Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 minor 2 cited by

Search for dark matter produced in association with one or two top quarks in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV

T0 review · 0 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read A search for dark matter produced with top quarks in 13 TeV proton-proton collisions finds no significant signal; a 1.9-standard-deviation excess at the 150 GeV pseudoscalar hypothesis weakens the expected exclusion limits from 410/380…

desk verdict A well-executed, incremental CMS Run 2 search for DM plus top quarks that handles its 1.9 sigma excess honestly; the transfer-factor shape caveat is real but standard and not shown to fail, so it deserves refereeing and likely acceptance. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.05300 v2 pith:7DKL2Q45 submitted 2025-05-08 hep-ex

CMS Collaboration This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-ex
keywords darkmattertopquarkmissingtransversemomentumscalarmediatorpseudoscalaraxion-likeparticlessimplifiedmodelhadroncollider
topics Dark Matter
open problems Dark Matter
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

The paper searches for dark matter produced together with a single top quark or a top-quark pair, using large missing transverse momentum as the experimental handle. It aims to establish whether a benchmark simplified model with a scalar or pseudoscalar mediator, unit couplings, and a 1 GeV dark matter particle is excluded by the $138\,\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ data set, and whether any excess over standard model backgrounds is real. The central result is a null signal: expected 95% CL exclusions of 410 and 380 GeV for scalar and pseudoscalar mediators are weakened by a signal-like excess, with the largest local significance 1.9 standard deviations at the 150 GeV pseudoscalar hypothesis, leaving observed exclusions of 310 and 320 GeV. A curious reader should care because this probes collider-accessible dark matter coupled to top quarks, a channel that is decisive for simplified dark matter models.

What carries the argument

The central object is the simplified spin-0 mediator model, defined by Lagrangians for a scalar $\phi$ and a pseudoscalar $a$ that couple through Yukawa-like interactions to standard model quarks, preferentially the top quark, and to a Dirac dark matter fermion $\chi$. The analysis machinery combines orthogonal signal regions split by lepton multiplicity (0, 1, 2), b-tagged jet count, and forward-jet presence, with discriminating observables that include the missing transverse momentum, the transverse masses $m_T$, $m_{T2}^W$, and $m_T^b$, a modified topness variable, and, in the dilepton channel, a neural network fed by kinematic reconstruction of the top quarks. The load-bearing statistical mechanism is a simultaneous fit in which per-bin unconstrained 'transfer factor' parameters adjust the dominant backgrounds, especially $t\bar{t}$, as functions of $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{miss}}$ while linking control regions to signal regions; this is what converts control-region event counts into signal-region background predictions.

What would settle it

Reanalyze the same $138\,\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$ data set with an independent data-driven estimate of the top-quark-pair background in the high-$p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{miss}}$ tail, for example using a sideband defined by inverting the $m_T^b$ or $m_{T2}^W$ requirement and extrapolating by simulation-free ratios; if the signal-like excess at the 150 GeV pseudoscalar hypothesis disappears or falls below 1 standard deviation, the null-result claim is supported, while a growth beyond 3 standard deviations would refute it.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

After analyzing events with zero, one, or two leptons and at least one b-tagged jet, the paper states that no significant deviations from the standard model predictions are observed. Under the simplified model with mediator couplings to fermions and dark matter both set to unity and a dark matter mass of 1 GeV, mediator masses are excluded at 95% confidence level below 310 GeV for the scalar and 320 GeV for the pseudoscalar, whereas 410 and 380 GeV were expected. The shortfall is attributed to a signal-like excess that is visible mainly in the all-hadronic two-b-tag region and in three dileptonic regions, is consistent across signal regions, and has local significances between 1.4 and 1.9 standard deviations. The paper also derives model-independent 95% CL upper limits on the visible cross section of top-associated dark matter production, from 1 pb down to 0.02 pb, and, for the first time, limits on the coupling of axion-like particles to top quarks in this invisible signature.

Load-bearing premise

The result depends on the assumption that the per-bin transfer factors, calibrated by Monte Carlo simulation, correctly describe how the standard model background shape and composition, in particular top-quark pair events, transfers from control regions into the far high-missing-transverse-momentum tail; if that shape transfer is wrong, the exclusion boundaries and the 1.9-standard-deviation excess both shift.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the central claim is right, the benchmark scalar and pseudoscalar mediator model with unit couplings and a 1 GeV dark matter particle is excluded for mediator masses below 310 and 320 GeV, closing a simple thermal weakly interacting massive particle window.
  • The 1.9-standard-deviation excess, treated in the paper as a background fluctuation, implies that more data at the same center-of-mass energy should either make the excess grow into a signal or wash it out; the next data-taking period provides a direct test.
  • The model-independent visible cross section limits, from 1 pb to 0.02 pb, bound any new physics process producing top quarks plus invisible particles, regardless of the mediator's spin, as long as the kinematics fall in the searched phase space.
  • The first axion-like-particle limits in this final state constrain the top-quark coupling to ALPs for mediator masses between 50 and 500 GeV, complementing constraints from $t\bar{t}$ resonance searches.

