arxiv: 2605.07303 · v1 · submitted 2026-05-08 · ✦ hep-ph · hep-ex

Recognition: 2 theorem links

· Lean Theorem

LHC Mono-W/Z Signatures as a Probe for Dark Matter Explanations of Astrophysical Excesses

Yu-Chen Guo , Ying-Xin Li , Chih-Ting Lu

Authors on Pith no claims yet

Pith reviewed 2026-05-11 01:29 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph hep-ex

keywords inert doublet modeldark matter annihilationmono-W/Z signaturesGalactic Center excessantiproton anomalyLHCmass splittingHigh-Luminosity LHC

0 comments

The pith

LHC mono-W/Z searches can test most of the inert doublet dark matter space explaining the galactic excesses

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

The paper establishes that mono-W/Z signatures provide a powerful probe for the inert two-Higgs doublet model in the regime where dark matter particles of 70 to 75 GeV annihilate to off-shell W bosons. This regime is chosen because it can simultaneously account for the Galactic Center gamma-ray excess and the AMS-02 antiproton anomaly while satisfying other constraints. The authors introduce a strategy to separate the impacts of neutral and charged mass splittings in the collider signals. A sympathetic reader cares because this offers an independent test at the LHC for a dark matter explanation that relies on astrophysical data. If correct, future LHC runs will exclude large portions of the remaining viable space.

Core claim

In the inert two-Higgs doublet model the parameter space with dark matter mass 70-75 GeV and dominant SS to WW star annihilation that fits both the galactic center excess and antiproton anomaly can be tested using LHC mono-W/Z plus missing energy searches. A channel separation strategy allows disentangling the contributions from neutral mass splitting Delta zero and charged mass splitting Delta plus minus. At the High-Luminosity LHC this leads to 2 sigma exclusion limits of 80 to 260 GeV on Delta zero from the leptonic channel and 30 to 150 GeV on Delta zero plus 70 to 230 GeV on Delta plus minus from the hadronic channel for a 70 GeV dark matter particle.

What carries the argument

The mono-W/Z plus missing transverse energy signatures at the LHC with a dedicated channel-separation strategy for distinguishing neutral and charged mass splittings in the inert scalars.

Load-bearing premise

The galactic center excess and antiproton anomaly are due to dark matter annihilation in the inert two-Higgs doublet model via the SS to WW star channel in the 70-75 GeV range with no other dominant contributions.

What would settle it

A lack of mono-W/Z events in the relevant signal regions at the High-Luminosity LHC within the mass splitting ranges of 30 to 260 GeV would rule out this dark matter explanation for the astrophysical excesses.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2605.07303 by Chih-Ting Lu, Ying-Xin Li, Yu-Chen Guo.

**Figure 2.** Figure 2: FIG. 2. Production cross-sections for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 3.** Figure 3: FIG. 3. Cross sections for mono- [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 4.** Figure 4: FIG. 4. Normalized invariant mass distributions of the dilep [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 6.** Figure 6: FIG. 6. Normalized distributions of the leading lepton trans [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 5.** Figure 5: FIG. 5. Normalized distributions of the missing transverse [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 7.** Figure 7: FIG. 7. Expected statistical significance [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_7.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 9.** Figure 9: FIG. 9. Normalized distributions of the transverse energy [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p008_9.png] view at source ↗

**Figure 11.** Figure 11: FIG. 11. Contours of statistical significance [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_11.png] view at source ↗

read the original abstract

The inert two-Higgs doublet model (IDM) is a compelling framework for weakly interacting massive particles (WIMPs) linked to electroweak symmetry breaking. It can account for both the Galactic Center gamma-ray excess (GCE) and the AMS-02 antiproton anomaly while also satisfying relic density and direct detection constraints for dark matter (DM) masses in the $55-75$ GeV range. Three specific DM annihilation channels can be identified: Higgs resonance, $SA$ co-annihilation, and $SS\to WW^{\ast}$ annihilation. Among these, the DM mass range of $70-75$ GeV with dominant $SS\to WW^{\ast}$ annihilation has received less attention in collider searches. To validate this parameter space, we combine LHC searches for mono-$W/Z$ signatures. In particular, we develop a channel-separation strategy to disentangle the contributions of charged mass splitting ($\Delta^{\pm}$) and neutral mass splitting ($\Delta^0$) in the inert scalar sector at the LHC. Our results indicate that most of the parameter space consistent with these astrophysical anomalies in the $SS\to WW^{\ast}$ annihilation regime will be testable at the High-Luminosity LHC. Specifically, from the leptonic channel we obtain a $2\sigma$ exclusion limit of $80 \lesssim \Delta^0 \lesssim 260$ GeV, while the hadronic channel yields $30 \lesssim \Delta^0 \lesssim 150$ GeV and $70 \lesssim \Delta^{\pm} \lesssim 230$ GeV for $m_S = 70$ GeV.

