Search for vector-like quarks in events with two oppositely charged leptons and jets in proton-proton collisions at s √ = 13 TeV
EEUROPEAN ORGANIZATION FOR NUCLEAR RESEARCH (CERN)
CERN-EP-2018-2902019/05/03
CMS-B2G-17-012
Search for vector-like quarks in events with two oppositelycharged leptons and jets in proton-proton collisions at √ s =
13 TeV
The CMS Collaboration ∗ Abstract
A search for the pair production of heavy vector-like partners T and B of the top andbottom quarks has been performed by the CMS experiment at the CERN LHC usingproton-proton collisions at √ s =
13 TeV. The data sample was collected in 2016 andcorresponds to an integrated luminosity of 35.9 fb − . Final states studied for TT pro-duction include those where one of the T quarks decays via T → tZ and the other viaT → bW, tZ, or tH, where H is a Higgs boson. For the BB case, final states includethose where one of the B quarks decays via B → bZ and the other B → tW, bZ, or bH.Events with two oppositely charged electrons or muons, consistent with coming fromthe decay of a Z boson, and jets are investigated. The number of observed events isconsistent with standard model background estimations. Lower limits at 95% confi-dence level are placed on the masses of the T and B quarks for a range of branchingfractions. Assuming 100% branching fractions for T → tZ, and B → bZ, T and Bquark mass values below 1280 and 1130 GeV, respectively, are excluded. Published in the European Physical Journal C as doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-6855-8. 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 The standard model (SM) has been outstandingly successful in describing a wide range of fun-damental phenomena. However, one of its notable shortcomings is that it does not provide anatural explanation for the Higgs boson (H) [1–3] observed at 125 GeV [4, 5] having a mass thatis comparable to the electroweak scale. The suppression of divergent loop corrections to theHiggs boson mass requires either fine-tuning of the SM parameters or new particles at the TeVscale. Many theories of beyond-the-SM physics phenomena that attempt to solve this hierar-chy problem predict new particles, which could be partners of the top and bottom quarks andthus cancel the leading loop corrections. Vector-like quarks (VLQs) represent one class of suchparticles among those that have fermionic properties. Their left- and right-handed componentstransform in the same way under the SM symmetry group SU ( ) C × SU ( ) L × U ( ) Y [6]. Thisproperty allows them to have a gauge-invariant mass term in the Lagrangian of the form ψψ ,where ψ represents the fermion field; hence, their masses are not determined by their Yukawacouplings to the Higgs boson. These quarks are not ruled out by the measured properties ofthe Higgs boson. They are predicted in many beyond-the-SM scenarios such as grand uni-fied theories [7], beautiful mirrors [8], models with extra dimensions [9], little Higgs [10–12],and composite Higgs models [13], as well as theories proposed to explain the SM flavor struc-ture [14] and solve the strong CP problem [15].The VLQs can be produced singly or in pairs [6]. The cross section for single-quark productionis model dependent and depends on the couplings of the VLQs to the SM quarks. On theother hand, pair production of VLQs occurs via the strong interaction, and its cross sectionis uniquely determined by the mass of the VLQ. Another characteristic of the VLQs is theirflavor-changing neutral current decay, which distinguishes them from chiral fermions. The topand bottom quark VLQ partners T and B are expected to couple to the SM third-generationquarks [16], and decay via T → bW, tZ, tH and B → tW, bZ, bH, respectively.In this paper, a search for the production of TT and BB is presented, where at least one of theT (B) quarks decays as T → tZ (B → bZ), as shown in Fig. 1. The search is performed usingevents with two oppositely charged electrons or muons, consistent with coming from a decayof a Z boson, and jets. The data were collected with the CMS detector at the CERN LHC in 2016,from proton-proton (pp) collisions at √ s =
13 TeV, corresponding to an integrated luminosityof 35.9 fb − . TT t bWZ + l - lt/ bW/ (Z, H) BB bZ + l - lb/ tW/ (Z, H) Figure 1: Leading-order Feynman diagrams for the pair production and decay of T (left) and B(right) VLQs relevant to final states considered in this analysis.Searches for the pair production of T and B quarks have previously been reported by the AT-LAS [17–20] and CMS [21–23] Collaborations. The strictest lower limits on the T and B quark masses range between 790 and 1350 GeV, depending on the decay mode studied. The massrange for the T and B quarks studied in this analysis is 800–1500 GeV.
The central feature of the CMS apparatus is a superconducting solenoid of 6 m internal diame-ter, providing a magnetic field of 3.8 T. Within the solenoid volume are a silicon pixel and striptracker, a lead tungstate crystal electromagnetic calorimeter (ECAL), and a brass and scintilla-tor hadron calorimeter (HCAL), each composed of a barrel and two endcap sections. Forwardcalorimeters extend the pseudorapidity ( η ) coverage provided by the barrel and endcap detec-tors. Muons are detected in gas-ionization chambers embedded in the steel flux-return yokeoutside the solenoid. A more detailed description of the CMS detector, together with a def-inition of the coordinate system used and the relevant kinematic variables, can be found inRef. [24].Events of interest are selected using a two-tiered trigger system [25]. The first level, composedof custom hardware processors, uses information from the calorimeters and muon detectors toselect events at a rate of around 100 kHz within a time interval of less than 4 µ s. The secondlevel, known as the high-level trigger, consists of a farm of processors running a version of thefull event reconstruction software optimized for fast processing, and reduces the event rate toaround 1 kHz before data storage.Monte Carlo (MC) simulated signal events of the processes pp → TT and pp → BB for T andB quark masses in the range 0.8–1.5 TeV are produced in steps of 0.1 TeV. The events are gen-erated with M AD G RAPH MC @ NLO
PYTHIA OP ++ pro-gram (v.2.0) [30], with the MSTW2008NNLO68CL PDF set as implemented in the LHAPDF(v.5.9.0) framework [31].The main background process is Drell–Yan (Z/ γ ∗ )+jets production, with smaller contributionsfrom tt+jets and ttZ. Throughout the paper this background will be referred to as DY+jets.Other backgrounds, such as diboson, tZq, tWZ, and ttW production, are considerably smaller.The DY+jets simulated background samples are generated in different bins of the Z bosontransverse momentum p T , using the MC @ NLO [32] event generator at NLO precision with theF X F X jet-matching scheme [33]. The tt+jets events are generated using the POWHEG
PYTHIA
PYTHIA AD G RAPH MC @ NLO MC @ NLO [32] generator arevalid up to NLO. Using a top quark mass of 172.5 GeV, the tt+jets production cross section at
NNLO [30] is determined. Diboson production is calculated at NLO for WZ [39] and NNLOfor ZZ [40] and WW [41]. The production cross sections for the rare processes tZq, tWZ, andttW are calculated at NLO [42].A G
EANT
PYTHIA
The event reconstruction in CMS uses a particle-flow (PF) algorithm [45] to reconstruct a set ofphysics objects (charged and neutral hadrons, electrons, muons, and photons) using an opti-mized combination of information from the subdetectors. The energy calibration is performedseparately for each particle type.The pp interaction vertices are reconstructed from tracks in the silicon tracker using the deter-ministic annealing filter algorithm [46]. The pp interaction vertex with the highest ∑ p of theassociated clusters of physics objects is considered to be the primary vertex associated with thehard scattering interaction. Here, the physics objects are the jets, which are clustered with thetracks assigned to the vertex using the anti- k T jet clustering algorithm [47, 48], and the missingtransverse momentum (cid:126) p missT , defined as the negative vector sum of the (cid:126) p T of those jets, with itsmagnitude referred to as p missT . The interaction vertices not associated with the hard scatteringare designated as pileup vertices.Electron candidates are reconstructed from clusters of energy deposited in the ECAL and fromhits in the silicon tracker [49]. The clusters are first matched to track seeds in the pixel de-tector, then the trajectory of an electron candidate is reconstructed considering energy lost bythe electron due to bremsstrahlung as it traverses the material of the tracker, using a Gaus-sian sum filter algorithm. The PF algorithm further distinguishes electrons from charged pionsusing a multivariate approach [50]. Observables related to the energy and geometrical match-ing between track and ECAL cluster(s) are used as main inputs. Additional requirements areapplied on the ECAL shower shape, the variables related to the track-cluster matching, the im-pact parameter, and the ratio of the energies measured in the HCAL and ECAL in the regionaround the electron candidate. With these requirements, the reconstruction and identificationefficiency of an electron from a Z → e + e − decay is on average 70%, whereas the misidentifica-tion rate is 1–2% [49]. Electrons with p T >
25 GeV and | η | < < | η | < p T >
25 GeV and | η | < Charged leptons (electrons or muons) from Z → e + e − or Z → µ + µ − decays, with the Z bosonoriginating from the decay of a heavy VLQ, are expected to be isolated, i.e., to have low levelsof energy deposited in the calorimeter regions around their trajectories. An isolation variable isdefined as the scalar p T sum of the charged and neutral hadrons and photons in a cone centeredon the direction of the lepton, of radius ∆ R ≡ √ ( ∆ η ) + ( ∆ φ ) , with ∆ R = ( ) for elec-trons (muons). The p T contributions from pileup and from the lepton itself are subtracted fromthe isolation variable [49, 51]. The relative isolation parameter, defined as the isolation vari-able divided by the lepton p T , is required to be less than 0.06 (0.15) for the electrons (muons),with corresponding efficiencies of 85 and 95%, respectively, based on simulation. The isolationrequirement helps reject jets misidentified as leptons and reduce multijet backgrounds.The anti- k T jet clustering algorithm [47, 48] reconstructs jets with PF candidates as inputs. Theenergy of charged hadrons is determined from a combination of their momentum measured inthe tracker and the matching ECAL and HCAL energy deposits, corrected for zero-suppressioneffects and for the response function of the calorimeters to hadronic showers. Finally, the en-ergy of neutral hadrons is obtained from the corresponding corrected ECAL and HCAL en-ergies. To suppress the contribution from pileup, charged particles not originating from theprimary vertex are removed from the jet clustering. An event-by-event jet-area-based correc-tion [52, 53] is applied to subtract the contribution of the neutral-particle component of thepileup. Residual corrections are applied to the data to account for the differences with thesimulations [54].Two types of jet are considered, distinguished by the choice of distance parameter used forclustering. Those clustered with a distance parameter of 0.4 (“AK4 jets”), are required to have p T >
30 GeV, and those clustered with a value of 0.8 for this parameter (“AK8 jets”) mustsatisfy the condition p T >
200 GeV, where the jet momentum is the vector sum of the momentaof all particles clustered in the jet. Both classes of jets must satisfy | η | < p missT is determined using the PF objects and including the jet energy corrections.The combined secondary vertex b tagging algorithm (CSVv2) [55] is used to identify jets origi-nating from the hadronization of b quarks. The algorithm combines information on tracks fromthe silicon tracker and vertices associated with the jets using a multivariate discriminant. AnAK4 jet is defined as a b-tagged jet if the corresponding CSVv2 discriminant is above a thresh-old that gives an average efficiency of about 70% for b quark jets and a misidentification rate of1% for light-flavored jets.The signal events searched for in this analysis have two massive VLQs decaying to at least oneZ boson and either a Z, W, or Higgs boson and two heavy quarks. One Z boson must decayleptonically, whereas the remaining Z, W, or Higgs boson is reconstructed using its hadronicdecays into jets. Depending on the mass of the VLQ, the decay products can have a largeLorentz boost. In this case, the decay products of W → qq (cid:48) and Z → qq (collectively labeledas V → qq), H → bb, and t → qq (cid:48) b may be contained within a single AK8 jet. These decaysare reconstructed using a jet substructure tagger. The decay products of heavy bosons and topquarks that do not acquire a large Lorentz boost are identified by a resolved tagger using AK4jets. Both types of taggers are described in the next section. For the dielectron (Z → e + e − ) channel, event candidates are selected using triggers requiringthe presence of at least one electron with p T >
115 GeV or a photon with p T >
175 GeV. Afterpassing one of the triggers, the triggering electron is also required to pass a set of criteria based on the electromagnetic shower shape and the quality of the electron track. A loose isolationcriterion on the electrons is further required, as described in Section 3. One of the electrons isrequired to have p T >