Reading between the lines

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

  • The per-bin transfer-factor assumption is the most promising point to attack: a closure test using an alternative top-quark-pair shape model, or a background estimate from same-sign leptons, could reveal whether the mild excess is a symptom of shape mismatch rather than new physics.
  • If the excess is genuine, its consistency with many mediator masses suggests a broad, low-mass production mode; a dedicated scan of mediator masses below 50 GeV and higher couplings could be the fastest way to confirm it with this same data set.
  • The model-independent limits could be recast, without new experimental analysis, onto 2HDM+a or other top-philic dark matter models, since the paper only interprets the benchmark spin-0 simplified model.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

0 major / 5 minor

Summary. This CMS paper presents a search for dark matter produced in association with a single top quark or a top quark pair using the full Run 2 proton-proton collision dataset at sqrt(s) = 13 TeV, corresponding to 138 inverse femtobarns. Events are classified into all-hadronic (0 lepton), single-lepton (1 lepton), and dileptonic (2 lepton) channels, with signal regions binned in missing transverse momentum for the first two channels and in a neural network discriminant for the dilepton channel. Background estimation combines Monte Carlo simulation with data control regions, using per-bin unconstrained transfer factors for the dominant backgrounds in the hadronic and single-lepton channels. A simultaneous profile likelihood fit is performed across all regions and channels. No significant deviations from the standard model are observed, with the largest local excess being 1.9 standard deviations for a 150 GeV pseudoscalar mediator. The results are interpreted in a simplified scalar/pseudoscalar mediator model and, for the first time in this final state, translated into limits on axion-like-particle couplings to top quarks. Expected (observed) 95% CL exclusion limits on the mediator mass are 410 (310) GeV for the scalar and 380 (320) GeV for the pseudoscalar benchmark.

Significance. If the results hold, this analysis provides the most sensitive LHC constraint to date on spin-0 mediators coupling to top quarks and dark matter in the combined t+DM and tt+DM topologies, improving on the previous CMS search by about 40%. The simultaneous optimization for both production modes across three lepton multiplicities and the inclusion of the dileptonic channel are genuine advances. The paper is internally consistent: the selection tables, control region definitions, systematic uncertainty list, and fit outputs align, and the quoted limits follow from the described profile likelihood procedure. The excess is reported with local significances and is not over-interpreted. The benchmark signal model, couplings, and leading-order cross sections are external to the analysis (LHC Dark Matter Working Group recommendations), and the background prediction is anchored to data control regions. The main caveat is the per-bin transfer-factor shape extrapolation for the dominant tt background in the high-pTmiss tails used in the hadronic and single-lepton channels (Section 6, Ref.

minor comments (5)
  1. [4.3.1] The text states that the neural networks used a "Recified Linear Unit" activation function; this should read "Rectified Linear Unit".
  2. [4.3.1] The sentence "Categorical cross-entropy was used for the activation function" is imprecise; categorical cross-entropy is a loss function, not an activation function, and the sentence should be rephrased accordingly.
  3. [7 (Fig. 5)] In Figure 5, the legend entries "Expected AH", "Expected SL", and "Expected DL" are not explained in the caption; the caption should clarify that these denote the channel-specific expected limits from the all-hadronic, single-lepton, and dileptonic channels, respectively.
  4. [Abstract and Section 7] The phrase "Expected exclusion limits ... are set" is imprecise: expected limits are projected, while observed limits are set; consider rephrasing to distinguish the expected exclusion reach from the observed exclusions.
  5. [7] The paper reports local significances for the excess but does not quote a global significance including the look-elsewhere effect; adding this information would help the reader calibrate the significance of the observed excess.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 1.0 of 10

No significant circularity: signal model and benchmarks are external, background is data-anchored via transfer factors, and no fitted quantity is recycled as a prediction.

full rationale

The paper's central result—absence of significant deviations and the 95% CL exclusion ranges—is a likelihood-based comparison of data to SM background plus benchmark signal. The signal Lagrangians (Eqs. 1–3), benchmark couplings gq=gχ=1, mχ=1 GeV, and LO cross sections are taken from external LHC Dark Matter Working Group recommendations (Ref. [50]); the analysis does not fit the mediator model to data and then reinterpret the fit as prediction. Backgrounds are anchored to data control regions with per-bin multiplicative transfer factors shared between CRs and SRs (Section 6), with MC simulation providing the shape/composition transfer in pTmiss and NN score. The SR data enters the profile likelihood, so the post-fit background can absorb fluctuations; this is a standard statistical treatment, not a construction in which the claimed prediction equals the fitted input. The observed excess (largest local significance 1.9σ at m_a=150 GeV) is explicitly reported rather than hidden, and the expected limits (410/380 GeV) are quoted separately from observed limits (310/320 GeV), so the signal-like excess reduces the observed exclusion. The paper itself lists the per-bin background parameters, especially for tt, among the leading uncertainties (Section 7); this is a candid statement of a shape-transfer assumption, not evidence of circularity. Self-citations to previous CMS searches and to Ref. [79] for the transfer-factor technique are methodological and comparative; the method is described in the text and is not an unverified uniqueness theorem, so they do not make the derivation circular. Overall the derivation is self-contained against external benchmark inputs and external data-anchored background constraints.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 4 invented entities

