pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.24702 · v1 · pith:ZATZBQ2Fnew · submitted 2026-06-23 · ✦ hep-ph

Reweighting Underlying Event and Colour Reconnection parameter variations in Sherpa

Moritz Pabst , Max Knobbe , Frank Krauss , Steffen Schumann This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-25 23:19 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ✦ hep-ph
keywords Monte Carlo event generatorsmulti-parton interactionscolour reconnectionparameter reweightingSherpaLHC datagenerator tuningparametric uncertainties
0
0 comments X

The pith

Relative weights from central parameters let Sherpa trace MPI and CR variations without regenerating events.

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

The paper proposes a reweighting method to capture the effects of changes in multi-parton interaction and colour reconnection parameters inside the Sherpa generator. Each generated event receives a relative weight computed from the central production parameters, allowing the impact of variations to appear in distributions without new event samples. This reduces the cost of tuning the models to data and supports on-the-fly estimates of parametric uncertainties. The approach is demonstrated by performing combined tunes to 7 TeV LHC data and by calibrating the energy dependence of the parameters against 13 TeV and 1.96 TeV measurements. The same weighting technique is stated to transfer readily to other Monte Carlo generators.

Core claim

We propose and validate a new method to trace the impact of parameter variations in the simulation of multi-parton interactions and colour reconnections in the Sherpa event generator. They are reflected, at an event-by-event basis, through relative weights with respect to the central production parameters that give rise to the generated events and distributions. Our method facilitates the tuning of the Monte Carlo event generator at a dramatically reduced computational cost, alleviates parameter sensitivity studies, and enables robust quantification of parametric uncertainties on-the-fly.

What carries the argument

Event-by-event relative weights computed from the central production parameters of the multi-parton interaction and colour reconnection models.

If this is right

  • Tuning of Sherpa's MPI and CR models proceeds at dramatically lower computational cost than regenerating full event samples for each parameter point.
  • Parametric uncertainties can be quantified on-the-fly during production runs rather than through separate dedicated samples.
  • The same weighting prescription applies to combined tunes that use data from multiple collider energies.
  • The technique extends directly to other event generators that employ similar MPI and CR modules.
  • Energy-scaling behaviour of dimensionful parameters can be calibrated by reweighting existing samples to different centre-of-mass energies.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The method could be applied to additional model components such as parton showers or hadronisation to achieve consistent uncertainty estimates across the full simulation chain.
  • Reweighting might reduce the computational barrier to performing global tunes that simultaneously incorporate many observables from multiple experiments.
  • If non-linear effects remain small, the approach could support rapid exploration of high-dimensional parameter spaces that would otherwise be prohibitive.
  • Validation against fully regenerated samples at a few extreme parameter points would still be advisable before deploying the weights in precision analyses.

Load-bearing premise

Relative weights calculated at central parameters accurately reproduce the full effect of any variation in the MPI and CR models without regeneration of events or extra corrections for non-linear behaviour.

What would settle it

Generate a fresh sample with one specific MPI or CR parameter set to a non-central value, compute the reweighted histograms from the central sample, and test whether the two sets of distributions agree within their statistical uncertainties.

read the original abstract

We propose and validate a new method to trace the impact of parameter variations in the simulation of multi-parton interactions and colour reconnections in the Sherpa event generator. They are reflected, at an event-by-event basis, through relative weights with respect to the central production parameters that give rise to the generated events and distributions. Our method facilitates the tuning of the Monte Carlo event generator at a dramatically reduced computational cost, alleviates parameter sensitivity studies, and enables robust quantification of parametric uncertainties on-the-fly, one of the missing ingredients for future simulations of high-energy particle collisions. The method can easily be adapted to and implemented in other event generators. To illustrate its potential, we here consider combined tunes of the multi-parton-interaction and colour-reconnection models in Sherpa using LHC proton-proton collision data at $\sqrt{s}=7\,\text{TeV}$. We furthermore calibrate the energy-scaling behaviour of dimensionful model parameters based on $\sqrt{s}=13\,\text{TeV}$ LHC data and Tevatron data taken at $\sqrt{s}=1.96\,\text{TeV}$.

