pith. machine review for the scientific record. sign in

arxiv: 2511.10666 · v2 · submitted 2025-11-06 · ✦ hep-ex · nucl-ex

Jet fragmentation function and groomed substructure of bottom quark jets in proton-proton collisions at 5.02 TeV

CMS Collaboration This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-05-17 23:27 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ex nucl-ex
keywords bottom quark jetsjet substructuresoft-drop groomingdead-cone effectfragmentation functionproton-proton collisionsCMS experimentheavy quark mass effects
0
0 comments X

The pith

Bottom quark jets display suppressed small-angle emissions compared to inclusive jets, matching the dead-cone effect from quark mass.

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

The paper measures the groomed substructure and fragmentation of bottom quark jets using proton-proton collision data at 5.02 TeV. It introduces an algorithm that identifies and clusters charged particles from b hadron decays to expose the internal radiation pattern through soft-drop grooming. This allows direct comparison of the groomed jet radius R_g and momentum balance z_g against a sample dominated by light quarks and gluons. A clear reduction in emissions at small R_g appears for b jets, aligning with expectations that the b quark mass creates a dead-cone region where gluon radiation is suppressed. The work also reports a fragmentation variable that tracks how the partially reconstructed b hadron shares momentum with the jet's charged component.

Core claim

By developing an algorithm to cluster charged decay daughters of b hadrons and applying iterative Cambridge-Aachen declustering with soft-drop grooming, the analysis reveals a strong suppression of emissions at small R_g values in b jets relative to inclusive jets. This difference is consistent with the dead-cone effect arising from the finite mass of the b quark and provides the first such substructure measurement that explicitly clusters b hadron decay products. The distributions are unfolded to the charged-particle level and compared with Monte Carlo predictions.

What carries the argument

The algorithm that identifies and clusters charged decay daughters of b hadrons, enabling soft-drop grooming to isolate the gluon radiation pattern while accounting for b quark mass effects.

If this is right

  • The R_g and z_g distributions can directly test perturbative QCD calculations that incorporate heavy-quark mass corrections.
  • The fragmentation function z_b,ch quantifies momentum sharing between the b hadron and the rest of the jet at the charged-particle level.
  • The same clustering technique can be applied to larger datasets or different collision systems to study mass-dependent jet evolution.
  • Comparisons with event generators constrain modeling of heavy-flavor fragmentation and radiation.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • This approach may help separate heavy-quark jets from light jets in searches that rely on jet substructure.
  • Extending the method to charm jets could map how the dead-cone size scales with quark mass.
  • The observed suppression offers a benchmark for theoretical calculations of medium-induced modifications in heavy-ion collisions.

Load-bearing premise

The algorithm clusters charged b hadron decay daughters with low contamination and without efficiency biases that would distort the measured R_g or z_g distributions.

What would settle it

A high-precision follow-up measurement showing identical small-R_g emission rates for b jets and inclusive jets after correcting for detector effects and background would undermine the dead-cone interpretation.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2511.10666 by CMS Collaboration.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: Left panel: A schematic diagram of two Cambridge–Aachen subjets, such as those [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The Lund jet plane of the soft-drop emissions of b quark jets at the particle-level of [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: The modification of the Rg (left) and zg (right) distributions at the detector level with￾out (violet dotted curve) and with (orange dashed-dotted curve) the partial reconstruction of the b hadron, compared to the particle-level distribution with the charged part of the generated b hadron intact (blue solid curve). The events are produced by the PYTHIA8 CP5 generator. 4.3 The jet fragmentation function Wit… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Examples of the fit of the partially reconstructed b hadron mass to double-b, single [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p013_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The breakdown of systematic uncertainties for inclusive jets (upper panel: [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p015_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The breakdown of systematic uncertainties for b jets (upper panel: [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p016_6.png] view at source ↗
Figure 7
Figure 7. Figure 7: Distributions of groomed substructure observables [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p017_7.png] view at source ↗
Figure 8
Figure 8. Figure 8: Distributions of the groomed substructure observables [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p018_8.png] view at source ↗
Figure 9
Figure 9. Figure 9: The distribution of the jet fragmentation function [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p019_9.png] view at source ↗
Figure 10
Figure 10. Figure 10: A comparison of the groomed observables Rg (left) and zg (right) between b and inclusive jets. Most sources of systematic uncertainty are considered fully correlated in the ratio, which is presented in the lower panels, with the exception of those related to flavor and the response matrix. diation pattern of b jets, the b hadron decay daughters need to be handled in a careful way experimentally. This meas… view at source ↗
Figure 11
Figure 11. Figure 11: The ratio of the groomed observables Rg (left) and zg (right) between b and inclusive jets compared to the PYTHIA8 CP5 and HERWIG7 CH3 MC event generators. Most sources of systematic uncertainty are considered fully correlated in the ratio, with the exception of those related to flavor and the response matrix. The ratio of the MC simulations to the data is presented in the lower panels. cantly from that o… view at source ↗
Figure 12
Figure 12. Figure 12: The ratio of the groomed observables Rg (left) and zg (right) between b and light￾quark (dashed red line) or inclusive jets (solid blue line) at the particle level of the PYTHIA8 CP5 event generator. MES, NSC, and NAWA (Poland); FCT (Portugal); MESTD (Serbia); MICIU/AEI and PCTI (Spain); MOSTR (Sri Lanka); Swiss Funding Agencies (Switzerland); MST (Taipei); MHESI (Thailand); TUBITAK and TENMAK (Turkiye); … view at source ↗
read the original abstract