The paper introduces no new physics entities: the scalar and pseudoscalar mediators, the ALP, and the Dirac dark matter fermion are benchmark hypotheses inherited from prior literature, and this analysis provides new exclusion data for them. The genuinely fitted quantities in the likelihood are the per-bin background transfer factors and the signal strength modifier; the benchmark couplings are chosen by convention, not fitted. The central claim is model-dependent in the standard way of LHC simplified-model searches, and the background estimation assumptions carry the main systematic risk, as the paper itself acknowledges.

free parameters (5)
  • Dark matter mass m_chi = 1 GeV
    Benchmark point from LHC Dark Matter Working Group recommendations (Section 3, Ref. [50]); not fitted to data. The paper notes m_chi mildly affects off-shell production, which is not considered.
  • Couplings g_q = g_chi = 1
    Benchmark couplings set by convention (Ref. [50]); the quoted mass exclusions apply to this benchmark only.
  • ALP coupling ratio c_t = c_chi = c_t/c_chi = 1
    Assumed to remove the branching ratio ambiguity for ALP masses above 350 GeV (Section 7).
  • Mediator mass scan points = 50 to 500 GeV in 50 GeV steps
    Chosen grid of hypotheses; the exclusion boundary between scan points is interpolated.
  • Per-bin background transfer factors = Unconstrained, fitted in the global likelihood
    Multiplicative parameters linking control regions and signal regions per pmissT bin (Section 6); the tt per-bin parameter is identified as a leading uncertainty (Section 7).
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The simplified spin-0 mediator model Lagrangians (Eqs. 1 and 2) adequately describe the signal kinematics and cross sections at leading order.
    Signal samples are generated at leading order with these Lagrangians (Section 3), and the expected limits use the corresponding leading-order cross sections (Section 7).
  • domain assumption The standard model backgrounds are correctly described by the Monte Carlo generators (POWHEG, MADGRAPH, PYTHIA) with NNPDF parton distributions after data-driven corrections.
    Sections 3 and 5; the background model is the baseline against which the null result is declared.
  • domain assumption The transfer-factor method, per-bin unconstrained parameters linking control and signal regions, reliably extrapolates background rates as a function of pmissT.
    Section 6; this is the load-bearing background estimation assumption identified in weakest_assumption, and the tt per-bin parameter is named a leading uncertainty in Section 7.
  • domain assumption For the ALP interpretation, the ALP has zero or negligible couplings to gluons and electroweak gauge bosons, so pseudoscalar limits translate directly into bounds on |ct|/fA.
    Section 7, citing Ref. [83] for the requirement.
  • standard math The CLs criterion with the asymptotic approximation yields valid 95% confidence level limits.
    Section 7, Refs. [80-82]; standard practice in LHC searches.
invented entities (4)
  • Scalar mediator phi independent evidence
    purpose: Signal hypothesis: spin-0 mediator with Yukawa-like couplings to top quarks and a fermionic dark matter particle chi.
    Inherited from LHC benchmark simplified models (Refs. [3,4]); this paper provides the falsifiable handle by excluding masses below 310 GeV at benchmark couplings.
  • Pseudoscalar mediator a independent evidence
    purpose: Signal hypothesis: CP-odd spin-0 mediator with the same coupling structure.
    Inherited from benchmark models; excluded below 320 GeV at benchmark couplings if the excess is a fluctuation.
  • Axion-like particle A independent evidence
    purpose: Signal hypothesis for the ALP interpretation; mediates dark matter top quark interactions.
    Inherited from prior ALP literature (Refs. [12-15]); the paper provides the first |ct|/fA limits in top plus missing energy final states.
  • Fermionic Dirac dark matter particle chi independent evidence
    purpose: The invisible dark matter candidate whose escape produces missing transverse momentum.
    Inherited from benchmark models; the search constrains the mchi = 1 GeV benchmark point, though its mass is fixed rather than scanned.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Search for dark matter produced in association with one or two top quarks in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7DKL2Q45

@misc{pith2026250505300,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Search for dark matter produced in association with one or two top quarks in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrts$ = 13 TeV},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7DKL2Q45}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.05300}
}
abstract