120 GeV in order to remain above the triggering electron p T threshold.Since the signal electrons originate from the decay of highly boosted Z bosons, these selectioncriteria preserve the high signal efficiency, while reducing the number of misidentified elec-trons. The photon trigger helps to retain electrons with p T >
300 GeV that would otherwise belost because of the requirements on electromagnetic shower shape in the ECAL.For the dimuon (Z → µ + µ − ) channel, event candidates are selected using a trigger that re-quires presence of at least one muon with p T >
24 GeV. The trigger implements a loose isola-tion requirement by allowing only a small energy deposit in the calorimeters around the muontrajectory. After passing the trigger, one of the muons from the Z → µ + µ − decay must have p T >
45 GeV, which provides the largest background rejection that can be obtained withoutdecreasing the signal efficiency for the VLQ mass range of interest. The trigger and lepton re-construction and identification efficiencies are determined using a tag-and-probe method [56].Scale factors are applied to the simulated events to account for any efficiency differences be-tween the data and simulation.The invariant mass of the lepton pair from the Z boson leptonic decay must satisfy 75 < m ( (cid:96)(cid:96) ) <
105 GeV, to be consistent with the Z boson mass, and have a total p T ( (cid:96)(cid:96) ) >
100 GeV,appropriate for the decay of a massive VLQ. Events must have exactly one e + e − or µ + µ − paircandidate consistent with a Z boson decay.Events are required to have at least three AK4 jets with H T >
200 GeV, and H T ≡ ∑ p T , wherethe summation is over all jets in the event. The highest p T (leading) AK4 jet is required to have p T >
100 GeV, the second-highest- p T (subleading) AK4 jet to have p T >
50 GeV, and all otherjets must satisfy the condition p T >
30 GeV. The AK4 (AK8) jets j within ∆ R ( (cid:96) , j ) < ( ) of either lepton from the Z boson decay are not considered further in the analysis. At least oneb-tagged jet with p T >
50 GeV is required. The S T variable, defined as the sum of H T , p T ( Z ) ,and p missT , must be greater than 1000 GeV. The selection criteria are summarized in Table 1.The selections are optimized to obtain the largest suppression of SM backgrounds that can beachieved without reducing the simulated signal efficiency by more than 1%.Table 1: Event selection criteria.Variable SelectionZ → (cid:96)(cid:96) candidate multiplicity = p T ( Z ) >
100 GeVAK4 jet multiplicity ≥ H T >
200 GeV p T of leading AK4 jet >
100 GeV p T of subleading AK4 jet >
50 GeVb-tagged AK4 jet multiplicity ≥ p T of b jet >
50 GeV S T > → qq and H → bb are reconstructed from AK8 jets, using the jet substructure tagger, and are referred to as V and H jets, respectively. As the Higgsboson mass is larger than W and Z boson masses, it requires a higher momentum for its decayproducts to merge into a single AK8 jet. Therefore, H jets are required to have p T >
300 GeVand V jets have p T >
200 GeV. A jet pruning algorithm [57, 58] is used to measure the jetmass. The V and H jet candidates are required to have a pruned jet mass in the range 65–105and 105–135 GeV, respectively. The jet pruning algorithm reclusters the groomed jets [59] byeliminating low energy subjets subjets. In the subsequent recombination of two subjets, theratio of the subleading subjet p T to the pruned jet p T must be greater than 0.1 and the distancebetween the two subjets must satisfy ∆ R < m jet /2 p Tjet , where m jet and p Tjet are the mass and p T of the pruned jet, respectively.The N -subjettiness algorithm [60] is used to calculate the jet shape variable τ N , which quantifiesthe consistency of a jet with the hypothesis of the jet having N subjets, each arising from ahard parton coming from the decay of an original heavy boson. The V and H jets in the TT(BB) search are required to have an N -subjettiness ratio τ ≡ τ / τ < ( ) . Both prunedsubjets coming from the H jet are required to be b-tagged. This is done by using the above-mentioned CSVv2 b-tagging algorithm with a cut that gives a 70–90% efficiency for b quarksubjets, depending on the subjet p T , and a misidentification rate of 10% for subjets from light-flavored quarks and gluons.Boosted top quarks decaying to bqq (cid:48) are identified (“t tagged”) using AK8 jets and the soft-dropalgorithm [61, 62] to groom the jet. This algorithm recursively declusters a jet into two subjets.It discards soft and wide-angle radiative jet components until a hard-splitting criterion is met,to obtain jets consistent with the decay of a massive particle. We use the algorithm with anangular exponent β =
0, a soft cutoff threshold z cut < R = N -subjettinessratio τ ≡ τ / τ < ( ) for the TT (BB) search, consistent with the expectation for threesubjets from top quark decay. There are a total of five heavy bosons and quarks produced inTT signal events, whereas there are only four in BB events. Thus it is possible to apply a tighter N -subjetiness ratio criterion in the BB analysis without a loss of signal efficiency.Corrections to the jet mass scale, resolution and τ selection efficiency for V jets due to the dif-ference in data and MC simulation are measured using a sample of semileptonic tt events [63].For the correction to the jet mass scale and resolution, boosted W bosons produced in the topquark decays are separated from the combinatorial tt background by performing a simultane-ous fit to the observed pruned jet mass spectrum. In order to account for the difference in thejet shower profile of V → qq and H → bb decays, a correction factor to the H jets mass scaleand resolution [64] is measured by comparing the ratio of H and V jet efficiencies using the PYTHIA
HERWIG ++ [65] shower generators. In addition, the corrections to τ selection efficiency are obtained based on the difference between data and simulation [64] forH-tagged jets. All these corrections are propagated to V, top quark and H jets, respectively.For top quark jets, the corrections to the τ selection efficiency are measured between data andsimulation [63] using soft-drop groomed jets. To account for the misidentification of boostedV-, H-, and t-tagged jets in the background samples, mistagging scale factors are derived froma region in the data enriched in Z+jets events, which is constructed using the selection criterialisted in Table 1, with the exception that events must have zero b jets. These mistagging scalefactors are applied to the mistagged jets in simulated signal and background events.In the TT search, in addition to the jet substructure techniques, the W, Z, H, and top quarkdecays are reconstructed with a resolved tagger using AK4 jets, as described below. Only thoseAK4 jets that are a radial distance ∆ R > resolved tagging algorithm. The resolved V → qq and H → bb candidates are composed oftwo AK4 jets j and j whose invariant mass must satisfy 70 < m ( j j ) <
120 GeV and 80 < m ( j j ) <
160 GeV, respectively, and have p T ( j j ) >
100 GeV. For H candidates, at least one ofthe jets must be b tagged. The resolved top quark candidate is composed of either three AK4jets j , j , and j with an invariant mass 120 < m ( j j j ) <
240 GeV and p T ( j j j ) >
100 GeV,or an AK4 jet j and an AK8 V jet satisfying 120 < m ( V j ) <
240 GeV and p T ( V j ) >
150 GeV.These selection criteria are derived from simulated TT events, using MC truth information.The TT events are next classified based on the number of AK4 b-tagged jets ( N b ), and numberof V → qq ( N V ), H → bb ( N H ), and t → qq (cid:48) b ( N t ) candidates identified using either the jetsubstructure or resolved tagging algorithms. In an event, N b can be 1 or ≥
2, and N V , N H , and N t each can be 0 or ≥
1. Thus, in total, 2 × × × =
16 categories of events are constructed.For simplicity, overlaps between candidates of different types are allowed, e.g., the same AK8jet could be tagged as both a top quark and an H candidate because of the overlapping masswindows. Such overlaps occur in a few percent of the signal events. However, by constructioneach event can belong to only one category. In the example above, the event would fall into acategory with both N H ≥ N t ≥ N b and the number of V → qq, H → bb, and t → qq (cid:48) bcandidates in the event, N V , N H and N t , respectively, identified using both the jet substructureand resolved tagger algorithms. The last three columns show the relative signal acceptance fora T quark of mass 1200 GeV for decay channels tZtZ, tZtH and tZbW as described in text.Group N b N V N H N t tZtZ (%) tZtH (%) tZbW (%)A = ≥ = ≥ = ≥ ≥ ≥ ≥ ≥ = ≥ ≥ ≥ ≥ ≥ = = = ≥ ≥ ≥ = = ≥ ≥ ≥ = ≥ = ≥ ≥ ≥ = = ≥ S / √ B , where S and B are theexpected TT → tZtZ signal and background event yields, respectively, as determined fromthe simulation. The categories with similar figures of merit based on expected upper lim-its at 95% confidence level (CL) are grouped together, while the categories that are foundnot to add sensitivity to the TT signal are discarded. A total of four event groups labeled Athrough D are selected, each with a different signal acceptance relative to the selection cri-teria described in Table 1 and depending on the T decay channel. Table 2 shows the selec-tions on these event groups, and the relative signal acceptances of the T quark decay chan-nels, namely, tZtZ, tZtH, or tZbW for a T quark of mass 1200 GeV. The decay channels aredefined with a benchmark combination of branching fractions B ( T → tZ ) = B ( T → tZ ) = B ( T → tH ) =
50% (tZtH), and B ( T → tZ ) = B ( T → bW ) =
50% (tZbW).Events from all the decay channels mainly contribute to groups A and B, whereas groups Cand D have slightly lower acceptance depending on the decay channel. The fraction of the sig- nal identified by the jet substructure and resolved taggers depends on the T quark mass. Formasses below 1200 GeV, the two taggers are equally efficient in identifying signal events for allthe channels. For T quark masses above 1200 GeV, the jet substructure tagger becomes moreefficient. For example, for T quark mass at 1800 GeV, the jet substructure tagger selects twiceas many T quark candidates as the resolved tagger.Table 3: The first four columns show different event categories used for the BB search, classifiedaccording to the number of AK4 b-tagged jets N b and the number of V → qq, H → bb, and t → qq (cid:48) b candidates in the event, N V , N H , and N t , respectively, identified using the jet substructurealgorithm. The last three columns show the relative signal acceptance for a B quark of mass1200 GeV for decay channels bZbZ, bZbH and bZtW as described in text.Category N b N V N H N t bZbZ (%) bZbH (%) bZtW (%)1b = = = = ≥ = = = ≥ ≥ ≥ ≥ ≥ ≥ ≥ = ≥ ≥ = = N b , N V , N H , and N t . Table 3 shows thesecategories, and the relative signal acceptances of B quark decay channels, namely, bZbZ, bZbH,or bZtW for a B quark of mass 1200 GeV. The decay channels are defined with a benchmarkcombination of branching fractions B ( B → bZ ) = B ( B → bZ ) = B ( B → bH ) =
50% (bZbH), and B ( B → bZ ) = B ( B → tW ) =
50% (bZtW).
The backgrounds from all sources are estimated using simulation, except for Z+jets where cor-rections to the simulated events are applied using data, as described below. The modeling ofsimulated background events is validated using several control regions in the data, which areconstructed by inverting one or more of the requirements listed in Table 1. The control regionlabeled CR0b+high- S T is constructed by requiring zero b jets. The control region CR1b+low- S T is constructed by inverting the S T requirement: S T ≤ S T requirement. Signal contaminationfrom all channels in each of these control regions is less than 1%.The AK4 jet multiplicity distribution is not modeled reliably in the Z+jets simulation, and there-fore it is corrected using scale factors obtained from data. Scale factors listed in Table 4 aredetermined using the CR0b control region, which is enriched with Z+jets events. After apply-ing these corrections, the distributions of kinematic variables in the control regions from thebackground simulations are in agreement with the data, as shown for example in Fig. 2 for the S T distributions. The systematic uncertainties in the SM background rates are due to the uncertainties in theCMS measurements of d σ /d H T for Z+jets [66], d σ /d m tt for tt+jets [67], and d σ /d p T ( Z ) for Table 4: The scale factors determined from data for correcting the AK4 jet multiplicity distribu-tion in the simulation. The quoted uncertainties in the scale factors are statistical only.Number of AK4 jets Scale factor3 0.92 ± ± ± ± ≥ ± [GeV] T S E v en t s / G e V (13 TeV) -1 CMS
DataDY+jetstt ZttOther backgroundsBackground uncertainty [GeV] T S
400 600 800 1000 U n c e r t a i n t y D a t a - B k g - [GeV] T S E v en t s / G e V (13 TeV) -1 CMS
