Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 3 cited by

Probing the coupling of axions to tops and gluons with LHC measurements

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read Run 2 LHC data, re-analyzed with loop-corrected effective field theory, exclude much of the axion–top–gluon coupling plane.

desk verdict A competent CONTUR reinterpretation that delivers the first real-data constraints on the low-mass ALP-gluon coupling and its interplay with the top coupling, but the headline contours are drawn without applying the paper's own EFT-validity cut, so the limits as plotted are not yet trustworthy. read the letter →

arxiv 2508.21660 v1 pith:7PHMWJIG submitted 2025-08-29 hep-ph hep-ex

Jon Butterworth , Matthew Cullingworth , Joseph Egan , Fabian Esser , Veronica Sanz , Maria Ubiali This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phhep-ex
keywords axion-likeparticlesALP-topcouplingALP-gluoneffectivefieldtheoryloopcorrectionsLHCreinterpretationtopquarkmissingenergy
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

ALPs that couple at tree level only to top quarks and gluons are hard to see directly, but this paper shows that one-loop radiative effects generate couplings to photons, Z bosons, and lighter fermions, so ordinary LHC measurements become probes of the ALP. Reinterpreting a wide range of Run 2 data—top-pair, dijet, photon+jet, and Z+jet distributions—the paper finds 2σ exclusions in the plane of the bare couplings: $f_a/c_t^0 \gtrsim 200$ GeV and $f_a/c_{\tilde G}^0 \gtrsim 5$ TeV, with $|c_{\tilde G}^0| \gtrsim 0.5$ excluded in dijet final states and $|c_t^0| \gtrsim 2$ excluded in semileptonic top-pair final states. The limits depend on the UV origin of the couplings, and the paper shows they already touch well-motivated UV scenarios such as composite Higgs models. The point is that loop-aware reinterpretation of existing measurements can probe otherwise elusive ALP scenarios, with sensitivity expected to improve at the HL-LHC.

What carries the argument

The key machinery is the set of one-loop corrected effective couplings that connect the two bare ALP couplings to the full low-energy ALP Lagrangian. In particular, the effective ALP–gluon coupling is $c^\mathrm{eff}_{agg} = c_{\tilde G}^0 - (\alpha_s/8\pi)\, c_t^0\, B_1(4m_t^2/p^2)$ and the effective ALP–top coupling is $c^\mathrm{eff}_t = c_t^0 + \frac{4\alpha_s}{3\pi} [3\log(\Lambda^2/m_t^2) - 4 - \frac{2\pi^2}{3} - \frac{1}{2}(\log(m_t^2/p^2)+i\pi)^2]\, c_{\tilde G}^0$, with the loop function $B_1$ given in the paper. These relations carry the argument: they determine every signal rate used in the fits, and they encode the UV sensitivity, since the cutoff $\Lambda$ appears logarithmically. The paper's sensitivity to UV origin comes from the fact that different UV completions map to different points in the bare-coupling plane, so the shape of the exclusion contour can in principle discriminate them.

What would settle it

An independent calculation of the one-loop mixing coefficient that produces $c^\mathrm{eff}_t$ from $c_{\tilde G}^0$ (the factor multiplying $c_{\tilde G}^0$ in Eq. (2.22), shown to be about 0.4–0.7 in the relevant energy range) that disagrees with the paper's result would invalidate the mapping between bare and effective couplings and therefore the quoted exclusion limits.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the LHC already constrains ALPs whose tree-level interactions are confined to the top quark and gluons, because loop corrections generate the couplings that make the ALP observable. Concretely, a bare coupling $c_t^0$ to tops induces an effective ALP–gluon coupling $c^\mathrm{eff}_{agg} = c_{\tilde G}^0 - (\alpha_s/8\pi) c_t^0 B_1(4m_t^2/p^2)$, while a bare gluon coupling $c_{\tilde G}^0$ induces an effective ALP–top coupling $c^\mathrm{eff}_t \simeq c_t^0 + 0.6\,c_{\tilde G}^0$ at typical LHC energies. These loop-induced couplings, combined with the assumption that the ALP is invisible at the detector, turn measurements of the transverse momentum of tops, jets, photons, and Z bosons into exclusion limits. The resulting 2σ bounds are $f_a/c_t^0 \gtrsim 200$ GeV and $f_a/c_{\tilde G}^0 \gtrsim 5$ TeV, and they are sensitive to whether the UV theory has a nonzero $c_t^0$ or $c_{\tilde G}^0$ at the matching scale.