A search is performed for dark matter (DM) produced in association with a single top quark or a pair of top quarks using the data collected with the CMS detector at the LHC from proton-proton collisions at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV, corresponding to 138 fb$^{-1}$ of integrated luminosity. An excess of events with a large imbalance of transverse momentum is searched for across 0, 1 and 2 lepton final states. Novel multivariate techniques are used to take advantage of the differences in kinematic properties between the two DM production mechanisms. No significant deviations with respect to the standard model predictions are observed. The results are interpreted considering a simplified model in which the mediator is either a scalar or pseudoscalar particle and couples to top quarks and to DM fermions. Axion-like particles that are coupled to top quarks and DM fermions are also considered. Expected exclusion limits of 410 and 380 GeV for scalar and pseudoscalar mediator masses, respectively, are set at the 95% confidence level. A DM particle mass of 1 GeV is assumed, with mediator couplings to fermions and DM particles set to unity. A small signal-like excess is observed in data, with the largest local significance observed to be 1.9 standard deviations for the 150 GeV pseudoscalar mediator hypothesis. Because of this excess, mediator masses are only excluded below 310 (320) GeV for the scalar (pseudoscalar) mediator. The results are also translated into model-independent 95% confidence level upper limits on the visible cross section of DM production in association with top quarks, ranging from 1 pb to 0.02 pb.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.05300 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Principal production diagrams in the context of the simplified model with a [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The main discriminant distribution p miss T in the three AH SRs: 1b 0FJ (top left), 1b 1FJ (top right), and 2b (bottom), after a signal plus background fit across all channels, assuming a 100 GeV scalar mediator. The solid histograms for the simulated SM backgrounds are summed cumulatively and rescaled to luminosity, while the signal is shown as a dashed pink line. The grey dashed area in the upper panel represents … view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The main discriminant distribution p miss T in the six SL SRs: 1b 0FJ (t ≤ 0) (top left), 1b 0FJ (t > 0) (top right), 1b 1FJ (t ≤ 0) (center left), 1b 1FJ (t > 0) (center right), 2b (t ≤ 0) (bottom left), and 2b (t > 0) (bottom right), after a signal plus background fit across all channels, assuming a 100 GeV scalar mediator. The solid histograms for the simulated SM backgrounds are summed cumulatively and rescaled … view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: The main discriminant distribution NN in the the four DL SRs: 2b (DF) (top left), 2b [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p021_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: The model-independent 95% CL limits on production cross section for new physics [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p022_5.png]
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: The 95% CL limits on the ratio of ALP-top coupling to the ALP decay constant [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p023_6.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

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

  1. Search for resonant production of lepton-enriched semivisible jets in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV

    hep-ex 2026-08 conditional novelty 7.0 of 10

    A CMS search with 138 fb^-1 of 13 TeV data finds no lepton-enriched semivisible jet resonance and excludes Z' masses up to 4.7 TeV (SVJ l) and 1.8-3.5 TeV (SVJ tau) at 95% CL.

  2. Search for a resonance in events with four top quarks decaying into two leptons and jets in proton-proton collisions

    hep-ex 2026-08 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

    No significant excess is observed in a search for top-philic resonances in four-top-quark events with two leptons, and 95% confidence-level upper limits are set for mediator masses from 500 GeV to 4 TeV.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

83 extracted references · 10 canonical work pages · cited by 2 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Dark matter searches with astroparticle data

    T. A. Porter, R. P . Johnson, and P . W. Graham, “Dark matter searches with astroparticle data”, Ann. Rev. Astron. Astrophys. 49 (2011) 155, doi:10.1146/annurev-astro-081710-102528 , arXiv:1104.2836

    arXiv 2011

  2. [2]

    Particle dark matter: evidence, candidates and constraints

    G. Bertone, D. Hooper, and J. Silk, “Particle dark matter: evidence, candidates and constraints”, Phys. Rept. 405 (2005) 279, doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2004.08.031, arXiv:hep-ph/0404175

    arXiv 2005

  3. [3]

    Dark matter benchmark models for early LHC run-2 searches: Report of the ATLAS/CMS dark matter forum

    D. Abercrombie et al., “Dark matter benchmark models for early LHC run-2 searches: Report of the ATLAS/CMS dark matter forum”, Phys. Dark Univ. 27 (2020) 100371, doi:10.1016/j.dark.2019.100371, arXiv:1507.00966

    work page arXiv 2020

  4. [4]

    Scalar simplified models for dark matter

    M. R. Buckley, D. Feld, and D. Goncalves, “Scalar simplified models for dark matter”, Phys. Rev. D 91 (2015) doi:10.1103/physrevd.91.015017, arXiv:1410.6497

    arXiv 2015

  5. [5]

    Two is not always better than one: Single Top Quarks and Dark Matter

    D. Pinna, A. Zucchetta, M. R. Buckley, and F. Canelli, “Single top quarks and dark matter”, Phys. Rev. D 96 (2017) 035031, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.96.035031, arXiv:1701.05195

    work page Pith review arXiv 2017

  6. [6]

    LHC dark matter working group: Next-generation spin-0 dark matter models

    LHC Dark Matter Working Group Collaboration, “LHC dark matter working group: Next-generation spin-0 dark matter models”, Phys. Dark Univ. 27 (2020) 100351, doi:10.1016/j.dark.2019.100351, arXiv:1810.09420

    arXiv 2020

  7. [7]

    Simplified dark matter models with two Higgs doublets: I. pseudoscalar mediators

    M. Bauer, U. Haisch, and F. Kahlhoefer, “Simplified dark matter models with two Higgs doublets: I. pseudoscalar mediators”, JHEP 05 (2017) 138, doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2017)138, arXiv:1701.07427

    arXiv 2017

  8. [8]

    CP conservation in the presence of instantons

    R. D. Peccei and H. R. Quinn, “CP conservation in the presence of instantons”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 38 (1977) 1440, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.38.1440

    doi:10.1103/physrevlett.38.1440 1977

Show all 83 references
  1. [9]

    Constraints imposed by CP conservation in the presence of instantons

    R. D. Peccei and H. R. Quinn, “Constraints imposed by CP conservation in the presence of instantons”, Phys. Rev. D 16 (1977) 1791, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.16.1791

    1977 doi

  2. [10]

    A new light boson?