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.

Desk Editor's Note private letter to a colleague

This paper gives a concrete LHC test for the IDM region that fits both the galactic center excess and AMS-02 antiprotons, using a separation trick on mono-W/Z channels.

read the letter

The core point is that most of the 70-75 GeV SS to WW* parameter space in the inert doublet model can be probed at the HL-LHC through mono-W/Z signatures, with a new way to pull apart the neutral and charged mass splittings. The authors take existing search strategies and apply them to this specific annihilation regime that has seen less collider attention. They show how combining leptonic and hadronic final states lets you set separate limits on Δ⁰ and Δ±, which is a useful practical step even if the underlying searches are not brand new. The quoted 2σ reaches (roughly 80-260 GeV on Δ⁰ from leptons, and 30-150 GeV plus 70-230 GeV on the two splittings from hadrons at m_S=70 GeV) follow from standard recasting and look plausible on the surface. The work stays independent of the astrophysical fits themselves, treating the splittings as free parameters to be constrained. That keeps the collider part clean. The main soft spot is that the whole exercise only matters if the IDM really explains the excesses; if the signals have other origins the motivation drops. The abstract also gives no details on simulation setup, background modeling, or systematics, so the robustness of those limits needs checking in the full text. Minor issues like that are common in projection papers and do not break the central argument. This is aimed at collider phenomenologists who follow WIMP models near the electroweak scale and at people tracking indirect detection claims. A reader who wants falsifiable numbers for this corner of parameter space will find it directly useful. It deserves peer review because the separation method is straightforward to implement and the projections are testable with data that will arrive soon.

Referee Report

0 major / 2 minor

Summary. The paper claims that the inert doublet model (IDM) parameter space with m_S = 70-75 GeV, where SS → WW* annihilation explains the Galactic Center Excess and AMS-02 antiproton anomaly while satisfying relic density and direct detection bounds, can be tested via mono-W/Z signatures at the LHC. A channel-separation strategy using leptonic and hadronic final states is developed to disentangle the neutral mass splitting Δ⁰ and charged mass splitting Δ±, yielding 2σ exclusion limits at the High-Luminosity LHC of 80 ≲ Δ⁰ ≲ 260 GeV (leptonic), and 30 ≲ Δ⁰ ≲ 150 GeV with 70 ≲ Δ± ≲ 230 GeV (hadronic) for m_S = 70 GeV.

Significance. If the projections hold, the work provides a direct collider test of astrophysically motivated DM explanations in the IDM, bridging indirect detection signals with LHC phenomenology. The channel-separation method is a useful technical contribution for isolating effects of the two mass splittings in the inert sector. The analysis follows standard recast procedures for mono-W/Z searches, rendering the limits falsifiable with HL-LHC data.

minor comments (2)

Abstract: the quoted 2σ limits are presented without any mention of the Monte Carlo tools, background modeling, or systematic uncertainties employed; a one-sentence summary of these elements would strengthen the abstract and allow readers to assess robustness immediately.
The manuscript would benefit from an explicit statement (perhaps in the introduction or results section) of how the leptonic and hadronic channels are combined to break the degeneracy between Δ⁰ and Δ±, including any assumptions about signal efficiencies or cut optimization.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

0 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive evaluation of our manuscript, the accurate summary of our results on mono-W/Z signatures in the IDM, and the recommendation for minor revision. We appreciate the recognition that our channel-separation strategy provides a useful technical contribution for testing astrophysically motivated DM explanations at the HL-LHC. As no specific major comments were raised in the report, we have no point-by-point responses to provide below. We will incorporate any minor suggestions into the revised version of the manuscript.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity identified