Load-bearing premise

The paper's limits rely on the assumption that ALPs produced in the final state, and whatever they decay into, escape the detector without being seen, so the signal is missing energy; if the ALP instead decays visibly, the constraints shift, although a version using only virtual ALP exchange still leaves bounds in place.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Run 3 and HL-LHC data should sharpen the constraints: the expected 2σ exclusion contours extend further in the same plane under simple luminosity scaling.
  • The semileptonic top-pair final state ($\ell + E_T^\mathrm{miss} +$ jets) is identified as the single most sensitive channel for $|c_t^0|$, so future differential top-pair measurements will directly improve the ALP–top bound.
  • Because loop mixing generates one coupling from the other, a UV theory that starts with only $c_t^0$ or only $c_{\tilde G}^0$ at the matching scale still produces observable signals in both top-pair and dijet channels; no hidden 'top-only' or 'gluon-only' ALP model escapes these constraints.
  • The domain-of-validity check shows the most sensitive signal regions have $\sqrt{\hat s}$ of a few hundred GeV, safely below $f_a$, so the bounds are not artifacts of pushing the EFT beyond its regime.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Extending the same loop-aware reinterpretation to ALP couplings to bottom quarks or tau leptons would likely produce complementary bounds, since the loop functions and mixing structure follow the same pattern.
  • If the ALP is ever discovered, the shape of the exclusion contour in the $(c_t^0, c_{\tilde G}^0)$ plane could act as a fingerprint of the UV completion—for instance, distinguishing a pure anomaly-induced gluon coupling from one generated by top or top-partner loops, since the sign and energy dependence of the loop corrections differ.
  • The invisible-ALP assumption, while motivated by dark-sector scenarios, is conservative for the missing-energy channels; adding visible-decay signatures (e.g., displaced vertices or diphoton resonances) would likely close additional regions of parameter space.
  • Combining these LHC bounds with astrophysical and low-energy constraints on $f_a$ could further narrow the allowed parameter space for composite-Higgs-like UV models, and may motivate dedicated searches in the semileptonic top-pair channel at the HL-LHC.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. The paper uses the CONTUR framework to reinterpret a broad set of 13 TeV LHC measurements (dijet, lepton+jets and dilepton top-pair, all-hadronic top-pair, photon+jets, Z+jets, and missing-energy+jets final states) in an ALP EFT in which only the top-quark and gluon couplings are non-zero at tree level. One-loop corrections from Ref. [46] are included, mapping the bare couplings (c0_t, c0_tildeG) to effective couplings ceff_t and ceff_agg, and inducing additional couplings to light fermions and electroweak gauge bosons. Exclusion contours are presented in the (ceff_agg/fa, ceff_t/fa) and (c0_tildeG/fa, c0_t/fa) planes for ma = 1 GeV and Lambda = 10 TeV, under the stated assumption that final-state ALPs are invisible at detector level; Sec. 4.3 provides a weaker alternative with only virtual ALP exchange. The paper also sketches an SO(6)/SO(5) composite-Higgs UV completion and discusses EFT validity in Sec. 5.

Significance. If the constraints survive scrutiny, the paper demonstrates that existing public LHC measurements can probe ALP couplings to tops and gluons, including regions where the ALP is effectively invisible. The analysis is transparent about its main assumption, provides a conservative virtual-only variant, includes momentum-dependent one-loop corrections, and relies on external data, so the central constraints are not circular. The main limitation is the unresolved EFT-validity issue described below, which affects the quoted headline limits.

major comments (3)
  1. [Sec. 5; Figs. 5 and 12] The headline exclusions are not validity-truncated. Section 5 states that no cut has been applied on the partonic center-of-mass energy sqrt(s_hat), yet the quoted 2sigma limit fa/c0_t >~ 200 GeV places the exclusion boundary at fa ~ 200 GeV for order-one c0_t. The histograms that drive the exclusions in Fig. 7b (top pT up to 1600 GeV) and Fig. 11b (Z pT up to 1000 GeV) extend well above this scale, so the signal predictions used to exclude those points violate the paper's own criterion sqrt(s_hat) < fa. The assertion that the sensitive kinematic regions lie in the few-hundred-GeV range is asserted but not demonstrated for the actual exclusion boundary, and it is in tension with those figures. I ask that the contours be re-derived with a validity cut, or equivalently that parameter regions with fa below the characteristic scale of the sensitive bins be masked, and that the quoted limits be restated for the valid region.
  2. [Sec. 4.3 and Fig. 12] The virtual-ALP-only limits, presented as the conservative alternative, are obtained under the same no-cut assumption as Fig. 5. Even with ALP production diagrams removed, the off-shell ttbar and dijet processes receive contributions from the same high-pT bins, so the validity concern carries over. The same truncation should be applied to Fig. 12, and the text should state whether the weaker bounds survive in the valid region.
  3. [Sec. 2.2, Eq. (2.22)] The conversion from the effective-coupling exclusions to the bare-coupling plane depends on the arbitrary cutoff Lambda, which is fixed to 10 TeV. Because the headline limits are quoted in the (c0_t, c0_tildeG) plane, the paper should quantify how those limits shift under a reasonable variation of Lambda (for example 5-20 TeV); the logarithmic dependence is expected to be mild, but it should be demonstrated rather than assumed.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Sec. 4.2] The phrase 'leading to to an increased cross section' contains a duplicated 'to'; it should read 'leading to an increased cross section'.
  2. [Sec. 4.2] The word 'particuarly' should be spelled 'particularly'.
  3. [Sec. 5] The statement that the most constraining regions arise from events with p >~ 200 GeV is vague; please specify whether p refers to the transverse momentum of the leading jet, the top quark, or the partonic center-of-mass energy, since the validity condition is stated for sqrt(s_hat).
  4. [Abstract and Sec. 6] The word 'model-independent' is used for bounds that depend on the invisible-ALP assumption and on the choice Lambda = 10 TeV; please add qualifying phrases such as 'under the stated assumptions'.
  5. [Fig. 5] The caption refers the reader to the legend of Fig. 4, but the two figures have different axis ranges and are not contiguous; repeating the legend or naming the pools in the caption would improve readability.
  6. [Eq. (2.21)] The master formula for the effective fermion coupling is presented without the explicit loop functions Di, which are only given in Ref. [46]; since this equation is central to the analysis, please consider listing the definitions or at least stating the sign conventions used.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: constraints are driven by external LHC data; loop corrections are independent one-loop results; the EFT-validity caveat is a limitation rather than an input-output equivalence.