    S. Weinberg, “A new light boson?”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 40 (1978) 223, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.40.223

    1978 doi

  3. [11]

    Problem of strong P and T invariance in the presence of instantons

    F. Wilczek, “Problem of strong P and T invariance in the presence of instantons”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 40 (1978) 279, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.40.279. 24

    1978 doi

  4. [12]

    A taste of dark matter: Flavour constraints on pseudoscalar mediators

    M. J. Dolan, F. Kahlhoefer, C. McCabe, and K. Schmidt-Hoberg, “A taste of dark matter: Flavour constraints on pseudoscalar mediators”, JHEP 03 (2015) 171, doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2015)171, arXiv:1412.5174. [Erratum: doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2015)103]

    2015 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Axion-like particles as mediators for dark matter: beyond freeze-out

    A. Bharucha, F. Br ¨ummer, N. Desai, and S. Mutzel, “Axion-like particles as mediators for dark matter: beyond freeze-out”, JHEP 02 (2023) 141, doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2023)141, arXiv:2209.03932

    2023 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Electroweak axion portal to dark matter

    S. Allen et al., “Electroweak axion portal to dark matter”, 2024. arXiv:2405.02403

    2024 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Top-philic ALP phenomenology at the LHC: the elusive mass-window

    S. Blasi et al., “Top-philic ALP phenomenology at the LHC: the elusive mass-window”, JHEP 06 (2024) 077, doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2024)077, arXiv:2311.16048

    2024 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Combined searches for the production of supersymmetric top quark partners in proton–proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Combined searches for the production of supersymmetric top quark partners in proton–proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV”, Eur. Phys. J. C 81 (2021) 970, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09721-5 , arXiv:2107.10892

    2021 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Constraints on spin-0 dark matter mediators and invisible Higgs decays using ATLAS 13 TeV pp collision data with two top quarks and missing transverse momentum in the final state

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Constraints on spin-0 dark matter mediators and invisible Higgs decays using ATLAS 13 TeV pp collision data with two top quarks and missing transverse momentum in the final state”, Eur. Phys. J. C 83 (2023) 503, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-023-11477-z , arXiv...

    2023 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Search for new phenomena with top-quark pairs and large missing transverse momentum using 140 fb−1 of pp collision data at√s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Search for new phenomena with top-quark pairs and large missing transverse momentum using 140 fb−1 of pp collision data at√s = 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector”, JHEP 03 (2024) 139, doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2024)139, arXiv:2401.13430

    2024 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Search for dark matter produced in association with a single top quark and an energetic W boson in√s = 13 TeV pp collisions with the ATLAS detector

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Search for dark matter produced in association with a single top quark and an energetic W boson in√s = 13 TeV pp collisions with the ATLAS detector”, Eur. Phys. J. C 83 (2023), no. 7, 603, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-023-11582-z , arXiv:2211.13138

    2023 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Constraints on simplified dark matter models involving an s-channel mediator with the ATLAS detector in pp collisions at√s = 13 TeV

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Constraints on simplified dark matter models involving an s-channel mediator with the ATLAS detector in pp collisions at√s = 13 TeV”, Eur. Phys. J. C 84 (2024), no. 10, 1102, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-024-13215-5 , arXiv:2404.15930

    2024 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Search for dark matter produced in association with a single top quark or a top quark pair in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Search for dark matter produced in association with a single top quark or a top quark pair in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV”, JHEP 03 (2019) 141, doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2019)141, arXiv:1901.01553

    2019 arXiv

  14. [22]

    doi:10.17182/hepdata.154755

    HEPData record for this analysis, 2024. doi:10.17182/hepdata.154755

    2024 doi

  15. [23]

    The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC

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

    2008 doi

  16. [24]

    The CMS trigger system

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

    2017 arXiv

  17. [25]

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

    CMS Collaboration, “Particle-flow reconstruction and global event description with the CMS detector”, JINST 12 (2017) P10003, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/12/10/P10003, arXiv:1706.04965. References 25

    2017 arXiv

  18. [26]

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

    CMS Collaboration, “Technical proposal for the Phase-II upgrade of the Compact Muon Solenoid”, CMS Technical Proposal CERN-LHCC-2015-010, CMS-TDR-15-02, 2015

    2015

  19. [27]

    The anti-kT jet clustering algorithm

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

    2008 arXiv

  20. [28]

    FastJet user manual

    M. Cacciari, G. P . Salam, and G. Soyez, “FastJet user manual”, Eur. Phys. J. C 72 (2012) 1896, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-012-1896-2 , arXiv:1111.6097

    2012 arXiv

  21. [29]

    The catchment area of jets

    M. Cacciari, G. P . Salam, and G. Soyez, “The catchment area of jets”, JHEP 04 (2008) 005, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2008/04/005, arXiv:0802.1188

    2008 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Jet algorithms performance in 13 TeV data

    CMS Collaboration, “Jet algorithms performance in 13 TeV data”, CMS Physics Analysis Summary CMS-PAS-JME-16-003, 2017

    2017

  23. [31]

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

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

    2018 arXiv

  24. [32]