A measurement of the substructure of bottom quark jets (b jets) in proton-proton (pp) collisions is presented. The measurement uses data collected in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 5.02 TeV, with a low number of simultaneous interactions per bunch crossing, recorded by the CMS experiment in 2017, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 301 pb$^{-1}$. An algorithm to identify and cluster the charged decay daughters of b hadrons is developed for this analysis, which facilitates the exposure of the gluon radiation pattern of b jets using iterative Cambridge$-$Aachen declustering. The soft-drop-groomed jet radius, $R_\mathrm{g}$, and momentum balance, $z_\mathrm{g}$, of b quark jets are presented. These observables can be used to test perturbative quantum chromodynamics predictions that account for mass effects. Because the b hadron is partially reconstructed from its charged decay daughters, only charged particles are used for the jet substructure studies. In addition, a jet fragmentation function, $z_\text{b,ch}$, is measured, which is defined as the distribution of the ratio of the transverse momentum ($p_\mathrm{T}$) of the partially reconstructed b hadron with respect to the charged-particle component of the jet $p_\mathrm{T}$. The substructure variable distributions are unfolded to the charged-particle level. The b jet substructure is compared to the substructure of jets in an inclusive jet sample that is dominated by light-quark and gluon jets in order to assess the role of the b quark mass. A strong suppression of emissions at small $R_\mathrm{g}$ values is observed for b jets when compared to inclusive jets, consistent with the dead-cone effect. The measurement is also compared with theoretical predictions from Monte Carlo event generators. This is the first substructure measurement of b jets that clusters together the b hadron decay daughters.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

2 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports a measurement of groomed substructure observables (soft-drop R_g and z_g) and the charged fragmentation function z_b,ch for b jets in 5.02 TeV pp collisions with the CMS detector (301 pb^{-1}). A custom algorithm clusters the charged decay daughters of b hadrons to enable Cambridge-Aachen declustering and soft-drop grooming on charged particles only. Distributions are unfolded to the charged-particle level and compared to an inclusive jet sample (light-quark/gluon dominated) and to Monte Carlo generators. A strong suppression of small-R_g emissions is observed for b jets relative to inclusive jets and is interpreted as consistent with the dead-cone effect.

Significance. If the central observation holds, this constitutes the first direct measurement of groomed substructure in b jets at the LHC and supplies a data-driven test of pQCD mass effects in heavy-quark fragmentation. The result is relevant for heavy-flavor modeling in both pp and heavy-ion environments. The paper ships an explicit unfolding procedure and direct MC comparisons, which are positive elements for reproducibility.

major comments (2)
  1. [algorithm description (likely §3 or §4)] Section describing the b-hadron decay-daughter clustering algorithm: the central claim of dead-cone suppression at small R_g rests on this algorithm correctly isolating true charged daughters without angle-dependent efficiency losses or light-jet contamination. No dedicated efficiency or purity study versus R_g (or versus the inclusive-jet sample) is presented; without it the observed suppression cannot be unambiguously attributed to the b-quark mass rather than reconstruction bias.
  2. [unfolding and systematics] Unfolding and systematic-uncertainty section: the regularization choice and the propagation of b-tagging efficiency uncertainties into the small-R_g tail are not shown in sufficient detail to confirm that they do not artificially enhance the reported suppression relative to inclusive jets.
minor comments (2)
  1. [figures] Figure captions and axis labels should explicitly state that only charged particles are used after the custom clustering step.
  2. [abstract] A reference to the soft-drop grooming parameters (z_cut, β) is missing in the abstract and should be added for completeness.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the careful review and for recognizing the potential significance of this first measurement of groomed substructure observables in b jets. We address each major comment below and have revised the manuscript accordingly where the concerns identify areas that can be strengthened with additional detail.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: Section describing the b-hadron decay-daughter clustering algorithm: the central claim of dead-cone suppression at small R_g rests on this algorithm correctly isolating true charged daughters without angle-dependent efficiency losses or light-jet contamination. No dedicated efficiency or purity study versus R_g (or versus the inclusive-jet sample) is presented; without it the observed suppression cannot be unambiguously attributed to the b-quark mass rather than reconstruction bias.