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain consists of two independent parts: (1) adopting the IDM parameter space (m_S ≈ 70-75 GeV, SS→WW* regime) that is already consistent with GCE and AMS-02 excesses from external astrophysical fits, and (2) performing a standard recast of mono-W/Z searches at the LHC/HL-LHC to project 2σ exclusion limits on the free parameters Δ⁰ and Δ± via a channel-separation strategy that combines leptonic and hadronic final states. The collider projections treat the mass splittings as independent inputs and do not derive them from the astrophysical data; no equation reduces a claimed prediction to a fitted quantity by construction, and no load-bearing step relies on a self-citation chain whose validity is internal to the present work. The overall result is therefore a conditional reach estimate rather than a closed loop.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

2 free parameters · 2 axioms · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on the IDM being a valid extension of the Standard Model, on the astrophysical excesses being attributable to DM annihilation, and on standard LHC background modeling assumptions. No new particles beyond the inert scalars are introduced.

free parameters (2)

m_S
Dark matter mass fixed near 70 GeV to simultaneously satisfy relic density, direct detection, and astrophysical excess fits.
Δ⁰ and Δ±
Neutral and charged mass splittings treated as free parameters whose ranges are constrained by the proposed LHC search.

axioms (2)

domain assumption The IDM scalar potential and Z2 symmetry protect the lightest inert scalar as stable DM.
Standard assumption of the inert doublet model invoked to ensure DM stability.
domain assumption Standard Model backgrounds and detector effects are correctly modeled in the mono-W/Z channels.
Required for translating simulated signal rates into exclusion limits.

invented entities (1)

Inert scalars S, A, H± no independent evidence
purpose: Provide stable DM candidate and additional states that produce mono-W/Z signatures.
These are the defining new fields of the established IDM; no independent evidence is supplied beyond the model itself.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.0 · 5610 in / 1708 out tokens · 35490 ms · 2026-05-11T01:29:07.879329+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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/RealityFromDistinction.lean reality_from_one_distinction unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

The general CP-conserving scalar potential is given by: V=μ₁²|H|² + μ₂²|HD|² + λ₁|H|⁴ + ... (Eq. 2); mass splittings Δ⁰ = mA − mS and Δ± = mh± − mS
IndisputableMonolith/Cost/FunctionalEquation.lean washburn_uniqueness_aczel unclear

?

unclear
Relation between the paper passage and the cited Recognition theorem.

Production cross-sections ... Monte Carlo event generation ... MadGraph5 aMC@NLO ... Pythia8 ... Delphes3

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

68 extracted references · 68 canonical work pages · 3 internal anchors

[1]

Trimble, Ann

V. Trimble, Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys.25, 425 (1987)

work page 1987
[2]

Bertone, D

G. Bertone, D. Hooper, and J. Silk, Phys. Rept.405, 279 (2005)

work page 2005
[3]

Arbey and F

A. Arbey and F. Mahmoudi, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.119, 103865 (2021), arXiv:2104.11488 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2021
[4]

Dark Matter

M. Cirelli, A. Strumia, and J. Zupan, “Dark Matter,” (2024), arXiv:2406.01705 [hep-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2024
[5]

Daylan, D

T. Daylan, D. P. Finkbeiner, D. Hooper, T. Linden, S. N. N. Portillo, N. L. Rodd, and T. R. Slatyer, Phys. Dark Univ.12, 1 (2016)

work page 2016
[6]

T. R. Slatyer, SciPost Phys. Lect. Notes53, 1 (2022), arXiv:2109.02696 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2022
[7]

Cholis, Y.-M

I. Cholis, Y.-M. Zhong, S. D. McDermott, and J. P. Surdutovich, Phys. Rev. D105, 103023 (2022), arXiv:2112.09706 [astro-ph.HE]

work page arXiv 2022
[8]

Di Mauro and M

M. Di Mauro and M. W. Winkler, Phys. Rev. D103, 123005 (2021), arXiv:2101.11027 [astro-ph.HE]

work page arXiv 2021
[9]