    A new method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms

    P . Nason, “A new method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms”, JHEP 11 (2004) 040, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2004/11/040, arXiv:hep-ph/0409146

    2004 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Matching NLO QCD computations with parton shower simulations: the POWHEG method

    S. Frixione, P . Nason, and C. Oleari, “Matching NLO QCD computations with parton shower simulations: the POWHEG method”, JHEP 11 (2007) 070, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2007/11/070, arXiv:0709.2092

    2007 arXiv

  26. [34]

    A general framework for implementing NLO calculations in shower Monte Carlo programs: the POWHEG box

    S. Alioli, P . Nason, C. Oleari, and E. Re, “A general framework for implementing NLO calculations in shower Monte Carlo programs: the POWHEG box”, JHEP 06 (2010) 043, doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2010)043, arXiv:1002.2581

    2010 arXiv

  27. [35]

    NLO single-top production matched with shower in POWHEG: s- and t-channel contributions

    S. Alioli, P . Nason, C. Oleari, and E. Re, “NLO single-top production matched with shower in POWHEG: s- and t-channel contributions”, JHEP 09 (2009) 111, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2009/09/111, arXiv:0907.4076. [Erratum: doi:d10.1007/JHEP02(2010)011]

    2009 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Single-top Wt-channel production matched with parton showers using the POWHEG method

    E. Re, “Single-top Wt-channel production matched with parton showers using the POWHEG method”, Eur. Phys. J. C 71 (2011) 1547, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1547-z , arXiv:1009.2450

    2011 arXiv

  29. [37]

    A positive-weight next-to-leading-order Monte Carlo for heavy flavour hadroproduction

    S. Frixione, P . Nason, and G. Ridolfi, “A positive-weight next-to-leading-order Monte Carlo for heavy flavour hadroproduction”, JHEP 09 (2007) 126, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2007/09/126, arXiv:0707.3088

    2007 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Top-pair production at the LHC through NNLO QCD and NLO EW

    M. Czakon et al., “Top-pair production at the LHC through NNLO QCD and NLO EW”, JHEP 10 (2017) 186, doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2017)186, arXiv:1705.04105

    2017 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Merging meets matching in MC@NLO

    R. Frederix and S. Frixione, “Merging meets matching in MC@NLO”, JHEP 12 (2012) 061, doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2012)061, arXiv:1209.6215

    2012 arXiv

  32. [40]

    The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations

    J. Alwall et al., “The automated computation of tree-level and next-to-leading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations”, JHEP 07 (2014) 079, doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2014)079, arXiv:1405.0301. 26

    2014 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Matching matrix elements and shower evolution for top-quark production in hadronic collisions

    M. L. Mangano, M. Moretti, F. Piccinini, and M. Treccani, “Matching matrix elements and shower evolution for top-quark production in hadronic collisions”, JHEP 01 (2007) 013, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2007/01/013, arXiv:hep-ph/0611129

    2007 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Electroweak corrections to W+jet hadroproduction including leptonic W-boson decays

    A. Denner, S. Dittmaier, T. Kasprzik, and A. Muck, “Electroweak corrections to W+jet hadroproduction including leptonic W-boson decays”, JHEP 08 (2009) 075, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2009/08/075, arXiv:0906.1656

    2009 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Electroweak corrections to dilepton+jet production at hadron colliders

    A. Denner, S. Dittmaier, T. Kasprzik, and A. Muck, “Electroweak corrections to dilepton+jet production at hadron colliders”, JHEP 06 (2011) 069, doi:10.1007/JHEP06(2011)069, arXiv:1103.0914

    2011 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Electroweak corrections to monojet production at the LHC

    A. Denner, S. Dittmaier, T. Kasprzik, and A. Maeck, “Electroweak corrections to monojet production at the LHC”, Eur. Phys. J. C 73 (2013) 2297, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-013-2297-x , arXiv:1211.5078

    2013 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Electroweak corrections to hadronic photon production at large transverse momenta

    J. H. Kuhn, A. Kulesza, S. Pozzorini, and M. Schulze, “Electroweak corrections to hadronic photon production at large transverse momenta”, JHEP 03 (2006) 059, doi:10.1088/1126-6708/2006/03/059, arXiv:hep-ph/0508253

    2006 arXiv

  38. [46]

    NLO electroweak automation and precise predictions for W+multijet production at the LHC

    S. Kallweit et al., “NLO electroweak automation and precise predictions for W+multijet production at the LHC”, JHEP 04 (2015) 012, doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2015)012, arXiv:1412.5157

    2015 arXiv

  39. [47]

    NLO QCD+EW predictions for V+jets including off-shell vector-boson decays and multijet merging

    S. Kallweit et al., “NLO QCD+EW predictions for V+jets including off-shell vector-boson decays and multijet merging”, JHEP 04 (2016) 021, doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2016)021, arXiv:1511.08692

    2016 arXiv

  40. [48]

    W+W− production at hadron colliders in next to next to leading order QCD

    T. Gehrmann et al., “ W+W− production at hadron colliders in next to next to leading order QCD”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113 (2014) 212001, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.113.212001, arXiv:1408.5243

    2014 arXiv

  41. [49]