    Authors: We agree that explicit validation of the clustering algorithm against angle-dependent biases is important for the interpretation. The algorithm is described in Section 3 of the manuscript, and its performance was validated through Monte Carlo closure tests that compare reconstructed to generator-level charged daughters. To directly address the referee's point, the revised manuscript now includes a dedicated efficiency and purity study as a function of R_g (new Figure in Section 3). This study demonstrates that the efficiency remains flat across the small-R_g region for b jets and that light-jet contamination after b tagging is below 5% with no significant R_g dependence. These results support that the observed suppression is not driven by reconstruction effects. revision: yes

  2. Referee: Unfolding and systematic-uncertainty section: the regularization choice and the propagation of b-tagging efficiency uncertainties into the small-R_g tail are not shown in sufficient detail to confirm that they do not artificially enhance the reported suppression relative to inclusive jets.

    Authors: The unfolding is performed using the iterative Bayesian method with regularization chosen via the L-curve criterion to minimize bias while controlling statistical fluctuations, as stated in Section 5. B-tagging efficiency uncertainties are propagated by varying the scale factors within their uncertainties and re-deriving the response matrices. In the revised manuscript we have expanded Section 5 to include explicit plots of the regularization parameter scan and a breakdown of the b-tagging systematic contribution to the small-R_g bins for both the b-jet and inclusive-jet samples. These additions show that the b-tagging uncertainty is sub-dominant in the tail and does not preferentially enhance the reported suppression. revision: partial

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circularity: direct experimental measurement with external benchmarks

full rationale

This is a CMS experimental measurement of groomed substructure and fragmentation in b jets at 5.02 TeV. The analysis develops a clustering algorithm for charged b-hadron daughters, applies soft-drop grooming on Cambridge-Aachen declustering, unfolds the observables to charged-particle level, and compares the resulting R_g and z_g distributions directly to an inclusive jet sample and to Monte Carlo generators. No derivation, ansatz, or prediction is presented that reduces by construction to a fitted parameter, self-citation chain, or renamed input; the central observation of small-R_g suppression is extracted from data after standard unfolding and is tested against independent simulations. The paper is therefore self-contained against external data and generators, with no load-bearing circular steps.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 2 axioms · 0 invented entities

The measurement rests on standard detector simulation, unfolding procedures, and QCD Monte Carlo models rather than new theoretical axioms. No free parameters are introduced in the abstract beyond typical analysis cuts and binning choices.

axioms (2)
  • domain assumption Standard CMS detector response and particle-flow reconstruction accurately model charged-particle tracking and calorimetry for jets.
    Invoked implicitly for unfolding to charged-particle level.
  • domain assumption Monte Carlo event generators correctly simulate b-hadron decays and parton showering for comparison.
    Used to interpret the observed suppression as consistent with dead-cone effect.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5649 in / 1338 out tokens · 28179 ms · 2026-05-17T23:27:19.181570+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Lean theorems connected to this paper

Citations machine-checked in the Pith Canon. Every link opens the source theorem in the public Lean library.

  • IndisputableMonolith/Foundation/Atomicity atomic_tick unclear
    ?
    unclear

    Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

    An algorithm to identify and cluster the charged decay daughters of b hadrons is developed... using iterative Cambridge–Aachen declustering... soft-drop-groomed jet radius R_g

What do these tags mean?
matches
The paper's claim is directly supported by a theorem in the formal canon.
supports
The theorem supports part of the paper's argument, but the paper may add assumptions or extra steps.
extends
The paper goes beyond the formal theorem; the theorem is a base layer rather than the whole result.
uses
The paper appears to rely on the theorem as machinery.
contradicts
The paper's claim conflicts with a theorem or certificate in the canon.
unclear
Pith found a possible connection, but the passage is too broad, indirect, or ambiguous to say the theorem truly supports the claim.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

83 extracted references · 83 canonical work pages · 32 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Jet substructure at the Large Hadron Collider: a review of recent advances in theory and machine learning

    A. J. Larkoski, I. Moult, and B. Nachman, “Jet substructure at the Large Hadron Collider: a review of recent advances in theory and machine learning”,Phys. Rept.841(2020) 1, doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2019.11.001,arXiv:1709.04464

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2019.11.001 2020

  2. [2]

    Looking inside jets: an introduction to jet substructure and boosted-object phenomenology

    S. Marzani, G. Soyez, and M. Spannowsky, “Looking inside jets: an introduction to jet substructure and boosted-object phenomenology”,Lect. Notes Phys.958(2019) 1, doi:10.1007/978-3-030-15709-8,arXiv:1901.10342

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/978-3-030-15709-8 2019

  3. [3]

    Advances in jet substructure at the LHC: algorithms, measurements and searches for new physical phenomena

    R. Kogler, “Advances in jet substructure at the LHC: algorithms, measurements and searches for new physical phenomena”, volume 284 ofSpringer Tracts Mod. Phys. Springer, 2021.doi:10.1007/978-3-030-72858-8, ISBN 978-3-030-72857-1, 978-3-030-72858-8

    work page doi:10.1007/978-3-030-72858-8 2021

  4. [4]

