orimoto,R. Teixeira De Lima, D. Trocino, R.-J. Wang, D. Wood
Northwestern University, Evanston, USA
S. Bhattacharya, K.A. Hahn, A. Kubik, A. Kumar, N. Mucia, N. Odell, B. Pollack, M.H. Schmitt,K. Sung, M. Trovato, M. Velasco
University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, USA
N. Dev, M. Hildreth, K. Hurtado Anampa, C. Jessop, D.J. Karmgard, N. Kellams, K. Lannon, A The CMS Collaboration
N. Marinelli, F. Meng, C. Mueller, Y. Musienko , M. Planer, A. Reinsvold, R. Ruchti, G. Smith,S. Taroni, M. Wayne, M. Wolf, A. Woodard The Ohio State University, Columbus, USA
J. Alimena, L. Antonelli, J. Brinson, B. Bylsma, L.S. Durkin, S. Flowers, B. Francis, A. Hart,C. Hill, R. Hughes, W. Ji, B. Liu, W. Luo, D. Puigh, B.L. Winer, H.W. Wulsin
Princeton University, Princeton, USA
S. Cooperstein, O. Driga, P. Elmer, J. Hardenbrook, P. Hebda, D. Lange, J. Luo, D. Marlow,J. Mc Donald, T. Medvedeva, K. Mei, M. Mooney, J. Olsen, C. Palmer, P. Pirou´e, D. Stickland,A. Svyatkovskiy, C. Tully, A. Zuranski
University of Puerto Rico, Mayaguez, USA
S. Malik
Purdue University, West Lafayette, USA
A. Barker, V.E. Barnes, S. Folgueras, L. Gutay, M.K. Jha, M. Jones, A.W. Jung, D.H. Miller,N. Neumeister, J.F. Schulte, X. Shi, J. Sun, F. Wang, W. Xie, L. Xu
Purdue University Calumet, Hammond, USA
N. Parashar, J. Stupak
Rice University, Houston, USA
A. Adair, B. Akgun, Z. Chen, K.M. Ecklund, F.J.M. Geurts, M. Guilbaud, W. Li, B. Michlin,M. Northup, B.P. Padley, R. Redjimi, J. Roberts, J. Rorie, Z. Tu, J. Zabel
University of Rochester, Rochester, USA
B. Betchart, A. Bodek, P. de Barbaro, R. Demina, Y.t. Duh, T. Ferbel, M. Galanti, A. Garcia-Bellido, J. Han, O. Hindrichs, A. Khukhunaishvili, K.H. Lo, P. Tan, M. Verzetti
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Piscataway, USA
A. Agapitos, J.P. Chou, E. Contreras-Campana, Y. Gershtein, T.A. G ´omez Espinosa,E. Halkiadakis, M. Heindl, D. Hidas, E. Hughes, S. Kaplan, R. Kunnawalkam Elayavalli,S. Kyriacou, A. Lath, K. Nash, H. Saka, S. Salur, S. Schnetzer, D. Sheffield, S. Somalwar, R. Stone,S. Thomas, P. Thomassen, M. Walker
University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA
A.G. Delannoy, M. Foerster, J. Heideman, G. Riley, K. Rose, S. Spanier, K. Thapa
Texas A&M University, College Station, USA
O. Bouhali , A. Celik, M. Dalchenko, M. De Mattia, A. Delgado, S. Dildick, R. Eusebi,J. Gilmore, T. Huang, E. Juska, T. Kamon , R. Mueller, Y. Pakhotin, R. Patel, A. Perloff,L. Perni`e, D. Rathjens, A. Rose, A. Safonov, A. Tatarinov, K.A. Ulmer Texas Tech University, Lubbock, USA
N. Akchurin, C. Cowden, J. Damgov, F. De Guio, C. Dragoiu, P.R. Dudero, J. Faulkner,E. Gurpinar, S. Kunori, K. Lamichhane, S.W. Lee, T. Libeiro, 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, P. Sheldon, S. Tuo,J. Velkovska, Q. Xu
University of Virginia, Charlottesville, USA
M.W. Arenton, P. Barria, B. Cox, J. Goodell, R. Hirosky, A. Ledovskoy, H. Li, C. Neu,T. Sinthuprasith, X. Sun, Y. Wang, E. Wolfe, F. Xia Wayne State University, Detroit, USA
C. Clarke, R. Harr, P.E. Karchin, J. Sturdy
University of Wisconsin - Madison, Madison, WI, USA