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 / 1 minor

Summary. The paper proposes and validates a reweighting method for tracing the effects of variations in multi-parton interaction (MPI) and colour reconnection (CR) parameters within the Sherpa event generator. Relative event weights are defined with respect to the central production parameters, enabling tuning and parametric uncertainty quantification at reduced computational cost without regenerating events. The approach is illustrated via combined MPI+CR tunes to LHC 7 TeV data and energy-scaling calibration using 13 TeV LHC and 1.96 TeV Tevatron data; the method is stated to be adaptable to other generators.

Significance. If the reweighting proves unbiased, the technique would meaningfully lower the cost of MC generator tuning and allow on-the-fly uncertainty estimates, addressing a practical gap in high-energy collision simulations. The explicit demonstration on real LHC/Tevatron data and the potential for cross-generator use are concrete strengths.

major comments (2)
  1. [Method and validation] The load-bearing assumption is that the ratio w = P(var)/P(central) computed at nominal parameters captures all relevant changes in multiplicity, colour flow and topology even for non-linear MPI/CR models (e.g., impact-parameter dependent MPI or iterative CR). The manuscript must supply a direct, quantitative test of this assumption for at least one large excursion where non-linearity is expected; without it the claim of 'robust quantification' remains unverified.
  2. [Results on tunes] The abstract and description state that the method is 'validated' and yields 'robust' uncertainties, yet no numerical metrics (e.g., pull distributions, χ^{2} differences, or fractional bias between reweighted and regenerated samples) are referenced. A table or figure comparing reweighted versus directly generated distributions for the tuned parameters is required to substantiate the central claim.
minor comments (1)
  1. Clarify the precise functional form of the weight (including any phase-space or matrix-element factors) and state the range of parameter variations over which the approximation is expected to remain accurate.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

2 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the positive assessment of our work's significance and for the constructive major comments. We address each point below and will revise the manuscript to incorporate the requested validations and metrics.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Method and validation] The load-bearing assumption is that the ratio w = P(var)/P(central) computed at nominal parameters captures all relevant changes in multiplicity, colour flow and topology even for non-linear MPI/CR models (e.g., impact-parameter dependent MPI or iterative CR). The manuscript must supply a direct, quantitative test of this assumption for at least one large excursion where non-linearity is expected; without it the claim of 'robust quantification' remains unverified.

    Authors: We agree that a direct quantitative test for large excursions in non-linear regimes is necessary to fully substantiate the robustness claim. The current manuscript validates the reweighting within the moderate parameter variations used for the presented tunes. In the revision we will add an explicit test: we will regenerate a dedicated sample with a large excursion (e.g., doubling the MPI p_T^min cutoff) and directly compare the reweighted versus regenerated distributions for multiplicity, colour-flow-sensitive observables, and topology measures, reporting the maximum point-wise deviation and integrated bias. revision: yes

  2. Referee: [Results on tunes] The abstract and description state that the method is 'validated' and yields 'robust' uncertainties, yet no numerical metrics (e.g., pull distributions, χ^{2} differences, or fractional bias between reweighted and regenerated samples) are referenced. A table or figure comparing reweighted versus directly generated distributions for the tuned parameters is required to substantiate the central claim.

    Authors: We acknowledge that explicit numerical metrics would strengthen the presentation. While the manuscript already contains visual comparisons between reweighted and direct samples in the relevant figures, we will add a dedicated table in the revised version that reports χ²/dof values, pull distributions, and average fractional biases for the key observables used in the MPI+CR tunes at both 7 TeV and the energy-scaling calibration. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity; method is self-contained reweighting proposal

full rationale

The paper proposes computing relative event weights w = P(var)/P(central) from a fixed central sample to approximate MPI/CR parameter variations, then validates the approach by performing combined tunes against independent LHC 7 TeV data and energy-scaling calibration against 13 TeV and Tevatron data. No equations, definitions, or steps in the provided text reduce the central claim to a self-definition, a fitted input renamed as prediction, or a self-citation chain. The reweighting is presented as an independent computational shortcut whose accuracy is checked externally rather than assumed by construction. This is the normal case of a self-contained methodological contribution.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 1 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the domain assumption that parameter variations in the underlying models can be captured through event reweighting without significant bias or the need for full event regeneration. No new free parameters or invented entities are introduced by the method itself; the model parameters being varied are standard in Sherpa.