M.-Y. Cui, Q. Yuan, Y.-L. S. Tsai, and Y.-Z. Fan, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 191101 (2017), arXiv:1610.03840 [astro- ph.HE]

work page arXiv 2017
[10]

Cuoco, M

A. Cuoco, M. Kr¨ amer, and M. Korsmeier, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 191102 (2017)

work page 2017
[11]

Calore, M

F. Calore, M. Cirelli, L. Derome, Y. Genolini, D. Mau- rin, P. Salati, and P. D. Serpico, SciPost Phys.12, 163 (2022), arXiv:2202.03076 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2022
[12]

Bartels, S

R. Bartels, S. Krishnamurthy, and C. Weniger, Phys. Rev. Lett.116, 051102 (2016)

work page 2016
[13]

Heisig, M

J. Heisig, M. Korsmeier, and M. W. Winkler, Phys. Rev. Res.2, 043017 (2020), arXiv:2005.04237 [astro-ph.HE]

work page arXiv 2020
[14]

Gautam, R

A. Gautam, R. M. Crocker, L. Ferrario, A. J. Ruiter, H. Ploeg, C. Gordon, and O. Macias, Nature Astron.6, 703 (2022), arXiv:2106.00222 [astro-ph.HE]

work page arXiv 2022
[15]

Lv, X.-J

X.-J. Lv, X.-J. Bi, K. Fang, P.-F. Yin, and M.-J. Zhao, Phys. Rev. D109, 043006 (2024), arXiv:2304.00760 [astro-ph.HE]. 11

work page arXiv 2024
[16]

K.-K. Duan, X. Wang, W.-H. Li, Z.-H. Xu, Y.-L. S. Tsai, and Y.-Z. Fan, JCAP10, 049 (2025), arXiv:2506.13352 [astro-ph.CO]

work page arXiv 2025
[17]

N. G. Deshpande and E. Ma, Phys. Rev. D18, 2574 (1978)

work page 1978
[18]

Improved Naturalness with a Heavy Higgs: An Alternative Road to LHC Physics

R. Barbieri, L. J. Hall, and V. S. Rychkov, Phys. Rev. D74, 015007 (2006), arXiv:hep-ph/0603188

work page Pith review arXiv 2006
[19]

The Inert Doublet Model: an Archetype for Dark Matter

L. Lopez Honorez, E. Nezri, J. F. Oliver, and M. H. G. Tytgat, JCAP02, 028 (2007), arXiv:hep-ph/0612275

work page Pith review arXiv 2007
[20]

Fan, T.-P

Y.-Z. Fan, T.-P. Tang, Y.-L. S. Tsai,et al., Phys. Rev. Lett.129, 091802 (2022)

work page 2022
[21]

Fan, Y.-Y

Y.-Z. Fan, Y.-Y. Li, C.-T. Lu, X.-Y. Luo, T.-P. Tang, V. Q. Tran, and Y.-L. S. Tsai, Phys. Rev. D111, 015046 (2025), arXiv:2410.00638 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2025
[22]

M. J. Dolan, F. Kahlhoefer, C. McCabe, and K. Schmidt-Hoberg, JHEP03, 171 (2015), [Erratum: JHEP 07, 103 (2015)], arXiv:1412.5174 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2015
[23]

S. Ipek, D. McKeen, and A. E. Nelson, Phys. Rev. D90, 055021 (2014), arXiv:1404.3716 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2014
[24]

Berlin, D

A. Berlin, D. Hooper, and S. D. McDermott, Phys. Rev. D89, 115022 (2014), arXiv:1404.0022 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2014
[25]

Alves, S

A. Alves, S. Profumo, F. S. Queiroz, and W. Shepherd, Phys. Rev. D90, 115003 (2014), arXiv:1403.5027 [hep- ph]

work page arXiv 2014
[26]

Agrawal, B

P. Agrawal, B. Batell, D. Hooper, and T. Lin, Phys. Rev. D90, 063512 (2014), arXiv:1404.1373 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2014
[27]

Izaguirre, G

E. Izaguirre, G. Krnjaic, and B. Shuve, Phys. Rev. D 90, 055002 (2014), arXiv:1404.2018 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2014
[28]

Ko, W.-I

P. Ko, W.-I. Park, and Y. Tang, JCAP09, 013 (2014), arXiv:1404.5257 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2014
[29]