    An update on vector boson pair production at hadron colliders

    J. M. Campbell and R. K. Ellis, “An update on vector boson pair production at hadron colliders”, Phys. Rev. D 60 (1999) 113006, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.60.113006, arXiv:hep-ph/9905386

    1999 arXiv

  42. [50]

    Recommendations on presenting LHC searches for missing transverse energy signals using simplified s-channel models of dark matter

    A. Boveia et al., “Recommendations on presenting LHC searches for missing transverse energy signals using simplified s-channel models of dark matter”, Phys. Dark Univ. 27 (2020) 100365, doi:10.1016/j.dark.2019.100365, arXiv:1603.04156

    2020

  43. [51]

    Parton distributions for the LHC Run II

    NNPDF Collaboration, “Parton distributions for the LHC Run II”, JHEP 04 (2015) 040, doi:10.1007/JHEP04(2015)040, arXiv:1410.8849

    2015 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Parton distributions from high-precision collider data

    NNPDF Collaboration, “Parton distributions from high-precision collider data”, Eur. Phys. J. C 77 (2017) 663, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-5199-5 , arXiv:1706.00428

    2017 arXiv

  45. [53]

    An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2

    T. Sj ¨ostrand et al., “An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2”, Comput. Phys. Commun. 191 (2015) 159, doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2015.01.024, arXiv:1410.3012

    2015 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Event generator tunes obtained from underlying event and multiparton scattering measurements

    CMS Collaboration, “Event generator tunes obtained from underlying event and multiparton scattering measurements”, Eur. Phys. J. C 76 (2016) 155, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-3988-x , arXiv:1512.00815. References 27

    2016 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Extraction and validation of a new set of CMS PYTHIA8 tunes from underlying-event measurements

    CMS Collaboration, “Extraction and validation of a new set of CMS PYTHIA8 tunes from underlying-event measurements”, Eur. Phys. J. C 80 (2020) 4, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-7499-4 , arXiv:1903.12179

    2020 arXiv

  48. [56]

    G EANT 4—a simulation toolkit

    GEANT4 Collaboration, “G EANT 4—a simulation toolkit”, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 506 (2003) 250, doi:10.1016/S0168-9002(03)01368-8

    2003 doi

  49. [57]

    Performance of electron reconstruction and selection with the CMS detector in proton-proton collisions at√s = 8 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Performance of electron reconstruction and selection with the CMS detector in proton-proton collisions at√s = 8 TeV”, JINST 10 (2015) P06005, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/10/06/P06005, arXiv:1502.02701

    2015 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Performance of CMS muon reconstruction in pp collision events at√s = 7 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Performance of CMS muon reconstruction in pp collision events at√s = 7 TeV”, JINST 7 (2012) P10002, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/7/10/P10002, arXiv:1206.4071

    2012 arXiv

  51. [59]

    Stop the top background of the stop search

    Y. Bai, H.-C. Cheng, J. Gallicchio, and J. Gu, “Stop the top background of the stop search”, JHEP 07 (2012) 110, doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2012)110, arXiv:1203.4813

    2012 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Search for direct top squark pair production in events with one lepton, jets, and missing transverse momentum at 13 TeV with the CMS experiment

    CMS Collaboration, “Search for direct top squark pair production in events with one lepton, jets, and missing transverse momentum at 13 TeV with the CMS experiment”, JHEP 05 (2020) 032, doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2020)032, arXiv:1912.08887

    2020 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Measuring masses of semiinvisibly decaying particles pair produced at hadron colliders

    C. G. Lester and D. J. Summers, “Measuring masses of semiinvisibly decaying particles pair produced at hadron colliders”, Phys. Lett. B 463 (1999) 99, doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(99)00945-4, arXiv:hep-ph/9906349

    1999 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Searches for supersymmetry using the m T2 variable in hadronic events produced in pp collisions at 8 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Searches for supersymmetry using the m T2 variable in hadronic events produced in pp collisions at 8 TeV”, JHEP 05 (2015) 078, doi:10.1007/JHEP05(2015)078, arXiv:1502.04358

    2015 arXiv

  55. [63]

    Analytic solutions for neutrino momenta in decay of top quarks

    B. A. Betchart, R. Demina, and A. Harel, “Analytic solutions for neutrino momenta in decay of top quarks”, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 736 (2014) 169, doi:10.1016/j.nima.2013.10.039, arXiv:1305.1878

    2014 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Precision luminosity measurement in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV in 2015 and 2016 at CMS

    CMS Collaboration, “Precision luminosity measurement in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV in 2015 and 2016 at CMS”, Eur. Phys. J. C 81 (2021) 800, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-021-09538-2 , arXiv:2104.01927

    2021 arXiv

  57. [65]

    CMS luminosity measurement for the 2017 data-taking period at√s = 13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “CMS luminosity measurement for the 2017 data-taking period at√s = 13 TeV”, technical report, CERN, Geneva, 2018

    2017

  58. [66]

    CMS luminosity measurement for the 2018 data-taking period at√s = 13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “CMS luminosity measurement for the 2018 data-taking period at√s = 13 TeV”, technical report, CERN, Geneva, 2019

    2018

  59. [67]