full rationale

The central chain is: define the ALP EFT with bare couplings c0_t and c0_tildeG (Eqs. (2.2), (2.4)); take the one-loop effective couplings from Ref. [46] (Eqs. (2.16)-(2.25), with loop functions in App. A); simulate pp -> ALP+jet / ALP+ttbar / etc. with the UFO model of Ref. [9]; and pass the events through CONTUR against ATLAS/CMS differential measurements. The exclusion contours are obtained by scanning c0_t and c0_tildeG (or ceff_t and ceff_agg) and comparing SM+ALP to actual LHC data. No parameter is fitted to a subset of those data and then 'predicted'; the loop relations used to map bare to effective couplings are one-loop formulae whose stated inputs (Lambda = 10 TeV, mt, sw, etc.) are not determined by the LHC observables being constrained. Refs. [9], [12] and [46] do have overlapping authors with the present paper, but they are published calculations/models with assumptions independent of the present data analysis, not self-authored uniqueness theorems invoked to forbid alternatives; under the hard rules these count as independent support and do not raise the circularity score. The paper itself flags the most substantive caveat in Sec. 5: the limits in Figs. 5 and 12 are obtained 'without imposing an explicit EFT validity cut' and 'no cut has been applied on the partonic center-of-mass energy sqrt(s_hat)', even though the quoted boundary fa/c0_t ~ 200 GeV lies near or below the sqrt(s_hat) values in the sensitive high-pT bins (e.g. Figs. 7b, 11b). That is a real domain-of-validity limitation that could shrink a validity-truncated contour, but it is not an equivalence between input and output: the constraints still derive from external LHC data plus a parameter-free loop calculation. Therefore no circular step is present.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central scan rests on a small number of modelling choices: two tree-level couplings, an invisible ALP, a chosen UV cutoff of 10 TeV, and one-loop formulas taken from Ref [46]. None of these are fitted to the LHC data being used as constraints, but they are assumptions that would change the interpretation if altered. The ALP itself is not an invented entity of this paper; it is an established hypothetical particle.

free parameters (2)
  • UV cutoff Lambda = 10 TeV
    Chosen value in Sec 2.2 and used in Eqs (2.22)-(2.25) to convert bare couplings into effective ones. The limits in the bare plane would shift for other Lambda values, and no Lambda scan is shown.
  • ALP mass ma = 1 GeV
    Fixed in the main scan in Sec 4.1. The authors state that masses below about 100 GeV give the same results if the ALP is invisible, so this is a scenario input rather than a fitted value.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption EFT expansion in powers of 1/fa remains valid for the events that drive the exclusions.
    Sec 5 states the condition sqrt(s) < fa, but the limits in Figs 5 and 12 are derived without an explicit cut; validity is argued from the typical signal region being at few hundred GeV.
  • domain assumption At tree level only the ALP-top and ALP-gluon couplings are non-zero; all other couplings are loop-induced.
    Sec 2 sets up this simplified scenario, with all effective couplings to electroweak gauge bosons and light fermions computed from c0_t and c0_tildeG.
  • domain assumption The ALP is invisible at detector level in the main scan.
    Sec 2.2 paragraph starting 'For this reason, we assume...' This is required for the missing-energy signatures; Sec 4.3 partially relaxes it for virtual ALP exchange only.
  • domain assumption The one-loop formulas of Ref [46] are correct.
    Eqs (2.11)-(2.25) are imported without derivation, and Ref [46] shares an author with this paper, so independent verification is absent.
  • domain assumption No flavour-violating ALP couplings are present.
    Footnote 1 and the flavour-diagonal Lagrangian of Eq (2.1) restrict the parameter space to third-generation couplings.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Probing the coupling of axions to tops and gluons with LHC measurements." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7PHMWJIG

@misc{pith2026250821660,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Probing the coupling of axions to tops and gluons with LHC measurements},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7PHMWJIG}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2508.21660}
}
abstract

We study axion-like particles (ALPs) whose dominant interactions are with gluons and third-generation quarks, and whose couplings to light Standard Model (SM) particles arise at one loop. These loop-induced effects lead to ALP decays and production channels that can be probed at the LHC, even when tree-level couplings are absent. Using an effective field theory (EFT) description that includes momentum-dependent corrections from radiative effects, we reinterpret a wide range of LHC measurements via the CONTUR framework to derive model-independent constraints on the ALP parameter space. We show that LHC data place meaningful bounds in the plane of effective couplings $c^0_t/f_a$ and $c^0_{\tilde G}/f_a$, and that these limits are sensitive to the UV origin of the ALP-top and ALP-gluon couplings. We discuss representative scenarios where either $c^0_t$ or $c^0_{\tilde G}$ vanishes at the matching scale, and highlight the role of EFT running and mixing in generating observable signals. We also assess the domain of validity of the EFT approach by comparing the typical momentum transfer $\sqrt{\hat s}$ in sensitive regions to the underlying scale $f_a$. Our results demonstrate the power of loop-aware EFT reinterpretation of SM measurements in probing otherwise elusive ALP scenarios. The framework presented here can be readily extended to include couplings to other fermions and to accommodate ALP decay or long-lived signatures.

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. ALP pair production at the LHC

    hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Non-resonant gg→aa→4γ production could constrain the dimension-6 ALP-gluon coupling down to ~10^-3 TeV^-2 at 300 fb^-1, but the allowed parameter space remains unbounded along multiple flat directions.

  2. A global analysis of ALP-mediated multiboson production at the LHC

    hep-ph 2025-10 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    A global fit to LHC multiboson data constrains the three ALP-gauge couplings to cG below 0.41, cW below 1.09 and cB below 1.78 at 2 sigma, for fa equal to 1 TeV.