DataDY+jetstt ZttOther backgroundsBackground uncertainty [GeV] T S U n c e r t a i n t y D a t a - B k g - Figure 2: The S T distributions for the CR1b+low- S T (left) and CR0b+high- S T (right) controlregions for the data (points) and the background simulations (shaded histograms) after apply-ing the scale factors given in Table 4. The vertical bars on the points represent the statisticaluncertainties in the data. The hatched bands indicate the total uncertainties in the simulatedbackground contributions added in quadrature. The lower plots show the difference betweenthe data and the simulated background, divided by the total uncertainty. Table 5: Summary of systematic uncertainties considered in the statistical analysis of TT andBB search on the background and signal events. All uncertainties affect the normalizations ofthe S T distributions. The tick mark indicates the uncertainties that also affect the shape, andthe uncertainty range accounts for their effects on the expected yields across all the TT groupsor BB categories. The TT and BB signal events correspond to the benchmark decay channelstZtZ and bZbZ, respectively, for T and B quark mass m T = m B = Source Shape Uncertainty (%)TT BBBackground yield Signal yield Background yield Signal yieldtt+jets rate 15 — 15 —DY+jets rate 15 — 15 —Diboson rate 15 — 15 —Integrated luminosity 2.5 2.5 2.5 2.5Lepton identification 3 3 3 3Trigger efficiency 1 1 1 1PDF (cid:88) µ f and µ r (cid:88) (cid:88) (cid:88) (cid:88) (cid:88) (cid:88) (cid:88) (cid:88) (cid:88) (cid:88) (cid:88) diboson production [68]. They are estimated to be 15% in each case. The measured integratedluminosity uncertainty of 2.5% [69] affects both the signal and background rate predictions.The uncertainties associated with the measured data-to-simulation efficiency scale factors forthe lepton identification and the trigger efficiencies are 3 and 1%, respectively.The effect on the signal and background acceptance uncertainties due to the renormalizationand factorization scale ( µ f and µ r ) uncertainties and the PDF choices in the simulations aretaken into account in the statistical analysis. The influence of µ f and µ r scale uncertaintiesare estimated by varying the default scales by the following six combinations of factors, ( µ f , µ r ) × (1/2, 1/2), (1/2, 1), (1, 1/2), (2, 2), (2, 1), and (1, 2). The maximum and minimum ofthe six variations are computed for each bin of the S T distribution, producing an uncertainty“envelope”. The uncertainties due to the PDF choices in the simulations are estimated usingthe PDF4LHC procedure [27, 70–72], where the root-mean-square of 100 pseudo-experimentsprovided by the PDF sets represents the uncertainty envelope. The background and signalevent counts are then varied relative to their nominal values up and down by a factor of twotimes the uncertainty envelopes. The impacts of these variations on the background and signalshape are also taken into account. The effect of the µ f and µ r scale uncertainties on the TTand BB signal yield is < Several uncertainties are associated with the measurement of jet-related quantities. The jet en-ergy scale and resolution uncertainties are about 1% [54, 73]. The AK8 pruned jet mass scaleand resolution uncertainties are evaluated to be 2.3 and 18% [63], respectively. The effect ofthese uncertainties on the TT and BB signal yields is 1.5–4.4% and 1.0–3.8%, respectively. Theseuncertainties, in addition to the uncertainties in the τ (8%) and τ (11%) selections [63], areapplied for the V-, H-, and t-tagged jets. The systematic uncertainties due to the jet showerprofile differences between the jets in the W → qq (cid:48) and H → bb processes are estimated fromthe difference observed between results obtained with the PYTHIA
HERWIG ++ generatorsand are applied to the V- and H-tagged jets. The overall effect of V, H, and t tagging uncer-tainties on TT and BB signal yields is 0.2–8.4%. The uncertainties in the misidentification ratesof boosted jets are 5, 14, and 7% for the W-, H-, and t-tagged jets, respectively. They are usedto derive the uncertainties in the estimates of the numbers of mistagged jets in the signal andbackground simulated events, which result in uncertainties in the BB signal yields of up to 14%.The uncertainties in the b tagging efficiency scale factors are propagated to the final result, withthe uncertainties in the b- and c-flavored quark jets treated as fully correlated. These uncertain-ties are in the range 2–5% for b-flavored jets, a factor of two larger for c-flavored jets, and ≈ m T = m B = T quark search The number of observed events for the TT production search in the A, B, C, and D event groupsare given for the electron and muon channels in Tables 6 and 7, respectively, along with thenumbers of predicted background events. The expected numbers of signal events for T quarkmasses of 800 and 1200 GeV are also shown in the same tables, for three different decay sce-narios, with branching fractions B ( T → tZ ) = B ( T → tZ ) = B ( T → tH ) = B ( T → tZ ) = B ( T → bW ) =
50% (tZbW). The predicted background and observedevent yields agree within their uncertainties.To determine the upper limits on the TT cross section, the electron and muon channels are com-bined, and a simultaneous binned maximum-likelihood fit is performed on the S T distributionsin data for the four event groups. The measured S T distributions in data are shown in Fig. 3 foreach of the event groups, along with the predicted background distributions and the expectedsignal distributions for TT → tZtZ with m T = S T distribution to ensure that thestatistical uncertainty associated with the expected background is less than 20% in each bin.There is no indication of a signal in the S T distribution of any of the event groups.The upper limits at 95% CL on the TT cross section are computed using a Bayesian likelihood-based technique [74] with the T HETA framework [75]. All the systematic uncertainties dueto normalization variations described in the previous section enter the likelihood as nuisanceparameters with log-normal prior distributions, whereas the uncertainties from the shape vari-ations are assigned Gaussian-distributed priors. For the signal cross section parameter, we usea uniform prior distribution. The likelihood is marginalized with respect to the nuisance pa- Table 6: The number of observed events and the predicted number of SM background eventsin the TT search using Z → e + e − channel in the four event groups. The expected numbers ofsignal events for T quark masses of 800 and 1200 GeV for three different decay scenarios withassumed branching fractions B ( T → tZ ) = B ( T → tZ ) = B ( T → tH ) = B ( T → tZ ) = B ( T → bW ) =
50% (tZbW) are also shown. The uncertainties inthe number of expected background events include the statistical and systematic uncertaintiesadded in quadrature.Event group A B C DDY+jets 54.9 ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± m T =800 GeV 54.9 ± ± ± ± m T =800 GeV 24.8 ± ± ± ± m T =800 GeV 24.5 ± ± ± ± m T =1200 GeV 3.6 ± ± ± ± m T =1200 GeV 1.6 ± ± ± ± m T =1200 GeV 1.6 ± ± ± ± → µ + µ − channel in the four event groups. The expected numbers ofsignal events for T quark masses of 800 and 1200 GeV for three different decay scenarios withassumed branching fractions B ( T → tZ ) = B ( T → tZ ) = B ( T → tH ) = B ( T → tZ ) = B ( T → bW ) =
50% (tZbW) are also shown. The uncertainties inthe number of expected background events include the statistical and systematic uncertaintiesadded in quadrature.Event group A B C DDY+jets 102.5 ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± m T =800 GeV 72.8 ± ± ± ± m T =800 GeV 33.0 ± ± ± ± m T =800 GeV 34.9 ± ± ± ± m T =1200 GeV 4.4 ± ± ± ± m T =1200 GeV 2.0 ± ± ± ± m T =1200 GeV 1.9 ± ± ± ± .1 T quark search [GeV] T S E v en t s / B i n (13 TeV) -1 CMS
Group A
DataDY+jetstt ZttOther backgrounds 2) · = 1200 GeV ( T tZtZ, M fi TTBackground uncertainty [GeV] T S U n c e r t a i n t y D a t a - B k g - [GeV] T S E v en t s / B i n (13 TeV) -1 CMS
Group B
DataDY+jetstt ZttOther backgrounds 2) · = 1200 GeV ( T tZtZ, M fi TTBackground uncertainty [GeV] T S U n c e r t a i n t y D a t a - B k g - [GeV] T S E v en t s / B i n (13 TeV) -1 CMS
Group C
DataDY+jetstt ZttOther backgrounds 2) · = 1200 GeV ( T tZtZ, M fi TTBackground uncertainty [GeV] T S U n c e r t a i n t y D a t a - B k g - [GeV] T S E v en t s / B i n (13 TeV) -1 CMS
Group D
DataDY+jetstt ZttOther backgrounds 2) · = 1200 GeV ( T tZtZ, M fi TTBackground uncertainty [GeV] T S U n c e r t a i n t y D a t a - B k g - Figure 3: The S T distributions for groups A, B, C, D (left to right, upper to lower) from data(points with vertical and horizontal bars), the expected SM backgrounds (shaded histograms),and the expected signal, scaled up by a factor 2, for TT → tZtZ with m T = rameters, and the limits are extracted from a simultaneous maximum-likelihood fit of the S T distributions in all four groups shown in Fig. 3.The upper limits on the TT cross section are computed for different T quark mass values andfor the three branching fraction scenarios listed above. The upper limits at 95% CL on theTT cross section are shown as a function of the T quark mass by the solid line in Fig. 4. Themedian expected upper limit is given by the dotted line, while the inner and outer bands corre-spond to one and two standard deviation uncertainties, respectively, in the expected limit. Thedotted-dashed curve displays the predicted theoretical signal cross section [30]. Comparing theobserved cross section limits to the theoretical signal cross section, we exclude T quarks withmasses less than 1280, 1185, and 1120 GeV, respectively, for the three branching ratio hypothe-ses listed above. The expected upper limits are 1290, 1175, and 1115 GeV for the respectivescenarios. [GeV] T m
800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 [ pb ] s - - -
10 1
CMS (13 TeV) -1 Observed limit (95% CL)Median expected68% expected95% expected(tZ) = 1.0 B , TT [GeV] T m
800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 [ pb ] s - - -
10 1
CMS (13 TeV) -1 Observed limit (95% CL)Median expected68% expected95% expected(tH) = 0.5 B (tZ) = B , TT [GeV] T m
800 1000 1200 1400 1600 1800 [ pb ] s - - -
10 1
CMS (13 TeV) -1 Observed limit (95% CL)Median expected68% expected95% expected(bW) = 0.5 B (tZ) = B , TT Figure 4: The observed (solid line) and expected (dashed line) 95% CL upper limits on the TTcross section as a function of the T quark mass assuming (upper left) B ( T → tZ ) = B ( T → tZ ) = B ( T → tH ) = B ( T → tZ ) = B ( T → bW ) = B ( T → tZ ) + B ( T → tH ) + B ( T → bW ) = → tZ, the lower mass limitis 1280 GeV. .1 T quark search (tH) B ( b W ) B (13 TeV) -1 % C L ob s e r v ed T qua r k m a ss li m i t [ G e V ] CMS
Observed T mass lower limits (tH) B ( b W ) B (13 TeV) -1 % C L e x pe c t ed T qua r k m a ss li m i t [ G e V ] CMS
Expected T mass lower limits (bH) B ( t W ) B (13 TeV) -1 % C L ob s e r v ed B qua r k m a ss li m i t [ G e V ] CMS
Observed B mass lower limits (bH) B ( t W ) B (13 TeV) -1 % C L e x pe c t ed B qua r k m a ss li m i t [ G e V ] CMS
Expected B mass lower limits
Figure 5: The observed (left) and expected (right) 95% CL lower limits on the mass of theT (upper) and B (lower) quark, in GeV, for various branching fraction scenarios, assuming B ( T → tZ ) + B ( T → tH ) + B ( T → bW ) = B ( B → bZ ) + B ( B → bH ) + B ( B → tW ) = B quark search The numbers of observed and predicted background events in the five event categories forthe BB search using Z → e + e − and Z → µ + µ − are given in Tables 8 and 9, respectively.The expected number of signal events in each category is also shown for B masses of 800and 1200 GeV. The branching fraction hypotheses assumed for the three decay channels are B ( B → bZ ) = B ( B → bZ ) = B ( B → bH ) =
50% (bZbH), and B ( B → bZ ) = B ( B → tW ) =
50% (bZtW). The numbers of observed and expected background events are con-sistent with each other for every event category. As with the TT search, 95% CL upper limitson the BB production cross section are determined using a simultaneous binned maximum-likelihood fit to the S T distributions for the different event categories, shown in Fig. 6.Table 8: The numbers of observed events and the predicted number of SM background eventsin the BB search for the five event categories using Z → e + e − channel. The expected numbersof signal events for B masses of 800 and 1200 GeV with branching fraction hypotheses for thethree decay channels, B ( B → bZ ) = B ( B → bZ ) = B ( B → bH ) =
50% (bZbH),and B ( B → bZ ) = B ( B → tW ) =
50% (bZtW) are also shown. The uncertainties in the numberof expected background events include the statistical and systematic uncertainties added inquadrature.Event category 1b 2b Boosted t Boosted H Boosted VDY+jets 155.2 ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± m B =800 GeV 39.3 ± ± ± ± ± m B =800 GeV 20.5 ± ± ± ± ± m B =800 GeV 18.8 ± ± ± ± ± m B =1200 GeV 2.6 ± ± ± ± ± m B =1200 GeV 1.4 ± ± ± ± ± m B =1200 GeV 1.2 ± ± ± ± ± B ( B → bZ ) + B ( B → bH ) + B ( B → tW ) = → bZ, the lower mass limitis 1130 GeV. The results of a search have been presented for the pair production of vector-like top (T) andbottom (B) quark partners in proton-proton collisions at √ s =
13 TeV, using data collected bythe CMS experiment at the CERN LHC, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 35.9 fb − . work E v en t s / B i n DataDY+jetstt ZttOther backgrounds = 1200 GeV (x 5) B bZbZ, M fi BBBackground uncertainty (13 TeV) -1 CMS [GeV] T S - U n c e r t a i n t y D a t a - B k g work E v en t s / B i n DataDY+jetstt ZttOther backgrounds = 1200 GeV (x 5) B bZbZ, M fi BBBackground uncertainty (13 TeV) -1 CMS [GeV] T S - U n c e r t a i n t y D a t a - B k g work E v en t s / B i n DataDY+jetstt ZttOther backgrounds = 1200 GeV (x 5) B bZbZ, M fi BBBackground uncertainty (13 TeV) -1 CMS
Boosted t [GeV] T S - U n c e r t a i n t y D a t a - B k g work E v en t s / B i n DataDY+jetstt ZttOther backgrounds = 1200 GeV (x 5) B bZbZ, M fi BBBackground uncertainty (13 TeV) -1 CMS
Boosted H [GeV] T S - U n c e r t a i n t y D a t a - B k g work E v en t s / B i n DataDY+jetstt ZttOther backgrounds = 1200 GeV (x 5) B bZbZ, M fi BBBackground uncertainty (13 TeV) -1 CMS