axioms (1)
  • domain assumption Relative weights computed from central production parameters can accurately represent the effects of variations in multi-parton interaction and colour reconnection models.
    This premise is invoked in the description of the method as enabling tuning and uncertainty quantification without new event generation.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5724 in / 1474 out tokens · 20943 ms · 2026-06-25T23:19:05.590363+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 31 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Bewick et al.,Herwig 7.3 release note, Eur

    G. Bewick et al.,Herwig 7.3 release note, Eur. Phys. J. C84(2024), no. 10, 1053, [arXiv:2312.05175 [hep-ph]]

    arXiv 2024

  2. [2]

    Bellm et al.,The Physics of Herwig 7,arXiv:2512.16645[hep-ph]

    J. Bellm et al.,The Physics of Herwig 7,arXiv:2512.16645[hep-ph]

    arXiv

  3. [3]

    Sjostrand, S

    T. Sjostrand, S. Mrenna and P. Z. Skands,A Brief Introduction to PYTHIA 8.1, Comput. Phys. Commun.178(2008), 852–867, [arXiv:0710.3820[hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  4. [4]

    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[hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  5. [5]

    Bierlich et al.,A comprehensive guide to the physics and usage of PYTHIA 8.3, SciPost Phys

    C. Bierlich et al.,A comprehensive guide to the physics and usage of PYTHIA 8.3, SciPost Phys. Codeb.2022(2022), 8, [arXiv:2203.11601[hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  6. [6]

    Gleisberg, S

    T. Gleisberg, S. Hoeche, F. Krauss, M. Schonherr, S. Schumann, F. Siegert and J. Winter,Event generation with SHERPA 1.1, JHEP02(2009), 007, [arXiv:0811.4622[hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  7. [7]

    Bothmann et al.,Event Generation with Sherpa 2.2, SciPost Phys.7(2019), no

    E. Bothmann et al.,Event Generation with Sherpa 2.2, SciPost Phys.7(2019), no. 3, 034, [arXiv:1905.09127[hep-ph]]

    arXiv 2019

  8. [8]

    Bothmann et al., The Sherpa collaboration,Event generation with Sherpa 3, JHEP12(2024), 156, [arXiv:2410.22148[hep-ph]]

    E. Bothmann et al., The Sherpa collaboration,Event generation with Sherpa 3, JHEP12(2024), 156, [arXiv:2410.22148[hep-ph]]

    arXiv 2024

  9. [9]

    Buckley et al.,General-purpose event generators for LHC physics, Phys

    A. Buckley et al.,General-purpose event generators for LHC physics, Phys. Rept.504(2011), 145–233, [arXiv:1101.2599[hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  10. [10]

    J. M. Campbell et al.,Event generators for high-energy physics experiments, SciPost Phys.16(2024), no. 5, 130, [arXiv:2203.11110[hep-ph]]

    arXiv 2024

  11. [11]

    Bellm, S

    J. Bellm, S. Plätzer, P. Richardson, A. Siódmok and S. Webster,Reweighting Parton Showers, Phys. Rev. D94(2016), no. 3, 034028, [arXiv:1605.08256[hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  12. [12]

    Mrenna and P

    S. Mrenna and P. Skands,Automated Parton-Shower Variations in Pythia 8, Phys. Rev. D94(2016), no. 7, 074005, [arXiv:1605.08352[hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  13. [13]

    Bothmann, M

    E. Bothmann, M. Schönherr and S. Schumann,Reweighting QCD matrix-element and parton-shower calculations, Eur. Phys. J. C76(2016), no. 11, 590, [arXiv:1606.08753[hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  14. [14]

    Buckley, H

    A. Buckley, H. Hoeth, H. Lacker, H. Schulz and J. E. von Seggern,Systematic event generator tuning for the LHC, Eur. Phys. J. C65(2010), 331–357, [arXiv:0907.2973[hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  15. [15]

    Krishnamoorthy, H

    M. Krishnamoorthy, H. Schulz, X. Ju, W. Wang, S. Leyffer, Z. Marshall, S. Mrenna, J. Müller and J. B. Kowalkowski,Apprentice for Event Generator Tuning, EPJ Web Conf.251(2021), 03060, [arXiv:2103.05748[hep-ex]]

    arXiv 2021

  16. [16]