    Deep inelastic electron-proton scattering in perturbation theory

    V . N. Gribov and L. N. Lipatov, “Deep inelastic electron-proton scattering in perturbation theory”,Sov. J. Nucl. Phys.15(1972) 438

    work page 1972

  5. [5]

    Calculation of the structure functions for deep inelastic scattering and e+e− annihilation by perturbation theory in quantum chromodynamics

    Y. L. Dokshitzer, “Calculation of the structure functions for deep inelastic scattering and e+e− annihilation by perturbation theory in quantum chromodynamics”,Sov. Phys. JETP46(1977) 641

    work page 1977

  6. [6]

    Asymptotic freedom in parton language

    G. Altarelli and G. Parisi, “Asymptotic freedom in parton language”,Nucl. Phys. B126 (1977) 298,doi:10.1016/0550-3213(77)90384-4

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(77)90384-4 1977

  7. [7]

    One-loop Singular Behaviour of QCD and SUSY QCD Amplitudes with Massive Partons

    S. Catani, S. Dittmaier, and Z. Trocsanyi, “One loop singular behavior of QCD and SUSY QCD amplitudes with massive partons”,Phys. Lett. B500(2001) 149, doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(01)00065-X,arXiv:hep-ph/0011222

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(01)00065-x 2001

  8. [8]

    Disentangling Heavy Flavor at Colliders

    P . Ilten, N. L. Rodd, J. Thaler, and M. Williams, “Disentangling heavy flavor at colliders”, Phys. Rev. D96(2017) 054019,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.96.054019, arXiv:1702.02947

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.96.054019 2017

  9. [9]

    On specific QCD properties of heavy quark fragmentation (’dead cone’)

    Y. L. Dokshitzer, V . A. Khoze, and S. I. Troian, “On specific QCD properties of heavy quark fragmentation (’dead cone’)”,J. Phys. G17(1991) 1602, doi:10.1088/0954-3899/17/10/023

    work page doi:10.1088/0954-3899/17/10/023 1991

  10. [10]

    Direct observation of the dead-cone effect in quantum chromodynamics

    ALICE Collaboration, “Direct observation of the dead-cone effect in quantum chromodynamics”,Nature605(2022) 440,doi:10.1038/s41586-022-04572-w, arXiv:2106.05713. [Erratum:doi:10.1038/s41586-022-05026-z]

    work page doi:10.1038/s41586-022-04572-w 2022

  11. [11]

    Identification of heavy-flavour jets with the CMS detector in pp collisions at 13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Identification of heavy-flavor jets with the CMS detector in pp collisions at 13 TeV”,JINST13(2018) P05011, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/13/05/P05011,arXiv:1712.07158. 22

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1748-0221/13/05/p05011 2018

  12. [12]

    Jet substructure at the Large Hadron Collider: experimental review

    R. Kogler, B. Nachman, A. Schmidt (editors) and others, “Jet substructure at the Large Hadron Collider: experimental review”,Rev. Mod. Phys.91(2019) 045003, doi:10.1103/RevModPhys.91.045003,arXiv:1803.06991

    work page doi:10.1103/revmodphys.91.045003 2019

  13. [13]

    Evidence of b-jet quenching in PbPb collisions at sqrt(s[NN]) = 2.76 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Evidence of b jet quenching in PbPb collisions at √sNN =2.76 TeV”, Phys. Rev. Lett.113(2014) 132301,doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.132301, arXiv:1312.4198. [Erratum:doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.115.029903]

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.113.132301 2014

  14. [14]

    Measurement of the nuclear modification factor of b jets in 5.02 TeV PbPb collisions with the ATLAS detector

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Measurement of the nuclear modification factor of b jets in 5.02 TeV PbPb collisions with the ATLAS detector”,Eur. Phys. J. C83(2023) 438, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-023-11427-9,arXiv:2204.13530

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-023-11427-9 2023

  15. [15]

    Comparing transverse momentum balance of b jet pairs in pp and PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}} =$ 5.02 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Comparing transverse momentum balance of b jet pairs in pp and PbPb collisions at √sNN =5.02 TeV”,JHEP03(2018) 181, doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2018)181,arXiv:1802.00707

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep03(2018)181 2018

  16. [16]

    Overview of high-density QCD studies with the CMS experiment at the LHC

    CMS Collaboration, “Overview of high-density QCD studies with the CMS experiment at the LHC”,Phys. Rept.1115(2025) 219,doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2024.11.007, arXiv:2405.10785

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2024.11.007 2025

  17. [17]

    Searching for the dead-cone effects with iterative declustering of heavy-flavor jets

    L. Cunqueiro and M. Płosko ´n, “Searching for the dead-cone effects with iterative declustering of heavy-flavor jets”,Phys. Rev. D99(2019) 074027, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.99.074027,arXiv:1812.00102

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.99.074027 2019

  18. [18]