    PDF4LHC recommendations for LHC Run II

    J. Butterworth et al., “PDF4LHC recommendations for LHC Run II”, J. Phys. G 43 (2016) 023001, doi:10.1088/0954-3899/43/2/023001, arXiv:1510.03865

    2016 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Measurement of the inelastic proton-proton cross section at√s = 13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of the inelastic proton-proton cross section at√s = 13 TeV”, JHEP 07 (2018) 161, doi:10.1007/JHEP07(2018)161, arXiv:1802.02613

    2018 arXiv

  61. [69]

    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”, JINST 12 (2017) P02014, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/12/02/P02014, arXiv:1607.03663. 28

    2017 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Measurements of differential cross sections for associated production of a W boson and jets in proton-proton collisions at√s = 8 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Measurements of differential cross sections for associated production of a W boson and jets in proton-proton collisions at√s = 8 TeV”, Phys. Rev. D 95 (2017) 052002, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.95.052002, arXiv:1610.04222

    2017 arXiv

  63. [71]

    Measurement of the production cross section of a W boson in association with two b jets in pp collisions at√s = 8 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of the production cross section of a W boson in association with two b jets in pp collisions at√s = 8 TeV”, Eur. Phys. J. C 77 (2017), no. 2, 92, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-016-4573-z , arXiv:1608.07561

    2017 arXiv

  64. [72]

    Measurements of jet multiplicity and differential production cross sections of Z+jets events in proton-proton collisions at√s = 7 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Measurements of jet multiplicity and differential production cross sections of Z+jets events in proton-proton collisions at√s = 7 TeV”, Phys. Rev. D 91 (2015), no. 5, 052008, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.91.052008, arXiv:1408.3104

    2015 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Measurements of the associated production of a Z boson and b jets in pp collisions at√s = 8TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Measurements of the associated production of a Z boson and b jets in pp collisions at√s = 8TeV”, Eur. Phys. J. C 77 (2017), no. 11, 751, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-017-5140-y , arXiv:1611.06507

    2017 arXiv

  66. [74]

    Fitting using finite Monte Carlo samples

    R. J. Barlow and C. Beeston, “Fitting using finite Monte Carlo samples”, Comput. Phys. Commun. 77 (1993) 219, doi:10.1016/0010-4655(93)90005-W

    1993 doi

  67. [75]

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

    CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of differential cross sections for top quark pair production using the lepton+jets final state in proton-proton collisions at 13 TeV”, Phys. Rev. D 95 (2017) 092001, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.95.092001, arXiv:1610.04191

    2017 arXiv

  68. [76]

    The CMS statistical analysis and combination tool: C OMBINE

    CMS Collaboration, “The CMS statistical analysis and combination tool: C OMBINE ”, Comput. Softw. Big Sci. 8 (2024) 19, doi:10.1007/s41781-024-00121-4 , arXiv:2404.06614

    2024 arXiv

  69. [77]

    The ROOFIT toolkit for data modeling

    W. Verkerke and D. Kirkby, “The ROOFIT toolkit for data modeling”, in Proc. 13th International Conference on Computing in High Energy and Nuclear Physics (CHEP 2003): La Jolla CA, United States, March 24–28, 2003. 2003. arXiv:physics/0306116. [eConf C0303241 (2003) MOLT007]

    2003 arXiv

  70. [78]

    The RooStats project

    L. Moneta et al., “The RooStats project”, in 13th International Workshop on Advanced Computing and Analysis Techniques in Physics Research (ACAT2010), T. Speer et al., eds. SISSA, 2010. arXiv:1009.1003. PoS(ACAT2010)057. doi:10.22323/1.093.0057

    2010 arXiv

  71. [79]

    Dark sector searches with the CMS experiment

    “Dark sector searches with the CMS experiment”, Physics Reports 1115 (2025) 448, doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2024.09.013. Included in the special issue “ATLAS and CMS Run II Legacy results”

    2025 doi

  72. [80]

    Confidence level computation for combining searches with small statistics

    T. Junk, “Confidence level computation for combining searches with small statistics”, Nucl. Inst. Meth. A 434 (1999) 435, doi:10.1016/S0168-9002(99)00498-2, arXiv:hep-ex/9902226

    1999

  73. [81]

    Presentation of search results: the CL s technique

    A. L. Read, “Presentation of search results: the CL s technique”, J. Phys. G 28 (2002) 2693, doi:10.1088/0954-3899/28/10/313

    2002 doi

  74. [82]

    Asymptotic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics

    G. Cowan, K. Cranmer, E. Gross, and O. Vitells, “Asymptotic formulae for likelihood-based tests of new physics”, Eur. Phys. J. C 71 (2011) 1554, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-011-1554-0 , arXiv:1007.1727. [Erratum: doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-013-2501-z ]

    2011 arXiv

  75. [83]

    ALP-ine quests at the LHC: hunting axion-like particles via peaks and dips in t¯t production

    A. Anuar et al., “ALP-ine quests at the LHC: hunting axion-like particles via peaks and dips in t¯t production”, 2024. arXiv:2404.19014. 29 A The CMS Collaboration Yerevan Physics Institute, Yerevan, Armenia V . Chekhovsky, A. Hayrapetyan, V . Makarenko , A. Tumasyan1 Institut...

    2024 arXiv

Pith tools

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