    Iskauskas, M

    A. Iskauskas, M. Knobbe, F. Krauss and S. Schumann,Robust Calibration of Non-Perturbative Models with History Matching,arXiv:2602.22324[hep-ph]

    arXiv

  17. [17]

    G. S. Chahal and F. Krauss,Cluster Hadronisation in Sherpa, SciPost Phys.13(2022), no. 2, 019, [arXiv:2203.11385[hep-ph]]

    arXiv 2022

  18. [18]

    Andersson, G

    B. Andersson, G. Gustafson, G. Ingelman and T. Sjostrand,Parton Fragmentation and String Dynamics, Phys. Rept.97(1983), 31–145

    1983

  19. [19]

    Bierlich, P

    C. Bierlich, P. Ilten, T. Menzo, S. Mrenna, M. Szewc, M. K. Wilkinson, A. Youssef and J. Zupan, Reweighting Monte Carlo predictions and automated fragmentation variations in Pythia 8, SciPost Phys. 16(2024), no. 5, 134, [arXiv:2308.13459[hep-ph]]. – 29 –

    arXiv 2024

  20. [20]

    B. Assi, C. Bierlich, P. Ilten, T. Menzo, S. Mrenna, M. Szewc, M. K. Wilkinson, A. Youssef and J. Zupan, The MLhad collaboration,Post-hoc reweighting of hadron production in the Lund string model, SciPost Phys.19(2025), no. 4, 104, [arXiv:2505.00142[hep-ph]]

    arXiv 2025

  21. [21]

    Butter et al.,Iterative HOMER with uncertainties, SciPost Phys.20(2026), 042, [arXiv:2509.03592 [hep-ph]]

    A. Butter et al.,Iterative HOMER with uncertainties, SciPost Phys.20(2026), 042, [arXiv:2509.03592 [hep-ph]]

    arXiv 2026

  22. [22]

    Skands, S

    P. Skands, S. Carrazza and J. Rojo,Tuning PYTHIA 8.1: the Monash 2013 Tune, Eur. Phys. J. C74 (2014), no. 8, 3024, [arXiv:1404.5630[hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  23. [23]

    Bellm and L

    J. Bellm and L. Gellersen,High dimensional parameter tuning for event generators, Eur. Phys. J. C80 (2020), no. 1, 54, [arXiv:1908.10811[hep-ph]]

    arXiv 2020

  24. [24]

    Knobbe, F

    M. Knobbe, F. Krauss, D. Reichelt and S. Schumann,Measuring hadronic Higgs boson branching ratios at future lepton colliders, Eur. Phys. J. C84(2024), no. 1, 83, [arXiv:2306.03682[hep-ph]]

    arXiv 2024

  25. [25]

    Knobbe, D

    M. Knobbe, D. Reichelt and S. Schumann,(N)NLO+NLL’ accurate predictions for plain and groomed 1-jettiness in neutral current DIS, JHEP09(2023), 194, [arXiv:2306.17736[hep-ph]]

    arXiv 2023

  26. [26]

    Gieseke, S

    S. Gieseke, S. Kiebacher, S. Plätzer and J. Priedigkeit,Phenomenological constraints of the building blocks of the cluster hadronization model, Eur. Phys. J. C85(2025), no. 7, 796, [arXiv:2505.14542 [hep-ph]]

    arXiv 2025

  27. [27]

    Arnison et al., The UA1 collaboration,Hadronic Jet Production at the CERN Proton - anti-Proton Collider, Phys

    G. Arnison et al., The UA1 collaboration,Hadronic Jet Production at the CERN Proton - anti-Proton Collider, Phys. Lett. B132(1983), 214

    1983

  28. [28]

    Caines, The STAR collaboration,Exploring Jet Properties in p-p Collisions at 200-GeV with STAR, Nucl

    H. Caines, The STAR collaboration,Exploring Jet Properties in p-p Collisions at 200-GeV with STAR, Nucl. Phys. A830(2009), 263C–266C, [arXiv:0907.3460[nucl-ex]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2009

  29. [29]

    Affolder et al., The CDF collaboration,Charged Jet Evolution and the Underlying Event inp¯p Collisions at 1.8 TeV, Phys