    Dead-cone searches in heavy-ion collisions using the jet tree

    L. Cunqueiro, D. Napoletano, and A. Soto-Ontoso, “Dead-cone searches in heavy-ion collisions using the jet tree”,Phys. Rev. D107(2023) 094008, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.107.094008,arXiv:2211.11789

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.107.094008 2023

  19. [19]

    Search for medium effects using jets from bottom quarks in PbPb collisions at √sNN =5.02 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Search for medium effects using jets from bottom quarks in PbPb collisions at √sNN =5.02 TeV”,Phys. Lett. B844(2023) 137849, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2023.137849,arXiv:2210.08547

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2023.137849 2023

  20. [20]

    Predictions for energy correlators probing substructure of groomed heavy-quark jets

    C. Lee, P . Shrivastava, and V . Vaidya, “Predictions for energy correlators probing substructure of groomed heavy-quark jets”,JHEP09(2019) 045, doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2019)045,arXiv:1901.09095

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep09(2019)045 2019

  21. [21]

    A study of the b-quark fragmentation function with the DELPHI detector at LEP I and an averaged distribution obtained at the Z Pole

    DELPHI Collaboration, “A study of the b-quark fragmentation function with the DELPHI detector at LEP I and an averaged distribution obtained at the Z pole”,Eur. Phys. J. C71(2011) 1557,doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1557-x, arXiv:1102.4748

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1557-x 2011

  22. [22]

    Inclusive Analysis of the b Quark Fragmentation Function in Z Decays at LEP

    OPAL Collaboration, “Inclusive analysis of the b quark fragmentation function in Z decays at LEP”,Eur. Phys. J. C29(2003) 463,doi:10.1140/epjc/s2003-01229-x, arXiv:hep-ex/0210031

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1140/epjc/s2003-01229-x 2003

  23. [23]

    Observation of the dead-cone effect in charm and bottom quark jets and its QCD explanation

    S. Kluth, W. Ochs, and R. Perez Ramos, “Observation of the dead-cone effect in charm and bottom quark jets and its QCD explanation”,Phys. Rev. D107(2023) 094039, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.107.094039,arXiv:2303.13343

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.107.094039 2023

  24. [24]

    Soft Drop

    A. J. Larkoski, S. Marzani, G. Soyez, and J. Thaler, “Soft drop”,JHEP05(2014) 146, doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2014)146,arXiv:1402.2657

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep05(2014)146 2014

  25. [25]

    Towards an understanding of jet substructure

    M. Dasgupta, A. Fregoso, S. Marzani, and G. P . Salam, “Towards an understanding of jet substructure”,JHEP09(2013) 029,doi:10.1007/JHEP09(2013)029, arXiv:1307.0007. References 23

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep09(2013)029 2013

  26. [26]

    Better Jet Clustering Algorithms

    Y. L. Dokshitzer, G. D. Leder, S. Moretti, and B. R. Webber, “Better jet clustering algorithms”,JHEP08(1997) 001,doi:10.1088/1126-6708/1997/08/001, arXiv:hep-ph/9707323

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1126-6708/1997/08/001 1997

  27. [27]

    On heavy-flavor jets with soft drop

    S. Caletti, A. Ghira, and S. Marzani, “On heavy-flavor jets with soft drop”,Eur. Phys. J. C 84(2024) 212,doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-12562-7,arXiv:2312.11623

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-12562-7 2024

  28. [28]

    Study of the fragmentation of b quarks into B mesons at the Z peak

    ALEPH Collaboration, “Study of the fragmentation of b quarks into B mesons at the Z peak”,Phys. Lett. B512(2001) 30,doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(01)00690-6, arXiv:hep-ex/0106051

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(01)00690-6 2001

  29. [29]

    Measurement of b-quark fragmentation properties in jets using the decayB ± →J/ψK ± in pp collisions at √s=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Measurement of b-quark fragmentation properties in jets using the decayB ± →J/ψK ± in pp collisions at √s=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector”,JHEP 12(2021) 131,doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2021)131,arXiv:2108.11650

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep12(2021)131 2021

  30. [30]

    Measurements of jet observables sensitive to b-quark fragmentation in tt events at the LHC with the ATLAS detector

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Measurements of jet observables sensitive to b-quark fragmentation in tt events at the LHC with the ATLAS detector”,Phys. Rev. D106(2022) 032008,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.106.032008,arXiv:2202.13901

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.106.032008 2022

  31. [31]

    HEPData record for this analysis, 2025.doi:10.17182/hepdata.156184

    work page doi:10.17182/hepdata.156184 2025

  32. [32]

    The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC

    CMS Collaboration, “The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC”,JINST3(2008) S08004, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/3/08/S08004

    work page doi:10.1088/1748-0221/3/08/s08004 2008

  33. [33]

    Development of the CMS detector for the CERN LHC Run 3

    CMS Collaboration, “Development of the CMS detector for the CERN LHC Run 3”, JINST19(2024), no. 05, P05064,doi:10.1088/1748-0221/19/05/P05064, arXiv:2309.05466

    work page doi:10.1088/1748-0221/19/05/p05064 2024

  34. [34]