Boosted Z [GeV] T S - U n c e r t a i n t y D a t a - B k g Figure 6: The S T distributions for the 1b, 2b, boosted t, boosted H and boosted Z (left to right,upper to lower) event categories for the data (points with vertical and horizontal bars), and theexpected background (shaded histograms). The vertical bars give the statistical uncertainty inthe data, and the horizontal bars show the bin widths. The expected signal for BB → bZbZwith m B = Table 9: The number of observed events and the predicted number of SM background eventsin the BB search for the five event categories using Z → µ + µ − channel. The expected numbersof signal events for B masses of 800 and 1200 GeV with branching fraction hypotheses for thethree decay channels, B ( B → bZ ) = B ( B → bZ ) = B ( B → bH ) =
50% (bZbH),and B ( B → bZ ) = B ( B → tW ) =
50% (bZtW) are also shown. The uncertainties in the numberof expected background events include the statistical and systematic uncertainties added inquadrature.Event category 1b 2b Boosted t Boosted H Boosted VDY+jets 280.6 ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± ± m B =800 GeV 56.7 ± ± ± ± ± m B =800 GeV 27.9 ± ± ± ± ± m B =800 GeV 26.3 ± ± ± ± ± m B =1200 GeV 3.3 ± ± ± ± ± m B =1200 GeV 1.7 ± ± ± ± ± m B =1200 GeV 1.5 ± ± ± ± ±
800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 [GeV] B m - - -
10 1 [ pb ] s CMS (13 TeV) -1 Observed limit (95% CL)Median expected68% expected95% expected(bZ) = 1.0 B , BB
800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 [GeV] B m - - -
10 1 [ pb ] s CMS (13 TeV) -1 Observed limit (95% CL)Median expected68% expected95% expected(bH) = 0.5 B (bZ) = B , BB
800 900 1000 1100 1200 1300 1400 [GeV] B m - - -
10 1 [ pb ] s CMS (13 TeV) -1 Observed limit (95% CL)Median expected68% expected95% expected(tW) = 0.5 B (bZ) = B , BB Figure 7: The observed (solid line) and expected (dashed line) 95% CL upper limits on the BBproduction cross section versus the B quark mass for (upper left) B ( B → bZ ) = B ( B → bZ ) = B ( B → bH ) = B ( B → bZ ) = B ( B → tW ) = The TT search is performed by looking for events in which one T quark decays via T → tZ andthe other decays via T → bW, tZ, tH, where H refers to the Higgs boson. The BB searchlooks for events in which one B quark decays via B → bZ and the other via B → tW, bZ, orbH. Events with two oppositely charged electrons or muons, consistent with coming from thedecay of a Z boson, and jets are investigated, and are categorized according to the numbers oftop quark and W, Z, and Higgs boson candidates. These categories are individually optimizedfor TT and BB event topologies.The data are in agreement with the standard model background predictions for all the eventcategories. Upper limits at 95% confidence level on the TT and BB production cross sectionsare obtained from a simultaneous binned maximum-likelihood fit to the observed distributionsfor the different event categories, under the assumption of various T and B quark branchingfractions. Comparing these upper limits to the theoretical predictions for the TT and BB crosssections as a function of the T and B quark masses, lower limits on the masses at 95% confi-dence level are determined for different branching fraction scenarios. In the case of a T quarkdecaying exclusively via T → tZ, the lower mass limit is 1280 GeV, while for a B quark decayingonly via B → bZ, it is 1130 GeV. These lower limits are comparable with those measured by theATLAS Collaboration [20], also using the Z boson dilepton decay channel. The results of theanalysis presented in this paper are complementary to previous CMS measurements [21–23],and have extended sensitivity in reaching higher mass limits for T and B quarks. Acknowledgments
We congratulate our colleagues in the CERN accelerator departments for the excellent perfor-mance of the LHC and thank the technical and administrative staffs at CERN and at other CMSinstitutes for their contributions to the success of the CMS effort. In addition, we gratefullyacknowledge the computing centers and personnel of the Worldwide LHC Computing Gridfor delivering so effectively the computing infrastructure essential to our analyses. Finally,we acknowledge the enduring support for the construction and operation of the LHC and theCMS detector provided by the following funding agencies: BMBWF and FWF (Austria); FNRSand FWO (Belgium); CNPq, CAPES, FAPERJ, FAPERGS, and FAPESP (Brazil); MES (Bulgaria);CERN; CAS, MoST, and NSFC (China); COLCIENCIAS (Colombia); MSES and CSF (Croa-tia); RPF (Cyprus); SENESCYT (Ecuador); MoER, ERC IUT, and ERDF (Estonia); Academy ofFinland, MEC, and HIP (Finland); CEA and CNRS/IN2P3 (France); BMBF, DFG, and HGF(Germany); GSRT (Greece); NKFIA (Hungary); DAE and DST (India); IPM (Iran); SFI (Ireland);INFN (Italy); MSIP and NRF (Republic of Korea); MES (Latvia); LAS (Lithuania); MOE and UM(Malaysia); BUAP, CINVESTAV, CONACYT, LNS, SEP, and UASLP-FAI (Mexico); MOS (Mon-tenegro); MBIE (New Zealand); PAEC (Pakistan); MSHE and NSC (Poland); FCT (Portugal);JINR (Dubna); MON, RosAtom, RAS, RFBR, and NRC KI (Russia); MESTD (Serbia); SEIDI,CPAN, PCTI, and FEDER (Spain); MOSTR (Sri Lanka); Swiss Funding Agencies (Switzerland);MST (Taipei); ThEPCenter, IPST, STAR, and NSTDA (Thailand); TUBITAK and TAEK (Turkey);NASU and SFFR (Ukraine); STFC (United Kingdom); DOE and NSF (USA).Individuals have received support from the Marie-Curie program and the European ResearchCouncil and Horizon 2020 Grant, contract No. 675440 (European Union); the Leventis Foun-dation; the A. P. Sloan Foundation; the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation; the Belgian Fed-eral Science Policy Office; the Fonds pour la Formation `a la Recherche dans l’Industrie et dansl’Agriculture (FRIA-Belgium); the Agentschap voor Innovatie door Wetenschap en Technologie(IWT-Belgium); the F.R.S.-FNRS and FWO (Belgium) under the “Excellence of Science - EOS” -be.h project n. 30820817; the Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports (MEYS) of the Czech Re- public; the Lend ¨ulet (“Momentum”) Program and the J´anos Bolyai Research Scholarship of theHungarian Academy of Sciences, the New National Excellence Program ´UNKP, the NKFIA re-search grants 123842, 123959, 124845, 124850 and 125105 (Hungary); the Council of Science andIndustrial Research, India; the HOMING PLUS program of the Foundation for Polish Science,cofinanced from European Union, Regional Development Fund, the Mobility Plus program ofthe Ministry of Science and Higher Education, the National Science Center (Poland), contractsHarmonia 2014/14/M/ST2/00428, Opus 2014/13/B/ST2/02543, 2014/15/B/ST2/03998, and2015/19/B/ST2/02861, Sonata-bis 2012/07/E/ST2/01406; the National Priorities ResearchProgram by Qatar National Research Fund; the Programa Estatal de Fomento de la Investi-gaci ´on Cient´ıfica y T´ecnica de Excelencia Mar´ıa de Maeztu, grant MDM-2015-0509 and the Pro-grama Severo Ochoa del Principado de Asturias; the Thalis and Aristeia programs cofinancedby EU-ESF and the Greek NSRF; the Rachadapisek Sompot Fund for Postdoctoral Fellowship,Chulalongkorn University and the Chulalongkorn Academic into Its 2nd Century Project Ad-vancement Project (Thailand); the Welch Foundation, contract C-1845; and the Weston HavensFoundation (USA). References [1] 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 .[2] 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 .[3] 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 .[4] ATLAS and CMS Collaborations, “Combined measurement of the Higgs boson mass inpp collisions at √ s = Phys. Rev.Lett. (2015) 191803, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.114.191803 , arXiv:1503.07589 .[5] CMS Collaboration, “Measurements of properties of the Higgs boson decaying into thefour-lepton final state in pp collisions at √ s = 13 TeV”, JHEP (2017) 047, doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2017)047 , arXiv:1706.09936 .[6] J. A. Aguilar-Saavedra, R. Benbrik, S. Heinemeyer, and M. P´erez-Victoria, “Handbook ofvectorlike quarks: Mixing and single production”, Phys. Rev. D (2013) 094010, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.88.094010 , arXiv:1306.0572 .[7] J. Kang, P. Langacker, and B. D. Nelson, “Theory and phenomenology of exotic isosingletquarks and squarks”, Phys. Rev. D (2008) 035003, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.77.035003 , arXiv:0708.2701v2 .[8] D. Choudhury, T. Tait, and C. Wagner, “Beautiful mirrors and precision electroweakdata”, Phys. Rev. D (2002) 053002, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.65.053002 , arXiv:hep-ph/0109097 . eferences [9] L. Randall and R. Sundrum, “A large mass hierarchy from a small extra dimension”, Phys. Rev. Lett. (1999) 3370, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.83.3370 , arXiv:hep-ph/9905221 .[10] N. Arkani-Hamed, A. G. Cohen, E. Katz, and A. E. Nelson, “The littlest Higgs”, JHEP (2002) 034, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2002/07/034 , arXiv:hep-ph/0206021 .[11] M. Schmaltz, “Physics beyond the standard model (theory): Introducing the LittleHiggs”, Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. (2003) 40, doi:10.1016/S0920-5632(03)01409-9 , arXiv:hep-ph/0210415 .[12] 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 .[13] M. S. D. Marzocca and J. Shu, “General composite Higgs models”, JHEP (2012) 013, doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2012)013 , arXiv:1205.0770 .[14] D. Guadagnoli, R. N. Mohapatra, and I. Sung, “Gauged flavor group with left-rightsymmetry”, JHEP (2011) 093, doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2011)093 , arXiv:1103.4170 .[15] R. T. D’Agnolo and A. Hook, “Finding the strong CP problem at the LHC”, Phys. Lett. B (2016) 421, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2016.09.061 , arXiv:1507.00336 .[16] Y. Okada and L. Panizzi, “LHC signatures of vector-like quarks”, Adv. High Energy Phys. (2013) 364936, doi:10.1155/2013/364936 , arXiv:1207.5607 .[17] ATLAS Collaboration, “Search for pair production of vector-like top quarks in eventswith one lepton, jets, and missing transverse momentum in √ s =
13 TeV pp collisionswith the atlas detector”,
JHEP (2017) 052, doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2017)052 , arXiv:1705.10751 .[18] ATLAS Collaboration, “Search for pair production of heavy vector-like quarks decayingto high- p T W bosons and b quarks in the lepton-plus-jets final state in pp collisions at √ s =
13 TeV with the atlas detector”,
JHEP (2017) 141, doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2017)141 , arXiv:1707.03347 .[19] ATLAS Collaboration, “Search for pair production of vector-like quarks into high- p T Wbosons and top quarks in the lepton-plus-jets final state in pp collisions at √ s =
13 TeVwith the ATLAS detector”,
JHEP (2018) 48, doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2018)048 , arXiv:1806.01762 .[20] ATLAS Collaboration, “Search for pair and single production of vector-like quarks infinal states with at least one Z boson decaying into a pair of electrons or muons in ppcollision data collected with the ATLAS detector at √ s =
13 TeV”,
Phys. Rev. D (2018) doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.98.112004 , arXiv:1806.10555 .[21] CMS Collaboration, “Search for pair production of vector-like T and B quarks insingle-lepton final states using boosted jet substructure in proton-proton collisions at √ s =
13 TeV”,
JHEP (2017) 085, doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2017)085 , arXiv:1706.03408 . [22] CMS Collaboration, “Search for pair production of vector-like quarks in the bWbWchannel from proton-proton collisions at √ s =
13 TeV”,
Phys. Lett. B (2018) 82, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2018.01.077 , arXiv:1710.01539 .[23] CMS Collaboration, “Search for vector-like T and B quark pairs in final states withleptons at √ s =
13 TeV”,
JHEP (2018) 177, doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2018)177 , arXiv:1805.04758 .[24] CMS Collaboration, “The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC”, JINST (2008) S08004, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/3/08/S08004 .[25] CMS Collaboration, “The CMS trigger system”, JINST (2017) P01020, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/12/01/P01020 , arXiv:1609.02366 .[26] 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 .[27] NNPDF Collaboration, “Parton distributions for the LHC Run II”, JHEP (2015) 040, doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2015)040 , arXiv:1410.8849 .[28] 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 .[29] CMS Collaboration, “Event generator tunes obtained from underlying event andmultiparton scattering measurements”, Eur. Phys. J. C (2016) 155, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-3988-x , arXiv:1512.00815 .[30] M. Czakon, P. Fiedler, and A. Mitov, “Total top quark pair production cross section athadron colliders through O ( α ) ”, Phys. Rev. Lett. (2013) 252004, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.252004 , arXiv:1303.6254 .[31] M. R. Whalley, D. Bourilkov, and R. C. Group, “The Les Houches accord PDFs (LHAPDF)and LHAGLUE”, (2005). arXiv:hep-ph/0508110 .[32] S. Frixione and B. R. Webber, “Matching NLO QCD computations and parton showersimulations”, JHEP (2002) 029, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2002/06/029 , arXiv:hep-ph/0204244 .[33] R. Frederix and S. Frixione, “Merging meets matching in MC@NLO”, JHEP (2012)061, doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2012)061 , arXiv:1209.6215 .[34] S. Frixione, G. Ridolfi, and P. Nason, “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 .[35] 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 .[36] 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 . eferences [37] CMS Collaboration, “Investigations of the impact of the parton shower tuning inPYTHIA 8 in the modelling of t¯t at √ s = Eur. Phys. J. C (2008) 473, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-007-0490-5 , arXiv:0706.2569 .[39] J. M. Campbell, R. K. Ellis, and C. Williams, “Vector boson pair production at the LHC”, JHEP (2011) 018, doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2011)018 , arXiv:1105.0020 .[40] F. Cascioli et al., “ZZ production at hadron colliders in NNLO QCD”, Phys. Lett. B (2014) 311, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2014.06.056 , arXiv:1405.2219v2 .[41] T. Gehrmann et al., “W + W − production at hadron colliders in NNLO QCD”, Phys. Rev.Lett. (2014) 212001, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.212001 , arXiv:1408.5243 .[42] D. de Florian et al., “Handbook of LHC Higgs cross sections: 4. Deciphering the nature ofthe Higgs sector”, CERN Report CERN-2017-002-M, CERN, 2016. doi:10.23731/CYRM-2017-002 , arXiv:1610.07922 .[43] GEANT4 Collaboration, “GEANT4 – a simulation toolkit”, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A (2003) 250, doi:10.1016/S0168-9002(03)01368-8 .[44] J. Allison et al., “GEANT4 developments and applications”,
IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. (2006) 270, doi:10.1109/TNS.2006.869826 .[45] CMS Collaboration, “Particle-flow reconstruction and global event description with theCMS detector”, JINST (2017) P10003, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/12/10/P10003 , arXiv:1706.04965 .[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] 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 .[48] 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 .[49] 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 .[50] CMS Collaboration, “Commissioning of the particle-flow event reconstruction with thefirst LHC collisions recorded in the CMS detector”, CMS Physics Analysis SummaryCMS-PAS-PFT-10-001, CERN, 2010.[51] CMS Collaboration, “Performance of the CMS muon detector and muon reconstructionwith proton-proton collisions at √ s =
13 TeV”,
JINST (2018) P06015, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/13/06/P06015 , arXiv:1804.04528 . [52] M. Cacciari and G. P. Salam, “Pileup subtraction using jet areas”, Phys. Lett. B (2008)119, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2007.09.077 , arXiv:0707.1378 .[53] 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 .[54] CMS Collaboration, “Jet energy scale and resolution in the CMS experiment in ppcollisions at 8 TeV”, JINST (2017) P02014, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/12/02/P02014 , arXiv:1607.03663 .[55] CMS Collaboration, “Identification of heavy-flavour jets with the CMS detector in ppcollisions at 13 TeV”, JINST (2018) P05011, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/13/05/P05011 , arXiv:1712.07158 .[56] 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 .[57] S. D. Ellis, C. K. Vermilion, and J. R. Walsh, “Techniques for improved heavy particlesearches with jet substructure”, Phys. Rev. D (2009) 051501, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.80.051501 , arXiv:0903.5081 .[58] S. D. Ellis, C. K. Vermilion, and J. R. Walsh, “Recombination algorithms and jetsubstructure: Pruning as a tool for heavy particle searches”, Phys. Rev. D (2010)094023, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.81.094023 , arXiv:0912.0033 .[59] G. P. Salam, “Towards jetography”, Eur. Phys. J. C (2010) 637, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-010-1314-6 , arXiv:0906.1833 .[60] J. Thaler and K. Van Tilburg, “Identifying boosted objects with N-subjettiness”, JHEP (2011) 015, doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2011)015 , arXiv:1011.2268 .[61] 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 .[62] A. J. Larkoski, S. Marzani, G. Soyez, and J. Thaler, “Soft drop”, JHEP (2014) 146, doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2014)146 , arXiv:1402.2657 .[63] CMS Collaboration, “Jet algorithms performance in 13 TeV data”, CMS Physics AnalysisSummary CMS-PAS-JME-16-003, CERN, 2017.[64] CMS Collaboration, “Search for a massive resonance decaying to a pair of Higgs bosonsin the four b quark final state in proton-proton collisions at √ s =
13 TeV”,
Phys. Lett. B (2018) 244, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2018.03.084 , arXiv:1710.04960 .[65] M. Bahr et al., “Herwig++ physics and manual”, Eur. Phys. J. C (2008) 639, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-008-0798-9 , arXiv:0803.0883 .[66] CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of differential cross sections for Z boson productionin association with jets in proton-proton collisions at √ s =
13 TeV”,
Eur. Phys. J. C (2018) doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-6373-0 , arXiv:1804.05252 . eferences [67] CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of differential cross sections for top quark pairproduction using the lepton+jets final state in proton-proton collisions at 13 TeV”, Phys.Rev. D (2017) 092001, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.95.092001 , arXiv:1610.04191 .[68] CMS Collaboration, “Measurements of the pp → ZZ production cross section and theZ → (cid:96) branching fraction, and constraints on anomalous triple gauge couplings at √ s =
13 TeV”,
Eur. Phys. J. C (2018) 165, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-5567-9 , arXiv:1709.08601 .[69] CMS Collaboration, “Cms luminosity measurement for the 2016 data taking period”,CMS Physics Analysis Summary CMS-PAS-LUM-17-001, CERN, 2017.[70] 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 .[71] S. Dulat et al., “The CT14 global analysis of quantum chromodynamics”, Phys. Rev. D (2015) 033006, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.93.033006 , arXiv:1506.07443 .[72] L. A. Harland-Lang, A. D. Martin, P. Motylinski, and R. S. Thorne, “Parton distributionsin the LHC era: MMHT 2014 PDFs”, Eur. Phys. J. C (2015) 204, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-015-3397-6 , arXiv:1412.3989 .[73] CMS Collaboration, “Jet energy scale and resolution performances with 13 TeV data”,CMS Detector Performance Summary CMS-DP-2016-020, CERN, 2016.[74] Particle Data Group, M. Tanabashi et al., “Review of particle physics”, Phys. Rev. D (2018) 030001, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.98.030001 .[75] J. Ott, “T HETA —A framework for template-based modeling and inference”, 2010.Accessed 30 Oct 2014. . A The CMS Collaboration
Yerevan Physics Institute, Yerevan, Armenia
A.M. Sirunyan, A. Tumasyan
Institut f ¨ur Hochenergiephysik, Wien, Austria
W. Adam, F. Ambrogi, E. Asilar, T. Bergauer, J. Brandstetter, M. Dragicevic, J. Er ¨o,A. Escalante Del Valle, M. Flechl, R. Fr ¨uhwirth , V.M. Ghete, J. Hrubec, M. Jeitler , N. Krammer,I. Kr¨atschmer, D. Liko, T. Madlener, I. Mikulec, N. Rad, H. Rohringer, J. Schieck , R. Sch ¨ofbeck,M. Spanring, D. Spitzbart, W. Waltenberger, J. Wittmann, C.-E. Wulz , M. Zarucki Institute for Nuclear Problems, Minsk, Belarus
V. Chekhovsky, V. Mossolov, J. Suarez Gonzalez
Universiteit Antwerpen, Antwerpen, Belgium
E.A. De Wolf, D. Di Croce, X. Janssen, J. Lauwers, M. Pieters, H. Van Haevermaet,P. Van Mechelen, N. Van Remortel
Vrije Universiteit Brussel, Brussel, Belgium
S. Abu Zeid, F. Blekman, J. D’Hondt, J. De Clercq, K. Deroover, G. Flouris, D. Lontkovskyi,S. Lowette, I. Marchesini, S. Moortgat, L. Moreels, Q. Python, K. Skovpen, S. Tavernier,W. Van Doninck, P. Van Mulders, I. Van Parijs
Universit´e Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium
D. Beghin, B. Bilin, H. Brun, B. Clerbaux, G. De Lentdecker, H. Delannoy, B. Dorney,G. Fasanella, L. Favart, R. Goldouzian, A. Grebenyuk, A.K. Kalsi, T. Lenzi, J. Luetic, N. Postiau,E. Starling, L. Thomas, C. Vander Velde, P. Vanlaer, D. Vannerom, Q. Wang
Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium
T. Cornelis, D. Dobur, A. Fagot, M. Gul, I. Khvastunov , D. Poyraz, C. Roskas, D. Trocino,M. Tytgat, W. Verbeke, B. Vermassen, M. Vit, N. Zaganidis Universit´e Catholique de Louvain, Louvain-la-Neuve, Belgium
H. Bakhshiansohi, O. Bondu, S. Brochet, G. Bruno, C. Caputo, P. David, C. Delaere,M. Delcourt, A. Giammanco, G. Krintiras, V. Lemaitre, A. Magitteri, K. Piotrzkowski, A. Saggio,M. Vidal Marono, P. Vischia, S. Wertz, J. Zobec
Centro Brasileiro de Pesquisas Fisicas, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
F.L. Alves, G.A. Alves, M. Correa Martins Junior, G. Correia Silva, C. Hensel, A. Moraes,M.E. Pol, P. Rebello Teles
Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
E. Belchior Batista Das Chagas, W. Carvalho, J. Chinellato , E. Coelho, E.M. Da Costa,G.G. Da Silveira , D. De Jesus Damiao, C. De Oliveira Martins, S. Fonseca De Souza,H. Malbouisson, D. Matos Figueiredo, M. Melo De Almeida, C. Mora Herrera, L. Mundim,H. Nogima, W.L. Prado Da Silva, L.J. Sanchez Rosas, A. Santoro, A. Sznajder, M. Thiel,E.J. Tonelli Manganote , F. Torres Da Silva De Araujo, A. Vilela Pereira Universidade Estadual Paulista a , Universidade Federal do ABC b , S˜ao Paulo, Brazil S. Ahuja a , C.A. Bernardes a , L. Calligaris a , T.R. Fernandez Perez Tomei a , E.M. Gregores b ,P.G. Mercadante b , S.F. Novaes a , SandraS. Padula a Institute for Nuclear Research and Nuclear Energy, Bulgarian Academy of Sciences, Sofia, Bulgaria
A. Aleksandrov, R. Hadjiiska, P. Iaydjiev, A. Marinov, M. Misheva, M. Rodozov, M. Shopova,G. Sultanov
University of Sofia, Sofia, Bulgaria
A. Dimitrov, L. Litov, B. Pavlov, P. Petkov
Beihang University, Beijing, China
W. Fang , X. Gao , L. Yuan Institute of High Energy Physics, Beijing, China
M. Ahmad, J.G. Bian, G.M. Chen, H.S. Chen, M. Chen, Y. Chen, C.H. Jiang, D. Leggat, H. Liao,Z. Liu, S.M. Shaheen , A. Spiezia, J. Tao, Z. Wang, E. Yazgan, H. Zhang, S. Zhang , J. Zhao State Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Technology, Peking University, Beijing, China
Y. Ban, G. Chen, A. Levin, J. Li, L. Li, Q. Li, Y. Mao, S.J. Qian, D. Wang
Tsinghua University, Beijing, China
Y. Wang
Universidad de Los Andes, Bogota, Colombia
C. Avila, A. Cabrera, C.A. Carrillo Montoya, L.F. Chaparro Sierra, C. Florez,C.F. Gonz´alez Hern´andez, M.A. Segura Delgado
University of Split, Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering and NavalArchitecture, Split, Croatia
B. Courbon, N. Godinovic, D. Lelas, I. Puljak, T. Sculac
University of Split, Faculty of Science, Split, Croatia
Z. Antunovic, M. Kovac
Institute Rudjer Boskovic, Zagreb, Croatia
V. Brigljevic, D. Ferencek, K. Kadija, B. Mesic, M. Roguljic, A. Starodumov , T. Susa University of Cyprus, Nicosia, Cyprus
M.W. Ather, A. Attikis, M. Kolosova, G. Mavromanolakis, J. Mousa, C. Nicolaou, F. Ptochos,P.A. Razis, H. Rykaczewski
Charles University, Prague, Czech Republic
M. Finger , M. Finger Jr. Escuela Politecnica Nacional, Quito, Ecuador
E. Ayala
Universidad San Francisco de Quito, Quito, Ecuador
E. Carrera Jarrin
Academy of Scientific Research and Technology of the Arab Republic of Egypt, EgyptianNetwork of High Energy Physics, Cairo, Egypt
A. Mahrous , A. Mohamed , Y. Mohammed National Institute of Chemical Physics and Biophysics, Tallinn, Estonia
S. Bhowmik, A. Carvalho Antunes De Oliveira, R.K. Dewanjee, K. Ehataht, M. Kadastik,M. Raidal, C. Veelken
Department of Physics, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
P. Eerola, H. Kirschenmann, J. Pekkanen, M. Voutilainen Helsinki Institute of Physics, Helsinki, Finland
J. Havukainen, J.K. Heikkil¨a, T. J¨arvinen, V. Karim¨aki, R. Kinnunen, T. Lamp´en, K. Lassila-Perini, S. Laurila, S. Lehti, T. Lind´en, P. Luukka, T. M¨aenp¨a¨a, H. Siikonen, E. Tuominen,J. Tuominiemi
Lappeenranta University of Technology, Lappeenranta, Finland
T. Tuuva
IRFU, CEA, Universit´e Paris-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France
M. Besancon, F. Couderc, M. Dejardin, D. Denegri, J.L. Faure, F. Ferri, S. Ganjour, A. Givernaud,P. Gras, G. Hamel de Monchenault, P. Jarry, C. Leloup, E. Locci, J. Malcles, G. Negro, J. Rander,A. Rosowsky, M. ¨O. Sahin, M. Titov
Laboratoire Leprince-Ringuet, Ecole polytechnique, CNRS/IN2P3, Universit´e Paris-Saclay,Palaiseau, France
A. Abdulsalam , C. Amendola, I. Antropov, F. Beaudette, P. Busson, C. Charlot,R. Granier de Cassagnac, I. Kucher, A. Lobanov, J. Martin Blanco, C. Martin Perez,M. Nguyen, C. Ochando, G. Ortona, P. Paganini, J. Rembser, R. Salerno, J.B. Sauvan, Y. Sirois,A.G. Stahl Leiton, A. Zabi, A. Zghiche Universit´e de Strasbourg, CNRS, IPHC UMR 7178, Strasbourg, France
J.-L. Agram , J. Andrea, D. Bloch, J.-M. Brom, E.C. Chabert, V. Cherepanov, C. Collard,E. Conte , J.-C. Fontaine , D. Gel´e, U. Goerlach, M. Jansov´a, A.-C. Le Bihan, N. Tonon,P. Van Hove Centre de Calcul de l’Institut National de Physique Nucleaire et de Physique des Particules,CNRS/IN2P3, Villeurbanne, France
S. Gadrat
Universit´e de Lyon, Universit´e Claude Bernard Lyon 1, CNRS-IN2P3, Institut de PhysiqueNucl´eaire de Lyon, Villeurbanne, France
S. Beauceron, C. Bernet, G. Boudoul, N. Chanon, R. Chierici, D. Contardo, P. Depasse,H. El Mamouni, J. Fay, L. Finco, S. Gascon, M. Gouzevitch, G. Grenier, B. Ille, F. Lagarde,I.B. Laktineh, H. Lattaud, M. Lethuillier, L. Mirabito, S. Perries, A. Popov , V. Sordini,G. Touquet, M. Vander Donckt, S. Viret Georgian Technical University, Tbilisi, Georgia