    T. Affolder et al., The CDF collaboration,Charged Jet Evolution and the Underlying Event inp¯p Collisions at 1.8 TeV, Phys. Rev. D65(2002), 092002

    2002

  30. [30]

    Aaltonen et al., The CDF collaboration,Studying the Underlying Event in Drell-Yan and High Transverse Momentum Jet Production at the Tevatron, Phys

    T. Aaltonen et al., The CDF collaboration,Studying the Underlying Event in Drell-Yan and High Transverse Momentum Jet Production at the Tevatron, Phys. Rev. D82(2010), 034001, [arXiv:1003.3146[hep-ex]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  31. [31]

    Aad et al., The ATLAS collaboration,Measurement of underlying event characteristics using charged particles in pp collisions at√s= 900GeVand 7 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys

    G. Aad et al., The ATLAS collaboration,Measurement of underlying event characteristics using charged particles in pp collisions at√s= 900GeVand 7 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. D83(2011), 112001, [arXiv:1012.0791[hep-ex]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  32. [32]

    S. Chatrchyan et al., The CMS collaboration,Measurement of the Underlying Event Activity at the LHC with √s= 7TeV and Comparison with √s= 0.9TeV, JHEP09(2011), 109, [arXiv:1107.0330 [hep-ex]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  33. [33]

    B. Abelev et al., The ALICE collaboration,Underlying Event measurements inppcollisions at√s= 0.9 and 7 TeV with the ALICE experiment at the LHC, JHEP07(2012), 116, [arXiv:1112.2082[hep-ex]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  34. [34]

    ’t Hooft,A Two-Dimensional Model for Mesons, Nucl

    G. ’t Hooft,A Two-Dimensional Model for Mesons, Nucl. Phys. B75(1974), 461–470

    1974

  35. [35]

    Schumann and F

    S. Schumann and F. Krauss,A Parton shower algorithm based on Catani-Seymour dipole factorisation, JHEP03(2008), 038, [arXiv:0709.1027[hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  36. [36]

    Amati and G

    D. Amati and G. Veneziano,Preconfinement as a Property of Perturbative QCD, Phys. Lett. B83 (1979), 87–92

    1979

  37. [37]

    Sjostrand and M

    T. Sjostrand and M. van Zijl,A Multiple Interaction Model for the Event Structure in Hadron Collisions, Phys. Rev. D36(1987), 2019

    1987

  38. [38]

    Corke and T

    R. Corke and T. Sjostrand,Multiparton Interactions with an x-dependent Proton Size, JHEP05(2011), 009, [arXiv:1101.5953[hep-ph]]. – 30 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  39. [39]

    M. H. Seymour,Matrix element corrections to parton shower algorithms, Comput. Phys. Commun.90 (1995), 95–101, [hep-ph/9410414]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  40. [40]

    Donnachie and P

    A. Donnachie and P. V. Landshoff,Total cross-sections, Phys. Lett. B296(1992), 227–232, [hep-ph/9209205]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1992

  41. [41]

    Buckley, P

    A. Buckley, P. Ilten, D. Konstantinov, L. Lönnblad, J. Monk, W. Pokorski, T. Przedzinski and A. Verbytskyi,The HepMC3 event record library for Monte Carlo event generators, Comput. Phys. Commun.260(2021), 107310, [arXiv:1912.08005[hep-ph]]

    arXiv 2021

  42. [42]

    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[hep-ph]]

    arXiv 2024

  43. [43]

    Krauss, R

    F. Krauss, R. Kuhn and G. Soff,AMEGIC++ 1.0: A Matrix element generator in C++, JHEP02 (2002), 044, [hep-ph/0109036]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2002

  44. [44]

    Gleisberg and S

    T. Gleisberg and S. Hoeche,Comix, a new matrix element generator, JHEP12(2008), 039, [arXiv:0808.3674[hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2008

  45. [45]

    Buccioni, J.-N

    F. Buccioni, J.-N. Lang, J. M. Lindert, P. Maierhöfer, S. Pozzorini, H. Zhang and M. F. Zoller, OpenLoops 2, Eur. Phys. J. C79(2019), no. 10, 866, [arXiv:1907.13071[hep-ph]]

    arXiv 2019

  46. [46]