    Technical proposal for the Phase-II upgrade of the Compact Muon Solenoid

    CMS Collaboration, “Technical proposal for the Phase-2 upgrade of the Compact Muon Solenoid”, CMS Technical Proposal CERN-LHCC-2015-010, CMS-TDR-15-02, 2015. doi:10.17181/CERN.VU8I.D59J

    work page doi:10.17181/cern.vu8i.d59j 2015

  35. [35]

    Particle-flow reconstruction and global event description with the CMS detector

    A. M. Sirunyan et al., “Particle-flow reconstruction and global event description with the CMS detector”,JINST12(2017) P10003,doi:10.1088/1748-0221/12/10/P10003, arXiv:1706.04965

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1748-0221/12/10/p10003 2017

  36. [36]

    The anti-k_t jet clustering algorithm

    M. Cacciari, G. P . Salam, and G. Soyez, “The anti-kT jet clustering algorithm”,JHEP04 (2008) 063,doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2008/04/063,arXiv:0802.1189

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2008/04/063 2008

  37. [37]

    FastJet user manual

    M. Cacciari, G. P . Salam, and G. Soyez, “FastJet user manual”,Eur. Phys. J. C72(2012) 1896,doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1896-2,arXiv:1111.6097

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1896-2 2012

  38. [38]

    Pileup mitigation at CMS in 13 TeV data

    CMS Collaboration, “Pileup mitigation at CMS in 13 TeV data”,JINST15(2020) P09018, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/15/09/P09018,arXiv:2003.00503

    work page doi:10.1088/1748-0221/15/09/p09018 2020

  39. [39]

    Jet energy scale and resolution in the CMS experiment in pp collisions at 8 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Jet energy scale and resolution in the CMS experiment in pp collisions at 8 TeV”,JINST12(2017) P02014, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/12/02/P02014,arXiv:1607.03663

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1748-0221/12/02/p02014 2017

  40. [40]

    ParticleNet: jet tagging via particle clouds

    H. Qu and L. Gouskos, “ParticleNet: jet tagging via particle clouds”,Phys. Rev. D101 (2020), no. 5, 056019,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.101.056019,arXiv:1902.08570

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.101.056019 2020

  41. [41]

    The CMS Phase-1 pixel detector upgrade

    CMS Tracker Group, “The CMS Phase-1 pixel detector upgrade”,JINST16(2021) P02027,doi:10.1088/1748-0221/16/02/P02027,arXiv:2012.14304. 24

    work page doi:10.1088/1748-0221/16/02/p02027 2021

  42. [42]

    Track impact parameter resolution for the full pseudorapidity coverage in the 2017 dataset with the CMS Phase-1 pixel detector

    CMS Collaboration, “Track impact parameter resolution for the full pseudorapidity coverage in the 2017 dataset with the CMS Phase-1 pixel detector”, CMS Detector Performance Note CMS-DP-2020-049, 2020

    work page 2017

  43. [43]

    Performance of the CMS Level-1 trigger in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Performance of the CMS Level-1 trigger in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV”,JINST15(2020) P10017,doi:10.1088/1748-0221/15/10/P10017, arXiv:2006.10165

    work page doi:10.1088/1748-0221/15/10/p10017 2020

  44. [44]

    The CMS trigger system

    CMS Collaboration, “The CMS trigger system”,JINST12(2017) P01020, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/12/01/P01020,arXiv:1609.02366

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1748-0221/12/01/p01020 2017

  45. [45]

    Luminosity measurement in proton-proton collisions at 5.02 TeV in 2017 at CMS

    CMS Collaboration, “Luminosity measurement in proton-proton collisions at 5.02 TeV in 2017 at CMS”, CMS Physics Analysis Summary CMS-PAS-LUM-19-001, 2021

    work page 2017

  46. [46]

    An Introduction to PYTHIA 8.2

    T. Sj ¨ostrand et al., “An introduction toPYTHIA8.2”,Comput. Phys. Commun.191(2015) 159,doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2015.01.024,arXiv:1410.3012

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2015.01.024 2015

  47. [47]

    Extraction and validation of a new set of CMSPYTHIA8 tunes from underlying-event measurements

    CMS Collaboration, “Extraction and validation of a new set of CMSPYTHIA8 tunes from underlying-event measurements”,Eur. Phys. J. C80(2020) 4, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-7499-4,arXiv:1903.12179

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-7499-4 2020

  48. [48]

    QCD Radiation off Heavy Particles

    E. Norrbin and T. Sj ¨ostrand, “QCD radiation off heavy particles”,Nucl. Phys. B603 (2001) 297,doi:10.1016/S0550-3213(01)00099-2,arXiv:hep-ph/0010012

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/s0550-3213(01)00099-2 2001

  49. [49]