  3. The Plan B Model: $Z^{\prime}$ collider phenomenology and discovery prospects

    hep-ph 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Current LHC data exclude a significant portion of the Plan B Model's preferred parameter space, and the HL-LHC could extend sensitivity to Z′ masses around 2.5 TeV.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

94 extracted references · 7 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [46]

    Bonilla, I

    J. Bonilla, I. Brivio, M. B. Gavela, and V. Sanz,One-loop corrections to ALP couplings, JHEP 11 (2021) 168, [arXiv:2107.11392]

    arXiv 2021

  2. [1]

    R. D. Peccei and H. R. Quinn,CP Conservation in the Presence of Instantons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 38 (1977) 1440–1443

    1977

  3. [2]

    R. D. Peccei and H. R. Quinn,Constraints Imposed by CP Conservation in the Presence of Instantons, Phys. Rev. D16 (1977) 1791–1797

    1977

  4. [3]

    Wilczek,Problem of StrongP and T Invariance in the Presence of Instantons, Phys

    F. Wilczek,Problem of StrongP and T Invariance in the Presence of Instantons, Phys. Rev. Lett. 40 (1978) 279–282

    1978

  5. [4]

    Weinberg,A New Light Boson?, Phys

    S. Weinberg,A New Light Boson?, Phys. Rev. Lett.40 (1978) 223–226

    1978

  6. [5]

    K. Choi, S. H. Im, and C. Sub Shin,Recent Progress in the Physics of Axions and Axion-Like Particles, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.71 (2021) 225–252, [arXiv:2012.05029]

    arXiv 2021

  7. [6]

    cajohare/axionlimits: Axionlimits

    C. O’Hare, “cajohare/axionlimits: Axionlimits.” https://cajohare.github.io/AxionLimits/, July, 2020

    2020

  8. [7]

    Mimasu and V

    K. Mimasu and V. Sanz,ALPs at Colliders, JHEP 06 (2015) 173, [arXiv:1409.4792]

    arXiv 2015

Show all 94 references
  1. [8]

    Jaeckel and M

    J. Jaeckel and M. Spannowsky,Probing MeV to 90 GeV axion-like particles with LEP and LHC, Phys. Lett. B753 (2016) 482–487, [arXiv:1509.00476]

    2016 arXiv

  2. [9]

    Brivio, M

    I. Brivio, M. B. Gavela, L. Merlo, K. Mimasu, J. M. No, R. del Rey, and V. Sanz,ALPs Effective Field Theory and Collider Signatures, Eur. Phys. J. C77 (2017), no. 8 572, [arXiv:1701.05379]

    2017 arXiv

  3. [10]

    Bauer, M

    M. Bauer, M. Neubert, and A. Thamm,Collider Probes of Axion-Like Particles, JHEP 12 (2017) 044, [arXiv:1708.00443]

    2017 arXiv

  4. [11]

    Craig, A

    N. Craig, A. Hook, and S. Kasko,The Photophobic ALP, JHEP 09 (2018) 028, [arXiv:1805.06538]

    2018 arXiv

  5. [12]

    Esser, M

    F. Esser, M. Madigan, V. Sanz, and M. Ubiali,On the coupling of axion-like particles to the top quark, JHEP 09 (2023) 063, [arXiv:2303.17634]

    2023 arXiv

  6. [13]

    Bisal,Constraining ALP-Top Interaction from the Chromoelectric Dipole Moment of the Top Quark, arXiv:2507.12570

    S. Bisal,Constraining ALP-Top Interaction from the Chromoelectric Dipole Moment of the Top Quark, arXiv:2507.12570

    arXiv

  7. [14]

    Esser, M

    F. Esser, M. Madigan, A. Salas-Bernardez, V. Sanz, and M. Ubiali,Di-Higgs production via axion-like particles, JHEP 10 (2024) 164, [arXiv:2404.08062]

    2024 arXiv

  8. [15]

    M. B. Gavela, J. M. No, V. Sanz, and J. F. de Trocóniz,Nonresonant Searches for Axionlike Particles at the LHC, Phys. Rev. Lett.124 (2020), no. 5 051802, [arXiv:1905.12953]. – 20 –

    2020 arXiv

  9. [16]

    J. M. No, V. Sanz, and J. Setford,See-saw composite Higgs model at the LHC: Linking naturalness to the 750 GeV diphoton resonance, Phys. Rev. D93 (2016), no. 9 095010, [arXiv:1512.05700]

    2016 arXiv

  10. [17]

    Carra, V

    S. Carra, V. Goumarre, R. Gupta, S. Heim, B. Heinemann, J. Kuechler, F. Meloni, P. Quilez, and Y.-C. Yap,Constraining off-shell production of axionlike particles with Zγ and WW differential cross-section measurements, Phys. Rev. D104 (2021), no. 9 092005, [arXiv:2106.10085]

    2021 arXiv

  11. [18]

    Alimena et al.,Searching for long-lived particles beyond the Standard Model at the Large Hadron Collider, J

    J. Alimena et al.,Searching for long-lived particles beyond the Standard Model at the Large Hadron Collider, J. Phys. G47 (2020), no. 9 090501, [arXiv:1903.04497]

    2020

  12. [19]

    CMS Collaboration, A. M. Sirunyan et al.,Evidence for light-by-light scattering and searches for axion-like particles in ultraperipheral PbPb collisions at√sNN = 5.02 TeV, Phys. Lett. B 797 (2019) 134826, [arXiv:1810.04602]

    2019 arXiv

  13. [20]

    A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al.,Search for boosted diphoton resonances in the 10 to 70 GeV mass range using 138 ifb of 13 TeV pp collisions with the ATLAS detector, JHEP 07 (2023) 155, [arXiv:2211.04172]

    2023 arXiv

  14. [21]

    Aad et al.,Search for a new pseudoscalar decaying into a pair of muons in events with a top-quark pair at s=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys

    A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al.,Search for a new pseudoscalar decaying into a pair of muons in events with a top-quark pair at s=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D 108 (2023), no. 9 092007, [arXiv:2304.14247]