T. Toriashvili Tbilisi State University, Tbilisi, Georgia
Z. Tsamalaidze RWTH Aachen University, I. Physikalisches Institut, Aachen, Germany
C. Autermann, L. Feld, M.K. Kiesel, K. Klein, M. Lipinski, M. Preuten, M.P. Rauch,C. Schomakers, J. Schulz, M. Teroerde, B. Wittmer
RWTH Aachen University, III. Physikalisches Institut A, Aachen, Germany
A. Albert, D. Duchardt, M. Erdmann, S. Erdweg, T. Esch, R. Fischer, S. Ghosh, A. G ¨uth,T. Hebbeker, C. Heidemann, K. Hoepfner, H. Keller, L. Mastrolorenzo, M. Merschmeyer,A. Meyer, P. Millet, S. Mukherjee, T. Pook, M. Radziej, H. Reithler, M. Rieger, A. Schmidt,D. Teyssier, S. Th ¨uer
RWTH Aachen University, III. Physikalisches Institut B, Aachen, Germany
G. Fl ¨ugge, O. Hlushchenko, T. Kress, T. M ¨uller, A. Nehrkorn, A. Nowack, C. Pistone, O. Pooth,D. Roy, H. Sert, A. Stahl Deutsches Elektronen-Synchrotron, Hamburg, Germany
M. Aldaya Martin, T. Arndt, C. Asawatangtrakuldee, I. Babounikau, K. Beernaert, O. Behnke,U. Behrens, A. Berm ´udez Mart´ınez, D. Bertsche, A.A. Bin Anuar, K. Borras , V. Botta,A. Campbell, P. Connor, C. Contreras-Campana, V. Danilov, A. De Wit, M.M. Defranchis,C. Diez Pardos, D. Dom´ınguez Damiani, G. Eckerlin, T. Eichhorn, A. Elwood, E. Eren,E. Gallo , A. Geiser, J.M. Grados Luyando, A. Grohsjean, M. Guthoff, M. Haranko, A. Harb,H. Jung, M. Kasemann, J. Keaveney, C. Kleinwort, J. Knolle, D. Kr ¨ucker, W. Lange, A. Lelek,T. Lenz, J. Leonard, K. Lipka, W. Lohmann , R. Mankel, I.-A. Melzer-Pellmann, A.B. Meyer,M. Meyer, M. Missiroli, J. Mnich, V. Myronenko, S.K. Pflitsch, D. Pitzl, A. Raspereza, P. Saxena,P. Sch ¨utze, C. Schwanenberger, R. Shevchenko, A. Singh, H. Tholen, O. Turkot, A. Vagnerini,M. Van De Klundert, G.P. Van Onsem, R. Walsh, Y. Wen, K. Wichmann, C. Wissing, O. Zenaiev University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany
R. Aggleton, S. Bein, L. Benato, A. Benecke, V. Blobel, T. Dreyer, A. Ebrahimi, E. Garutti,D. Gonzalez, P. Gunnellini, J. Haller, A. Hinzmann, A. Karavdina, G. Kasieczka, R. Klanner,R. Kogler, N. Kovalchuk, S. Kurz, V. Kutzner, J. Lange, D. Marconi, J. Multhaup, M. Niedziela,C.E.N. Niemeyer, D. Nowatschin, A. Perieanu, A. Reimers, O. Rieger, C. Scharf, P. Schleper,S. Schumann, J. Schwandt, J. Sonneveld, H. Stadie, G. Steinbr ¨uck, F.M. Stober, M. St ¨over,B. Vormwald, I. Zoi
Karlsruher Institut fuer Technologie, Karlsruhe, Germany
M. Akbiyik, C. Barth, M. Baselga, S. Baur, E. Butz, R. Caspart, T. Chwalek, F. Colombo,W. De Boer, A. Dierlamm, K. El Morabit, N. Faltermann, B. Freund, M. Giffels,M.A. Harrendorf, F. Hartmann , S.M. Heindl, U. Husemann, I. Katkov , S. Kudella, S. Mitra,M.U. Mozer, Th. M ¨uller, M. Musich, M. Plagge, G. Quast, K. Rabbertz, M. Schr ¨oder, I. Shvetsov,H.J. Simonis, R. Ulrich, S. Wayand, M. Weber, T. Weiler, C. W ¨ohrmann, R. Wolf Institute of Nuclear and Particle Physics (INPP), NCSR Demokritos, Aghia Paraskevi,Greece
G. Anagnostou, G. Daskalakis, T. Geralis, A. Kyriakis, D. Loukas, G. Paspalaki
National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece
A. Agapitos, G. Karathanasis, P. Kontaxakis, A. Panagiotou, I. Papavergou, N. Saoulidou,E. Tziaferi, K. Vellidis
National Technical University of Athens, Athens, Greece
K. Kousouris, I. Papakrivopoulos, G. Tsipolitis
University of Io´annina, Io´annina, Greece
I. Evangelou, C. Foudas, P. Gianneios, P. Katsoulis, P. Kokkas, S. Mallios, N. Manthos,I. Papadopoulos, E. Paradas, J. Strologas, F.A. Triantis, D. Tsitsonis
MTA-ELTE Lend ¨ulet CMS Particle and Nuclear Physics Group, E ¨otv ¨os Lor´and University,Budapest, Hungary
M. Bart ´ok , M. Csanad, N. Filipovic, P. Major, M.I. Nagy, G. Pasztor, O. Sur´anyi, G.I. Veres Wigner Research Centre for Physics, Budapest, Hungary
G. Bencze, C. Hajdu, D. Horvath , ´A. Hunyadi, F. Sikler, T. ´A. V´ami, V. Veszpremi,G. Vesztergombi † Institute of Nuclear Research ATOMKI, Debrecen, Hungary
N. Beni, S. Czellar, J. Karancsi , A. Makovec, J. Molnar, Z. Szillasi Institute of Physics, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary
P. Raics, Z.L. Trocsanyi, B. Ujvari
Indian Institute of Science (IISc), Bangalore, India
S. Choudhury, J.R. Komaragiri, P.C. Tiwari
National Institute of Science Education and Research, HBNI, Bhubaneswar, India
S. Bahinipati , C. Kar, P. Mal, K. Mandal, A. Nayak , S. Roy Chowdhury, D.K. Sahoo ,S.K. Swain Panjab University, Chandigarh, India
S. Bansal, S.B. Beri, V. Bhatnagar, S. Chauhan, R. Chawla, N. Dhingra, S.K. Gill, R. Gupta,A. Kaur, M. Kaur, P. Kumari, M. Lohan, M. Meena, A. Mehta, K. Sandeep, S. Sharma, J.B. Singh,A.K. Virdi, G. Walia
University of Delhi, Delhi, India
A. Bhardwaj, B.C. Choudhary, R.B. Garg, M. Gola, S. Keshri, Ashok Kumar, S. Malhotra,M. Naimuddin, P. Priyanka, K. Ranjan, Aashaq Shah, R. Sharma
Saha Institute of Nuclear Physics, HBNI, Kolkata, India
R. Bhardwaj , M. Bharti , R. Bhattacharya, S. Bhattacharya, U. Bhawandeep , D. Bhowmik,S. Dey, S. Dutt , S. Dutta, S. Ghosh, K. Mondal, S. Nandan, A. Purohit, P.K. Rout, A. Roy,G. Saha, S. Sarkar, M. Sharan, B. Singh , S. Thakur Indian Institute of Technology Madras, Madras, India
P.K. Behera, A. Muhammad
Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Mumbai, India
R. Chudasama, D. Dutta, V. Jha, V. Kumar, D.K. Mishra, P.K. Netrakanti, L.M. Pant, P. Shukla,P. Suggisetti
Tata Institute of Fundamental Research-A, Mumbai, India
T. Aziz, M.A. Bhat, S. Dugad, G.B. Mohanty, N. Sur, RavindraKumar Verma
Tata Institute of Fundamental Research-B, Mumbai, India
S. Banerjee, S. Bhattacharya, S. Chatterjee, P. Das, M. Guchait, Sa. Jain, S. Karmakar, S. Kumar,M. Maity , G. Majumder, K. Mazumdar, N. Sahoo, T. Sarkar Indian Institute of Science Education and Research (IISER), Pune, India
S. Chauhan, S. Dube, V. Hegde, A. Kapoor, K. Kothekar, S. Pandey, A. Rane, A. Rastogi,S. Sharma
Institute for Research in Fundamental Sciences (IPM), Tehran, Iran
S. Chenarani , E. Eskandari Tadavani, S.M. Etesami , M. Khakzad, M. Mohammadi Na-jafabadi, M. Naseri, F. Rezaei Hosseinabadi, B. Safarzadeh , M. Zeinali University College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland
M. Felcini, M. Grunewald
INFN Sezione di Bari a , Universit`a di Bari b , Politecnico di Bari c , Bari, Italy M. Abbrescia a , b , C. Calabria a , b , A. Colaleo a , D. Creanza a , c , L. Cristella a , b , N. De Filippis a , c ,M. De Palma a , b , A. Di Florio a , b , F. Errico a , b , L. Fiore a , A. Gelmi a , b , G. Iaselli a , c , M. Ince a , b ,S. Lezki a , b , G. Maggi a , c , M. Maggi a , G. Miniello a , b , S. My a , b , S. Nuzzo a , b , A. Pompili a , b ,G. Pugliese a , c , R. Radogna a , A. Ranieri a , G. Selvaggi a , b , A. Sharma a , L. Silvestris a , R. Venditti a ,P. Verwilligen a INFN Sezione di Bologna a , Universit`a di Bologna b , Bologna, Italy G. Abbiendi a , C. Battilana a , b , D. Bonacorsi a , b , L. Borgonovi a , b , S. Braibant-Giacomelli a , b ,R. Campanini a , b , P. Capiluppi a , b , A. Castro a , b , F.R. Cavallo a , S.S. Chhibra a , b , G. Codispoti a , b ,M. Cuffiani a , b , G.M. Dallavalle a , F. Fabbri a , A. Fanfani a , b , E. Fontanesi, P. Giacomelli a ,C. Grandi a , L. Guiducci a , b , F. Iemmi a , b , S. Lo Meo a ,29 , S. Marcellini a , G. Masetti a , A. Montanari a ,F.L. Navarria a , b , A. Perrotta a , F. Primavera a , b , A.M. Rossi a , b , T. Rovelli a , b , G.P. Siroli a , b , N. Tosi a INFN Sezione di Catania a , Universit`a di Catania b , Catania, Italy S. Albergo a , b , A. Di Mattia a , R. Potenza a , b , A. Tricomi a , b , C. Tuve a , b INFN Sezione di Firenze a , Universit`a di Firenze b , Firenze, Italy G. Barbagli a , K. Chatterjee a , b , V. Ciulli a , b , C. Civinini a , R. D’Alessandro a , b , E. Focardi a , b ,G. Latino, P. Lenzi a , b , M. Meschini a , S. Paoletti a , L. Russo a ,30 , G. Sguazzoni a , D. Strom a ,L. Viliani a INFN Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy
L. Benussi, S. Bianco, F. Fabbri, D. Piccolo
INFN Sezione di Genova a , Universit`a di Genova b , Genova, Italy F. Ferro a , R. Mulargia a , b , E. Robutti a , S. Tosi a , b INFN Sezione di Milano-Bicocca a , Universit`a di Milano-Bicocca b , Milano, Italy A. Benaglia a , A. Beschi b , F. Brivio a , b , V. Ciriolo a , b ,16 , S. Di Guida a , b ,16 , M.E. Dinardo a , b ,S. Fiorendi a , b , S. Gennai a , A. Ghezzi a , b , P. Govoni a , b , M. Malberti a , b , S. Malvezzi a , D. Menasce a ,F. Monti, L. Moroni a , M. Paganoni a , b , D. Pedrini a , S. Ragazzi a , b , T. Tabarelli de Fatis a , b ,D. Zuolo a , b INFN Sezione di Napoli a , Universit`a di Napoli ’Federico II’ b , Napoli, Italy, Universit`a dellaBasilicata c , Potenza, Italy, Universit`a G. Marconi d , Roma, Italy S. Buontempo a , N. Cavallo a , c , A. De Iorio a , b , A. Di Crescenzo a , b , F. Fabozzi a , c , F. Fienga a ,G. Galati a , A.O.M. Iorio a , b , W.A. Khan a , L. Lista a , S. Meola a , d ,16 , P. Paolucci a ,16 , C. Sciacca a , b ,E. Voevodina a , b INFN Sezione di Padova a , Universit`a di Padova b , Padova, Italy, Universit`a di Trento c ,Trento, Italy P. Azzi a , N. Bacchetta a , D. Bisello a , b , A. Boletti a , b , A. Bragagnolo, R. Carlin a , b , P. Checchia a ,M. Dall’Osso a , b , P. De Castro Manzano a , T. Dorigo a , U. Dosselli a , F. Gasparini a , b ,U. Gasparini a , b , A. Gozzelino a , S.Y. Hoh, S. Lacaprara a , P. Lujan, M. Margoni a , b ,A.T. Meneguzzo a , b , J. Pazzini a , b , M. Presilla b , P. Ronchese a , b , R. Rossin a , b , F. Simonetto a , b ,A. Tiko, E. Torassa a , M. Tosi a , b , M. Zanetti a , b , P. Zotto a , b , G. Zumerle a , b INFN Sezione di Pavia a , Universit`a di Pavia b , Pavia, Italy A. Braghieri a , A. Magnani a , P. Montagna a , b , S.P. Ratti a , b , V. Re a , M. Ressegotti a , b , C. Riccardi a , b ,P. Salvini a , I. Vai a , b , P. Vitulo a , b INFN Sezione di Perugia a , Universit`a di Perugia b , Perugia, Italy M. Biasini a , b , G.M. Bilei a , C. Cecchi a , b , D. Ciangottini a , b , L. Fan `o a , b , P. Lariccia a , b , R. Leonardi a , b ,E. Manoni a , G. Mantovani a , b , V. Mariani a , b , M. Menichelli a , A. Rossi a , b , A. Santocchia a , b ,D. Spiga a INFN Sezione di Pisa a , Universit`a di Pisa b , Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa c , Pisa, Italy K. Androsov a , P. Azzurri a , G. Bagliesi a , L. Bianchini a , T. Boccali a , L. Borrello, R. Castaldi a ,M.A. Ciocci a , b , R. Dell’Orso a , G. Fedi a , F. Fiori a , c , L. Giannini a , c , A. Giassi a , M.T. Grippo a ,3
INFN Sezione di Genova a , Universit`a di Genova b , Genova, Italy F. Ferro a , R. Mulargia a , b , E. Robutti a , S. Tosi a , b INFN Sezione di Milano-Bicocca a , Universit`a di Milano-Bicocca b , Milano, Italy A. Benaglia a , A. Beschi b , F. Brivio a , b , V. Ciriolo a , b ,16 , S. Di Guida a , b ,16 , M.E. Dinardo a , b ,S. Fiorendi a , b , S. Gennai a , A. Ghezzi a , b , P. Govoni a , b , M. Malberti a , b , S. Malvezzi a , D. Menasce a ,F. Monti, L. Moroni a , M. Paganoni a , b , D. Pedrini a , S. Ragazzi a , b , T. Tabarelli de Fatis a , b ,D. Zuolo a , b INFN Sezione di Napoli a , Universit`a di Napoli ’Federico II’ b , Napoli, Italy, Universit`a dellaBasilicata c , Potenza, Italy, Universit`a G. Marconi d , Roma, Italy S. Buontempo a , N. Cavallo a , c , A. De Iorio a , b , A. Di Crescenzo a , b , F. Fabozzi a , c , F. Fienga a ,G. Galati a , A.O.M. Iorio a , b , W.A. Khan a , L. Lista a , S. Meola a , d ,16 , P. Paolucci a ,16 , C. Sciacca a , b ,E. Voevodina a , b INFN Sezione di Padova a , Universit`a di Padova b , Padova, Italy, Universit`a di Trento c ,Trento, Italy P. Azzi a , N. Bacchetta a , D. Bisello a , b , A. Boletti a , b , A. Bragagnolo, R. Carlin a , b , P. Checchia a ,M. Dall’Osso a , b , P. De Castro Manzano a , T. Dorigo a , U. Dosselli a , F. Gasparini a , b ,U. Gasparini a , b , A. Gozzelino a , S.Y. Hoh, S. Lacaprara a , P. Lujan, M. Margoni a , b ,A.T. Meneguzzo a , b , J. Pazzini a , b , M. Presilla b , P. Ronchese a , b , R. Rossin a , b , F. Simonetto a , b ,A. Tiko, E. Torassa a , M. Tosi a , b , M. Zanetti a , b , P. Zotto a , b , G. Zumerle a , b INFN Sezione di Pavia a , Universit`a di Pavia b , Pavia, Italy A. Braghieri a , A. Magnani a , P. Montagna a , b , S.P. Ratti a , b , V. Re a , M. Ressegotti a , b , C. Riccardi a , b ,P. Salvini a , I. Vai a , b , P. Vitulo a , b INFN Sezione di Perugia a , Universit`a di Perugia b , Perugia, Italy M. Biasini a , b , G.M. Bilei a , C. Cecchi a , b , D. Ciangottini a , b , L. Fan `o a , b , P. Lariccia a , b , R. Leonardi a , b ,E. Manoni a , G. Mantovani a , b , V. Mariani a , b , M. Menichelli a , A. Rossi a , b , A. Santocchia a , b ,D. Spiga a INFN Sezione di Pisa a , Universit`a di Pisa b , Scuola Normale Superiore di Pisa c , Pisa, Italy K. Androsov a , P. Azzurri a , G. Bagliesi a , L. Bianchini a , T. Boccali a , L. Borrello, R. Castaldi a ,M.A. Ciocci a , b , R. Dell’Orso a , G. Fedi a , F. Fiori a , c , L. Giannini a , c , A. Giassi a , M.T. Grippo a ,3 F. Ligabue a , c , E. Manca a , c , G. Mandorli a , c , A. Messineo a , b , F. Palla a , A. Rizzi a , b , G. Rolandi ,P. Spagnolo a , R. Tenchini a , G. Tonelli a , b , A. Venturi a , P.G. Verdini a INFN Sezione di Roma a , Sapienza Universit`a di Roma b , Rome, Italy L. Barone a , b , F. Cavallari a , M. Cipriani a , b , D. Del Re a , b , E. Di Marco a , b , M. Diemoz a , S. Gelli a , b ,E. Longo a , b , B. Marzocchi a , b , P. Meridiani a , G. Organtini a , b , F. Pandolfi a , R. Paramatti a , b ,F. Preiato a , b , S. Rahatlou a , b , C. Rovelli a , F. Santanastasio a , b INFN Sezione di Torino a , Universit`a di Torino b , Torino, Italy, Universit`a del PiemonteOrientale c , Novara, Italy N. Amapane a , b , R. Arcidiacono a , c , S. Argiro a , b , M. Arneodo a , c , N. Bartosik a , R. Bellan a , b ,C. Biino a , A. Cappati a , b , N. Cartiglia a , F. Cenna a , b , S. Cometti a , M. Costa a , b , R. Covarelli a , b ,N. Demaria a , B. Kiani a , b , C. Mariotti a , S. Maselli a , E. Migliore a , b , V. Monaco a , b ,E. Monteil a , b , M. Monteno a , M.M. Obertino a , b , L. Pacher a , b , N. Pastrone a , M. Pelliccioni a ,G.L. Pinna Angioni a , b , A. Romero a , b , M. Ruspa a , c , R. Sacchi a , b , R. Salvatico a , b , K. Shchelina a , b ,V. Sola a , A. Solano a , b , D. Soldi a , b , A. Staiano a INFN Sezione di Trieste a , Universit`a di Trieste b , Trieste, Italy S. Belforte a , V. Candelise a , b , M. Casarsa a , F. Cossutti a , A. Da Rold a , b , G. Della Ricca a , b ,F. Vazzoler a , b , A. Zanetti a Kyungpook National University, Daegu, Korea