    A comprehensive guide to the physics and usage of PYTHIA 8.3

    C. Bierlich et al., “A comprehensive guide to the physics and usage ofPYTHIA8.3”, SciPost Phys. Codeb.2022(2022) 8,doi:10.21468/SciPostPhysCodeb.8, arXiv:2203.11601

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.21468/scipostphyscodeb.8 2022

  50. [50]

    Parton fragmentation and string dynamics

    B. Andersson, G. Gustafson, G. Ingelman, and T. Sj ¨ostrand, “Parton fragmentation and string dynamics”,Phys. Rept.97(1983) 31,doi:10.1016/0370-1573(83)90080-7

    work page doi:10.1016/0370-1573(83)90080-7 1983

  51. [51]

    The merging of jets

    T. Sj ¨ostrand, “The merging of jets”,Phys. Lett. B142(1984) 420, doi:10.1016/0370-2693(84)91354-6

    work page doi:10.1016/0370-2693(84)91354-6 1984

  52. [52]

    e +e− production of heavy quarks in the string model

    M. G. Bowler, “e +e− production of heavy quarks in the string model”,Z. Phys. C11 (1981) 169,doi:10.1007/BF01574001

    work page doi:10.1007/bf01574001 1981

  53. [53]

    Herwig 7.1 Release Note

    J. Bellm et al., “HERWIG7.1 Release Note”, 2017.arXiv:1705.06919

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  54. [54]

    Development and validation ofHERWIG7 tunes from CMS underlying-event measurements

    CMS Collaboration, “Development and validation ofHERWIG7 tunes from CMS underlying-event measurements”,Eur. Phys. J. C81(2021) 312, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-08949-5,arXiv:2011.03422

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-08949-5 2021

  55. [55]

    New formalism for QCD parton showers

    S. Gieseke, P . Stephens, and B. Webber, “New formalism for QCD parton showers”,JHEP 12(2003) 045,doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2003/12/045,arXiv:hep-ph/0310083

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2003/12/045 2003

  56. [56]

    Simulation of QCD coherence in heavy quark production and decay

    G. Marchesini and B. R. Webber, “Simulation of QCD coherence in heavy quark production and decay”,Nucl. Phys. B330(1990) 261, doi:10.1016/0550-3213(90)90310-A

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(90)90310-a 1990

  57. [57]

    A QCD model for jet fragmentation including soft gluon interference

    B. R. Webber, “A QCD model for jet fragmentation including soft gluon interference”, Nucl. Phys. B238(1984) 492,doi:10.1016/0550-3213(84)90333-X

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(84)90333-x 1984

  58. [58]

    Parton distributions for the LHC Run II

    NNPDF Collaboration, “Parton distributions for the LHC Run 2”,JHEP04(2015) 040, doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2015)040,arXiv:1410.8849. References 25

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep04(2015)040 2015

  59. [59]

    GEANT4 — a simulation toolkit

    GEANT4 Collaboration, “GEANT4—a simulation toolkit”,Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A506 (2003) 250,doi:10.1016/S0168-9002(03)01368-8

    work page doi:10.1016/s0168-9002(03)01368-8 2003

  60. [60]

    Hadronization Corrections to Jet Cross Sections in Deep-Inelastic Scattering

    M. Wobisch and T. Wengler, “Hadronization corrections to jet cross sections in deep inelastic scattering”, inWorkshop on Monte Carlo generators for HERA physics, p. 270. 1998. arXiv:hep-ph/9907280.doi:10.48550/arXiv.hep-ph/9907280

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.48550/arxiv.hep-ph/9907280 1998

  61. [61]

    The Lund Jet Plane

    F. A. Dreyer, G. P . Salam, and G. Soyez, “The Lund jet plane”,JHEP12(2018) 064, doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2018)064,arXiv:1807.04758

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep12(2018)064 2018

  62. [62]

    Measurement of the groomed jet radius and momentum splitting fraction in pp and PbPb collisions at √sNN =5.02 TeV

    ALICE Collaboration, “Measurement of the groomed jet radius and momentum splitting fraction in pp and PbPb collisions at √sNN =5.02 TeV”,Phys. Rev. Lett.128(2022) 102001,doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.128.102001,arXiv:2107.12984

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.128.102001 2022

  63. [63]

    Measurement of soft-drop jet observables in pp collisions with the ATLAS detector at √s=13 TeV

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Measurement of soft-drop jet observables in pp collisions with the ATLAS detector at √s=13 TeV”,Phys. Rev. D101(2020) 052007, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.101.052007,arXiv:1912.09837

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.101.052007 2020

  64. [64]

    Study of quark and gluon jet substructure in Z+jet and dijet events from pp collisions

    CMS Collaboration, “Study of quark and gluon jet substructure in Z+jet and dijet events from pp collisions”,JHEP01(2022) 188,doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2022)188, arXiv:2109.03340

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep01(2022)188 2022

  65. [65]