Abdullah, A

M. Abdullah, A. DiFranzo, A. Rajaraman, T. M. P. Tait, P. Tanedo, and A. M. Wijangco, Phys. Rev. D 90, 035004 (2014), arXiv:1404.6528 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2014
[30]

Martin, J

A. Martin, J. Shelton, and J. Unwin, Phys. Rev. D90, 103513 (2014), arXiv:1405.0272 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2014
[31]

Berlin, P

A. Berlin, P. Gratia, D. Hooper, and S. D. McDermott, Phys. Rev. D90, 015032 (2014), arXiv:1405.5204 [hep- ph]

work page arXiv 2014
[32]

Cheung, M

C. Cheung, M. Papucci, D. Sanford, N. R. Shah, and K. M. Zurek, Phys. Rev. D90, 075011 (2014), arXiv:1406.6372 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2014
[33]

Agrawal, B

P. Agrawal, B. Batell, P. J. Fox, and R. Harnik, JCAP 05, 011 (2015)

work page 2015
[34]

S. J. Clark, B. Dutta, and L. E. Strigari, Phys. Rev. D 97, 023003 (2018), arXiv:1709.07410 [astro-ph.HE]

work page arXiv 2018
[35]

Jia, Phys

L.-B. Jia, Phys. Rev. D96, 055009 (2017), arXiv:1703.06938 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2017
[36]

Cui, W.-C

M.-Y. Cui, W.-C. Huang, Y.-L. S. Tsai, and Q. Yuan, JCAP11, 039 (2018), arXiv:1805.11590 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2018
[37]

Arcadi, F

G. Arcadi, F. S. Queiroz, and C. Siqueira, Phys. Lett. B 775, 196 (2017)

work page 2017
[38]

Abdughani, Y.-Z

M. Abdughani, Y.-Z. Fan, L. Feng, Y.-L. S. Tsai, L. Wu, and Q. Yuan, Sci. Bull.66, 2170 (2021), arXiv:2104.03274 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2021
[39]

Di Mauro, C

M. Di Mauro, C. Arina, N. Fornengo, J. Heisig, and D. Massaro, Phys. Rev. D108, 095008 (2023), arXiv:2305.11937 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2023
[40]

Boet al.(PandaX), Dark Matter Search Results from 1.54 Tonne·Year Exposure of PandaX-4T, Phys

Z. Boet al.(PandaX), Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 011805 (2025), arXiv:2408.00664 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2025
[41]

Dark Matter Search Results from 4.2 Tonne-Years of Exposure of the LUX-ZEPLIN (LZ) Experiment,

J. Aalberset al.(LZ), Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 011802 (2025), arXiv:2410.17036 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2025
[42]

Aprileet al.[XENON], Phys

E. Aprileet al.(XENON), Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 221003 (2025), arXiv:2502.18005 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2025
[43]

Abe and R

T. Abe and R. Sato, JHEP03, 109 (2015), arXiv:1501.04161 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2015
[44]

Y.-L. S. Tsai, C.-T. Lu, and V. Q. Tran, JHEP06, 033 (2020), arXiv:1912.08875 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2020
[45]

Datta, N

A. Datta, N. Ganguly, N. Khan, and S. Rakshit, Phys. Rev. D95, 015017 (2017)

work page 2017
[46]

Belyaev, G

A. Belyaev, G. Cacciapaglia, I. P. Ivanov, F. Rojas- Abatte, and M. Thomas, Phys. Rev. D97, 035011 (2018), arXiv:1612.00511 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2018
[47]

Dercks and T

D. Dercks and T. Robens, Eur. Phys. J. C79, 924 (2019), arXiv:1812.07913 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2019
[48]

Kalinowski, T

J. Kalinowski, T. Robens, D. Sokolowska, and A. F. Zar- necki, Symmetry13, 991 (2021), arXiv:2012.14818 [hep- ph]

work page arXiv 2021
[49]

Q.-H. Cao, E. Ma, and G. Rajasekaran, Phys. Rev. D 76, 095011 (2007), arXiv:0708.2939 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2007
[50]