D.H. Kim, G.N. Kim, M.S. Kim, J. Lee, S. Lee, S.W. Lee, C.S. Moon, Y.D. Oh, S.I. Pak, S. Sekmen,D.C. Son, Y.C. Yang
Chonnam National University, Institute for Universe and Elementary Particles, Kwangju,Korea
H. Kim, D.H. Moon, G. Oh
Hanyang University, Seoul, Korea
B. Francois, J. Goh , T.J. Kim Korea University, Seoul, Korea
S. Cho, S. Choi, Y. Go, D. Gyun, S. Ha, B. Hong, Y. Jo, K. Lee, K.S. Lee, S. Lee, J. Lim, S.K. Park,Y. Roh
Sejong University, Seoul, Korea
H.S. Kim
Seoul National University, Seoul, Korea
J. Almond, J. Kim, J.S. Kim, H. Lee, K. Lee, K. Nam, S.B. Oh, B.C. Radburn-Smith, S.h. Seo,U.K. Yang, H.D. Yoo, G.B. Yu
University of Seoul, Seoul, Korea
D. Jeon, H. Kim, J.H. Kim, J.S.H. Lee, I.C. Park
Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon, Korea
Y. Choi, C. Hwang, J. Lee, I. Yu
Vilnius University, Vilnius, Lithuania
V. Dudenas, A. Juodagalvis, J. Vaitkus
National Centre for Particle Physics, Universiti Malaya, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
Z.A. Ibrahim, M.A.B. Md Ali , F. Mohamad Idris , W.A.T. Wan Abdullah, M.N. Yusli,Z. Zolkapli Universidad de Sonora (UNISON), Hermosillo, Mexico
J.F. Benitez, A. Castaneda Hernandez, J.A. Murillo Quijada
Centro de Investigacion y de Estudios Avanzados del IPN, Mexico City, Mexico
H. Castilla-Valdez, E. De La Cruz-Burelo, M.C. Duran-Osuna, I. Heredia-De La Cruz ,R. Lopez-Fernandez, J. Mejia Guisao, R.I. Rabadan-Trejo, M. Ramirez-Garcia, G. Ramirez-Sanchez, R. Reyes-Almanza, A. Sanchez-Hernandez Universidad Iberoamericana, Mexico City, Mexico
S. Carrillo Moreno, C. Oropeza Barrera, F. Vazquez Valencia
Benemerita Universidad Autonoma de Puebla, Puebla, Mexico
J. Eysermans, I. Pedraza, H.A. Salazar Ibarguen, C. Uribe Estrada
Universidad Aut ´onoma de San Luis Potos´ı, San Luis Potos´ı, Mexico
A. Morelos Pineda
University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
D. Krofcheck
University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand
S. Bheesette, P.H. Butler
National Centre for Physics, Quaid-I-Azam University, Islamabad, Pakistan
A. Ahmad, M. Ahmad, M.I. Asghar, Q. Hassan, H.R. Hoorani, A. Saddique, M.A. Shah,M. Shoaib, M. Waqas
National Centre for Nuclear Research, Swierk, Poland
H. Bialkowska, M. Bluj, B. Boimska, T. Frueboes, M. G ´orski, M. Kazana, M. Szleper, P. Traczyk,P. Zalewski
Institute of Experimental Physics, Faculty of Physics, University of Warsaw, Warsaw, Poland
K. Bunkowski, A. Byszuk , K. Doroba, A. Kalinowski, M. Konecki, J. Krolikowski, M. Misiura,M. Olszewski, A. Pyskir, M. Walczak Laborat ´orio de Instrumenta¸c˜ao e F´ısica Experimental de Part´ıculas, Lisboa, Portugal
M. Araujo, P. Bargassa, C. Beir˜ao Da Cruz E Silva, A. Di Francesco, P. Faccioli, B. Galinhas,M. Gallinaro, J. Hollar, N. Leonardo, J. Seixas, G. Strong, O. Toldaiev, J. Varela
Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia
S. Afanasiev, P. Bunin, M. Gavrilenko, I. Golutvin, I. Gorbunov, A. Kamenev, V. Karjavine,A. Lanev, A. Malakhov, V. Matveev , P. Moisenz, V. Palichik, V. Perelygin, S. Shmatov,S. Shulha, N. Skatchkov, V. Smirnov, N. Voytishin, A. Zarubin
Petersburg Nuclear Physics Institute, Gatchina (St. Petersburg), Russia
V. Golovtsov, Y. Ivanov, V. Kim , E. Kuznetsova , P. Levchenko, V. Murzin, V. Oreshkin,I. Smirnov, D. Sosnov, V. Sulimov, L. Uvarov, S. Vavilov, A. Vorobyev Institute for Nuclear Research, Moscow, Russia
Yu. Andreev, A. Dermenev, S. Gninenko, N. Golubev, A. Karneyeu, M. Kirsanov, N. Krasnikov,A. Pashenkov, A. Shabanov, D. Tlisov, A. Toropin
Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia
V. Epshteyn, V. Gavrilov, N. Lychkovskaya, V. Popov, I. Pozdnyakov, G. Safronov,A. Spiridonov, A. Stepennov, V. Stolin, M. Toms, E. Vlasov, A. Zhokin Moscow Institute of Physics and Technology, Moscow, Russia
T. Aushev
National Research Nuclear University ’Moscow Engineering Physics Institute’ (MEPhI),Moscow, Russia
R. Chistov , M. Danilov , P. Parygin, E. Tarkovskii P.N. Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia
V. Andreev, M. Azarkin, I. Dremin , M. Kirakosyan, A. Terkulov Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics, Lomonosov Moscow State University, Moscow,Russia
A. Baskakov, A. Belyaev, E. Boos, 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
A. Barnyakov , V. Blinov , T. Dimova , L. Kardapoltsev , Y. Skovpen Institute for High Energy Physics of National Research Centre ’Kurchatov Institute’,Protvino, Russia
I. Azhgirey, I. Bayshev, S. Bitioukov, V. Kachanov, A. Kalinin, D. Konstantinov, P. Mandrik,V. Petrov, R. Ryutin, S. Slabospitskii, A. Sobol, S. Troshin, N. Tyurin, A. Uzunian, A. Volkov
National Research Tomsk Polytechnic University, Tomsk, Russia
A. Babaev, S. Baidali, V. Okhotnikov
University of Belgrade, Faculty of Physics and Vinca Institute of Nuclear Sciences, Belgrade,Serbia
P. Adzic , P. Cirkovic, D. Devetak, M. Dordevic, J. Milosevic Centro de Investigaciones Energ´eticas Medioambientales y Tecnol ´ogicas (CIEMAT),Madrid, Spain
J. Alcaraz Maestre, A. ´Alvarez Fern´andez, I. Bachiller, M. Barrio Luna, J.A. Brochero Cifuentes,M. Cerrada, N. Colino, B. De La Cruz, A. Delgado Peris, C. Fernandez Bedoya,J.P. Fern´andez Ramos, J. Flix, M.C. Fouz, O. Gonzalez Lopez, S. Goy Lopez, J.M. Hernandez,M.I. Josa, D. Moran, A. P´erez-Calero Yzquierdo, J. Puerta Pelayo, I. Redondo, L. Romero,S. S´anchez Navas, M.S. Soares, A. Triossi
Universidad Aut ´onoma de Madrid, Madrid, Spain
C. Albajar, J.F. de Troc ´oniz
Universidad de Oviedo, Oviedo, Spain
J. Cuevas, C. Erice, J. Fernandez Menendez, S. Folgueras, I. Gonzalez Caballero,J.R. Gonz´alez Fern´andez, E. Palencia Cortezon, V. Rodr´ıguez Bouza, S. Sanchez Cruz,J.M. Vizan Garcia
Instituto de F´ısica de Cantabria (IFCA), CSIC-Universidad de Cantabria, Santander, Spain
I.J. Cabrillo, A. Calderon, B. Chazin Quero, J. Duarte Campderros, M. Fernandez,P.J. Fern´andez Manteca, A. Garc´ıa Alonso, J. Garcia-Ferrero, G. Gomez, A. Lopez Virto,J. Marco, C. Martinez Rivero, P. Martinez Ruiz del Arbol, F. Matorras, J. Piedra Gomez,C. Prieels, T. Rodrigo, A. Ruiz-Jimeno, L. Scodellaro, N. Trevisani, I. Vila, R. Vilar Cortabitarte
University of Ruhuna, Department of Physics, Matara, Sri Lanka
N. Wickramage CERN, European Organization for Nuclear Research, Geneva, Switzerland
D. Abbaneo, B. Akgun, E. Auffray, G. Auzinger, P. Baillon, A.H. Ball, D. Barney, J. Bendavid,M. Bianco, A. Bocci, C. Botta, E. Brondolin, T. Camporesi, M. Cepeda, G. Cerminara,E. Chapon, Y. Chen, G. Cucciati, D. d’Enterria, A. Dabrowski, N. Daci, V. Daponte, A. David,A. De Roeck, N. Deelen, M. Dobson, M. D ¨unser, N. Dupont, A. Elliott-Peisert, P. Everaerts,F. Fallavollita , D. Fasanella, G. Franzoni, J. Fulcher, W. Funk, D. Gigi, A. Gilbert, K. Gill,F. Glege, M. Gruchala, M. Guilbaud, D. Gulhan, J. Hegeman, C. Heidegger, V. Innocente,A. Jafari, P. Janot, O. Karacheban , J. Kieseler, A. Kornmayer, M. Krammer , C. Lange, P. Lecoq,C. Lourenc¸o, L. Malgeri, M. Mannelli, A. Massironi, F. Meijers, J.A. Merlin, S. Mersi, E. Meschi,P. Milenovic , F. Moortgat, M. Mulders, J. Ngadiuba, S. Nourbakhsh, S. Orfanelli, L. Orsini,F. Pantaleo , L. Pape, E. Perez, M. Peruzzi, A. Petrilli, G. Petrucciani, A. Pfeiffer, M. Pierini,F.M. Pitters, D. Rabady, A. Racz, T. Reis, M. Rovere, H. Sakulin, C. Sch¨afer, C. Schwick,M. Selvaggi, A. Sharma, P. Silva, P. Sphicas , A. Stakia, J. Steggemann, D. Treille, A. Tsirou,A. Vartak, V. Veckalns , M. Verzetti, W.D. Zeuner Paul Scherrer Institut, Villigen, Switzerland
L. Caminada , K. Deiters, W. Erdmann, R. Horisberger, Q. Ingram, H.C. Kaestli, D. Kotlinski,U. Langenegger, T. Rohe, S.A. Wiederkehr ETH Zurich - Institute for Particle Physics and Astrophysics (IPA), Zurich, Switzerland
M. Backhaus, L. B¨ani, P. Berger, N. Chernyavskaya, G. Dissertori, M. Dittmar, M. Doneg`a,C. Dorfer, T.A. G ´omez Espinosa, C. Grab, D. Hits, T. Klijnsma, W. Lustermann, R.A. Manzoni,M. Marionneau, M.T. Meinhard, F. Micheli, P. Musella, F. Nessi-Tedaldi, F. Pauss, G. Perrin,L. Perrozzi, S. Pigazzini, C. Reissel, D. Ruini, D.A. Sanz Becerra, M. Sch ¨onenberger,L. Shchutska, V.R. Tavolaro, K. Theofilatos, M.L. Vesterbacka Olsson, R. Wallny, D.H. Zhu
Universit¨at Z ¨urich, Zurich, Switzerland
T.K. Aarrestad, C. Amsler , D. Brzhechko, M.F. Canelli, A. De Cosa, R. Del Burgo, S. Donato,C. Galloni, T. Hreus, B. Kilminster, S. Leontsinis, I. Neutelings, G. Rauco, P. Robmann,D. Salerno, K. Schweiger, C. Seitz, Y. Takahashi, A. Zucchetta National Central University, Chung-Li, Taiwan
T.H. Doan, R. Khurana, C.M. Kuo, W. Lin, A. Pozdnyakov, S.S. Yu
National Taiwan University (NTU), Taipei, Taiwan
P. Chang, Y. Chao, K.F. Chen, P.H. Chen, W.-S. Hou, Y.F. Liu, R.-S. Lu, E. Paganis, A. Psallidas,A. Steen
Chulalongkorn University, Faculty of Science, Department of Physics, Bangkok, Thailand
B. Asavapibhop, N. Srimanobhas, N. Suwonjandee
C¸ ukurova University, Physics Department, Science and Art Faculty, Adana, Turkey
A. Bat, F. Boran, S. Cerci , S. Damarseckin, Z.S. Demiroglu, F. Dolek, C. Dozen, I. Dumanoglu,G. Gokbulut, Y. Guler, E. Gurpinar, I. Hos , C. Isik, E.E. Kangal , O. Kara, A. Kayis Topaksu,U. Kiminsu, M. Oglakci, G. Onengut, K. Ozdemir , S. Ozturk , D. Sunar Cerci , B. Tali ,U.G. Tok, S. Turkcapar, I.S. Zorbakir, C. Zorbilmez Middle East Technical University, Physics Department, Ankara, Turkey
B. Isildak , G. Karapinar , M. Yalvac, M. Zeyrek Bogazici University, Istanbul, Turkey
I.O. Atakisi, E. G ¨ulmez, M. Kaya , O. Kaya , S. Ozkorucuklu , S. Tekten, E.A. Yetkin Istanbul Technical University, Istanbul, Turkey
M.N. Agaras, A. Cakir, K. Cankocak, Y. Komurcu, S. Sen Institute for Scintillation Materials of National Academy of Science of Ukraine, Kharkov,Ukraine
B. Grynyov
National Scientific Center, Kharkov Institute of Physics and Technology, Kharkov, Ukraine
L. Levchuk
University of Bristol, Bristol, United Kingdom
F. Ball, J.J. Brooke, D. Burns, E. Clement, D. Cussans, O. Davignon, H. Flacher, J. Goldstein,G.P. Heath, H.F. Heath, L. Kreczko, D.M. Newbold , S. Paramesvaran, B. Penning, T. Sakuma,D. Smith, V.J. Smith, J. Taylor, A. Titterton Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom
K.W. Bell, A. Belyaev , C. Brew, R.M. Brown, D. Cieri, D.J.A. Cockerill, J.A. Coughlan,K. Harder, S. Harper, J. Linacre, K. Manolopoulos, E. Olaiya, D. Petyt, C.H. Shepherd-Themistocleous, A. Thea, I.R. Tomalin, T. Williams, W.J. Womersley Imperial College, London, United Kingdom
R. Bainbridge, P. Bloch, J. Borg, S. Breeze, O. Buchmuller, A. Bundock, D. Colling, P. Dauncey,G. Davies, M. Della Negra, R. Di Maria, G. Hall, G. Iles, T. James, M. Komm, L. Lyons,A.-M. Magnan, S. Malik, A. Martelli, J. Nash , A. Nikitenko , V. Palladino, M. Pesaresi,D.M. Raymond, A. Richards, A. Rose, E. Scott, C. Seez, A. Shtipliyski, G. Singh, M. Stoye,T. Strebler, S. Summers, A. Tapper, K. Uchida, T. Virdee , N. Wardle, D. Winterbottom,S.C. Zenz Brunel University, Uxbridge, United Kingdom
J.E. Cole, P.R. Hobson, A. Khan, P. Kyberd, C.K. Mackay, A. Morton, I.D. Reid, L. Teodorescu,S. Zahid
Baylor University, Waco, USA
K. Call, J. Dittmann, K. Hatakeyama, H. Liu, C. Madrid, B. McMaster, N. Pastika, C. Smith
Catholic University of America, Washington, DC, USA
R. Bartek, A. Dominguez
The University of Alabama, Tuscaloosa, USA
A. Buccilli, S.I. Cooper, C. Henderson, P. Rumerio, C. West
Boston University, Boston, USA
D. Arcaro, T. Bose, D. Gastler, S. Girgis, D. Pinna, D. Rankin, C. Richardson, J. Rohlf, L. Sulak,D. Zou
Brown University, Providence, USA
G. Benelli, X. Coubez, D. Cutts, M. Hadley, J. Hakala, U. Heintz, J.M. Hogan , K.H.M. Kwok,E. Laird, G. Landsberg, J. Lee, Z. Mao, M. Narain, S. Sagir , R. Syarif, E. Usai, D. Yu University of California, Davis, Davis, USA
R. Band, C. Brainerd, R. Breedon, D. Burns, M. Calderon De La Barca Sanchez, M. Chertok,J. Conway, R. Conway, P.T. Cox, R. Erbacher, C. Flores, G. Funk, W. Ko, O. Kukral, R. Lander,M. Mulhearn, D. Pellett, J. Pilot, S. Shalhout, M. Shi, D. Stolp, D. Taylor, K. Tos, M. Tripathi,Z. Wang, F. Zhang University of California, Los Angeles, USA
M. Bachtis, C. Bravo, R. Cousins, A. Dasgupta, A. Florent, J. Hauser, M. Ignatenko, N. Mccoll,S. Regnard, D. Saltzberg, C. Schnaible, V. Valuev
University of California, Riverside, Riverside, USA
E. Bouvier, K. Burt, R. Clare, J.W. Gary, S.M.A. Ghiasi Shirazi, G. Hanson, G. Karapostoli,E. Kennedy, F. Lacroix, O.R. Long, M. Olmedo Negrete, M.I. Paneva, W. Si, L. Wang, H. Wei,S. Wimpenny, B.R. Yates
University of California, San Diego, La Jolla, USA
J.G. Branson, P. Chang, S. Cittolin, M. Derdzinski, R. Gerosa, D. Gilbert, B. Hashemi,A. Holzner, D. Klein, G. Kole, V. Krutelyov, J. Letts, M. Masciovecchio, D. Olivito, S. Padhi,M. Pieri, M. Sani, V. Sharma, S. Simon, M. Tadel, J. Wood, F. W ¨urthwein, A. Yagil,G. Zevi Della Porta