    2023 arXiv

  15. [22]

    Aad et al.,Search for short- and long-lived axion-like particles in H→aa→ 4γ decays with the ATLAS experiment at the LHC, Eur

    A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al.,Search for short- and long-lived axion-like particles in H→aa→ 4γ decays with the ATLAS experiment at the LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C84 (2024), no. 7 742, [arXiv:2312.03306]

    2024 arXiv

  16. [23]

    Aad et al.,Search for an axion-like particle with forward proton scattering in association with photon pairs at ATLAS, JHEP 07 (2023) 234, [arXiv:2304.10953]

    A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al.,Search for an axion-like particle with forward proton scattering in association with photon pairs at ATLAS, JHEP 07 (2023) 234, [arXiv:2304.10953]

    2023 arXiv

  17. [24]

    Aad et al.,Search for the decay of the Higgs boson to aZ boson and a light pseudoscalar particle decaying to two photons, Phys

    A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al.,Search for the decay of the Higgs boson to aZ boson and a light pseudoscalar particle decaying to two photons, Phys. Lett. B850 (2024) 138536, [arXiv:2312.01942]

    2024 arXiv

  18. [25]

    Aad et al.,Search for decays of the Higgs boson into a pair of pseudoscalar particles decaying into bb¯τ+τ- using pp collisions at s=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys

    A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al.,Search for decays of the Higgs boson into a pair of pseudoscalar particles decaying into bb¯τ+τ- using pp collisions at s=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D110 (2024), no. 5 052013, [arXiv:2407.01335]

    2024 arXiv

  19. [26]

    CMS Collaboration, A. Tumasyan et al.,Search for a scalar or pseudoscalar dilepton resonance produced in association with a massive vector boson or top quark-antiquark pair in multilepton events at s=13 TeV, Phys. Rev. D110 (2024), no. 1 012013, [arXiv:2402.11098]

    2024 arXiv

  20. [27]

    Arganda, A

    E. Arganda, A. D. Medina, N. I. Mileo, R. A. Morales, and A. Szynkman,Constraining R-axion models through dijet searches at the LHC, Phys. Lett. B789 (2019) 575–581, [arXiv:1808.01292]

    2019 arXiv

  21. [28]

    Haghighat, D

    G. Haghighat, D. Haji Raissi, and M. Mohammadi Najafabadi,New collider searches for axionlike particles coupling to gluons, Phys. Rev. D102 (2020), no. 11 115010, [arXiv:2006.05302]

    2020 arXiv

  22. [29]

    Redi and A

    M. Redi and A. Weiler,Flavor and CP Invariant Composite Higgs Models, JHEP 11 (2011) 108, [arXiv:1106.6357]. – 21 –

    2011 arXiv

  23. [30]

    Matsedonskyi, G

    O. Matsedonskyi, G. Panico, and A. Wulzer,Light Top Partners for a Light Composite Higgs, JHEP 01 (2013) 164, [arXiv:1204.6333]

    2013 arXiv

  24. [31]

    Pomarol and F

    A. Pomarol and F. Riva,The Composite Higgs and Light Resonance Connection, JHEP 08 (2012) 135, [arXiv:1205.6434]

    2012 arXiv

  25. [32]

    Alloul, N

    A. Alloul, N. D. Christensen, C. Degrande, C. Duhr, and B. Fuks,FeynRules 2.0 - A complete toolbox for tree-level phenomenology, Comput. Phys. Commun.185 (2014) 2250–2300, [arXiv:1310.1921]

    2014 arXiv

  26. [33]

    Degrande, C

    C. Degrande, C. Duhr, B. Fuks, D. Grellscheid, O. Mattelaer, and T. Reiter,UFO - The Universal FeynRules Output, Comput. Phys. Commun.183 (2012) 1201–1214, [arXiv:1108.2040]

    2012 arXiv

  27. [34]

    Alwall, R

    J. Alwall, R. Frederix, S. Frixione, V. Hirschi, F. Maltoni, O. Mattelaer, H. S. Shao, T. Stelzer, P. Torrielli, and M. Zaro,The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations, JHEP 07 ...

    2014 arXiv

  28. [35]

    Buckley, J

    A. Buckley, J. Butterworth, D. Grellscheid, H. Hoeth, L. Lonnblad, J. Monk, H. Schulz, and F. Siegert,Rivet user manual, Comput. Phys. Commun.184 (2013) 2803–2819, [arXiv:1003.0694]

    2013 arXiv

  29. [36]

    Bierlich, A

    C. Bierlich, A. Buckley, J. M. Butterworth, C. Gutschow, L. Lonnblad, T. Procter, P. Richardson, and Y. Yeh,Robust independent validation of experiment and theory: Rivet version 4 release note, SciPost Phys. Codeb.36 (2024) 1, [arXiv:2404.15984]

    2024 arXiv

  30. [37]

    J. M. Butterworth, D. Grellscheid, M. Krämer, B. Sarrazin, and D. Yallup,Constraining new physics with collider measurements of Standard Model signatures, JHEP 03 (2017) 078, [arXiv:1606.05296]

    2017 arXiv

  31. [38]

    Buckley et al.,Testing new physics models with global comparisons to collider measurements: the Contur toolkit, SciPost Phys

    A. Buckley et al.,Testing new physics models with global comparisons to collider measurements: the Contur toolkit, SciPost Phys. Core4 (2021) 013, [arXiv:2102.04377]

    2021 arXiv

  32. [39]