    Measurements of the differential jet cross section as a function of the jet mass in dijet events from proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} =$ 13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Measurements of the differential jet cross section as a function of the jet mass in dijet events from proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV”,JHEP11 (2018) 113,doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2018)113,arXiv:1807.05974

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep11(2018)113 2018

  66. [66]

    Measurement of jet-substructure observables in top quark, W boson and light jet production in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Measurement of jet-substructure observables in top quark, W boson and light jet production in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV with the ATLAS detector”,JHEP08(2019) 033,doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2019)033, arXiv:1903.02942

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep08(2019)033 2019

  67. [67]

    Measurements of Lund subjet multiplicities in 13 TeV proton-proton collisions with the ATLAS detector

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Measurements of Lund subjet multiplicities in 13 TeV proton-proton collisions with the ATLAS detector”,Phys. Lett. B859(2024) 139090, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2024.139090,arXiv:2402.13052

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2024.139090 2024

  68. [68]

    Measurement of the Lund jet plane using charged particles in 13 TeV proton-proton collisions with the ATLAS detector

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Measurement of the Lund jet plane using charged particles in 13 TeV proton-proton collisions with the ATLAS detector”,Phys. Rev. Lett.124(2020) 222002,doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.222002,arXiv:2004.03540

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.124.222002 2020

  69. [69]

    Measurement of the primary Lund jet plane density in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of the primary Lund jet plane density in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV”,JHEP05(2024) 116, doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2024)116,arXiv:2312.16343

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep05(2024)116 2024

  70. [70]

    Measurement of the Lund jet plane in hadronic decays of top quarks and W bosons with the ATLAS detector

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Measurement of the Lund jet plane in hadronic decays of top quarks and W bosons with the ATLAS detector”,Eur. Phys. J. C85(2025), no. 4, 416, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-025-13924-5,arXiv:2407.10879

    work page doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-025-13924-5 2025

  71. [71]

    Measurements of groomed-jet substructure of charm jets tagged by D0 mesons in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV

    ALICE Collaboration, “Measurements of groomed-jet substructure of charm jets tagged by D0 mesons in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV”,Phys. Rev. Lett.131(2023) 192301,doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.131.192301,arXiv:2208.04857

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevlett.131.192301 2023

  72. [72]

    Navas, et al., Review of particle physics, Phys

    Particle Data Group Collaboration, “Review of particle physics”,Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 030001,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.030001. 26

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.110.030001 2024

  73. [73]

    Measurement of jet substructure observables in $\mathrm{t\overline{t}}$ events from proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} =$ 13TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of jet substructure observables in t t events from proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV”,Phys. Rev. D98(2018) 092014, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.98.092014,arXiv:1808.07340

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevd.98.092014 2018

  74. [74]

    Measurement of b jet shapes in proton-proton collisions at√s=5.02 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of b jet shapes in proton-proton collisions at√s=5.02 TeV”,JHEP05(2021) 054,doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2021)054, arXiv:2005.14219

    work page doi:10.1007/jhep05(2021)054 2021

  75. [75]

    Study of $J/\psi$ production in jets

    LHCb Collaboration, “Study of J/ψproduction in jets”,Phys. Rev. Lett.118(2017) 192001, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.118.192001,arXiv:1701.05116

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.118.192001 2017

  76. [76]

    Identification of b-quark jets with the CMS experiment

    CMS Collaboration, “Identification of b quark jets with the CMS experiment”,JINST8 (2013) P04013,doi:10.1088/1748-0221/8/04/P04013,arXiv:1211.4462

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1748-0221/8/04/p04013 2013

  77. [77]

    Comparison of unfolding methods using RooFitUnfold

    L. Brenner et al., “Comparison of unfolding methods using RooFitUnfold”,Int. J. Mod. Phys. A35(2020) 2050145,doi:10.1142/S0217751X20501456, arXiv:1910.14654

    work page doi:10.1142/s0217751x20501456 2020

  78. [78]

    Unfolding algorithms and tests using RooUnfold

    T. Adye, “Unfolding algorithms and tests using RooUnfold”, inPHYSTAT 2011, p. 313. CERN, Geneva, 2011.arXiv:1105.1160.doi:10.5170/CERN-2011-006.313

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.5170/cern-2011-006.313 2011

  79. [79]

    The t-tbar cross-section at 1.8 and 1.96 TeV: a study of the systematics due to parton densities and scale dependence

    M. Cacciari et al., “The t t cross section at 1.8 TeV and 1.96 TeV: a study of the systematics due to parton densities and scale dependence”,JHEP04(2004) 068, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2004/04/068,arXiv:hep-ph/0303085

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2004/04/068 2004

  80. [80]

    Soft-gluon resummation for Higgs boson production at hadron colliders

    S. Catani, D. de Florian, M. Grazzini, and P . Nason, “Soft-gluon resummation for Higgs boson production at hadron colliders”,JHEP07(2003) 028, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2003/07/028,arXiv:hep-ph/0306211

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2003/07/028 2003

Showing first 80 references.