University of California, Santa Barbara - Department of Physics, Santa Barbara, USA
N. Amin, R. Bhandari, C. Campagnari, M. Citron, V. Dutta, M. Franco Sevilla, L. Gouskos,R. Heller, J. Incandela, H. Mei, A. Ovcharova, H. Qu, J. Richman, D. Stuart, I. Suarez, S. Wang,J. Yoo
California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, USA
D. Anderson, A. Bornheim, J.M. Lawhorn, N. Lu, H.B. Newman, T.Q. Nguyen, J. Pata,M. Spiropulu, J.R. Vlimant, R. Wilkinson, S. Xie, Z. Zhang, R.Y. Zhu
Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, USA
M.B. Andrews, T. Ferguson, T. Mudholkar, M. Paulini, M. Sun, I. Vorobiev, M. Weinberg
University of Colorado Boulder, Boulder, USA
J.P. Cumalat, W.T. Ford, F. Jensen, A. Johnson, E. MacDonald, T. Mulholland, R. Patel, A. Perloff,K. Stenson, K.A. Ulmer, S.R. Wagner
Cornell University, Ithaca, USA
J. Alexander, J. Chaves, Y. Cheng, J. Chu, A. Datta, K. Mcdermott, N. Mirman, J.R. Patterson,D. Quach, A. Rinkevicius, A. Ryd, L. Skinnari, L. Soffi, S.M. Tan, Z. Tao, J. Thom, J. Tucker,P. Wittich, M. Zientek
Fermi National Accelerator Laboratory, Batavia, USA
S. Abdullin, M. Albrow, M. Alyari, G. Apollinari, A. Apresyan, A. Apyan, S. Banerjee,L.A.T. Bauerdick, A. Beretvas, J. Berryhill, P.C. Bhat, K. Burkett, J.N. Butler, A. Canepa,G.B. Cerati, H.W.K. Cheung, F. Chlebana, M. Cremonesi, J. Duarte, V.D. Elvira, J. Freeman,Z. Gecse, E. Gottschalk, L. Gray, D. Green, S. Gr ¨unendahl, O. Gutsche, J. Hanlon, R.M. Harris,S. Hasegawa, J. Hirschauer, Z. Hu, B. Jayatilaka, S. Jindariani, M. Johnson, U. Joshi, B. Klima,M.J. Kortelainen, B. Kreis, S. Lammel, D. Lincoln, R. Lipton, M. Liu, T. Liu, J. Lykken,K. Maeshima, J.M. Marraffino, D. Mason, P. McBride, P. Merkel, S. Mrenna, S. Nahn, V. O’Dell,K. Pedro, C. Pena, O. Prokofyev, G. Rakness, F. Ravera, A. Reinsvold, L. Ristori, A. Savoy-Navarro , B. Schneider, E. Sexton-Kennedy, A. Soha, W.J. Spalding, L. Spiegel, S. Stoynev,J. Strait, N. Strobbe, L. Taylor, S. Tkaczyk, N.V. Tran, L. Uplegger, E.W. Vaandering, C. Vernieri,M. Verzocchi, R. Vidal, M. Wang, H.A. Weber, A. Whitbeck University of Florida, Gainesville, USA
D. Acosta, P. Avery, P. Bortignon, D. Bourilkov, A. Brinkerhoff, L. Cadamuro, A. Carnes,D. Curry, R.D. Field, S.V. Gleyzer, B.M. Joshi, J. Konigsberg, A. Korytov, K.H. Lo, P. Ma,K. Matchev, G. Mitselmakher, D. Rosenzweig, K. Shi, D. Sperka, J. Wang, S. Wang, X. Zuo Florida International University, Miami, USA
Y.R. Joshi, S. Linn
Florida State University, Tallahassee, USA
A. Ackert, T. Adams, A. Askew, S. Hagopian, V. Hagopian, K.F. Johnson, T. Kolberg,G. Martinez, T. Perry, H. Prosper, A. Saha, C. Schiber, R. Yohay
Florida Institute of Technology, Melbourne, USA
M.M. Baarmand, V. Bhopatkar, S. Colafranceschi, M. Hohlmann, D. Noonan, M. Rahmani,T. Roy, F. Yumiceva
University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC), Chicago, USA
M.R. Adams, L. Apanasevich, D. Berry, R.R. Betts, R. Cavanaugh, X. Chen, S. Dittmer,O. Evdokimov, C.E. Gerber, D.A. Hangal, D.J. Hofman, K. Jung, J. Kamin, C. Mills, M.B. Tonjes,N. Varelas, H. Wang, X. Wang, Z. Wu, J. Zhang
The University of Iowa, Iowa City, USA
M. Alhusseini, B. Bilki , W. Clarida, K. Dilsiz , S. Durgut, R.P. Gandrajula, M. Haytmyradov,V. Khristenko, J.-P. Merlo, A. Mestvirishvili, A. Moeller, J. Nachtman, H. Ogul , Y. Onel,F. Ozok , A. Penzo, C. Snyder, E. Tiras, J. Wetzel Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, USA
B. Blumenfeld, A. Cocoros, N. Eminizer, D. Fehling, L. Feng, A.V. Gritsan, W.T. Hung,P. Maksimovic, J. Roskes, U. Sarica, M. Swartz, M. Xiao
The University of Kansas, Lawrence, USA
A. Al-bataineh, P. Baringer, A. Bean, S. Boren, J. Bowen, A. Bylinkin, J. Castle, S. Khalil,A. Kropivnitskaya, D. Majumder, W. Mcbrayer, M. Murray, C. Rogan, S. Sanders, E. Schmitz,J.D. Tapia Takaki, Q. Wang
Kansas State University, Manhattan, USA
S. Duric, A. Ivanov, K. Kaadze, D. Kim, Y. Maravin, D.R. Mendis, T. Mitchell, A. Modak,A. Mohammadi
Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory, Livermore, USA
F. Rebassoo, D. Wright
University of Maryland, College Park, USA
A. Baden, O. Baron, A. Belloni, S.C. Eno, Y. Feng, C. Ferraioli, N.J. Hadley, S. Jabeen, G.Y. Jeng,R.G. Kellogg, J. Kunkle, A.C. Mignerey, S. Nabili, F. Ricci-Tam, M. Seidel, Y.H. Shin, A. Skuja,S.C. Tonwar, K. Wong
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, USA
D. Abercrombie, B. Allen, V. Azzolini, A. Baty, G. Bauer, R. Bi, S. Brandt, W. Busza, I.A. Cali,M. D’Alfonso, Z. Demiragli, G. Gomez Ceballos, M. Goncharov, P. Harris, D. Hsu, M. Hu,Y. Iiyama, G.M. Innocenti, M. Klute, D. Kovalskyi, Y.-J. Lee, P.D. Luckey, B. Maier, A.C. Marini,C. Mcginn, C. Mironov, S. Narayanan, X. Niu, C. Paus, C. Roland, G. Roland, Z. Shi,G.S.F. Stephans, K. Sumorok, K. Tatar, D. Velicanu, J. Wang, T.W. Wang, B. Wyslouch
University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, USA
A.C. Benvenuti † , R.M. Chatterjee, A. Evans, P. Hansen, J. Hiltbrand, Sh. Jain, S. Kalafut,M. Krohn, Y. Kubota, Z. Lesko, J. Mans, N. Ruckstuhl, R. Rusack, M.A. Wadud University of Mississippi, Oxford, USA
J.G. Acosta, S. Oliveros University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Lincoln, USA
E. Avdeeva, K. Bloom, D.R. Claes, C. Fangmeier, F. Golf, R. Gonzalez Suarez, R. Kamalieddin,I. Kravchenko, J. Monroy, J.E. Siado, G.R. Snow, B. Stieger
State University of New York at Buffalo, Buffalo, USA
A. Godshalk, C. Harrington, I. Iashvili, A. Kharchilava, C. Mclean, D. Nguyen, A. Parker,S. Rappoccio, B. Roozbahani
Northeastern University, Boston, USA
G. Alverson, E. Barberis, C. Freer, Y. Haddad, A. Hortiangtham, D.M. Morse, T. Orimoto,T. Wamorkar, B. Wang, A. Wisecarver, D. Wood
Northwestern University, Evanston, USA
S. Bhattacharya, J. Bueghly, O. Charaf, T. Gunter, K.A. Hahn, N. Odell, M.H. Schmitt, K. Sung,M. Trovato, M. Velasco
University of Notre Dame, Notre Dame, USA
R. Bucci, N. Dev, M. Hildreth, K. Hurtado Anampa, C. Jessop, D.J. Karmgard, K. Lannon, W. Li,N. Loukas, N. Marinelli, F. Meng, C. Mueller, Y. Musienko , M. Planer, R. Ruchti, P. Siddireddy,G. Smith, S. Taroni, M. Wayne, A. Wightman, M. Wolf, A. Woodard The Ohio State University, Columbus, USA
J. Alimena, L. Antonelli, B. Bylsma, L.S. Durkin, S. Flowers, B. Francis, C. Hill, W. Ji, T.Y. Ling,W. Luo, B.L. Winer
Princeton University, Princeton, USA
S. Cooperstein, P. Elmer, J. Hardenbrook, N. Haubrich, S. Higginbotham, A. Kalogeropoulos,S. Kwan, D. Lange, M.T. Lucchini, J. Luo, D. Marlow, K. Mei, I. Ojalvo, J. Olsen, C. Palmer,P. Pirou´e, J. Salfeld-Nebgen, D. Stickland, C. Tully
University of Puerto Rico, Mayaguez, USA
S. Malik, S. Norberg
Purdue University, West Lafayette, USA
A. Barker, V.E. Barnes, S. Das, L. Gutay, M. Jones, A.W. Jung, A. Khatiwada, B. Mahakud,D.H. Miller, N. Neumeister, C.C. Peng, S. Piperov, H. Qiu, J.F. Schulte, J. Sun, F. Wang, R. Xiao,W. Xie
Purdue University Northwest, Hammond, USA
T. Cheng, J. Dolen, N. Parashar
Rice University, Houston, USA
Z. Chen, K.M. Ecklund, S. Freed, F.J.M. Geurts, M. Kilpatrick, Arun Kumar, W. Li, B.P. Padley,R. Redjimi, J. Roberts, J. Rorie, W. Shi, Z. Tu, A. Zhang
University of Rochester, Rochester, USA
A. Bodek, P. de Barbaro, R. Demina, Y.t. Duh, J.L. Dulemba, C. Fallon, T. Ferbel, M. Galanti,A. Garcia-Bellido, J. Han, O. Hindrichs, A. Khukhunaishvili, E. Ranken, P. Tan, R. Taus
Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, Piscataway, USA
B. Chiarito, J.P. Chou, Y. Gershtein, E. Halkiadakis, A. Hart, M. Heindl, E. Hughes, S. Kaplan,R. Kunnawalkam Elayavalli, S. Kyriacou, I. Laflotte, A. Lath, R. Montalvo, K. Nash,M. Osherson, H. Saka, S. Salur, S. Schnetzer, D. Sheffield, S. Somalwar, R. Stone, S. Thomas,P. Thomassen University of Tennessee, Knoxville, USA
A.G. Delannoy, J. Heideman, G. Riley, S. Spanier
Texas A&M University, College Station, USA
O. Bouhali , A. Celik, M. Dalchenko, M. De Mattia, A. Delgado, S. Dildick, R. Eusebi,J. Gilmore, T. Huang, T. Kamon , S. Luo, D. Marley, R. Mueller, D. Overton, L. Perni`e,D. Rathjens, A. Safonov Texas Tech University, Lubbock, USA
N. Akchurin, J. Damgov, F. De Guio, P.R. Dudero, S. Kunori, K. Lamichhane, S.W. Lee,T. Mengke, S. Muthumuni, T. Peltola, S. Undleeb, I. Volobouev, Z. Wang
Vanderbilt University, Nashville, USA
S. Greene, A. Gurrola, R. Janjam, W. Johns, C. Maguire, A. Melo, H. Ni, K. Padeken, F. Romeo,J.D. Ruiz Alvarez, P. Sheldon, S. Tuo, J. Velkovska, M. Verweij, Q. Xu
University of Virginia, Charlottesville, USA
M.W. Arenton, P. Barria, B. Cox, R. Hirosky, M. Joyce, A. Ledovskoy, H. Li, C. Neu,T. Sinthuprasith, Y. Wang, E. Wolfe, F. Xia
Wayne State University, Detroit, USA
R. Harr, P.E. Karchin, N. Poudyal, J. Sturdy, P. Thapa, S. Zaleski
University of Wisconsin - Madison, Madison, WI, USA
J. Buchanan, C. Caillol, D. Carlsmith, S. Dasu, I. De Bruyn, L. Dodd, B. Gomber , M. Grothe,M. Herndon, A. Herv´e, U. Hussain, P. Klabbers, A. Lanaro, K. Long, R. Loveless, T. Ruggles,A. Savin, V. Sharma, N. Smith, W.H. Smith, N. Woods † : Deceased1: Also at Vienna University of Technology, Vienna, Austria2: Also at IRFU, CEA, Universit´e Paris-Saclay, Gif-sur-Yvette, France3: Also at Universidade Estadual de Campinas, Campinas, Brazil4: Also at Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul, Porto Alegre, Brazil5: Also at Universit´e Libre de Bruxelles, Bruxelles, Belgium6: Also at University of Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China7: Also at Institute for Theoretical and Experimental Physics, Moscow, Russia8: Also at Joint Institute for Nuclear Research, Dubna, Russia9: Now at Helwan University, Cairo, Egypt10: Also at Zewail City of Science and Technology, Zewail, Egypt11: Now at Fayoum University, El-Fayoum, Egypt12: Also at Department of Physics, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, Saudi Arabia13: Also at Universit´e de Haute Alsace, Mulhouse, France14: Also at Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear Physics, Lomonosov Moscow State University,Moscow, Russia15: Also at Tbilisi State University, Tbilisi, Georgia16: Also at CERN, European Organization for Nuclear Research, Geneva, Switzerland17: Also at RWTH Aachen University, III. Physikalisches Institut A, Aachen, Germany18: Also at University of Hamburg, Hamburg, Germany19: Also at Brandenburg University of Technology, Cottbus, Germany20: Also at Institute of Physics, University of Debrecen, Debrecen, Hungary21: Also at Institute of Nuclear Research ATOMKI, Debrecen, Hungary22: Also at MTA-ELTE Lend ¨ulet CMS Particle and Nuclear Physics Group, E ¨otv ¨os Lor´andUniversity, Budapest, Hungary
23: Also at Indian Institute of Technology Bhubaneswar, Bhubaneswar, India24: Also at Institute of Physics, Bhubaneswar, India25: Also at Shoolini University, Solan, India26: Also at University of Visva-Bharati, Santiniketan, India27: Also at Isfahan University of Technology, Isfahan, Iran28: Also at Plasma Physics Research Center, Science and Research Branch, Islamic AzadUniversity, Tehran, Iran29: Also at ITALIAN NATIONAL AGENCY FOR NEW TECHNOLOGIES, ENERGY ANDSUSTAINABLE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, Bologna, Italy30: Also at Universit`a degli Studi di Siena, Siena, Italy31: Also at Scuola Normale e Sezione dell’INFN, Pisa, Italy32: Also at Kyunghee University, Seoul, Korea33: Also at International Islamic University of Malaysia, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia34: Also at Malaysian Nuclear Agency, MOSTI, Kajang, Malaysia35: Also at Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnolog´ıa, Mexico City, Mexico36: Also at Warsaw University of Technology, Institute of Electronic Systems, Warsaw, Poland37: Also at Institute for Nuclear Research, Moscow, Russia38: Now at National Research Nuclear University ’Moscow Engineering Physics Institute’(MEPhI), Moscow, Russia39: Also at St. Petersburg State Polytechnical University, St. Petersburg, Russia40: Also at University of Florida, Gainesville, USA41: Also at P.N. Lebedev Physical Institute, Moscow, Russia42: Also at California Institute of Technology, Pasadena, USA43: Also at Budker Institute of Nuclear Physics, Novosibirsk, Russia44: Also at Faculty of Physics, University of Belgrade, Belgrade, Serbia45: Also at INFN Sezione di Pavia a , Universit`a di Pavia b , Pavia, Italy46: Also at University of Belgrade, Faculty of Physics and Vinca Institute of Nuclear Sciences,Belgrade, Serbia47: Also at National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, Athens, Greece48: Also at Riga Technical University, Riga, Latvia49: Also at Universit¨at Z ¨urich, Zurich, Switzerland50: Also at Stefan Meyer Institute for Subatomic Physics (SMI), Vienna, Austria51: Also at Adiyaman University, Adiyaman, Turkey52: Also at Istanbul Aydin University, Istanbul, Turkey53: Also at Mersin University, Mersin, Turkey54: Also at Piri Reis University, Istanbul, Turkey55: Also at Gaziosmanpasa University, Tokat, Turkey56: Also at Ozyegin University, Istanbul, Turkey57: Also at Izmir Institute of Technology, Izmir, Turkey58: Also at Marmara University, Istanbul, Turkey59: Also at Kafkas University, Kars, Turkey60: Also at Istanbul University, Faculty of Science, Istanbul, Turkey61: Also at Istanbul Bilgi University, Istanbul, Turkey62: Also at Hacettepe University, Ankara, Turkey63: Also at Rutherford Appleton Laboratory, Didcot, United Kingdom64: Also at School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Southampton, Southampton,United Kingdom65: Also at Monash University, Faculty of Science, Clayton, Australia66: Also at Bethel University, St. Paul, USA3