    Buckley, J

    CONTUR Collaboration, A. Buckley, J. Butterworth, J. Egan, C. Gutschow, S. Jeon, M. Habedank, T. Procter, P. Wang, Y. Yeh, and L. Yue,Constraints On New Theories Using Rivet : CONTUR version 3 release note, arXiv:2505.09272

    arXiv

  33. [40]

    Bonilla, A

    J. Bonilla, A. de Giorgi, B. Gavela, L. Merlo, and M. Ramos,The cost of an ALP solution to the neutralB-anomalies, arXiv:2209.11247

    arXiv

  34. [41]

    Carmona, F

    A. Carmona, F. Elahi, C. Scherb, and P. Schwaller,The ALPs from the top: searching for long lived axion-like particles from exotic top decays, JHEP 07 (2022) 122, [arXiv:2202.09371]

    2022 arXiv

  35. [42]

    Carmona, C

    A. Carmona, C. Scherb, and P. Schwaller,Charming ALPs, JHEP 08 (2021) 121, [arXiv:2101.07803]

    2021 arXiv

  36. [43]

    Chala, G

    M. Chala, G. Guedes, M. Ramos, and J. Santiago,Running in the ALPs, Eur. Phys. J. C81 (2021), no. 2 181, [arXiv:2012.09017]

    2021 arXiv

  37. [44]

    Bauer, M

    M. Bauer, M. Neubert, S. Renner, M. Schnubel, and A. Thamm,Axionlike Particles, Lepton-Flavor Violation, and a New Explanation ofaµ and ae, Phys. Rev. Lett.124 (2020), no. 21 211803, [arXiv:1908.00008]

    2020 arXiv

  38. [45]

    Bauer, M

    M. Bauer, M. Neubert, S. Renner, M. Schnubel, and A. Thamm,Flavor probes of axion-like particles, JHEP 09 (2022) 056, [arXiv:2110.10698]. – 22 –

    2022 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Gripaios, A

    B. Gripaios, A. Pomarol, F. Riva, and J. Serra,Beyond the Minimal Composite Higgs Model, JHEP 04 (2009) 070, [arXiv:0902.1483]

    2009 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Contino, D

    R. Contino, D. Marzocca, D. Pappadopulo, and R. Rattazzi,On the effect of resonances in composite Higgs phenomenology, JHEP 10 (2011) 081, [arXiv:1109.1570]

    2011 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Ferretti and D

    G. Ferretti and D. Karateev,Fermionic UV completions of Composite Higgs models, JHEP 03 (2014) 077, [arXiv:1312.5330]

    2014 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Sanz and J

    V. Sanz and J. Setford,Composite Higgses with seesaw EWSB, JHEP 12 (2015) 154, [arXiv:1508.06133]

    2015 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Belvedere, C

    A. Belvedere, C. Englert, R. Kogler, and M. Spannowsky,Dispelling the √ L myth for the High-Luminosity LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C84 (2024), no. 7 715, [arXiv:2402.07985]

    2024 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Tumasyan et al.,Measurement of differentialt¯t production cross sections in the full kinematic range using lepton+jets events from proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV, Phys

    CMS Collaboration, A. Tumasyan et al.,Measurement of differentialt¯t production cross sections in the full kinematic range using lepton+jets events from proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV, Phys. Rev. D104 (2021), no. 9 092013, [arXiv:2108.02803]

    2021 arXiv

  45. [53]

    A TLASCollaboration, M. Aaboud et al.,Measurements of top-quark pair differential cross-sections in the lepton+jets channel inpp collisions at√s = 13 TeV using the ATLAS detector, JHEP 11 (2017) 191, [arXiv:1708.00727]

    2017 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Aad et al.,Measurements of top-quark pair differential and double-differential cross-sections in theℓ+jets channel withpp collisions at√s = 13 TeV using the ATLAS detector, Eur

    A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al.,Measurements of top-quark pair differential and double-differential cross-sections in theℓ+jets channel withpp collisions at√s = 13 TeV using the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C79 (2019), no. 12 1028, [arXiv:1908.07305]. [Erratum: Eur.Phys.J....

    2019 arXiv

  47. [55]

    A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al.,Measurement of the differential cross-section of highly boosted top quarks as a function of their transverse momentum in√s = 8 TeV proton-proton collisions using the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D93 (2016), no. 3 032009, [arXiv:1510.03818]

    2016 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Aaboud et al.,Measurements of electroweakWjj production and constraints on anomalous gauge couplings with the ATLAS detector, Eur

    A TLASCollaboration, M. Aaboud et al.,Measurements of electroweakWjj production and constraints on anomalous gauge couplings with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C77 (2017), no. 7 474, [arXiv:1703.04362]

    2017 arXiv

  49. [57]

    A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al.,Measurements of differential cross-sections in top-quark pair events with a high transverse momentum top quark and limits on beyond the Standard Model contributions to top-quark pair production with the ATLAS detector at√s = 13 TeV, JHEP 06 (...

    2022 arXiv

  50. [58]

    A TLASCollaboration, M. Aaboud et al.,Measurement of differential cross sections and W +/W − cross-section ratios forW boson production in association with jets at√s = 8 TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP 05 (2018) 077, [arXiv:1711.03296]. [Erratum: JHEP 10, 048 (2020)]

    2018 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Khachatryan et al.,Measurement of differential cross sections for top quark pair production using the lepton+jets final state in proton-proton collisions at 13 TeV, Phys

    CMS Collaboration, V. Khachatryan et al.,Measurement of differential cross sections for top quark pair production using the lepton+jets final state in proton-proton collisions at 13 TeV, Phys. Rev. D95 (2017), no. 9 092001, [arXiv:1610.04191]

    2017 arXiv

  52. [60]