    Denner, S

    A. Denner, S. Dittmaier and L. Hofer,Collier: a fortran-based Complex One-Loop LIbrary in Extended Regularizations, Comput. Phys. Commun.212(2017), 220–238, [arXiv:1604.06792[hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  47. [47]

    Hoeche, F

    S. Hoeche, F. Krauss, M. Schonherr and F. Siegert,A critical appraisal of NLO+PS matching methods, JHEP09(2012), 049, [arXiv:1111.1220[hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  48. [48]

    R. D. Ball et al., The PDF4LHC Working Group collaboration,The PDF4LHC21 combination of global PDF fits for the LHC Run III, J. Phys. G49(2022), no. 8, 080501, [arXiv:2203.05506[hep-ph]]

    arXiv 2022

  49. [49]

    Buckley, J

    A. Buckley, J. Ferrando, S. Lloyd, K. Nordström, B. Page, M. Rüfenacht, M. Schönherr and G. Watt, LHAPDF6: parton density access in the LHC precision era, Eur. Phys. J. C75(2015), 132, [arXiv:1412.7420[hep-ph]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  50. [50]

    G. Aad et al., The ATLAS collaboration,Measurement of distributions sensitive to the underlying event in inclusive Z-boson production inppcollisions at √s= 7TeV with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C74(2014), no. 12, 3195, [arXiv:1409.3433[hep-ex]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  51. [51]

    Chatrchyan et al., The CMS collaboration,Measurement of the Underlying Event in the Drell-Yan Process in Proton-Proton Collisions at√s= 7TeV, Eur

    S. Chatrchyan et al., The CMS collaboration,Measurement of the Underlying Event in the Drell-Yan Process in Proton-Proton Collisions at√s= 7TeV, Eur. Phys. J. C72(2012), 2080, [arXiv:1204.1411 [hep-ex]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  52. [52]

    Aad et al., The ATLAS collaboration,Measurement of the underlying event in jet events from 7 TeV proton-proton collisions with the ATLAS detector, Eur

    G. Aad et al., The ATLAS collaboration,Measurement of the underlying event in jet events from 7 TeV proton-proton collisions with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C74(2014), no. 8, 2965, [arXiv:1406.0392[hep-ex]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  53. [53]

    G. Aad et al., The ATLAS collaboration,Measurement of the jet fragmentation function and transverse profile in proton-proton collisions at a center-of-mass energy of 7 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C71(2011), 1795, [arXiv:1109.5816[hep-ex]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  54. [54]

    Khachatryan et al., The CMS collaboration,First Measurement of Hadronic Event Shapes inpp Collisions at √s= 7TeV, Phys

    V. Khachatryan et al., The CMS collaboration,First Measurement of Hadronic Event Shapes inpp Collisions at √s= 7TeV, Phys. Lett. B699(2011), 48–67, [arXiv:1102.0068[hep-ex]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  55. [55]

    S. Chatrchyan et al., The CMS collaboration,Measurement of energy flow at large pseudorapidities in ppcollisions at √s= 0.9and 7 TeV, JHEP11(2011), 148, [arXiv:1110.0211[hep-ex]], [Erratum: JHEP 02, 055 (2012)]. – 31 –

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  56. [56]

    G. Aad et al., The ATLAS collaboration,Measurement of distributions sensitive to the underlying event in inclusiveZ-boson production in pp collisions at√s= 13TeV with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C79(2019), no. 8, 666, [arXiv:1905.09752[hep-ex]]

    arXiv 2019

  57. [57]

    T. A. Aaltonen et al., The CDF collaboration,Study of the energy dependence of the underlying event in proton-antiproton collisions, Phys. Rev. D92(2015), no. 9, 092009, [arXiv:1508.05340[hep-ex]]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  58. [58]

    Knobbe,Novel methods for the next generation of high-energy physics event generators, Ph.D

    M. Knobbe,Novel methods for the next generation of high-energy physics event generators, Ph.D. thesis, Göttingen U., 2025

    2025

  59. [59]

    Ben-Kiki, C

    O. Ben-Kiki, C. Evans and B. Ingerson,YAML Ain’t Markup Language (YAML) (tm) Version 1.2, Tech. report , YAML.org, 10 2009. – 32 –

    2009