Dilepton constraints in the Inert Doublet Model from Run 1 of the LHC

G. Belanger, B. Dumont, A. Goudelis, B. Herrmann, S. Kraml, and D. Sengupta, Phys. Rev. D91, 115011 (2015), arXiv:1503.07367 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2015
[51]

Inert Doublet Model in light of LHC Run I and astrophysical data

A. Ilnicka, M. Krawczyk, and T. Robens, Phys. Rev. D 93, 055026 (2016), arXiv:1508.01671 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2016
[52]

Exploring collider signatures of the inert Higgs doublet model

A. Datta, N. Ganguly, N. Khan, and S. Rakshit, Phys. Rev. D95, 015017 (2017), arXiv:1610.00648 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2017
[53]

Advancing LHC Probes of Dark Matter from the Inert 2-Higgs Doublet Model with the Mono-jet Signal

A. Belyaev, T. R. Fernandez Perez Tomei, P. G. Mer- cadante, C. S. Moon, S. Moretti, S. F. Novaes, L. Panizzi, F. Rojas, and M. Thomas, Phys. Rev. D99, 015011 (2019), arXiv:1809.00933 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2019
[54]

collaboration (CMS), CMS-PAS-NPS-25-002 (2026)

C. collaboration (CMS), CMS-PAS-NPS-25-002 (2026)

work page 2026
[55]

Eriksson, J

D. Eriksson, J. Rathsman, and O. St˚ al, Computer Physics Communications181, 189 (2010)

work page 2010
[56]

de Blas et al., JHEP 01 (2020) 139, arXiv:1905.03764 [hep-ph]

J. de Blaset al., JHEP01, 139 (2020), arXiv:1905.03764 [hep-ph]

work page arXiv 2020
[57]

Tumasyanet al.(CMS), Nature607, 60 (2022), [Er- ratum: Nature 623, (2023)], arXiv:2207.00043 [hep-ex]

A. Tumasyanet al.(CMS), Nature607, 60 (2022), arXiv:2207.00043 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2022
[58]

Zhu, M.-Y

C.-R. Zhu, M.-Y. Cui, Z.-Q. Xia,et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 129, 231101 (2022)

work page 2022
[59]

Ajelloet al.(Fermi-LAT), Astrophys

M. Ajelloet al.(Fermi-LAT), The Astrophysical Journal 819, 44 (2016), arXiv:1511.02938 [astro-ph.HE]

work page arXiv 2016
[60]

Aguilaret al.(AMS), Phys

M. Aguilaret al.(AMS), Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 091103 (2016)

work page 2016
[61]

N. D. Christensen and C. Duhr, Comput. Phys. Com- mun.180, 1614 (2009), arXiv:0806.4194 [hep-ph]

work page Pith review arXiv 2009
[62]

Alwall, R

J. Alwall, R. Frederix, S. Frixione,et al., JHEP07, 079 (2014)

work page 2014
[63]

An Introduction to PYTHIA 8.2

T. Sj¨ ostrand, S. Ask, J. R. Christiansen, R. Corke, N. De- sai, P. Ilten, S. Mrenna, S. Prestel, C. O. Rasmussen, and P. Z. Skands, Comput. Phys. Commun.191, 159 (2015), arXiv:1410.3012 [hep-ph]

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2015
[64]

de Favereau, C

J. de Favereau, C. Delaere, P. Demin,et al., JHEP02, 057 (2014)

work page 2014
[65]

Aadet al.(ATLAS), Eur

G. Aadet al.(ATLAS), Eur. Phys. J. C79, 970 (2019), arXiv:1907.05120 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2019
[66]

A. M. Sirunyanet al.(CMS), Eur. Phys. J. C78, 291 (2018), arXiv:1711.00431 [hep-ex]

work page arXiv 2018
[67]

Asymptotic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics

G. Cowan, K. Cranmer, E. Gross, and O. Vitells, Eur. Phys. J. C71, 1554 (2011), [Erratum: Eur.Phys.J.C 73, 2501 (2013)], arXiv:1007.1727 [physics.data-an]

work page internal anchor Pith review arXiv 2011
[68]

M. L. Mangano, M. Moretti, F. Piccinini, and M. Trec- cani, JHEP01, 013 (2007), arXiv:hep-ph/0611129

work page arXiv 2007