    CMS Collaboration, A. M. Sirunyan et al.,Measurements of differential cross sections of top quark pair production as a function of kinematic event variables in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV, JHEP 06 (2018) 002, [arXiv:1803.03991]. – 23 –

    2018 arXiv

  53. [61]

    CMS Collaboration, A. M. Sirunyan et al.,Measurement of differential cross sections for the production of top quark pairs and of additional jets in lepton+jets events from pp collisions at√s = 13 TeV, Phys. Rev. D97 (2018), no. 11 112003, [arXiv:1803.08856]

    2018 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Aad et al.,Measurements of top-quark pair differential cross-sections in the lepton+jets channel inpp collisions at√s = 8 TeV using the ATLAS detector, Eur

    A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al.,Measurements of top-quark pair differential cross-sections in the lepton+jets channel inpp collisions at√s = 8 TeV using the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C76 (2016), no. 10 538, [arXiv:1511.04716]

    2016 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Aaboud et al.,Measurement of the cross section for isolated-photon plus jet production inpp collisions at√s = 13 TeV using the ATLAS detector, Phys

    A TLASCollaboration, M. Aaboud et al.,Measurement of the cross section for isolated-photon plus jet production inpp collisions at√s = 13 TeV using the ATLAS detector, Phys. Lett. B780 (2018) 578–602, [arXiv:1801.00112]

    2018 arXiv

  56. [64]

    A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al.,Differential cross-sections for events with missing transverse momentum and jets measured with the ATLAS detector in 13 TeV proton-proton collisions, JHEP 08 (2024) 223, [arXiv:2403.02793]

    2024 arXiv

  57. [65]

    Aad et al.,Measurement of isolated-photon plus two-jet production inpp collisions at√s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP 03 (2020) 179, [arXiv:1912.09866]

    A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al.,Measurement of isolated-photon plus two-jet production inpp collisions at√s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP 03 (2020) 179, [arXiv:1912.09866]

    2020 arXiv

  58. [66]

    A TLASCollaboration, M. Aaboud et al.,Measurements oft¯t differential cross-sections of highly boosted top quarks decaying to all-hadronic final states inpp collisions at√s = 13 TeV using the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D98 (2018), no. 1 012003, [arXiv:1801.02052]

    2018 arXiv

  59. [67]

    A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al.,Measurements of top-quark pair single- and double-differential cross-sections in the all-hadronic channel inpp collisions at√s = 13 TeV using the ATLAS detector, JHEP 01 (2021) 033, [arXiv:2006.09274]

    2021 arXiv

  60. [68]

    CMS Collaboration, A. M. Sirunyan et al.,Measurement of the Jet Mass Distribution and Top Quark Mass in Hadronic Decays of Boosted Top Quarks inpp Collisions at√s = TeV, Phys. Rev. Lett.124 (2020), no. 20 202001, [arXiv:1911.03800]

    2020 arXiv

  61. [69]

    Aad et al.,Differentialtt cross-section measurements using boosted top quarks in the all-hadronic final state with 139 fb−1 of ATLAS data, JHEP 04 (2023) 080, [arXiv:2205.02817]

    A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al.,Differentialtt cross-section measurements using boosted top quarks in the all-hadronic final state with 139 fb−1 of ATLAS data, JHEP 04 (2023) 080, [arXiv:2205.02817]

    2023 arXiv

  62. [70]

    CMS Collaboration, A. M. Sirunyan et al.,Measurement of thet¯tb¯b production cross section in the all-jet final state in pp collisions at√s = 13 TeV, Phys. Lett. B803 (2020) 135285, [arXiv:1909.05306]

    2020 arXiv

  63. [71]

    A TLASCollaboration, M. Aaboud et al.,Measurement of detector-corrected observables sensitive to the anomalous production of events with jets and large missing transverse momentum inpp collisions at√s = 13 TeV using the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C77 (2017), no. 11 765, [ar...

    2017 arXiv

  64. [72]

    Tumasyan et al.,Observation of electroweak W+W− pair production in association with two jets in proton-proton collisions at s=13TeV, Phys

    CMS Collaboration, A. Tumasyan et al.,Observation of electroweak W+W− pair production in association with two jets in proton-proton collisions at s=13TeV, Phys. Lett. B841 (2023) 137495, [arXiv:2205.05711]

    2023 arXiv

  65. [73]

    CMS Collaboration, A. M. Sirunyan et al.,W+W− boson pair production in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV, Phys. Rev. D102 (2020), no. 9 092001, [arXiv:2009.00119]

    2020 arXiv

  66. [74]

    Aad et al.,Inclusive and differential cross-sections for dileptontt production measured in√s = 13 TeV pp collisions with the ATLAS detector, JHEP 07 (2023) 141, [arXiv:2303.15340]

    A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al.,Inclusive and differential cross-sections for dileptontt production measured in√s = 13 TeV pp collisions with the ATLAS detector, JHEP 07 (2023) 141, [arXiv:2303.15340]. – 24 –

    2023 arXiv

  67. [75]

    Aad et al.,Measurement of thet¯t production cross-section and lepton differential distributions ineµ dilepton events frompp collisions at√s = 13TeV with the ATLAS detector, Eur

    A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al.,Measurement of thet¯t production cross-section and lepton differential distributions ineµ dilepton events frompp collisions at√s = 13TeV with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C80 (2020), no. 6 528, [arXiv:1910.08819]

    2020 arXiv

  68. [76]

    A TLASCollaboration, M. Aaboud et al.,Searches for scalar leptoquarks and differential cross-section measurements in dilepton-dijet events in proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of√s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS experiment, Eur. Phys. J. C79 (2019), no. 9 733, [arXi...

    2019 arXiv

  69. [77]

    Aad et al.,Measurement of four-jet differential cross sections in√s = 8 TeV proton-proton collisions using the ATLAS detector, JHEP 12 (2015) 105, [arXiv:1509.07335]

    A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al.,Measurement of four-jet differential cross sections in√s = 8 TeV proton-proton collisions using the ATLAS detector, JHEP 12 (2015) 105, [arXiv:1509.07335]

    2015 arXiv

  70. [78]

    Aaboud et al.,Measurement of inclusive jet and dijet cross-sections in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP 05 (2018) 195, [arXiv:1711.02692]

    A TLASCollaboration, M. Aaboud et al.,Measurement of inclusive jet and dijet cross-sections in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP 05 (2018) 195, [arXiv:1711.02692]

    2018 arXiv

  71. [79]

    Aaboud et al.,Measurement of the cross-section for electroweak production of dijets in association with a Z boson in pp collisions at√s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys

    A TLASCollaboration, M. Aaboud et al.,Measurement of the cross-section for electroweak production of dijets in association with a Z boson in pp collisions at√s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Lett. B775 (2017) 206–228, [arXiv:1709.10264]

    2017 arXiv

  72. [80]

    Aad et al.,Measurements of the production cross-section for a Z boson in association with b- or c-jets in proton–proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Eur

    A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al.,Measurements of the production cross-section for a Z boson in association with b- or c-jets in proton–proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C84 (2024), no. 9 984, [arXiv:2403.15093]

    2024 arXiv

  73. [81]

    A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al.,Measurements of the production cross-section for aZ boson in association withb-jets in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP 07 (2020) 044, [arXiv:2003.11960]

    2020 arXiv

  74. [82]

    M. M. Altakach, T. Ježo, M. Klasen, J.-N. Lang, and I. Schienbein,Electroweak tt¯ hadroproduction in the presence of heavy Z’ and W’ bosons at NLO QCD in POWHEG, Phys. Rev. D103 (2021), no. 11 115026, [arXiv:2012.14855]

    2021 arXiv

  75. [83]

    Sjöstrand, S

    T. Sjöstrand, S. Ask, J. R. Christiansen, R. Corke, N. Desai, P. Ilten, S. Mrenna, S. Prestel, C. O. Rasmussen, and P. Z. Skands,An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2, Comput. Phys. Commun. 191 (2015) 159–177, [arXiv:1410.3012]

    2015 arXiv

  76. [84]

    Alioli, P

    S. Alioli, P. Nason, C. Oleari, and E. Re,A general framework for implementing NLO calculations in shower Monte Carlo programs: the POWHEG BOX, JHEP 06 (2010) 043, [arXiv:1002.2581]

    2010 arXiv

  77. [85]

    Bellm et al.,Herwig 7.0/Herwig++ 3.0 release note, Eur

    J. Bellm et al.,Herwig 7.0/Herwig++ 3.0 release note, Eur. Phys. J. C76 (2016), no. 4 196, [arXiv:1512.01178]

    2016 arXiv

  78. [86]

    Frixione, P

    S. Frixione, P. Nason, and C. Oleari,Matching NLO QCD computations with Parton Shower simulations: the POWHEG method, JHEP 11 (2007) 070, [arXiv:0709.2092]

    2007 arXiv

  79. [87]

    X. Chen, T. Gehrmann, N. Glover, M. Höfer, and A. Huss,Isolated photon and photon+jet production at NNLO QCD accuracy, JHEP 04 (2020) 166, [arXiv:1904.01044]

    2020 arXiv

  80. [88]

    CMS Collaboration, A. M. Sirunyan et al.,Measurement of differential cross sections for Z boson production in association with jets in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV, Eur. Phys. J. C78 (2018), no. 11 965, [arXiv:1804.05252]

    2018 arXiv

  81. [89]

    CMS Collaboration, A. M. Sirunyan et al.,Measurements of differential Z boson production cross sections in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV, JHEP 12 (2019) 061, [arXiv:1909.04133]. – 25 –

    2019 arXiv

  82. [90]

    Tumasyan et al.,Study of Z boson plus jets events using variables sensitive to double-parton scattering in pp collisions at 13 TeV, JHEP 10 (2021) 176, [arXiv:2105.14511]

    CMS Collaboration, A. Tumasyan et al.,Study of Z boson plus jets events using variables sensitive to double-parton scattering in pp collisions at 13 TeV, JHEP 10 (2021) 176, [arXiv:2105.14511]

    2021 arXiv

  83. [91]

    Tumasyan et al.,Measurement of the mass dependence of the transverse momentum of lepton pairs in Drell-Yan production in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV, Eur

    CMS Collaboration, A. Tumasyan et al.,Measurement of the mass dependence of the transverse momentum of lepton pairs in Drell-Yan production in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV, Eur. Phys. J. C83 (2023), no. 7 628, [arXiv:2205.04897]

    2023 arXiv

  84. [92]

    P. F. Monni, P. Nason, E. Re, M. Wiesemann, and G. Zanderighi,MiNNLOPS: a new method to match NNLO QCD to parton showers, JHEP 05 (2020) 143, [arXiv:1908.06987]. [Erratum: JHEP 02, 031 (2022)]

    2020 arXiv

  85. [93]

    P. F. Monni, E. Re, and M. Wiesemann,MiNNLOPS: optimizing 2→ 1 hadronic processes, Eur. Phys. J. C80 (2020), no. 11 1075, [arXiv:2006.04133]

    2020 arXiv

  86. [94]

    Passarino and M

    G. Passarino and M. Veltman,One-loop corrections fore+e− annihilation intoµ+µ− in the weinberg model, Nuclear Physics B160 (1979), no. 1 151–207. – 26 –

    1979

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.